Messages

481

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes

« on: February 02, 2013, 06:58:49 AM »

Great job. Amazing photo.

Oh yes, lovely picture.

482

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...

« on: February 02, 2013, 06:52:25 AM »

You are quite provocative against me, with a answer like that, if you understand, your answers had been different

JR   point out one thing there Im wrong

Im used to discuss facts at Dpreview, luminous-landscape, DXO, fred miranda and I have  newer   met  a answers like "As usual, you appear to be right whatever Mikael would like us to believe so ... What's the point?"  this shows  only poor knowledge..

There seems to be a big problems here when Im questioning for example Neuro, Jrista answers.

I don't for one second doubt your knowledge of cameras. You come up with interesting and good information usually.

My humble suggestion to you is that you should use the preview button while posting and read carefully what you write so that incorrect / incomplete information is not supplied. My problem with you arose at the time of the "Half The Photons" discussion where, from your posts I got the impression that changing the ISO would somehow change the photons hitting the sensor. I'm sure you knew fully well that changing the ISO does not change the number of photons hitting the sensor then why the charade? What's the point of your expertise if you ultimately end up confusing people - Well you may very well say I'm a noob but there are a number of noobs on CR who log on only to look for some help?

Every time you have landed up in an argument was because you initially posted something which is incomplete / incorrect and when this was pointed out instead of simply agreeing that you missed out on something, you have adopted the "me against them" approach. Constant posts containing phrases  "you don't understand how a sensor works", "poor knowledge", "you have no clue" are in bad taste and are sufficient to get people riled up.

Not having English as your first language doesn't help matters either.

BTW, If you are right, there is no need for you to "prove yourself right" - there are sufficient intelligent people here who will agree with you.

Neuro, Mt Spokane, wickidwombat and the others get a lot of respect here coz they try to help without insulting anyone.

JR WROTE :I got the impression that changing the ISO would somehow change the photons hitting the sensor. I'm sure you knew fully well that changing the ISO does not change the number of photons hitting the sensor then why the charade?  I'm sure you knew fully well that changing the ISO does not change the number of photons hitting the sensor then why the charade? What's the point of your expertise if you ultimately end up confusing people //

Change TO HIGHER iso means shorter time/f-stop compare to  earlier iso,  higher iso, GO  from 400 to 800 = shorter time or more f-stop =halving the hitting photons increase amp gain

CHOSE Lower the iso means go from 800iso to 400 iso =1 STOP  longer exposure time or open up 1 F-stop = let DUBBLE  photons hit the sensor   = decrease the amp gain
Changing iso = TIME/F-STOP   CONTROL THE  numberS of photons TO HIT THE SENSOR


DO YOU NOW UNDERSTAND?  IF NOT  FEEL FRI TO ASK

It is very  difficult to discuss with people who do not understand the most basic things
and you can call what ever you want
when I was writing here first time I was insulting by two people who where  wrong - and it is still going on from one  person.

SO again, point out where Im wrong

Mikael, you just proved J.R. right! Please do yourself a favor and re-read his note and then re-read your response. You keep doing this. You know quite a lot but do not take to time to review your writing.

You just stated above that that:
Change TO HIGHER iso means shorter time/f-stop compare to  earlier iso,  higher iso, GO  from 400 to 800 = shorter time or more f-stop =halving the hitting photons increase amp gain

This does not automatically happen in M or B! Do you not agree? I agree that your statement would be true for P, Av, Tv and the Green Rectangle... Your statement is a generalization. However, it cant be true for all the settings on my 5D3.

483

PowerShot / Re: Best Low Light Pocket Size Camera

« on: February 01, 2013, 03:01:29 PM »

RX100. Best compromise from size, weight and most important: image quality. I simply love this little tool. And has also a certain stealthquality....

So many people like the RX100! sanj is going to be a happy person!

484

Portrait / Re: My happy nephew

« on: February 01, 2013, 02:59:18 PM »

How lovely

Agree. That is the "I have no baggage and I don't even know that..." smile. Need to get back to being a kid.

485

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF

« on: February 01, 2013, 02:54:04 PM »

First, the corporate portrait. That is as perfect a headshot as I've ever seen -- and exactly the kind of perfection I'd expect to see from Canon. Imagine being the photographer charged with doing their management headshots!

I downloaded the file and notice that all the metadata was stripped from the photo.

I wonder what camera was used to take it?

Nokia cell phone
 

486

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF

« on: February 01, 2013, 01:23:13 PM »

Press and pray is not my style... If i wanna be somewhat professional id at least get a 5D.

I find "press and pray" to be a very derogatory reference to a very usefull tool.

Follow this scenario....
On the riverbank we have three people taking pictures of a osprey fishing. We have Neuro, with a 1DX and 600mm lens, we have me with a 1Dx and a 600mm lens, and we have my neice with a point/shoot.... Neuro has the presence of mind (and probably has scans to prove it ) to set his camera for burst mode at 10 frames per second... I rely on pushing the shutter quickly, and my neice has to wait a few seconds between pictures......

The Osprey swoops down and snatches up a fish...... Neuro has about 15 shots to choose from as the fish is picked up out of the water.... I have 3 or 4.... my neice gets one from a second after the grab. Who do you think got the nicest shot?.... And as an asside, who do you think is going to be the most excited and happiest with thier picture?

Who cares! I am downstream (in the line of the bird's flight). I have an assault rifle. I shoot the bird. I have a charcoal grill ready and primed. I marinate both (after removing the feathers and descaling etc.). I grill them. Now I get to eat the bird and the fish!
 
<SARCASM/>
Yes!

487

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...

« on: February 01, 2013, 01:10:24 PM »

The new Photodo do not show any longer the old MTF tests manage by Lars Klellberg the founder of Photodo, since years back Photodo owns by a UK  company

Please start your own threads if you want to argue a point that does not directly apply to the threads you usually write into. Please do not hijack threads of others. Please stay on topic on other's threads. It is simple politeness. We are a community. Please help build it. We ALL share this great forum. Contribute. Life is about sharing. Not about who won an argument!

488

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...

« on: February 01, 2013, 12:42:20 PM »

Good thing tomorrow is Saturday

We can type all night...

BTW, does anyone need to go to work?

489

Lighting / Re: Specular Highlights... Feed Back Please

« on: February 01, 2013, 12:37:48 PM »

You should find this very informative.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsPYqxXNMJ0

Thank you! Looking at the video I figured what I meant by saying "It looks washed out towards the edges of the bottle and the glass". See, in the video, he puts a light in the background and that gets the outer shape to show up... I guess it is like shooting a portrait of a model  in a studio (not that I have done any - just seen great pictures on this forum) where a background light accentuates the model's hair - or glass in this case

Steven_urwin I guess I have a better response here. Also the neck in your bottle needs work. Take a look a the final image in the video and you will be able to tell.

490

Lighting / Re: Specular Highlights... Feed Back Please

« on: February 01, 2013, 12:01:42 PM »

Sorry, but it does not appeal to me. It looks washed out towards the edges of the bottle and the glass.

Besides, can you take a look again, I see a halo around the bottle and the glass. It is more pronounced between the two. OK, so I am not one of those guys with a calibrated monitor. Mine is a LCD screen of a HP Probook.

491

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: post your best photographic gear for under 100 euro (100$)

« on: February 01, 2013, 11:52:19 AM »

A rubber band 

+100
and a white plastic bag as a diffuser.
Oh! and the BR strap. My neck thanks me and my shoulder does not complain!

492

Lenses / Re: Advice for shooting House Interior with 5DIII

« on: February 01, 2013, 06:12:05 AM »

Why not first try shooting a panorama and stitch the photos with Microsoft ICE?

Ice stitches good. No hassle. Make sure you have at least 20% overlap...

493

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF

« on: February 01, 2013, 06:06:01 AM »

There is no reason not to have FF cameras except production cost. that will be solved in the future and hopefully all cameras will be FF. Tough i guess APS-C will still always be around. I mean "back in the days" everybody was fine with 35mm film also 

A good step Canon Just get 1.4TC for reach...

And the promised f8 AF fix!

494

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...

« on: February 01, 2013, 01:39:36 AM »

Wondering why would Canon, Nikon would NOT measure actual lenses?

It's a numbers game. If they produce ten thousand lenses of a particular lens (I picked that number out of the air - I could be waaaaaaay out on that one...) and each MTF chart has at least eight squiggles, and each squiggle needs at least fifteen points (with zoom, double that - two charts...) that is a lot of points! So which point do you publish? Best? Worst? Average? Median? Mode? I guess simpler not to publish and statistically QA lenses assuring quality is as expected...

495

Lighting / Re: When do _you_ use a bare bulb diffusor?

« on: January 31, 2013, 10:02:48 PM »

I have used it to fill light when the ceiling was high and not too reflective. Oh, my diffuser is a white plastic bag

I keep one and a rubber band in my camera bag. You may laugh, but it does the job...