March 05, 2015, 02:13:30 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - GuyF

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 22
Yeah, I vaguely recall seeing footage of an Airbus at an airshow where they were doing a slow, wheels-down fly-by. The onboard computer decided they were to land in some nearby trees while the pilot tried to give it full power and save the aircraft.

Amazing what a few lines of bad coding can do.

Technical Support / Completely off topic but you gotta see this....
« on: June 18, 2013, 01:21:00 PM »
Firstly apologies for posting this here as it doesn't talk of dynamic range and taking shots of the inside of lens caps. Mind you, technical support is required - read on:

A brand spanking new Airbus 340-600, the longest passenger airplane ever built, sits just outside its hangar in Toulouse, France without a single hour of airtime.

Enter the Arab flight crew of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies (ADAT) to conduct pre-delivery tests on the ground, such as engine run-ups prior to delivery to Etihad Airways in Abu Dhabi.

The ADAT crew taxied the A340-600 to the run-up area. Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with a virtually empty aircraft. Not having read the run-up manuals, they had no clue just how light an empty A340-600 really is.

The takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit because they had all 4 engines at full power. The aircraft computers thought they were trying to take off, but it had not been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc..).

Then one of the ADAT crew decided to pull the circuit breaker on the Ground Proximity Sensor to silence the alarm. This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air.

The computers automatically released all the brakes and set the aircraft rocketing forward. The ADAT crew had no idea that this is a safety feature so that pilots can't land with the brakes on.

Not one member of the seven-man crew was smart enough to throttle back the engines from their max power setting, so the $200 million brand-new Aircraft crashed into a blast barrier, totaling it.

The extent of injuries to the crew is unknown due to the news blackout in the major media in France and elsewhere.

Finally, the photos are starting to leak out.

A French Airbus: $200 million dollars
Untrained Flight Crew: $300,000 Yearly Salary
Unread Operating Manual: $300

Aircraft meets retaining wall, and the wall wins.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 17, 2013, 01:22:21 PM »
Looks like a 3 to me...but if they were trying to keep it secret then why would they make a strap for it instead of just a standard canon one?

Exactly. I once had a strap with Mickey Mouse on it, didn't mean my camera was made by Disney.

Lenses / Re: 200-400mm1.4x - let the unboxing videos begin...
« on: June 09, 2013, 08:46:53 AM »

Congratulations on your new acquisition  :)

Alas that isn't me in the video - I just found it. Mind you, I could buy one if I really wanted to. I just have to justify it to myself!

Lenses / 200-400mm1.4x - let the unboxing videos begin...
« on: June 09, 2013, 06:40:59 AM »

Lighting / Re: Can a (DSLR) flash cause permanent eye damage?
« on: June 08, 2013, 05:26:27 AM »
Like I said, Richard Feynman viewed a nuclear test through just a car windshield and didn't report damage to his eyes. Is there any flashgun available that is brighter than a nuke?

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 07, 2013, 01:58:35 PM »
Serendipidy - don't know if you've seen this site It gives some good advice that has helped me - go buy that 5D3!


Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 07, 2013, 01:49:55 PM »
Since this thread started off as bird portraits, here's a family portrait.

Duck shots added too for the heck of it.

5D3 and 300mm 2.8 IS
I love this image Guy!  Exquisite!

Krob - very kind of you to say that but as you know with photography often it's just the luck of being in the right place at the right time. I'm visiting an island bird colony at the end of the month so will hopefully have some good shots to show from that.

Lighting / Re: Can a (DSLR) flash cause permanent eye damage?
« on: June 07, 2013, 01:38:37 PM »
I recently saw a programme about Nobel prize winning physicist Richard Feynman who worked on the Manhattan project to build the first nuclear bomb. He said, "They gave out dark glasses that you could watch it with. Dark glasses! Twenty miles away, you couldn’t see a damn thing through dark glasses. So I figured the only thing that could really hurt your eyes (bright light can never hurt your eyes) is ultraviolet light. I got behind a truck windshield, because the ultraviolet can’t go through glass, so that would be safe, and so I could see the damn thing.

Time comes, and this tremendous flash out there is so bright that I duck, and I see this purple splotch on the floor of the truck. I said, “That’s not it. That’s an after-image.” So I look back up, and I see this white light changing into yellow and then into orange. Clouds form and disappear again – from the compression and expansion of the shock wave.

Finally, a big ball of orange, the center that was so bright, becomes a ball of orange that starts to rise and billow a little bit and get a little black around the edges, and then you see it’s a big ball of smoke with flashes on the inside, with the heat of the fire going outwards.

All this took about one minute. It was a series from bright to dark, and I had seen it. I am about the only guy who actually looked at the damn thing – the first Trinity test. Everybody else had dark glasses, and the people at six miles couldn’t see it because they were all told to lie on the floor. I’m probably the only guy who saw it with the human eye."

So there you go, as long as there's a sheet of glass between you and the light, you might be fine 8)

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: June 04, 2013, 01:35:43 PM »
Oscar - that first shot is just screaming out to be converted to black and white! Great images.

Canon General / Re: Seabird colony - change lens or not?
« on: June 03, 2013, 02:39:44 PM »
I was filming with the Scottish Seabird Centre last week, in North Dunbar though, not Isle of May.  I went with the Isle of May ferry, a rib would be much more fun!

Oh you name dropper! First it was filming Rod Stewart now it's the Seabird Centre. Will I have seen any of your stuff on telly?

Seems interesting. Also take a look at this from Canon - replace your flash with incense sticks!

Canon General / Re: Seabird colony - change lens or not?
« on: June 02, 2013, 06:06:14 AM »
Paul - thanks again for the info. From what you say, I should take my crash helmet and keep the visor down at all times.

I'm booked up for the end of June so hopefully the sun might shine and the water will be just above freezing. The trip is by the Scottish Seabird Centre and they supply waterproofs for when you're on their RIB. I don't want any crap on my Billingham so it'll be the Tamrac that gets the abuse. Of course the sensible thing would be just to take my camera and sandwiches in a poly-bag from the supermarket and keep it on my lap during the journey. Light, cheap and disposable!

Sounds like the 70-200 is the way to go.

Glad to hear staff were on hand to take care of your eye.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: June 02, 2013, 05:44:42 AM »
Since this thread started off as bird portraits, here's a family portrait.

Duck shots added too for the heck of it.

5D3 and 300mm 2.8 IS

The lighting in the "family portrait" is exquisite.  Very intimate

Thanks for the comment. I have to thank nature for the lighting, I just stood there and pressed a button!

The original image was a crop of the image below as I thought it maybe worked better.


Canon General / Re: Seabird colony - change lens or not?
« on: June 01, 2013, 08:42:19 AM »
Thanks Fussy, I'll keep that in mind and certainly won't go chasing the wildlife (too much like exercise!)

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 22