Messages

16

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Anyone use Wasabi Power Batteries?

« on: April 19, 2013, 10:50:54 PM »

Take a couple quarters out of your pocket and put them on one side of a balance scale.

On the other side, place enough TNT to balance the quarters.

That's about how much energy is in an LP-E6 -- 13 Wh ~= 9 g explosives.

I don't know about all y'all, but I think I trust Canon a bit more than some random company named after a spicy condiment to keep my hands and face from blowing up....

Cheers,

b&

Lol... Awesome! I never thought of it like that.

17

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign

« on: April 15, 2013, 03:33:11 PM »

First, I'm kinda surprised they're not also taking flak from the pushback of the 90% of Americans fed up with the NRA. Their words say this is for hunting game, but it reads much more like a sniper rifle for somebody wanting to take out an entire SWAT team ("pigs") with a single magazine. The veiling, it is very thin.

I can't help but laugh when someone believes that 90% number.

(pro-tip: a survey of 1000 college students asked leading questions is not even remotely representative of the general adult population)

Well, we're really getting off-topic, now.

But here's a very comprehensive collection of data on surveys about guns. You'll see, very consistently, from every pollster, roughly 90% support for universal background checks.

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

You may well oppose universal background checks. But you're not only in a very small minority of Americans, you're in a rather small minority of NRA members.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/03/90-percent-of-americans-want-expanded-background-checks-on-guns-why-isnt-this-a-political-slam-dunk/

And, yet, the NRA is doing everything in its power to prevent universal background checks -- including threatening its own most favored members of Congress if they even allow the matter to come to a vote.

Cheers,

b&

This is way off topic, I shouldn't have responded in the first place.

Any other admin feel free to delete the political portion of this thread, my posts included.  Having already participated, I'm biased, and it would be improper for me to take further action.

18

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign

« on: April 15, 2013, 02:23:51 PM »

First, I'm kinda surprised they're not also taking flak from the pushback of the 90% of Americans fed up with the NRA. Their words say this is for hunting game, but it reads much more like a sniper rifle for somebody wanting to take out an entire SWAT team ("pigs") with a single magazine. The veiling, it is very thin.

I can't help but laugh when someone believes that 90% number.

(pro-tip: a survey of 1000 college students asked leading questions is not even remotely representative of the general adult population)

19

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign

« on: April 15, 2013, 02:19:50 PM »

so what they make scopes....

As always, animal rights activists seem to live on another planet and completely fail to connect to the rest of the world, but certainly the us american public. After all arms manufacturers don't kill, and gun's don't either, it's the people that use them, so if people abuse automatic weapons or scopes it's certainly only the fault of a small minority? But well, here's probably not the place to discuss that in depth.

Anyway, the issue of some with Nikon is that they the lack of differentiation between shooting for re-balancing the wildlife after human impact or general sports hunting of non-endangered species and trophy hunting that is a factor in severely diminishing some animal species in africa (but they sponsor trophy safaris), for example see http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/the-wrong-kind-of-photo-shoot-nikon-in-the-line-of-fire-over-rifle-sights-for-big-game-hunting-8556123.html

But for some reason or another Nikon doesn't seem to be entirely unaffected by the pressure - they recently re-designed their arms website to exclude shots of happy hunters standing in 19s century pose above capital prey and renamed it from "Nikon Hunting" to "Nikon Sport Optics".

I've been a hunter all my life.  My personal philosophy is that I'll never hunt something that I either can't eat, or isn't a genuine nuisance/threat.  So I would never go trophy hunting, but as long as it's species with a stable population, I'm not opposed to other people doing it.

20

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?

« on: April 11, 2013, 07:39:23 PM »

If you set the bar to too high you will just end up with a bunch of smart ass's asses.

Or worse... grammar Nazis. 

21

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?

« on: April 11, 2013, 02:42:54 PM »

.
Just curious -- what is the minimum IQ requirement for posting in the forum here? And by "IQ" I mean the old school variety -- Intelligence Quotient.

We just had a thread shut down for being "beyond stupid." That would suggest that posts must meet a certain intellectual level before proceeding to full forum discussion. What's the standard? Surely we would not be capricious about such a thing.

Or, is it possible people may be stressed over an upcoming taxes due date in the U.S? That may explain some reduced tolerance for our mentally challenged members.

Since I'm not the brightest lens in the mix here, I'd like some guidance on this matter so pressing to me.

Thanks.

That thread almost immediately degenerated into insults, which I'm sure was the intention of the OP.  They can troll somewhere else.

insults or sophomoric humor?

The insults were deleted, the sophomoric humor was left alone.

Humor is fine, but when it degenerates into mean spirited attacks and name calling, either mods have to babysit the thread, or we have to shut it down completely.  There have been too may threads that have gone the wrong way lately, and this one had no redeeming value.

22

Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?

« on: April 11, 2013, 12:58:07 PM »

.
Just curious -- what is the minimum IQ requirement for posting in the forum here? And by "IQ" I mean the old school variety -- Intelligence Quotient.

We just had a thread shut down for being "beyond stupid." That would suggest that posts must meet a certain intellectual level before proceeding to full forum discussion. What's the standard? Surely we would not be capricious about such a thing.

Or, is it possible people may be stressed over an upcoming taxes due date in the U.S? That may explain some reduced tolerance for our mentally challenged members.

Since I'm not the brightest lens in the mix here, I'd like some guidance on this matter so pressing to me.

Thanks.

That thread almost immediately degenerated into insults, which I'm sure was the intention of the OP.  They can troll somewhere else.

23

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 1DX Junk camera??

« on: April 11, 2013, 09:32:18 AM »

I must not be in a good mood today.  I thought that was kinda stupid. 

Beyond stupid.

Locked

24

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: The Blackmagic Production Camera 4K

« on: April 10, 2013, 02:48:22 PM »

The 35mm Sigma has 2.5 stops better resolution that the 35mm Canon.

The 50mm Zeiss has 5 stops better resolution than the Canon 50mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.2L.

The Nikon 80-400mm has a 5 stop resolution advantage over the ridiculously old Canon 100-400mm.

Stops?  You keep using that word...  I don't think it means what you think it means.

I can only really comment on the 80-400 (new version, old was not even worth comparing) vs 100-400.  The Nikon is sharper at the wide end in the center, and the Canon is sharper at the long end in the center.  They're comparable in the corners at all focal lengths.

If you're using a lens like this, long end performance is probably the most important. But YMMV.

25

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: The Blackmagic Production Camera 4K

« on: April 10, 2013, 01:33:04 AM »

I'm not all that interested in Video (well not at all honestly), but this still is pretty cool.

One thing that really strikes me, is the price.  More precisely the price compared to a 4k display.  You can get three of these for the cost of the cheapest 4k display.   I just find that amazing.

26

Lenses / Re: Is there any chance this is legit?

« on: April 09, 2013, 12:59:29 PM »

Scam

Quick image search shows these images being used on other auction sites.

https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZivX6H7i7_1_1UVw_1Z1_1iKwTx9kUKSshvHW5w9I_1LRjoXdCFLxpHOqQK16hfvvY50PrvBHlbcQPF1G2UCvDdgSqy0W9muKQOABX7_1yC7lXdFh72K-5mmX2icjisqQadGKHbcqzWbMpzw0bttPFkjaRLxOIJ-THz4DfN7YhkDcTOv49SMVhbvNo9_16ZCY3066dcuFFGq-Nyx74DNREa95jmXgdRY0ceTRIqB0RXpNU7Shw_14VxkE-sYPhMvwiUYjIZereFV7FTsgiTjE4Ata1rVM-HGQc_1YaaRNFXQZYSOKj8K615Lus_1amRrSpimd6dABDXVwhqsEsV4yKyvzn9SIUQq3NXPhQFsiI25eiGQD7xeP8bgpXF5LPlmP_1DVJtDK9uutrBBarjp7xalZkzHyGmDfvZo5aAU58GUmED1Ksn4EpzNf-lqea7OXl14tQnzqPhUApNwndKWNCZUJZqr01NvHgAc47srIOeb1ztygA9sOITsk2IEoFQlLkgFozvE2iSTu8_1--vco1e_1lJ9wP_10KCKXr5KuAS5WPO1JDF8Ja8JI89UnBc4w84IApqx0DB2j0AOmD7z4ls1vg_1LFnL-KvcATD2TdfVk0WBdYqLsETeM7qcNNOQz_1FwSRjhSJXLN3-Cc5rADXF3PF4-IqrV_1psQPZ2u32VwvMwnE2zNzpJbaOLYbiTp2o87YOQhD9VEHZmnvNahFFZt_1cbVm5w0XZ_1v-vvfE0CCcXZrC-1u9HaD6tSHojOprNSefDo0uUjR-KsAM3K-YN7pxVINhZihkdBqyFuyAOyc94JjmzfhooKQzBKcsD-bFAMbcC-2AG3Oi7_1ZEH7Z-P02sAMWNB8_19qBu7_1p3ymbWDmqhB095dmSiX9ouZd6gWlU8BaMeimvLI2a-F4jgO9yGQuXzNZ16WjnYE7kqxFagbjfLouId0Rmnwjej4OG9_1d5VtNrB3Xa5HZeTVYclk2myLUA7KNfex8JuRGweNRErlLNDSzoESgeSshXoBhuuWtUxjE3HKP0o9Z7es9QayvUNGbzNXaafSMjFGzUFgGIf7rKN--59SBnRyfa1na-lWiEtmyKV7lI1CgviFl3kGpGHVfjrIljPuW3-X80EDTMxMAvrnUsMNNbklcB6Qv0B-pgAJltWUuQMlYg1XDCORcp2UamfNpptHcnrLiYy8_1UIF6HR-hxGKo8-dw8mFcNdCeWqCnRfNP6xyJm1OSbT-njTJdOWi-KJjOVZjJsyeTNz_1-CC2mRKJxXNegIPXd0a98S8Nj3vSYLIpr-PV_1T1IsA0Tdwsx66BbxUIwbNISDTWRq9RXOaLcnST_134l5c52hw&hl=en&authuser=0&bih=666&biw=1268

27

EOS Bodies / Re: diy ideas on how to protect camera from rain?

« on: April 07, 2013, 03:55:08 PM »

Could you better describe the hole you cut?!?! Did you take any measurements? Where did you source this "plastic bag"? Bands of rubber, not sure what these are?!?!? What type of scissors? I am left handed, do they make these left handed? Could you post a DIY video and a mini-review?

I'f you're not going to be helpful, at least be funny.  Sadly, you quite missed the mark on both. You are not adding anything to this community by posting such inane drivel, merely detracting.

Someone asked a genuine question, obviously seeking input from people that have done similar things in the past in an effort to not reinvent the wheel.  You are under no obligation to read these posts if you are uninterested, and posting; doubly so.  And since this forum offends you so, feel free to leave at any time.  A full refund will gladly be offered.

28

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Batteries and AF

« on: April 07, 2013, 12:37:28 AM »

This is (highly) unlikely, but I'll throw it out there any way...

Do you use magic lantern?

On my 60D I had back button AF magically turn itself on, and then back off shortly thereafter. In my perception AF just stopped working, then started again.  The second time it happened is when I figured out what was happening.  But then it hasn't happened since.

I suspect it was caused by ML, but I have no actual proof.  ML saving it's settings on the card is the main reason I suspected it.  It may be completely unrelated to ML though.

29

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS-1D C Firmware After NAB

« on: April 02, 2013, 03:23:58 PM »

I hope the people at Magic Lantern get their hands on this and reverse engineer the technology for the 1DX and 5DMK3.

Last I read, they have no intentions of ever bringing Magic Lantern to the 1DX, and explicitly stated they will never attempt to hack it to become a 1DC.

And I agree completely.  It's not really a gentlemen's agreement, being one sided and all; more like a gentlemen's nod.  As long as Canon doesn't try and stop them, and they've been WAY more generous in that regard than Nikon would ever consider, the ML team has no intention of pushing too far.  Turning a 1DX into a 1DC in firmware would be too far.

They're (ML Devs) even speculating that a few "suspiciously convenient" hooks were left in recent Canon firmwares just for them.  Which if it's true, means Canon isn't just turning a blind eye, they're passively assisting.  That's huge, and bodes well for the future of ML.  And shows that Canon sees the benefit of having them around, much like a robust 3rd party ecosystem benefits them.

30

Lenses / Re: New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]

« on: March 27, 2013, 11:18:34 AM »

Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?

I find it great for football (american, but both would probably apply; as well as any other large field games, rugby, polo, baseball, etc.), you can see nearly the whole field at 100mm to scan for interesting action, and almost instantly be at 400mm to get in to the action.  If you're constantly going from one end of the range to the other, it's much faster with the push/pull.

The push/pull was much less useful, but in no way a hindrance, for things where I was staying at the same focal length for long periods of time; like when I shot a "Dirty Girl" mud run.

Would I want all zooms to be like that?  Absolutely not!  But I do think the 100-400 and it's common uses lend themselves to the more expedient, brute force method, that the push/pull provides.