rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Rebel T1i exposure questons - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/4f34ea9e0c2655cd?hl=en
* Anything for the Perfect Shot - 8 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
* Olympus EP-1 focusing may doom it for DSLR users - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6b39aaf93aed311f?hl=en
* Running OS X on my PC!!! - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en
* Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware - 5
messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
* How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1415c1c3e6a92134?hl=en
* New Olympus EP-1 beats D3 at low ISO - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ca418075fb445b10?hl=en
* Why Non-Correlating Print, Negative and CMOS Sizes? - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a72842738be30c46?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Rebel T1i exposure questons
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/4f34ea9e0c2655cd?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:04 pm
From: ransley
On Jun 26, 11:32 am, John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 05:16:48 -0700 (PDT), ransley
> <Mark_Rans...@Yahoo.com> wrote in
> <879f9304-e9a7-41ef-b26d-ed8242046...@l2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >I am trying to take a photo of a house in basicly 50% shade with a
> >section of roof in sun, the section off roof in sun overexposes. Would
> >the Highlight Priority or Auto Lighting Optimiser help, Would HDR
> >help. How do I easily set myself up to get even exposures. I am using
> >factory settings.
>
> HDR is a simple and easy solution.
> Take 3-5 shots at a 1 EV interval.
> Combine them with HDR software.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)
I think I will try HDR, the sun filtering in different areas and
shadows do make it more difficult
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anything for the Perfect Shot
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:05 pm
From: John A.
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:34:40 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
wrote:
>
>"whisky-dave" <whisky-dave@final.front.ear> wrote in message
>news:h22opi$obb$1@qmul...
>>
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:AcydnXkyDMKQz9nXnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2009062520543516807-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>> ...but then live with the consequences of that, and don't complain even
>>>> after you have been presented with solutions.
>>>> It is appears you live to complain, and having whatever you use
>>>> functioning optimally is not something you would put any effort into, as
>>>> you would not be able to complain about it.
>>>
>>> You've got to be kidding......I have spent many hundreds of hours
>>> reconfiguring my machine to get it to function the way I want it to.
>>
>> perhaps your next computer should be a Mac. :-)
>>
>>
>For sure, my last one should have been a Mac, but it is about one year too
>late now.....I doubt if there will ever be a, "next computer" This one will
>live to see my demise.
Or vise-versa. Ya never know with computers.
== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:26 pm
From: "Bill Graham"
"John A." <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
news:1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:21:15 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:4a446d53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>> Well that's Vista for ya!
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>>> Time to sell that machine, put your feet up, and find a good book to
>>>> read.
>>>
>>> Personally, I'd upgrade it to XP.
>>>
>>No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to
>>Windows
>>7.
>
> I wish I'd downloaded the beta when it was available. I didn't think
> to do so until a couple weeks after they closed the tap.
>
> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
I understand that the upgrade will be free to current VISTA owners, so you
might as well wait until all the bugs are out......Microsoft likes to use
their customers as software testers........
== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 6:07 pm
From: John Navas
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:26:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
wrote in <FPednXQGmr7U-tjXnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>"John A." <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
>news:1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com...
>> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
>
>I understand that the upgrade will be free to current VISTA owners,
Only to those who buy Vista for a specific period prior to release.
--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)
== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 6:08 pm
From: John Navas
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:03:41 -0400, John A. <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote
in <1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com>:
>On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:21:15 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
>wrote:
>>No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to Windows
>>7.
>
>I wish I'd downloaded the beta when it was available. I didn't think
>to do so until a couple weeks after they closed the tap.
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/download.aspx>
>I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
Seems pretty good to me.
--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 8:00 pm
From: "Bill Graham"
"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:k5sa4519agfda8lkm5s195n1e4dahgsmrk@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:26:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
> wrote in <FPednXQGmr7U-tjXnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>
>>"John A." <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com...
>
>>> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
>>
>>I understand that the upgrade will be free to current VISTA owners,
>
> Only to those who buy Vista for a specific period prior to release.
Well, I just bought this one about 4 months ago, but I would probably have
to reload all my software again after I upgraded it, and I don't want to
have to go through THAT again....
== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 9:51 pm
From: John A.
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:08:56 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:03:41 -0400, John A. <john@nowhere.invalid> wrote
>in <1boa45dnetnqv6j7n3t8v23o6010b4jp1i@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:21:15 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net>
>>wrote:
>
>>>No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to Windows
>>>7.
>>
>>I wish I'd downloaded the beta when it was available. I didn't think
>>to do so until a couple weeks after they closed the tap.
>
><http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/download.aspx>
Nice! I hadn't heard they'd put out another prerelease.
>>I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
>
>Seems pretty good to me.
I'm just a classic, minimalist, function-over-form kinda guy. Keep the
bells & whistles and "let my processor go!"
Maybe someone will come out with an alternate shell that's more like
2k. But looking at the alternate XP shells out there, I'm not so
confident someone will. That crowd seems to go for the bizarre.
== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:21 pm
From: "David J Taylor"
Bill Graham wrote:
[]
> No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to
> Windows 7.
You'll like Windows 7 - very nice and smooth, and has run everything I've
thrown at it. Be sure to give either Vista or Windows 7 enough memory,
though. 2GB for OS and applications.
David
== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:23 pm
From: "David J Taylor"
John A. wrote:
[]
> I wish I'd downloaded the beta when it was available. I didn't think
> to do so until a couple weeks after they closed the tap.
>
> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
Windows-7 release candidate is available for anyone to download, I
understand.
David
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Olympus EP-1 focusing may doom it for DSLR users
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6b39aaf93aed311f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:07 pm
From: Scott W
On Jun 26, 12:10 pm, John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:17:20 -0400, Steven Wandy <swa...@si.rr.com>
> wrote in <12ba45lg13o666tigkp3tt3nfcqkhjg...@4ax.com>:
>
> >On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:50:54 -0700, John Navas
> ><spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> >>Some perhaps, but better compact digitals now have very fast focusing.
>
> >The only ones that I have heard that have very fast focusing is the
> >two m4/3 from Panasonic.
> >...
>
> Then you need to get out more. For example, Digital Photography Review
> said of the Panasonic DMC-FZ8, "the actual delay between pressing the
> button and the shot being taken is almost instantaneous".
You mean here
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/page5.asp
Where they say the full press lag is around 0.7 seconds?
And they say
"*2 Focus speed at the long end of the zoom varies quite widely - from
0.4 to 1.0 seconds, depending on the mode used and the subject matter.
"
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 7:42 pm
From: Steven Wandy
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:07:08 -0700 (PDT), Scott W
<biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote:
> You mean here
>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/page5.asp
>
>Where they say the full press lag is around 0.7 seconds?
>
>And they say
>"*2 Focus speed at the long end of the zoom varies quite widely - from
>0.4 to 1.0 seconds, depending on the mode used and the subject matter.
Yeah - I would certainly say that sounds like "almost instantaneous."
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 7:44 pm
From: Steven Wandy
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:42:02 -0400, Steven Wandy <swandy@si.rr.com>
wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:07:08 -0700 (PDT), Scott W
><biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> You mean here
>>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/page5.asp
>>
>>Where they say the full press lag is around 0.7 seconds?
>>
>>And they say
>>"*2 Focus speed at the long end of the zoom varies quite widely - from
>>0.4 to 1.0 seconds, depending on the mode used and the subject matter.
>
>Yeah - I would certainly say that sounds like "almost instantaneous."
Not meaning to sound sarcastic in the previous post, but I think
people are making a bigger deal out of the AF of the EP1 - certainly
before they get to actually USE the camera.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 8:18 pm
From: SMS
Steven Wandy wrote:
> Not to DSLR users who want it as a smaller backup to their main
> camera. And I think that is the audience that Olympus is "shooting"
> for. People who have already invested in the 4/3 system and lens that
> want something extra.
> Also, most people that have P&S cameras are used to the slower CDAF,
> so it will not come as big a disappointment to them.
The disappointment will be to those current P&S owners that expect the
EP-1 to solve the slow CDAF problem.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Running OS X on my PC!!!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:08 pm
From: Savageduck
On 2009-06-26 16:46:12 -0700, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> said:
> frank wrote:
>>> ------< le Snip>---------
>>> Only security I ever saw that worked was when the security guy would
>> audit the safes and what not.
>
> Hey, you're _lucky_. Read Feynman's autobiography--I don't remember whether
> it was in the first or the second volume--but he discovered that every safe
> in use on the Manhattan Project (which, if you don't know the name, was the
> first atomic bomb) was set to the factory default combination, which anybody
> who had taken the Foley-Belsaw locksmithing correspondence course (which at
> the time was nerd-chic at MIT) would either know or know how to obtain. He
> informed the Powers That Be. Their solution was to issue a memo that said
> "Keep Feynman away from your safes".
Feynman, one of the true geniuses.
The safe cracking story was in "Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman!" in
the chapter titled "Safecracker meets Safecracker."
--
Regards,
Savageduck
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:18 pm
From: Savageduck
On 2009-06-26 17:08:15 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
> On 2009-06-26 16:46:12 -0700, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> said:
>
>> frank wrote:
>>>> ------< le Snip>---------
>
>>>> Only security I ever saw that worked was when the security guy would
>>> audit the safes and what not.
>>
>> Hey, you're _lucky_. Read Feynman's autobiography--I don't remember whether
>> it was in the first or the second volume--but he discovered that every safe
>> in use on the Manhattan Project (which, if you don't know the name, was the
>> first atomic bomb) was set to the factory default combination, which anybody
>> who had taken the Foley-Belsaw locksmithing correspondence course (which at
>> the time was nerd-chic at MIT) would either know or know how to obtain. He
>> informed the Powers That Be. Their solution was to issue a memo that said
>> "Keep Feynman away from your safes".
>
> Feynman, one of the true geniuses.
>
> The safe cracking story was in "Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman!" in
> the chapter titled "Safecracker meets Safecracker."
BTW the bottom line on that story was, the safe in question never had
the combination changed from the factory default settings, and there
were only 2 of those to check, the second one opened the safe.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:09 pm
From: Chris Malcolm
J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> John Navas wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:04:02 GMT, "David J Taylor"
>>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> wrote
>>> in <Sj61m.48055$OO7.29699@text.news.virginmedia.com>:
>>>
>>>> John Navas wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Garmin GPSMAP 176/176C
>>>>> Power Source: Four AA batteries (not included)
>>>>> Battery life: 4 to 16 hours based on backlight setting
>>>>
>>>> GPSMAP 176 - "This product has been discontinued"
>>>> https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=140#gpsmap176
>>>> Hardly the latest.
>>>
>>> What I actually meant to look up was the 76Cx, but fair enough,
>>> albeit nothing in rebuttal.
>>>
>>> Garmin GPSMAP 76Cx
>>> Battery: 2 AA batteries (not included)
>>> Battery life: 18 hours, typical
>>
>> That unit appears to date from the end of 2005, so hardly one of
>> "Garmin's latest receivers". However, I would also like to know just
>> which model Chris Malcolm was referring to.
> Well, the Etrex HCx models will go about 25 hours and hot start in 3
> seconds.
The HCx models use the latest low power chip set and are what I was
referring to. But note that Garmin's cited battery life assume a
specific kind of average use. The units have various modes of use,
some of which require more power, some less. But that's about 50% more
life than the earlier Sirf powered Etrexen, which in turn IIRC were
around double the life of the first models.
--
Chris Malcolm
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 5:53 pm
From: "Peter"
"Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2009062615113611272-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
> On 2009-06-26 13:59:32 -0700, "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> said:
>
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>> news:2009062509321527722-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>
>>>
>>> I am currently using a Promote Systems GPS on my D300:
>>> https://www.promotesystems.com/products/Promote-GPS.html
>>>
>>> My only complaint is the initial acquire time which can range from 45sec
>>> to several minutes, however once running it provides accurate fixes even
>>> with tree cover.
>>>
>>
>> How much weight does it add?
>> This may sound stupid, but does it mount any place other than the hot
>> shoe?
>
> It adds less than 1 oz
>
> No, the mount is the hot shoe, however the times I have had to use the
> pop-up flash or add my SB-800, I have just pulled it off the hot shoe and
> let it dangle from the 6 inch cable and still get an accurate fix.
>
> I know the Nikon GP-1, which is also hot shoe mounted has a clip which
> will allow attachment to the camera strap. It does the same job, but will
> add another $100 to the bill.
>
>
After checking the price difference is about $50. But, more important is
loss of use of the 10 pin connector as a remote release.
--
Peter
Life is a compromise.
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 6:08 pm
From: Chris Malcolm
In rec.photo.digital John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On 26 Jun 2009 12:13:44 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
> in <7ajsboF1vdl3nU2@mid.individual.net>:
>>In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> Thank you, but I'm thoroughly familiar with how to use GPS -- I'd even
>>> be willing to bet that I have far more hours of experience than you do,
>>> since I routinely use it for marine navigation.
>>
>>There aren't many trees in the sea :-)
> I also hike, but of course you're just being "cute".
No I'm not. I'm pointing out that you have claimed that most of your
experience is in the easiest and least demanding GPS navigation
environment. The topic under discussion is GPS navigation under tree
cover, which is probably the most demanding both of GPS performance
and user skills. I've so far posted quite a bit of explanation about
what causes the problems and some ways of getting round them. You've
had very little to say on the topic beyond that it's an "issue".
It would have been both welcome and impressive had you added some more
helpful details about how to navigate under difficult tree
cover. Instead you chose to suggest you probably have far more hours
of GPS experience than I have -- in the simplest and easiest GPS
environment there is!
>>> The problem with tree cover is that GPS in a camera, the point of this
>>> increasingly silly discussion, would be turned off except when taking
>>> pictures, so would have to make a new fix when the camera is turned on.
>>
>>Not necessarily. You seem to be unaware of the way such long batterey
>>life instant response GPS systems can work. They can for example run a
>>cycle of turning on briefly to maintain lock, so that they can do an
>>instant hot start when required, without having to be on all the time.
> I'm familiar with how they work.
If you gave a bit more detail in your comments it would help to dispel
the impression that you aren't.
>>> Or are you suggesting the camera would be draining its battery by
>>> keeping the GPS turned on all the time, and that users should be
>>> expected to manually acquire new birds from time to time?
>>
>>It's also the case that the very latest GPS chip sets consume very
>>much less power than their predecessors, and wouldn't add much extra
>>drain to a camera if left fully active all the time the camera was on.
> Simply not workable, for fairly obvious reasons.
I suspect this is a difference of opinion between us about what
constitutes an acceptable size of battery and an acceptable battery
life. I'd be happy with today's best power drain. I guess that five
years should be enough to develop to develop GPS receivers of low
enough power drain to satisfy you.
>>There are plenty of technology options now available to solve these
>>problems, and sufficient well-established demand for low power fast
>>response GPS in other applications to fund their development outside
>>of in-camera market demands.
> If there were, we'd undoubtedly be seeing such products flooding the
> market, yet we don't. What we do see is cell phones with GPS and
> (mostly) A-GPS, mostly because of mandated E-911 positioning, and
> powered only when the cell phone is on, yet still a battery drain.
> (The difference in battery life of my TM506 with A-GPS on and off is
> easily noticeable.)
You can't flood a market until the products have been developed. I was
talking about the technological possibilities of these products being
developed. They are being developed. DSLRs with GPS options have been
available for some time. Compacts with GPS built in are just
arriving. The power requirements of GPS have been steadily dropping in
much the same way as have computer power requirements. I've not seen
mention of any technological barrier which will stop the continuing
development of lower power units.
--
Chris Malcolm
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 6:27 pm
From: Savageduck
On 2009-06-26 17:53:57 -0700, "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> said:
> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
> news:2009062615113611272-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>> On 2009-06-26 13:59:32 -0700, "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> said:
>>
>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2009062509321527722-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am currently using a Promote Systems GPS on my D300:
>>>> https://www.promotesystems.com/products/Promote-GPS.html
>>>>
>>>> My only complaint is the initial acquire time which can range from
>>>> 45sec to several minutes, however once running it provides accurate
>>>> fixes even with tree cover.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How much weight does it add?
>>> This may sound stupid, but does it mount any place other than the hot shoe?
>>
>> It adds less than 1 oz
>>
>> No, the mount is the hot shoe, however the times I have had to use the
>> pop-up flash or add my SB-800, I have just pulled it off the hot shoe
>> and let it dangle from the 6 inch cable and still get an accurate fix.
>>
>> I know the Nikon GP-1, which is also hot shoe mounted has a clip which
>> will allow attachment to the camera strap. It does the same job, but
>> will add another $100 to the bill.
>>
>>
>
>
> After checking the price difference is about $50. But, more important
> is loss of use of the 10 pin connector as a remote release.
The GP-1 has a pass through to allow for a remote.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 7:43 pm
From: Savageduck
On 2009-06-26 18:27:03 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
> On 2009-06-26 17:53:57 -0700, "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> said:
>
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>> news:2009062615113611272-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>> On 2009-06-26 13:59:32 -0700, "Peter" <peternew@nospamoptonline.net> said:
>>>
>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2009062509321527722-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am currently using a Promote Systems GPS on my D300:
>>>>> https://www.promotesystems.com/products/Promote-GPS.html
>>>>>
>>>>> My only complaint is the initial acquire time which can range from
>>>>> 45sec to several minutes, however once running it provides accurate
>>>>> fixes even with tree cover.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How much weight does it add?
>>>> This may sound stupid, but does it mount any place other than the hot shoe?
>>>
>>> It adds less than 1 oz
>>>
>>> No, the mount is the hot shoe, however the times I have had to use the
>>> pop-up flash or add my SB-800, I have just pulled it off the hot shoe
>>> and let it dangle from the 6 inch cable and still get an accurate fix.
>>>
>>> I know the Nikon GP-1, which is also hot shoe mounted has a clip which
>>> will allow attachment to the camera strap. It does the same job, but
>>> will add another $100 to the bill.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> After checking the price difference is about $50. But, more important
>> is loss of use of the 10 pin connector as a remote release.
>
> The GP-1 has a pass through to allow for a remote.
I have to correct myself here, the GP-1 allows for connection of the
MC-DC2 Remote Cable, which is the mini-UPS D-90 remote, not the MC-30
or MC-36 10-pin remotes.
However Solmeta has a 10-pin splitter cable allowing 2 input devices,
as well of their own Geotagger N2 (also hot shoe mount, but which
includes a strap clip & remote cable.) It has some other features, but
as it uses its own battery in conjunction with the camera battery,
seems to be a little on the bulky and inelegant compared to the GP-1 &
PromoteGPS.
http://www.solmeta.com/line.asp?id=18&imgid=75
http://www.solmeta.com/products.asp?lid=18&imgid=71
--
Regards,
Savageduck
==============================================================================
TOPIC: How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1415c1c3e6a92134?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 6:34 pm
From: ASAAR
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:32:37 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote:
> I have been kicking around on the internet, and before that on Fidonet
> for about 25 years, and have grown a pretty thick skin, and a back that
> sheds flames, and insults pretty well.
So that explains it, I've got at least 1/2 dozen years on you so
you're a newbie! And that's just considering modem use. My first
computer (completely hand built) preceded that by a good number of
years and it had no OS, just a simple monitor that had to be loaded
from paper tape, and the boot code to load the tape I/O routine into
memory had to be hand toggled into that same memory which at the
time was a whopping 8k bytes, soon to be expanded to 24k so I could
run a better BASIC interpreter. The first improvement for that
ancient system, before the added memory was a monitor in EPROM which
retired the paper tape.
I used several of those BBS networks, some of which were really
large multi-user BBS systems, and they often networked with other
multi-user BBSes. I even ran one (single user, non-network) for a
while. But before that was the first BBS, Ward and Randy's single
user system in Chicago back in the late 1970s. No charge to use it,
but at 300 (with luck) and more often connecting at 110 baud, long
distance rates made it only an occasional and very brief indulgence.
> Getting all that upset about something on newsgroups
> isn't worth the trouble.
There are a couple of guys from the old BBS networks that
habitually got themselves vacations from the moderated BBSes due to
repeatedly being abusive. A couple were quite knowledgeable and the
others much less so, though they didn't realize it. I've seen them
here in newsgroup_land. In some ways, not much has changed. :)
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 9:58 pm
From: l v
KILL-POST RichA wrote:
> Plastic? Thermal expansion of plastic is much greater than metal and
> it could very well be why we are seeing focus issues that need "lens
> re-calibration" at service depots or that we see the need for in-
> camera focus fine-tuning. Even cameras and lenses that appear to be
> metal today may have plastic cells holding lenses, components in
> cameras. The cameras are produced in a control temp environment but
> that isn't real life use where temps can vary by 10's of degrees. I
> don't remember all metal AF SLRs needing focus fine-tuning (or having
> that facility) in the film days.
IMO ...
1) Manufacturing quality controls are lacking.
2) The smaller sensor sizes of digital cameras when compared to a 35mm
film camera, results in a smaller depth of field - given all other
factors are kept the same. Less room for error.
#1 + #2 = focus errors you speak of.
--
Len
==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Olympus EP-1 beats D3 at low ISO
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ca418075fb445b10?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 6:55 pm
From: Rich
On Jun 26, 11:32 am, "PDM" <pdcm99[deletethisbit]@tiscali.co.uk>
wrote:
> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c1368505-65e2-4a72-ba8a-e8a15524b500@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Honest! :)
>
> > See what the EP-1 can do with a scene with no DR and no moving parts?
>
> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=32227706
>
> No moving parts? What about the release button, and the lens release button
> and all the other buttons, et al
>
> PDM
In reference to the scene. No action. A static scene with narrow
DR. Hardly a test for any camera.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why Non-Correlating Print, Negative and CMOS Sizes?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a72842738be30c46?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:02 pm
From: Bob Larter
Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:32:02 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:37:19 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> nospam wrote:
>>>>> In article <4a3dd3d6$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
>>>>> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> People say that anything over 300 is wasted, but I've yet to see a
>>>>>>>> convincing argument that proves this. Of course, I've never seen
>>>>>>>> convincing argument that anything over 300 improves, either.
>>>>>>> it depends on the image and viewing conditions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/printer-ppi/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Laser printers used to be 300 dots per inch (dpi), but evolved to 600
>>>>>>> and even 1200 dpi. Why? People could see ragged edges on letters on 300
>>>>>>> dpi laser printers. At 600 dpi edges appear smoother. Some can tell the
>>>>>>> difference between 600 and 1200 dpi printers if the paper quality is
>>>>>>> high.
>>>>>> That's for monochrome bi-level prints. Continuous tone images are much
>>>>>> less demanding. For example; dye-sub prints give good results at 100-150DPI.
>>>>> i find that to be extremely low, at least with ink jet printers, and
>>>>> can easily see a difference between that and 250-300 ppi (not dpi).
>>>> Inkjets aren't continuous tone, they use dithering.
>>> Epson printers can be continuous tone for all practical purposes.
>>> Their printers control droplet size and make use of blending to mix
>>> colours on the paper.
>> Stick a glossy inkjet print under a good magnifier some time.
>
> With the purpose of seeing what, exactly?
That it isn't a continous tone print. You should be able to see the
dithering quite clearly.
> I'm asking not to be difficult but because I've just done what you
> asked and I don't know what stage of the image forming is responsible
> for what I am seeing.
Some combination of the printer driver & the printer firmware.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:13 pm
From: Bob Larter
Bob Williams wrote:
> Bob Larter wrote:
>> John Navas wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:35:44 -0700, Bob Williams <mytbobnospam@cox.net>
>>> wrote in <kMR_l.9352$FI5.6956@newsfe12.iad>:
>>>
>>>> Some people LIKE the shallow depth of field effect, because it keeps
>>>> mundane backgrounds from distracting the eye from the central image.
>>>> In fact, one reason that many people CHOOSE a DSLR over a good P/S,
>>>> is because it is much harder to get a shallow depth of field with
>>>> small sensor cameras like most P/S on the market.
>>>
>>> Because they'ye been sold a bill of goods, since a good compact digital
>>> can produce depth of field sufficiently shallow for most purposes.
>>> <http://profile.imageshack.us/user/jnavas/images/detail/#384/p1030671bb9ca2.jpg>
>>>
>>
>> Hrm. The bokeh in that shot is pretty ugly, & you can clearly see the
>> cars in the background.
>>
>> Here's a DLSR shot with moderately shallow DoF (F4.0)(warning - large
>> file):
>> <http://users.tpg.com.au/lionel6//CRW_4710.jpg>
Bah! - I uploaded the wrong file.
This is the good one:
<http://users.tpg.com.au/lionel6//CRW_4708-1.jpg>
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
