Stupidest, most overpriced, most poorly executed camera in the lasttwo years

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by RichA, May 14, 2013.

  1. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Why should you care, then. Or could it be, that I'm simply letting you
    dig yourself in deeper. It's noted how you always resort to a personal
    attack when it is shown that you are dead wrong.
     
    PeterN, May 19, 2013
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    You really are an asshole.
    Bye
     
    PeterN, May 19, 2013
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Guest Guest

    no, it could not.

    quite the opposite, actually. you're digging yourself deeper with every
    post.

    you refuse to acknowledge your mistake and you are making a bigger fool
    of yourself with every post.
    i didn't insult you at all.

    meanwhile, all you do is insult, especially when you are wrong.
     
    Guest, May 19, 2013
    #83
  4. RichA

    Guest Guest

    more insults, as usual.

    this quote of yours made just moments earlier applies to you so very
    perfectly:
     
    Guest, May 19, 2013
    #84
  5. RichA

    Eric Stevens Guest

    So have I. You are correct.

    Too many layers of double-negatives. :-(
     
    Eric Stevens, May 19, 2013
    #85
  6. is an EVF. Not an LCD.

    And RichA never met a transflexive LCD. These are readable
    in full sunlight --- in fact, you'd likely switch off the
    backlight them to save battery power.

    (As to wearing glasses --- yes, I wear glasses using optical
    viewfinders, too. So why shouldn't I use them for LCDs?)

    [...]
    Because you're likely going to be seasick.
    And hold the camera even more unstably? 2 arms
    extended-stand?

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 20, 2013
    #86
  7. This bird is sitting, and you can presumably get close enough
    that the active focus point only covers the eye. (Yep, they're
    usually active for a larger area than the etched part in the
    ground glass). Unless that photo is an extreme crop, that is.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 20, 2013
    #87
  8. The AF knows for every focus points:
    - distance and direction of focus compared to the current
    lens focus setting --- or "no contrast (e.g. sky)"
    - approximate absolute focus setting of the lens right
    now

    So the AF sees in 3D ... not just in the 2D photos are in.

    Therefore the AF sees that the plane is *much* closer to the
    lens than the trees. If it saw the man down at the bottom,
    it again would be much closer.

    Now, physics dictate that one can change the distance to the
    lens only gradually --- one can't teleport --- and thus the
    range to the plane is only gradually changing. It doesn't
    matter if it also shifts from AP point to AF point (which
    again won't be jumpy, but gradually, even if very fast),
    if a neighbouring AF point of the plane suddenly jumps to
    the approximate distance of the plane and the original one
    suddenly jumps to the background of the others (off plane)
    near it, then of course the plane must have moved by 1 AF
    point and this one should be switched active then.

    Same if a tree suddenly comes into view in front of the plane
    you're tracking: the AF jumps to "much closer" and thus the
    camera knows it's off target.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 20, 2013
    #88
  9. RichA

    J. Clarke Guest

    Ever see a Steadicam?
     
    J. Clarke, May 21, 2013
    #89
  10. RichA

    Eric Stevens Guest

    This last is a matter of programming and I doubt if you know the
    intimate details of the D300s' focussing program. That's why I asked
    Savageduck who almost certainly will know what it does.
     
    Eric Stevens, May 22, 2013
    #90
  11. How much does one weight? Doesn't it need to be adjusted
    exactly for the wearer and camera (at least it's weight?

    Don't the usual users of Steadycams have rather large displays
    to see what they're filming, and not some jeveler's loupe
    type viewer?

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 22, 2013
    #91
  12. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Yes which is why I find manual focusing useful as the subject might not yet be in view.
    Not on a camera no, I have used the built in magnifier if that's what you mean.
     
    Whisky-dave, May 22, 2013
    #92
  13. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

     
    Whisky-dave, May 22, 2013
    #93
  14. Of course you can always do suboptimal programming.
    I'm describing what is possible because the PDAF knows distance.

    A simple method possible with even a single AF is to delay a
    moment if the distance suddenly jumps closer (and to continue
    focussing the previous measured rate of reducing or increasing
    distance) --- until either something close to the expected
    distance is found again or the time-out has reached. (And you
    can always add configurable timeout or the allowed change of
    velocity parallel to the optical axis --- or an AF Stop button.)

    As to the aircraft in front of trees: using the closest AF
    measurement tracks the aircraft just fine --- and that method
    is a real old hat, back from when multiple AF points could
    be in use at the same time. It was an old hat with the 20D,
    for example.
    Savageduck has the sourcecode of the D300s' focussing program?

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 22, 2013
    #94
  15. RichA

    Savageduck Guest

     
    Savageduck, May 22, 2013
    #95
  16. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    I always managed to twist the focusing ring to focus on what I wanted to focus on at that instant, might not have always worked. If I wanted the left hand side in focus then I focused on that.


    Can I do this while following the subject, I hate the idea of reapeadly going back to my camera controls it's like watching someone on their mobile phone (not talking).

    Do you think people let the camera focus because there''s no other option ?
    do people leave there cameras on auto because there's no other option.

    So in the furture when video camera get better we'd be better off shooting video.

    No I make the choice with manual that's what it means.

    Who can me or the autofocus system ?
     
    Whisky-dave, May 22, 2013
    #96
  17. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    I find it easier especailly at gig wher elow lights and bright lights mingle and flash and you never know quite what's happening and when.
     
    Whisky-dave, May 22, 2013
    #97
  18. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

     
    Whisky-dave, May 22, 2013
    #98
  19. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    To clarify, I was not the least bit confused. I try to be precise in my
    language. All manual lenses are non-afs. perhaps if nospam used
    precision in his language, it might be an interesting discussion. but of
    course he will accuse me of twisting.
     
    PeterN, May 23, 2013
    #99
  20. You are simply confused to an extreme...

    All non-AF lenses are of course not of the AF-S type of
    AF since they are not AF at all. But with Nikon if one
    says "non-afs" the obvious meaning is AF without a motor
    in the lens. That is either just "AF" or "AF-D", and has
    nothing to do with manual focus only lenses.

    In other words, your language was not precise due to
    confusion.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, May 23, 2013
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.