|
Oh I didn't know he was referring to that other guy. No, I get that. I thought he was just saying "woah, Nikons man, I can't handle poo poo that's different" and talking about himself. My bad.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2010 06:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
pwn posted:The N64 controller owned but my sister hated it. She preferred a third party controller like the black one in this picture, that I hated. She consistently kicked my rear end in Mariokart 64, whatever controller she used. Gah, I hated those drat 3rd-rate controllers, but it's the only thing my parents would buy to replace the Nintendo-brand one that died of root beer poisoning. Besides, how else do you show the ladies how good you are at Smash Bros. if you don't have those calluses on your thumbs? On an unrelated note, I bought a Bronica GS-1 from a guy on eBay (he's in the US) about 2 weeks ago and it's been stuck in Canadian customs for a week now. I've concluded that it's either because the seller laced the thing in cocaine, or custom officers think it's some funky looking gun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2010 06:53
|
|
was directed at DaNzA, not fronkpies.
|
Hop Pocket posted:That's funny - almost completely different from Canon (except for aperture priority enabling the front wheel). In AE on my Canon, at leaset, the back wheel allows you to adjust the exposure +/- 2 stops. How does the Nikon let you do this? On the more advanced models, there are also plenty of custom settings to fine tune the controls to your liking. On aperture priority, my front wheel changes aperture, the back wheel does EV -/+ 3 stops. I've only used the xxxD line of Canons, but I reckon the more complex models also have huge menus and huge manuals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2010 09:40
|
|
|
orange lime posted:Good point. Hopefully the guy who insisted you use his D3 isn't some kind of gear nut who decided that your 7D wasn't good enough or something? Mannequin posted:I guess the real question is, why the hell were you using somebody else's camera to take pictures of an important event? He is a bit of a gear nut, and i didn't have have anything but my pop up flash for the 7d so he thought it would be best to give me the nikon. EDIT: Missed that argument on the last page, I could quite easily have learned the camera within half an hour (at least most of what I needed) but I had absolutely no prep time at all. I can now say I have a deep down hatred that I don't think I will ever be able to get rid of for Nikon products haha 
fronkpies fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Mar 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2010 11:27
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:Oh I didn't know he was referring to that other guy. No, I get that.  Nah it's all good, and yeah I was referring to the poor guy who had no time to learn and just picked a high end nikon for a demanding job, hence the stuff about RTFM near the end of my post. Personally I think the best time to read the manual is when you are waiting for the battery to charge. Also you probably could've used the SB800 on the 7D too eg. manual flash output, manual setting on the camera etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
I was reading a thread debating the merits of isopropanol (rubbing alcohol) vs. methanol for cleaning sensors. Amazing the amount of misinformation out there -- people saying that methanol is more "corrosive", or that it "dissolves your AA filter" and that isopropanol is much "safer". For what it's worth: it doesn't matter, because you can get much purer methanol than you can rubbing alcohol, and any impurities (including water) will leave a residue when the liquid evaporates. It doesn't really matter which one you use to clean your sensor as long as it's 99.9+% pure. Anyway, after someone with a degree in chemistry pointed out that there is nothing on your sensor that would be harmed by any alcohol, there was this winner of a post: quote:Man, who knew you needed to be a chemist to be a photographer? Really, how often do you need to clean a sensor? How do you know if you need to? Where do you get the swab cleaners you referenced? Yes, who knew you needed to be a chemist to be a photographer?  I guess it just shows how much the times have changed. orange lime fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Mar 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2010 22:05
|
|
|
orange lime posted:
Haha, That is pretty special. With creative auto modes, soon people are gonna be all "Who knew you had to learn about F-stops..."
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2010 22:59
|
|
|
I uh..... um... I um... gently caress, I got nothing here.  Can someone please explain how a hood costs $600?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 16:01
|
|
|
13% of the lens cost? Meeeh yeah it's steep... but most of the time it's a company expense, so who gives a drat... yah know?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 16:29
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Haha, That is pretty special. With creative auto modes, soon people are gonna be all "Who knew you had to learn about F-stops..." There is this bag of dicks photographer in California who I have a personal, deep, and abiding thing against. He goes by Lionel Lum and he's somehow managed to parlay a single good photograph in to an ego the size of a small moon. I asked him, once, how he was setting his camera and if he knew his highlights were consistently blown out. What fstop are you using and have you tried stopping down that shutter just a bit? The response... "Hey, I don't need to know about shutters or fstops or any of that other bullshit, I just know that I take amazing pictures that everyone likes. Oh, and I do it with a point and shoot." The amazing pictures he's talking about are like...   and  And according to him, this was all done on purpose, because that's what great photography is all about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 16:37
|
|
|
Cosplay. He can keep as much of that business as he wants. I've been to a couple anime conventions, but how he goes to hundreds of them, I have no idea.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 16:45
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Cosplay. He can keep as much of that business as he wants. I've been to a couple anime conventions, but how he goes to hundreds of them, I have no idea. Its a chore, let me tell you. And by chore, I mean I usually end up finding the over 21s and getting free alcohol in exchange for pictures. Have you been to cons in the US? I went to Comiket in Japan once. Once. Never again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 16:49
|
|
|
US only, I went to Otakon in Baltimore. I was told that I was "that drunk guy" at the DDR stations. I was also remember being poo poo faced and talking to Tim Buckley at some other con somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 16:54
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:US only, I went to Otakon in Baltimore. I was told that I was "that drunk guy" at the DDR stations. I was also remember being poo poo faced and talking to Tim Buckley at some other con somewhere. Ahhh, ok. For some reason I've got it in my head that you live in Singapore. And hey, at least you didn't get told that you were the guy with his hands up some 14 year old's skirt. I've met a couple of cosplay photographers that have run themselves out of business like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 17:00
|
|
|
Noticed a weird S shaped mark on some of my pictures, looked like a smudge on my lens, decided to get in closer to have a look. Sweet! At least it's just the kit lens, I can't figure how how in the gently caress I managed to do that though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 18:22
|
|
|
Whoa Now posted:Noticed a weird S shaped mark on some of my pictures, looked like a smudge on my lens, decided to get in closer to have a look.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 18:27
|
|
|
Whoa Now posted:Noticed a weird S shaped mark on some of my pictures, looked like a smudge on my lens, decided to get in closer to have a look. Looks like a tiny bird crapped on your lens. I found this site: Ken Rockwell facts (a la Chuck Norris) With such winners as "When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories" "Circle of confusion? You might be confused. Ken Rockwell never is." "For every 10 shots that Ken Rockwell takes, 11 are keepers." "Ken Rockwell ordered an L-lens from Nikon, and got one."
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 18:30
|
|
|
Whoa Now posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 18:32
|
|
|
orange lime posted:I found this site: Ken Rockwell facts (a la Chuck Norris) "Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Nikon sticker and the less good get a Canon sticker. Once Ken tested a camera, he said I cant even put Canon on this one, that's how Pentax was born." Fuckin'  EDIT: "Ken Rockwell never produces awful work, only work too advanced for the viewer." Boy if that isn't the loving truth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 18:37
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:If only you'd had a $100 filter, you would have busted that instead of your
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2010 18:48
|
|
|
http://hint.fm/projects/flickr/quote:- The two of us see the world as a stream of color, and in 2009 we finally had a chance to draw the river in our heads. We began with a collection of photographs of the Boston Common taken from Flickr. Using an algorithm developed for the WIRED Anniversary visualization, our software calculated the relative proportions of different colors seen in photos taken in each month of the year, and plotted them on a wheel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 15:28
|
|
|
Whoa Now posted:Noticed a weird S shaped mark on some of my pictures, looked like a smudge on my lens, decided to get in closer to have a look. It's an omen, go buy a 17-50 Tamron!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 15:31
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:If only you'd had a $100 filter, you would have busted that instead of your precious lens! You laugh, but this was on my 24-70L when my camera bag fell off the back of my motorcycle (going like 5 mph) about a year and a half ago:  The guy gave me a UV filter instead of the CPL I wanted and I was already home by the time I realized the mistake. Only had it on that day because it was raining and I wanted to keep the front element clean when I took it out to shoot, have never bought another one to replace it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 17:05
|
|
|
That photo makes me feel better. I keep the $100 protective filters on anything that has an L on it. The sad part is they cost so much I'm still afraid of breaking the filters. I'm also extremely defensive about them, I wouldn't want anyone to think it's a cheapo UV filter! It's like walking around with a pocket protector or something. I also notice slight halos on bright things from time to time and I blame the filters. There needs to be a better way. Like force fields or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 17:45
|
|
|
You could just get a hood.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:18
|
|
|
Don't spend $100 on a UV Filter! If you give me $80 I will cast a spell on your lens that will keep it safe!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:27
|
|
|
Phat_Albert posted:You could just get a hood. The lens hood says you're serious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
I use hoods. It looks like that filter cracked from being dropped on its edge anyway -- something that's just as likely to break the lens whether or not there's a filter on it. Filters can only really protect from grit/water/salt and flying debris. VVVVVV Well obviously, you have to put a filter on the lens hood so it doesn't fill up with dirt. They're like little buckets. orange lime fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Mar 23, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
I always use a hood, what else would protect my protectors?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
Thats why I only use my camera in a waterproof case. They serve just as much of a purpose on dry land.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:46
|
|
|
My camera is still in the original box. It survived being shipped in there so I figure it's gonna be safe forever if I just leave it there and never pick it up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 18:56
|
|
|
I'm keeping my new camera at Amazon indefinitely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 20:36
|
|
|
Hop Pocket posted:I'm keeping my new camera at Amazon indefinitely. I keep my D700 in my wish list, Amazon updates the price for me. I only use my D80 out in the field.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2010 21:27
|
|
|
I had the hood on my 17-50 save the lens after my girlfriend knocked it off my desk a few days ago. It just bounced off the tile so I could catch it. No damage other than a slight heart attack.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 01:59
|
|
|
DJExile posted:I uh..... um... I um... gently caress, I got nothing here. It's a required accessory, so they can charge whatever they want. If you have a 600mm lens you really have to have the lens hood, especially if you're shooting outdoors. Plus, it helps protect your investment. I think I remember reading it also has something to do with the cost of manufacturing parts for lenses that are not produced in huge numbers. (400mm, 500mm, and 600mm lenses are produced in limited quantities). Hoods for lenses this long normally ship with the lens, though, so you really only have to pay $600 bucks if you break the one you already have. Here is what bothers me: lens hood for 35mm lens - $25 + shipping!  Or lens caps! Or rear lens caps! Or really, just about everything.  Pompous Rhombus posted:You laugh, but this was on my 24-70L when my camera bag fell off the back of my motorcycle (going like 5 mph) about a year and a half ago: In my experience, when a lens drops from a significant height you risk breaking internal components that a UV filter, (or a hood, for that matter), can't protect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 05:37
|
|
|
I watched a pretty drat interesting documentary last night about a photographer named Murray Fredericks. He's an Australian guy who for 5 weeks of the year goes out to Lake Eyre in South Australia which is basically a loving huge salt lake in the middle of nowhere. Its pretty drat inhospitable and barren. But it does make for some amazing photography. He took with him a 8x10 format camera to take a series of landscapes as well as other photography gear to take some amazing time lapse stuff. The website for the doco is here with a trailer. http://www.saltdoco.com/index.htm I think its on ABC2 this sunday for any Australians. See some of the large format photos here - http://www.murrayfredericks.com.au/currentexhibition-lake-eyre0607.asp And theres some more in other areas. Its amazing how looking at a landscape of "nothing" can be so stunning.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 13:25
|
|
|
On a similar note, did anyone see the piece that the Today show did on Ann Curry and her photography? Its kind of cool to see a celebrity (even a relatively minor one) who's actually into photography.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 15:22
|
|
|
Fists Up posted:I watched a pretty drat interesting documentary last night about a photographer named Murray Fredericks. It's on iView at the moment (http://www.abc.net.au/iview/) but I don't know if iView allows viewers outside of Australia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 15:36
|
|
|
trueblue posted:It's on iView at the moment (http://www.abc.net.au/iview/) but I don't know if iView allows viewers outside of Australia. quote:Due to copyright reasons this video program is available for download by people located in Australia only. If you are not located in Australia, you are not authorised to view this video.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 15:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
Phat_Albert posted:On a similar note, did anyone see the piece that the Today show did on Ann Curry and her photography? Its kind of cool to see a celebrity (even a relatively minor one) who's actually into photography. Ben Folds is also into photography http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLu8wTVho8Q Has his own dark room and a load of film cameras.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 00:13
|
|