|
If you're going on a paid shoot or something, that's a perfect idea. If you're just some schlub you can always buy a luggage tag, print out a checklist and get it laminated, throw the checcklist in the luggage tag and consult it before you leave the house. This saved my rear end so many time when I started playing hockey since I'd always be forgetting something or other -- checked the tag and all of a sudden I've got a full checklist. Planning on doing the same thing for my camera bag since I just realized my CF cards are lying on my computer instead of in the camera and bag respectively.
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2010 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:51 |
|
|
brad industry posted:Nope, don't want to start that. Spam your facebook or whatever like everybody else. Figured as much.. cheers for the clarification.. (worth throwing in the forum rules?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2010 23:33
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:Do you print that out every day? Really, really, good practice. Clients aren't very understanding of "Ooops forgot my battery pack cables, brb."
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2010 00:19
|
|
|
I use google tasks to do the same thing, I can do it from my computer or from my phone. After you are done your job/trip you can uncheck all the items and use it again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2010 01:29
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:Do you print that out every day? Just when I go to locations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2010 14:16
|
|
|
So I keep seeing this same camera at different thrift stores- it's a big plastic fake SLR, with a pseudo-TLR-like brilliant viewfinder. It's always banded with the Canon logo, though Canon would obviously never make such a monstrosity. Anyone seen these before?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2010 02:42
|
|
|
My dad just managed to score a 70-200 2.8 and a 300 f/4 Canon lens both for 500 USD total. I don't even use telephotos, but drat that's a good deal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2010 22:19
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:My dad just managed to score a 70-200 2.8 and a 300 f/4 Canon lens both for 500 USD total. I don't even use telephotos, but drat that's a good deal. That's a mega mega mega good deal. Craigslist?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2010 23:20
|
|
|
Thats a "this must be stolen" kind of deal. Or deceased estate or something like that. In other news Facebook has increased the the quality of its photos. Up to 2048 pixels now or something and the ability to make prints is being developed or something Expecting it to taking more bites out of flickr eventually. Heres an example of the better quality http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=441929318950&set=a.431705768950.218732.23497828950
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 01:50
|
|
|
Either the gear is stolen or the seller is a new crack addict. (or the poo poo is broke, and where's the fun in that? ) Grats to your dad on the killer deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 01:52
|
|
|
Looks at this scrub, trying to hand hold a 1/4s exposure @ 16mm on a 5k camera and it came out all blurry  http://twitpic.com/32e3kd/full
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 02:39
|
|
|
I would give a kidney to have an opportunity at taking that shot. It amazes me how high up you can be, and still resolve points in a city. He gets from Israel to Tunisia and you can still pick out Cairo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 05:02
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:That's a mega mega mega good deal. Craigslist? Nope, art teacher at my mother's school who used to be a photographer. (who isn't a meth dealer). She bought them new several years ago, and I'm assuming she just figured normal devaluing applied to lenses. I don't think my dad will use the 300 much. I'm thinking of offering him 400 for it and we'd both still come out ahead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 11:25
|
|
|
coke posted:Looks at this scrub, trying to hand hold a 1/4s exposure @ 16mm on a 5k camera and it came out all blurry 17,000mph blur.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 14:13
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Nope, art teacher at my mother's school who used to be a photographer. (who isn't a meth dealer). Man that's the deal of the drat year right there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2010 14:48
|
|
|
http://gizmodo.com/5678601/what-your-choice-of-camera-says-about-you What Your Choice of Camera Says About You
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 05:40
|
|
|
xzzy posted:It amazes me how high up you can be, and still resolve points in a city. He gets from Israel to Tunisia and you can still pick out Cairo. low earth orbit isn't very far away. the space station is 173 miles away and if you run the calcs for how well you can resolve a point source from a distance (in space, darkness, etc) you'd be really surprised. math stuff below: Threshold Intensity/observing area = Radiated Power/Surface Area = R. Power / (4 Pi dist^2). E = planck constant * speed of light / wavelength (planck & speed of light are constants & wavelength is between 400-600 nm). Use a threshold intensity, eg human eye will trigger on ~5 photons, and area, pi (5 mm)^2 so assuming a 10 W red light bulb: 5/(pi (5 mm)^2) = 10/(h c/600 nm) / (4 pi r^2) and solve for r. god im bored guidoanselmi fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Nov 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 06:01
|
|
|
spog posted:http://gizmodo.com/5678601/what-your-choice-of-camera-says-about-you gently caress it i wanna buy a sigma camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 06:03
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:low earth orbit isn't very far away. the space station is 173 miles away and if you run the calcs for how well you can resolve a point source from a distance (in space, darkness, etc) you'd be really surprised. What the gently caress does that even mean
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 06:12
|
|
|
spog posted:http://gizmodo.com/5678601/what-your-choice-of-camera-says-about-you I like to imagine brand fanboys getting seriously offended over this article
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 06:21
|
|
|
it's the max distance that you can observe a light source with perfect seeing and no other light. it's also AP level physics fwiw also made an error. gunna edit in a correction. guidoanselmi fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Nov 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 06:35
|
|
|
So how far way could you say see a normal 60W globe or whatever is in a house? Its been 5 years since I touched much in the way of maths.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 06:51
|
|
|
I'm guessing r shouldn't end up in Newtons.... it's been too long since I've done math.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 07:07
|
|
|
spog posted:http://gizmodo.com/5678601/what-your-choice-of-camera-says-about-you My Renault is awesome, I'll have you know. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 12:05
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:I'm guessing r shouldn't end up in Newtons.... it's been too long since I've done math. If you end up with distance measured in Newtons, you've done something wrong. Something terribly wrong. @600nm, E = 6.626e-34*3e8/600e-9 = 3.313e-19 J/photon @10W (J/s), 10/3.313e-19 = 3.02e19 photon/sec Human eye flicker fusion rate ~25Hz @1/25 sec, 3.02e19/25 = 1.21e18 photons/25th sec so 1.21e18 photons are produced by a 10W bulb in 1/25 sec and they all pass through an area 4*pi*R^2 (surface area of a sphere) aperture of pupil @5mm = pi*(5e-3)^2 = 7.85e-5m^2 so if 5 are needed (and I don't think this is correct - the fovea responds to 5 photons, but the brain doesn't process the signal, but assuming it is correct) 5/1.21e18 = 7.85e-5/(4*pi*R^2) R = sqrt[(7.85e-5*1.21e18)/(5*4*pi)] = 1.2e6m, or 1,200km Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Nov 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 12:12
|
|
|
Let's stop talking about math now, please.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 14:52
|
|
|
spog posted:http://gizmodo.com/5678601/what-your-choice-of-camera-says-about-you Weird, I don't really agree with any of these.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 15:10
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Weird, I don't really agree with any of these. Well, humour is subjective and all that, but I found it pretty funny and thought the sterotypes hit the mark well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 15:46
|
|
|
spog posted:http://gizmodo.com/5678601/what-your-choice-of-camera-says-about-you Is there really this much switching between Nikon and Canon? Everyone I've talked to seems to be a lifer one way or the other. Maybe I should stop hanging out with wedding photographers though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 16:16
|
|
|
The Affair posted:Is there really this much switching between Nikon and Canon? Everyone I've talked to seems to be a lifer one way or the other. I know the paper I work at switched from Nikon to Canon during a period when Nikon seemed to neglect the pro market and focus mostly on consumer P&S. Having 15 photographers and hundreds of lenses, I'm sure this was no spur of the moment rash decision. If Canon did something similar, I guarantee they would do it again: photos are that important for the paper. I'd assume other people have similar reasons: a buddy has a bunch of brand X lenses, so you switch to that brand. You see a great deal on a few lenses when your current kit isn't that big, making it worth the switch. One company or the other has a camera you want for whatever reason (video, better sensor, etc). Honestly if you sell the lenses and body you have, and then buy used lenses for the "new" brand you generally come out only slightly behind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 16:41
|
|
|
I imagine it's true, Nikon handles super high ISOs better, Canon handles video better, Nikon has the cheap 35mm lens that makes some people want to start with them, Canon has the better high end telephotos/super teles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 16:55
|
|
|
Even though I can't afford it right now, I would feel better about Nikon if they just had an 85 f/1.2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 18:41
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Even though I can't afford it right now, I would feel better about Nikon if they just had an 85 f/1.2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 19:41
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Secretly hoping you're serious. I don't understand, is there a Nikon 85 f/1.2?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 19:45
|
|
|
It's a joke at FM users expense I think, it's pretty common to see people selling off their whole "investment" in one system for another because of the latest body that has that killer feature.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I don't understand, is there a Nikon 85 f/1.2?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 20:02
|
|
|
I want to check out that Sigma 85mm 1.4, but they're $900 
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 20:04
|
|
|
dunkman posted:I want to check out that Sigma 85mm 1.4, but they're $900
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 20:10
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Yeah I'm kinda curious too. No shops around it stock it (yet?) so I'm having to wait til next time I'm in Amsterdam.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:51 |
|
|
Rixatrix posted:Does Amsterdam get stuff sooner than wherever it is you are at, or is it cheaper? If you want to have your family send you stuff over, them buying it online would probably be cheapest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2010 22:03
|
|