|
Reichstag posted:I feel that they are camera manufacturers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuaDP_tx0_s Is this 'you can be as good as those snobbish sounding photographers, without sounding snobbish but a common man' or 'even an idiot can get great shots with our camera'? And I can't imagine anyone asking 'what aperture/shutter speed/iso did you use' during an art exhibition type event. DaNzA fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jan 26, 2011 |
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 02:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
Looks like "any idiot can take great photos with our camera", which is a half-stop removed from "your camera takes great pictures!". But it is seasoned with a dash of "professional photographers are such snobs, aren't they?". Unrelated to the ad, but a feature of the camera: apparently it has a touch screen. My nose mashes into the screen on the back of my K10D when I'm really concentrating on lining up a shot and checking my settings, I can only assume something similar would happen with that Panasonic. I hate touchscreens as a general principle (give me buttons, dammit!) but one in that position would drive me completely insane. Back to the earlier question: I shoot Pentax. Both Canon and Nikon are evil corporate giants bent on world domination by any means necessary. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 02:17
|
|
|
ease posted:Can we just please move on? Those are awesome. Interesting how a few of them looked like recovery attempts at totally blown exposure or handling. Normally I wouldn't notice such a thing, but after shooting and developing B&W film for a year or two I can see it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 02:22
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Back to the earlier question: I shoot Pentax. Both Canon and Nikon are evil corporate giants bent on world domination by any means necessary. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 02:39
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Back to the earlier question: I shoot Pentax. Both Canon and Nikon are evil corporate giants bent on world domination by any means necessary. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 03:04
|
|
|
My roommate bought a used 20D and 50 f/1.8 because he is looking to get into photography, it just arrived in the mail today. After putting everything together he comes to me and says "it wont focus on anything". I had no idea what he was talking about, the AF servos would work and it would take photos which looked alright. My eyesight is so bad and the 20D viewfinder is so dim that I didn't realize the diopter dial was waaaay off. His eyesight is so good that he was able to see that stuff looked out of focus even after the camera had acquired a lock. I feel like an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 03:14
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Does the word-part, word-root, word-suffix, something, "-kor" have a particular meaning in Japanese? I ask because both Nikon and Minolta created a new brand for their lenses, but not for their camera bodies or (as far as I know) other components like flashes, Nikkor for Nikon (which seams reasonable enough) and Rokkor for Minolta (which seems totally out of left field). Or is this just some lame coincidence, probably based on the names of people who founded glass-shops 100 years ago? Nikkor is a mash-up of the Japanese words for "Japan Optics."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 03:18
|
|
|
/\/\/\ Cool, thanks! Does that mean "Rokkor" means "(something) optics", too?ease posted:Who both have sensors that detect if your face is near the screen so it can shut it off when you are looking through the viewfinder. BUTTONS. I JUST WANT BUTTONS. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 03:24
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:/\/\/\ Cool, thanks! Does that mean "Rokkor" means "(something) optics", too? I honestly have no idea. I know the "kkor" is what refers to optics but I don't know where the "Ro" comes from. I don't speak a lick of Japanese so I can't take a guess either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 03:56
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:I honestly have no idea. I know the "kkor" is what refers to optics but I don't know where the "Ro" comes from. I don't speak a lick of Japanese so I can't take a guess either. "Ro" by itself would stand for hearth, fireplace...maybe furnace too etc. But I have my doubts that this is what's meant. I guess it's an abbreviation for another Ro- word, just like Ni- in "Nikkor" was an abbreviation for "Nippon". So unless we find that out it'll just be a guessing game. Edit: Aaand I was way off and beaten by proper research. 
VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Jan 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 04:00
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:I honestly have no idea. I know the "kkor" is what refers to optics but I don't know where the "Ro" comes from. I don't speak a lick of Japanese so I can't take a guess either. quote:Another term commonly seen in relation to Minolta lenses is the term “Rokkor”. Like many other manufacturers, Minolta employed a separate name for its lenses, in this case the name “Rokkor” was chosen by Minolta founder, Kazuo Tashima, as a reference to Mount Rokko in Japan, which is adjacent to the Minolta Factory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 04:05
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:I'll be over at Vet Med tomorrow a couple of times, maybe if the pigs don't poo poo explosively upon me / I'm able to wash up effectively I'll track down the relevant people. I'm posting this so that I can guilt myself into actually following through on this idea. If I tell other people, that means I have to do it, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
Saw this pimpin' lens hood
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 05:24
|
|
|
Is that supposed to be carbon fiber? Like, I heard you like hoods so I put a lens in your lens hood.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 05:30
|
|
|
I have a legitimate CF hood (came with the lens), they scratch really easy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 05:56
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:I have a legitimate CF hood (came with the lens), they scratch really easy. Any pics? My 70-200 f4L hood is scratched to hell. Expected better from an L lens :/
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 06:00
|
|
|
They're not "scratches", they're "experience lines"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 07:29
|
|
|
Ringo R posted:Any pics? My 70-200 f4L hood is scratched to hell. Expected better from an L lens :/ It's there to block flare not peacock your lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 07:34
|
|
|
Gotta love hoods for giving you those extra optical inches if you know what I mean 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:I feel that they are camera manufacturers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 07:56
|
|
|
gently caress all camera manufacturers. Real playas ARE cameras.  ^ Ann Hamilton, using her mouth as a pinhole aperture. Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 08:13 on Jan 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 08:09
|
|
is go
|
Ringo R posted:Any pics? My 70-200 f4L hood is scratched to hell. Expected better from an L lens :/ Put fake carbon fiber over the real carbon fiber.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 16:03
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 18:39
|
|
|
I'm thinking of switching to carbon fiber because the lens hood on my 24-70 is too heavy and isn't stiff enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 18:50
|
|
|
How about this for annoying: http://dallas.craigslist.org/dal/wan/2180452834.html LEICA D-LUX 5 Digital Camera - $650 (N.Dallas) quote:Willing to buy or trade Canon 40D with 28-135 lens for LEICA D-LUX 5 Digital Camera This is happening all the time. People will put what they want in the Subject/Title, then offer some ridiculous poo poo for trade. Like there was someone who put Canon "85 f/1.2 - $1400" and then inside offered to trade his pair of outboard motors for one. It got pulled pretty quick though. Is this a Dallas thing or is it happening all over?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 20:17
|
|
|
ease posted:Here is a new topic. vikingtravels posted:http://www.rokkorfiles.com/Lens%20History.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
I started reading the Ansel Adams book trilogy tonight, and holy poo poo is it awesome. Everyone should read it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 06:10
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I started reading the Ansel Adams book trilogy tonight, and holy poo poo is it awesome. Everyone should read it. Spoiler alert: Snape kills Cunningham.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 06:51
|
|
|
So how often does this happen to everyone else? I've been lugging my camera in to work every day the past week. It's been really grey out, hovering in the mid to high 20's for more or less the past week. Weather forecast has had "light snow" listed every day, so I've been waiting for either that or a fog to go on a walk. This morning, I wake up, it's still cloudy, but the forecast says it's going to clear up, no snow. So, tired of carrying all my gear around on a daily basis, I leave the camera at home. As I get to work, there's a dense fog rolling in, and all the trees have a layer of frost on them. This has me thinking I need to come up with a more portable camera bag. Something that holds just the body and the attached lens, so it's not a pain in the rear end to carry everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 15:28
|
|
|
xzzy posted:This has me thinking I need to come up with a more portable camera bag. Something that holds just the body and the attached lens, so it's not a pain in the rear end to carry everywhere. I am currently in the exact same predicament.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 16:21
|
|
|
You mean an ever-ready case? http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/Accessories/Bags%20and%20Cases/Ever%20Ready%20Cases/Show.html   I that they will do what you want. Unfortunately, the versions for zoom lenses tend to look like large, neoprene dongs.  Which may or may not be an added benefit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 16:40
|
|
|
I guess this could be moved to the camera bag thread, but yes, that's the sort of thing I'd like. A camera condom that I can toss in my normal backpack. And holy loving poo poo do they want a lot of money for those things. £49.95? Isn't that close to US $90?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 17:02
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I guess this could be moved to the camera bag thread, but yes, that's the sort of thing I'd like. A camera condom that I can toss in my normal backpack. These are <USD40: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=zoomster+delsey&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Azoomster+delsey&ajr=3 I've used both types and I prefer these ones. They are slightly bigger than neoprene ones, but I always felt that neoprene wasn't that protective: it could stop scratches, but if you had something hard and pointy in your backpack, it would push right through. Plus, you can sling them over your shoulder for carrying, or attach them to your belt if you want your trousers to fall down in public.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:I'm thinking of switching to carbon fiber because the lens hood on my 24-70 is too heavy and isn't stiff enough. Every gram counts. Once could borrow a trick from the world of ultralight backpacking and drill holes in the hood to save even more weight. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 17:34
|
|
|
xzzy posted:So how often does this happen to everyone else? This happens way too often. For me, it was last week, it had been cloudy for days, and the morning after a full moon, I was driving to work over the I-5 bridge near UW, look over to the west to see a gigantic, orange moon setting over the Olympics. I had brought my camera with me all week...except that morning. Bollucks. But as far as bags, I have a new lowepro bag, i think the outback, that is pretty portable. The lens holder's on the side pop off if you don't need them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I guess this could be moved to the camera bag thread, but yes, that's the sort of thing I'd like. A camera condom that I can toss in my normal backpack. Try looking around a local camera shop for those things. My nearby shop has a whole bin of used leather ever-ready cases for like ~$10 or less. e: actually, I think they all for film bodies, so this might be stupid advice after all Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jan 27, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 22:14
|
|
|
Hey Guys, I know I'm easily amused, but I just took my lens and just walked around my apartment focusing the image circle onto a piece of paper. It's crazy, I mean intuitively I know that a lens projects an image onto the sensor, but to see it and interact with it outside of the camera is really really really cool. I mean, I never thought to try it before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Hey Guys, I know I'm easily amused, but I just took my lens and just walked around my apartment focusing the image circle onto a piece of paper. It's crazy, I mean intuitively I know that a lens projects an image onto the sensor, but to see it and interact with it outside of the camera is really really really cool. I mean, I never thought to try it before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 06:11
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Hey Guys, I know I'm easily amused, but I just took my lens and just walked around my apartment focusing the image circle onto a piece of paper. It's crazy, I mean intuitively I know that a lens projects an image onto the sensor, but to see it and interact with it outside of the camera is really really really cool. I mean, I never thought to try it before. You're stoned right now aren't you
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 06:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
gently caress you guys jump to the drug conclusion quickly well from now on, i'm going to jump to the conclusion you've just been pegged. and i hope it was rough, zocrowes
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 07:11
|
|
