|
Actually, I'm kinda curious. Wikipedia says the ME was solely an Av camera, unlike the ME Super, or the MX. Why buy an ME, than? I mean, I have an old Av/manual Minolta and I think it's awesome, but I don't know that I'd want an Av-only camera. What's the deal? e. Am I missing something?
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2012 05:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 12:29 |
|
|
Is it actually smaller than most '80's SLRs then? Because I can't imagine fitting mine into a coat pocket without a pancake lens or something. I mean, I guess if you could convince the shutter to go fast enough, you could s16 400 ASA film or something, but I haven't found a place here that'll sell 100 film. It just seems a somewhat silly recommendation for the dorkroom to me, but what do I know? Hell, I wish my Minolta had a mechanical mode. drat thing sat in a kitchen cabinet for over a decade due to dead batteries.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2012 06:12
|
|
|
Qubee posted:can someone ELI5 what the F adjustments on the Olympus OM-D E-M5 is supposed to do? from what I can tell, raising or lowering it adjusts how much light gets let in, but I read online that changing the f-stop to a lower value gives you a wider field of view? but I've done tests with a low f-stop and a high f-stop and as far as I can tell, there is zero difference between the two images.  Here is a highly-technical drawing demonstrating how this works*. It's not a wider field of view, what changing the f-stop does is make more of the image (distant from the camera) in focus. You can try it out yourself if you set up some boxes or books (something with some text on it would be good) or something in a large-ish area, so there's a decent amount of distance between yourself/the camera and the items. (They are the boxes in the image). Set your camera to Aperture-priority (A or Av on the mode select wheel), and set the aperture to the smallest numerical value (probably somewhere between 2.8 and 4.5). Focus on the closest item and take a picture. From the same spot, repeat that process at numerically larger apertures (f/8 and f/16 would be good choices). When you review the pictures, you'll notice that the items further away are blurrier or harder to read in the pictures taken at the smaller numerals, and that as the numerical value increases, more distant items will also be in focus. You'll also notice the decrease in light if you look at the photo's data — the shutter speed will be getting longer as you increase the numerical value of the aperture. For best results, you should probably set the camera on the ground to take the pictures. Especially indoors, you'll likely end up with everything blurry at f/16 if you're holding it in your hands. * In case it's difficult to make out, the bit on the side says "Amount of scene in focus." And that's 100% not to scale, but it's enough for you to get the idea, I imagine. Also worth noting, the 'amount in focus' is both towards and away from the item you've focused on (from the camera's perspective). Zenostein fucked around with this message at 04:38 on May 17, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 17, 2018 04:35
|
|