LincolnB: Is it possible to verify from the photo that it is still a K-mount?
Well I *assumed* so, but not having a K-mount camera myself I can't verify it. Are there any distinguishing contact points etc. that you recognize?
Is it possible to verify from the photo that it is still a K-mount?
Focus stacking, awesome. That's a feature I predicted a while back.
Nice detail. I can see the lead bird taking a crap.
I'd like it if focus distance could be stored in EXIF. That would be a huge boon in forensic analysis, among other uses. It would help answer the question of "How far away WAS I when I took that shot?"
RichRMA: Texas bill isn't draconian. That 15ft is designed to keep people out of the confrontations police are involved in. Does it sound safe being within 10ft of a fight between a cop and some drug-user, as an example?
The effective range of a pistol is 50-100 yards. The range of a cellphone camera is about 25 feet. Who do you REALLY think they're trying to prevent from getting "shot"?
My guess is that the police asked someone to propose this legislation and the reason had NOTHING to do with civilian safety. The police are clearly uncomfortable being filmed and it's not because they fear for their own physical safety or yours. The presence of a camera makes the situation LESS dangerous for the person doing the filming as it decreases the odds that their civil rights will be violated.
If the police can search my belongings, without a warrant, under the guise of protecting THEIR safety (aka a "Terry Stop") then I should be able to film them for MY safety.
GodSpeaks: This needs to be a Federal law.
No 15ft recording limit, but perhaps a limit within which the lookyloos cannot approach.
It's already a law, called interfering with police duties.What this Texas law is saying is that if you're 10 feet away, without a camera, standing by passively, you're not breaking the law. If I'm 20 feet away, also not interacting with the police, but I'm recording/documenting, I'd be committing a misdemeanor. Not only that, but the police could use their bodycam video in court to prove that I was recording them recording me.
It's not that it's draconian, the problem is that it's probably unconstitutional.
Note that interfering with a police officer is not normally defined by the number of feet of distance from the L.E.O. Suddenly, because someone is "X" number of feet away, recording, this becomes interference? That would mean that screaming at the cops at the top of your lungs from 26 feet away is not interference. I fail to see how the presence of a civilian's camera suddenly turns 25 feet of distance into "interference" from a constitutional standpoint. Why would it be constitutional for the police to be operating a body camera but a civilian would be guilty of a misdemeanor for recording the same incident in the same fashion?
The proposed Texas law says 25 feet, not 15 feet.
It defines documenting the police as an "an interruption,disruption, impediment, or interference that occurs while a peaceofficer is performing a duty..."
Somehow I don't that that would get past the SCOTUS.
Also, the Texas definition of "news media" is obsolete and does not cover online publications and free lance journalists. That too would have trouble before the Supreme Court of the United States.
HappyVan: What about lens selection? EM1 may be the favour of the day. But, APSC lens selection for DSLR is way better.
For example, Sigma 18-35 1.8 matches DOF control of FF. What is the EM1 equivalent?
You can cherry-pick and nit-pick from among my thousands of shots and dozens of DPR Challenge entries all you want. That sort of ad-hominem attack won't fix your photography or enhance your reputation one whit.
Meanwhile, I will continue to be selected as photographer of the month on other sites, I will continue to accept paying clients as I please, I will continue to win and place well above average in DPR Challenges, I will continue to let my photographs be used on books and in published articles and marketing materials.
You will continue to attempt to buy your way out of a lack of taste and skill. You will continue to lecture others to do the same. You will continue to troll until forced to stop.
Honey, you are none of those photographers.
You don't sell because nobody likes your stuff. Nobody thinks you're the better photographer. NOBODY. I do better work in a week than you do in a year. Or ever. There are lots of photographers to admire but you're not one of them. You collect haters like a hobby. You're a troll. That's what you do. You lecture people on photography and no one takes your advice. You're a troll.
Why do you own so many cameras and have so little to show for it?
You recently paid $900 on a lens so you could take a picture of a parking lot. A parking lot.
Yes, I am in a position to pass judgment on your snapshots.
If I'm getting $5 results on a $5 lens that means I'm getting better value for my money than you. Heck, I've even been paid for photos I took with a point & shoot. And there you are, hiding behind your anonymous account with a $3,000 camera and a $900 lens for what? Why do you own so many cameras with so little to show for them?
Answer the question: why do you own so many cameras? Especially since your photos show such a limited repertoire of style, skill, and ability? You have one of practically everything Nikon sells. How is that not the exact OPPOSITE of versatile???
If HappyVan thinks a system needs to be versatile, then why does he own so many different cameras? Are Nikon's systems so limited that he needs a compact, a mirrorless, an APS-C, and a full frame? This is especially confusing considering the very limited range and skill set of HappyVan's photography, which as far as anyone can tell seems to consist almost entirely of snapshots in broad daylight.
HappyTroll, you should try entering one of these challenges.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!Like that'll ever happen! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
HappyVan: Sounds like more of the mirrorless nonsense.
At one point, mirrorless was the next big thing. Heavily promoted by cultists and websites. The DSLR was a dinosaur, they say. Today, mirrorless is in retreat even in Japan. Why is that?
Any camera is a tool. All it means is that Barney is doing snapshots at the moment for social sharing. Will he ever return to photography as an art? Will he ever need to zoom?
This coming from a guy who owns every Nikon from a compact to a mirrorless to an enthusiast to a full frame. And his pictures speak louder than his words.
Well done, Bob!