Michael Meissner

Michael Meissner

Lives in United States Ayer USA, United States
Works as a Computer Programmer
Has a website at http://www.the-meissners.org
Joined on Jan 14, 2002
About me:

Gear profile moved to:
http://www.the-meissners.org/camera-gear.html

FAQ for flashes that support Olympus DSLRs:
http://www.the-meissners.org/olympus-flash2.html

Older FAQ for flashes on Olympus C-2100UZ:
http://www.the-meissners.org/olympus-flash.html

Photo album:
http://www.the-meissners.org/photo.html

Comments

Total: 17, showing: 1 – 17
On article Throwback Thursday: Our first cameras (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Meissner: Ah yes, the C-2100UZ. I still have mine, though I didn't take any usable shots with it in 2016, but it sits in a place of honor on my shelf.

It was my second digital camera. My first was an Olympus D-510Z that I bought after a trip to Disney World where I somehow left mouse land with money in my pockets, and it was burning a hole itching to be spent, and I settled on the D-510Z.

However, the D-510Z was a pretty forgettable point & shoot, and I soon outgrew its limitations. I was looking around for something better. It was the time of the great CompUSA (remember them?) firesale, where Olympus was off-loading the UZI's for $500 (off of $1200). After doing some investigation, I settled on the UZI.

One of the things that helped me decide was the rather active Olympus forum (now Olympus Compact forum) at the time that was populated by UZI-lovers that were more interested in photos and techniques than spec-manship. I miss the forum of those days. I have 10,564 shots with the UZI.

Thanks Stephen. Yes, I miss those days.

And they were friendly (with the exception perhaps of my entry into "Flower Art" challenge [#10] that caused a ruckus).

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 14:54 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Our first cameras (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Meissner: Ah yes, the C-2100UZ. I still have mine, though I didn't take any usable shots with it in 2016, but it sits in a place of honor on my shelf.

It was my second digital camera. My first was an Olympus D-510Z that I bought after a trip to Disney World where I somehow left mouse land with money in my pockets, and it was burning a hole itching to be spent, and I settled on the D-510Z.

However, the D-510Z was a pretty forgettable point & shoot, and I soon outgrew its limitations. I was looking around for something better. It was the time of the great CompUSA (remember them?) firesale, where Olympus was off-loading the UZI's for $500 (off of $1200). After doing some investigation, I settled on the UZI.

One of the things that helped me decide was the rather active Olympus forum (now Olympus Compact forum) at the time that was populated by UZI-lovers that were more interested in photos and techniques than spec-manship. I miss the forum of those days. I have 10,564 shots with the UZI.

Nice shot!

Here is one of my favorite sunsets of all times. I was in Austin, Texas for business. After work I joined two other DPR's (John Chandler was one) for dinner at one of the restaurants that overlooks lake Austin. I had my UZI, and captured this:
http://www.the-meissners.org/2006-small-albums/2006-09/small/2006-09-09-22-26-009-sunset.jpg

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 04:34 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Our first cameras (384 comments in total)

Ah yes, the C-2100UZ. I still have mine, though I didn't take any usable shots with it in 2016, but it sits in a place of honor on my shelf.

It was my second digital camera. My first was an Olympus D-510Z that I bought after a trip to Disney World where I somehow left mouse land with money in my pockets, and it was burning a hole itching to be spent, and I settled on the D-510Z.

However, the D-510Z was a pretty forgettable point & shoot, and I soon outgrew its limitations. I was looking around for something better. It was the time of the great CompUSA (remember them?) firesale, where Olympus was off-loading the UZI's for $500 (off of $1200). After doing some investigation, I settled on the UZI.

One of the things that helped me decide was the rather active Olympus forum (now Olympus Compact forum) at the time that was populated by UZI-lovers that were more interested in photos and techniques than spec-manship. I miss the forum of those days. I have 10,564 shots with the UZI.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 12:41 UTC as 106th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

AndersSJ: More of a Kickstarter add than digital photography; but let's look at the bright side, no whimper from those who would by if they could afford it.

Note, Trigger Trap had a successful original campaign (for the Arduino based shutter release). Well it was successful in that they eventually released working rewards, though missing the delivery date by nearly a year was a problem. I was one who was irked by the delay, but it spurred me to pick up an Arduino and start my own Trigger.

They ran as a company, producing the Trigger Trap mobile that worked ont he Apple iphone and sort of worked on Android. I always wondered how they could exist on their funding model.

They then tried a second bite at the apple with the Ada product, and came to the conclusion that it would be too expensive to make for funding they had gathered and refunded some/all of the money. Since I didn't back the Ada project, I don't know how much was returned.

They continued on the mobile path, and about 6 months or so, they abandoned the Android mobile device.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 23:16 UTC
In reply to:

AndersSJ: More of a Kickstarter add than digital photography; but let's look at the bright side, no whimper from those who would by if they could afford it.

Yes, you have to pay extra for delivery. For US delivery, you add $10 for one camera, $17 for two (I didn't check 3 or more). I prefer to pay delivery at the time of pledging. I've had one kickstarter project that added delivery after the initial pledge, and I wasn't too happy.

That being said, kickstarter is not a store. Things do go wrong. Delivery dates are frequently just guesses. I've had a few KS projects that delivered nearly on time, one that was nearly a year late, and one that got cancelled before the project happened due to fraud.

Most KS projects are somebody with an idea, but not necessarily a manufacturing background. Things often go off the rails when they try to scale it up. This is particularly true if the product goes viral and wildly exceeds its goals. Right now, it is almost 3x the initial funding request, so it might still be manageable.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

Anesh Pather: wonder if this will work on an FZ1000 or RX10

The pin layout for Olympus/Panasonic should not be a problem, since they use the same layout as Canon (except Canon has an extra pin compared to Olympus/Panasonic).

Sony is a bit different, since Sony does not use the standard flash hot-shoe, instead using the old Minolta hot-shoe design.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 18:15 UTC
In reply to:

BarnabyJones: Despite what the official website states, TTL passthrough does not work with Olympus. Tested on the E-m1 with both the FL-600r & Metz 58 AF-2. Additionally, flash profiling is quite limited so unless you're with Nikon or Canon odds are your flashes won't be compatible.

If you go to the cactus web page for V6, and scroll down to major features, it says: TTL pass-through with Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, and Fujifilm via one single unit. The web page is at: http://www.cactus-image.com/v6.html

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Meissner: No Olympus or Panasonic support. Sigh..... Also, no Sony support.....

I have no idea. I was just going off the announcement, which only lists Nikon, Canon, and Pentax. If you go to their web site, they claim that they support pass through mode (where you put a TTL flash in the hot shoe), it will allow the camera to use that one flash in TTL mode, but the other flashes must be fired in manual mode. However BarnabyJones who has a Cactus V6 and an Olympus E-M1, says even pass through mode does not work.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 23:16 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Meissner: No Olympus or Panasonic support. Sigh..... Also, no Sony support.....

Yes, but it never seems to pan out.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 19:59 UTC
In reply to:

BarnabyJones: Despite what the official website states, TTL passthrough does not work with Olympus. Tested on the E-m1 with both the FL-600r & Metz 58 AF-2. Additionally, flash profiling is quite limited so unless you're with Nikon or Canon odds are your flashes won't be compatible.

Sigh.... Thanks for the heads up.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Meissner: No Olympus or Panasonic support. Sigh..... Also, no Sony support.....

Every manufacturer has its own protocol for working with flashes. Sometimes the manufacturer licenses the technology. Sometimes a clean room discovery of the protocol is done (which can be costly, and you have to do it right so you can't be sued). Nikon and Canon are obvious because they are the market leaders, and so would get the most amount of customers. Pentax probably licenses the spec cheaply. Sony has a reputation for going after people it suspects of violating its IP. Olympus/Panasonic probably don't license their stuff cheap, and may not have the market share for a company to think about doing a clean room implementation.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

Anesh Pather: wonder if this will work on an FZ1000 or RX10

Since the FZ1000 is a Panasonic camera, it will not support the Olympus/Panasonic remote TTL flashes (i.e. the Olympus FL-600R or Panasonic DMW FL-360 for instance). From the documentation, it would allow an Olympus/Panasonic TTL flash to be mounted on the hot-shoe, and presumably control a manual flash (which is useful in limited situations).

It is rumored that the Aokatec AK-TTL will work for Olympus and Panasonic (base price $70 for a starter kit). I don't have experience with the RX10, but it is probably similar to the Olympus.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 13:38 UTC

No Olympus or Panasonic support. Sigh..... Also, no Sony support.....

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 13:18 UTC as 22nd comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Shaken: Quadro GPU supported?

It presumably runs on some Linuxen, but I couldn't find the appropriate libstdc++ libraries on my Fedora 14 system (I installed all of the libstdc++ libraries listed by yum).

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 03:00 UTC
On article Compact Flash Association announces XQD card format (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

Habemus_Canon: Ahh, but does it use easily-bendable/breakable pins (the biggest point of failure in the current CF spec) or does it use the small more-robust tabs like SDHC and PCIe cards? If it still uses pins, it's DOA.

There are some devices with a short enough track that you can put the card in upside down and smash the pins, which happened to me on a Vosonic portable storage unit. It didn't help that this device you put the card in face down compared to every other reader where you put it face up. In reading the various comments about it, I wasn't the only one who bent the pins.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2011 at 13:30 UTC
On article Compact Flash Association announces XQD card format (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

mrmut: I don't see the point. CF standard is nice, fast, has a great form factor and is widely adopted. The smaller alternative is excellent SD card. Why add another one?

Note, CF cards in their current form top out at 128GB which we are just getting to now (CF cards are based on IDE ATA-5). There is the CFast format based on SATA, but that never caught on. I suspect the main home for XQD will be in embedded devices as a disk drive (where CF is already used today when laptop drives are too big), and not in digital cameras. It may be the high end video cameras will use it, but I don't play in that market.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2011 at 13:26 UTC
On article Olympus PEN Lite and PEN Mini announced and previewed (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

absentaneous: sometimes I really don't understand the logic of camera manufacturers. if the dpreview specification sheet is right and it should be also from looking at the pictures the E-PL3 and E-PM1 cameras don't even have a built in flash! while the E-P3 one which is supposed to be aimed at more advanced users has one! before the story was the way around. the less advanced E-PL got the built in flash and the E-P didn't. and that made sense because an advanced photographer is more likely to even want to use an external flash anyway. I really wonder how many potential E-PL3 or E-PM1 users are the kind of photographers that would want to bother with an external flash unit. I mean really, you bother making a really small camera and then you make it in the way that it need an external flash unit which makes it's small size irrelevant. no logic whatsoever. the only logic I see here is to make more money selling external flashes. I wonder how many people are stupid enough to buy into this.

tompabes2:
Well if you want to use the VF-2 viewfinder at the same time as the flash, the external flash is problematical. I run into this from time to time on my E-P2. Another nit might be that being modular, it might fall off, and you might not notice it was gone until later.

Hmmm, speaking of the E-P2, I wonder if the external flash will will be available separately and if it would work on the E-P2.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:39 UTC
Total: 17, showing: 1 – 17