Grogly

Grogly

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Ex- Physicist now Telecommunications Manager
Joined on Aug 20, 2005
About me:

Canon Bodies:
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Canon EOS M
Canon EOS Elan IIE
Canon G10

Canon Lenses:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM L
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 IS USM L
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM L
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 STM IS
Kenko Pro300 2x Teleconverter

Canon Flashes:
Canon 580EX II
Canon 420EX

Micro-4/3 Gear
Panasonic GX7
Panasonic Lumix 20mm f/1.7
Sigma 60mm f/2.8 DN

Comments

Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
In reply to:

Sdaniella: there is a war of theoretics going on in galactic/stellar/planetary sciences, and cosmic origins

the "consensus (status quo) science" relies heavily in "big bang theoretics" where gravitational force (the weakest of all forces) as the major driving force in explaining what is formed in our universe

versus

exploratory "electric universe" science where observations openly point to new theoretics covering plasmically visible electromagnetic forces (extremely powerful, active, destructive forces) as major forces in explaining most features of galaxies, stars, nebulas, quasars, planets, comets, asteroids, and planetary phenomena (surface features, activities, and atmospheric activities) far better than gravitational-based "consensus" theoretics

most of the spiral storm structures on the gassy giant planets, and even the sun, are seen as evidence of ongoing massively sized intense electromagnetic "birkland current" driven storms that easily reach into interplanetary space (moon orbits)

The above comments are a good example of why people in this site should stick to photography. Let's leave the science to those who have a clue.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 21:55 UTC
On article Looking back: Canon's eye-controlled focus (211 comments in total)

My first auto focus camera was the Elan IIe and i really liked the eye control focus method. It worked pretty well for me and I remember getting enough keepers to be satisfied with it.

I have wondered if the real reason this feature vanished from the digital realm is that the early digital DSR were APS-C format and their smaller viewfinders were not capable of working well enough with the eye control algorithms.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 12:27 UTC as 119th comment

Favorite lens has to be the magic drainpipe; EF 80-200mm L f/2.8. Something was really special about that one. Examples linked below:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=21673484%40N00&sort=date-taken-desc&text=80-200mm%20f%2F2.8%20featured%20-2x&view_all=1

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 09:54 UTC as 137th comment | 1 reply
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2468 comments in total)
In reply to:

Grogly: DPreview has done a disservice to their readers with this article. Equivalence between formats comes down to only one thing, depth of field. An f/2.8 lens is ALWAYS and f/2.8 lens for exposure. Here is why this is true without all the technical mumbo-jumbo. Let’s do a thought experiment.

Suppose you went down to your local camera store and bought a hand held light meter to use with your various format cameras. Once you get the meter home, you discover that there is no setting for your 6x9 medium format camera or your 35mm digital camera or your 16mm film movie camera. There are only settings for ISO, f-stop and shutter speed. Why? Because for exposure, all that matters are those three settings, completely independent of what format you use. By the way, that light meter still works with your digital cameras, provided their ISO/SS/F-stops are correctly calibrated.

So feel free to discuss the merits of DOF, or whatever other comparisons between formats, but leave exposure out!

Quote from the article:

"But surely F1.2=F1.2=F1.2?

Yes, it is. But F1.2 is not equivalent to F1.2 across different formats."

Wrong! Exposure is exposure, f/1.2 or f/8. Just discussing this only obfuscates the equivalence thing unnecessarily.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 13:50 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2468 comments in total)

DPreview has done a disservice to their readers with this article. Equivalence between formats comes down to only one thing, depth of field. An f/2.8 lens is ALWAYS and f/2.8 lens for exposure. Here is why this is true without all the technical mumbo-jumbo. Let’s do a thought experiment.

Suppose you went down to your local camera store and bought a hand held light meter to use with your various format cameras. Once you get the meter home, you discover that there is no setting for your 6x9 medium format camera or your 35mm digital camera or your 16mm film movie camera. There are only settings for ISO, f-stop and shutter speed. Why? Because for exposure, all that matters are those three settings, completely independent of what format you use. By the way, that light meter still works with your digital cameras, provided their ISO/SS/F-stops are correctly calibrated.

So feel free to discuss the merits of DOF, or whatever other comparisons between formats, but leave exposure out!

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 13:36 UTC as 488th comment | 11 replies
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5