Karroly

Lives in France Grenoble, France
Joined on Jan 13, 2009

Comments

Total: 808, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MikeF4Black: The political exchange in the comments below is harshly revealing, for a Western-European anarcho-liberal like myself.

Oh, these words have different meanings where I live. "Liberal" does not equate "Communist" over here.

@arbux,
I totally agree with TrojMacReady. Obviously, you do not know what you are talking about...
I live in France and I can tell you this : in politics, "liberal" is more or less synonym of "capitalist" here, and I feel quite free, personnally...

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 05:29 UTC
In reply to:

AK41: Mediocre photography. Giant distance from works of Eisenstaedt, Capa, Bourke–White and many others.

@arbux,
And this is the main democraty weakness : people who, for the most part, do not have the knowledge/skills to be a President, but are asked to express, with their vote, their feeling about who is able to be a good President..without success most of the time ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 04:53 UTC
In reply to:

Albino_BlacMan: Don't really like to be a grammar Nazi but I think your credibility as a site would increase if someone proofread enough to remove the really bad run on sentences.

"A good deal of vignetting is said to be present when the lens is used wide open, but the designer says that when the focus is set to 1.40m everything from 0.8m to infinity will be sharp."

That's two completely unrelated sentences jammed into one that make it seem like hyperfocal settings and vignetting are related on this lens.

Credibility is not a matter of being perfect, but just better...
Or, a teacher does not have to be perfect, but just to have something valuable to teach...

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 10:22 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: Unless you do birds or bugs, nobody actually needs more lenses. If you get a good enough and fast enough 24-85mm or 24-70mm equivalent lens when you buy the body- giving you a vast and infinitely variable range of focal lengths, you'll be just fine.

I have many lenses, but find in practice they are used only for specific purposes, as in general use on a D800 the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 is just fine. I use it all the time, unless the light in winter demands an f1.4 to stop action.

Marketing men, but not modern photographers go large on bokeh and fast lenses abilities to put the background out of focus, but on a full-frame camera there's very little depth of field wide open at f3.5 even at 24mm, and the closer you get to your subject the more out of focus the background gets anyway.

Its not the aperture that gives extra depth of field, but your closeness to your subject, and with faces and bugs you will need more depth of field not less

"Its not the aperture that gives extra depth of field, but your closeness to your subject"
This is right at very short distances, when shooting macro, where the DOF only depends on the magnification ratio (for a given lens aperture). In other words, shooting macro with a wide angle lens does not provide extra DOF as some people believe it (hum..., including some staff at DPR...). To get more DOF in this situation, it is better to shoot with a smaller sensor...
This is wrong at any longer distances.
Formulas here :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 03:48 UTC
In reply to:

faterikcartman: I'm no longer a young man. I've seen orangish moons on the horizon. I've even seen reddish moons during big fires. But I've never seen a RED moon on a clear black night. Admittedly I skimmed it, but the article gave me the impression the colour of the moon was entirely natural due to atmospheric effects and not an effect of saturation or other PS manipulation. I'm not sure I'm buying that. Regardless, I really liked and enjoyed the images.

The difference of saturation of the moon color, between what one can see with naked eyes and what the camera records, can be explained by the fact that the eye iris is wide open because of an overall dark image and thus the eyes see an "over-exposed" moon. On the opposite, the camera is set up to not over-expose the moon (and the time to take the shot was choosen to achieve this, as explained by the author). Try this : look at the moon, when it is low on the horizon, through a variable ND filter...

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

landscaper1: Oh, joy. Just when I thought I would never again (thanks to digital photography) have to pick up someone else' discarded film packaging in a national park, along comes Kodak to resurrect the source of much of that trash.

@ landscaper1,
"Everything "wastes" natural resources. Even you, if you're able to be honest about it."
I did not say I do not waste resources myself. If you read carefully my previous post, I wrote " uninteresting digital pictures (INCLUDING MINES)". But like many people, I hope, I try not to waste when I can.
The point of my first comment is that, before you blame people who do not care for the environment, please, look at what YOU do against it yourself with your digital gears...

"But at least in our national parks you'll never find discarded hard drives, floppy disks, and flashcards at every roadside overlook."
For sure, we send all that trash in third world countries...
Please have a look here, it is in French, but the picture speaks by itself :
http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2013/12/27/les-dechets-electroniques-intoxiquent-le-ghana_4340635_3244.html

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 06:56 UTC
In reply to:

Slouch Hooligan: No remotely piloted vehicle is complete without a cup holder!

The cup holder is attached to the remote controller...more useful ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:33 UTC
In reply to:

landscaper1: Oh, joy. Just when I thought I would never again (thanks to digital photography) have to pick up someone else' discarded film packaging in a national park, along comes Kodak to resurrect the source of much of that trash.

And what about the waste of natural ressources, and environmental impact caused by the many hard disk drives, servers, and data centers build and run 7 days a week, 24 hours on 24, to store the zillions of uninteresting digital pictures (including mines) and selfies uploaded constinuously on the cloud and the social networks ?

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 04:15 UTC
On article HMD Global releases Nokia 6 Android smartphone (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

noisephotographer: Irrelevant because of small sensor.

Irrelevant because no EVF... ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 23:42 UTC
On article Rugged Fujifilm XP120 arrives just in time for winter (25 comments in total)
In reply to:

Xentinus: I really would love to have such a camera with;
-1 inch sensor
-a lens wider than 24mm (at least 21 or 18 would be better)
-tilt screen
(I know it would be bigger and heavier but it is ok)

A waterproof camera with an articulated screen will be harder to design...
And if you drop it when the screen is deployed, I do not think it will survive...

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 03:54 UTC
On article Hawks Factory announces new 35mm F2 in M-mount (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: How much extra would it cost me to get a lens with soft retro blur in the center as well?

Marketing guys trick to sell stuff at a high price is amazing. So, when a lens manufacturer is not able to design a lens that is tack-sharp from center to corners, the solution is easy : just label it "retro something" and then you can ask a lot of money for it. You will always find stupid, rich hipsters to buy it...

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 03:44 UTC
In reply to:

LFPCPH: But will it have global shutter

:-)

Yes if you use a shutter speed lower or equal to the flash sync speed...

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 23:37 UTC
In reply to:

James Pilcher: I came from deep in the film era. I don't ever want to look back. Digital does it for me.

@Spectro,
I kindly invite you to read the comment left by Entoman above about the not so environmentally friendly digital photography...

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 23:35 UTC
In reply to:

Tan68: I wonder if 'Canon Inc' was misprinted so the people could argue it wasn't a complete copy in some effort to later divert a copyright infringement suit..? Not that I think that would be a successful argument.

I am just trying to rationalize how they could miss such an obvious part of the lens markings. Surely, it is possible to put a space between the 'Canon' and the 'Inc'

Perhaps someone in the crime syndicate had second thoughts and deleted the space as a warning to the unwitting public..

If so, I hope that hero was not teabagged with cement shoes into the Giants football stadium.

Blue birds help us if the counterfeiters add that space on their next effort !

These counterfeiters are dishonest but not stupid. If they want to buy a genuine Canon lens they will be able to recognized - and discard - the fake one !

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Ma: How hard is it to get the font and spacing right... geez. That's just lazy.

@Sacher,
Counterfeiters who have some sense of humor cannot be totally bad guys...

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: It's a pity people with the intellectual, manufacturing and marketing skills to do this can't turn their efforts to actually making decent lenses that either compete with the real thing or offer a few FLs the OEMs don't make.

I would be very surprised if these counterfeiters were able to build their own manufacturing plant from scratch, considering the required skills and money to do that. I rather suspect that these fake lenses come from the same manufacturing plants than the original ones. Maybe they are samples that did not pass quality tests and, rather than being thrown into the trash bin, were "rebadged" by unscrupulous employees to be sold at the black market.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 14:17 UTC

Samsung NX rebirth from the ashes ?
They should have called this camera fNX... ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 10:48 UTC as 97th comment

The video of the Aral Sea is terrifying !

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 09:38 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

paulkienitz: 3/3: The second approach is a simple sort of switching power supply, with no transformer. Put a silicon switch and a wide resistor between the main bank and a smaller capacitor, and switch the power to that capacitor on and off to keep it charged to a steady level. This would risk introducing interference to the rest of the circuitry so it would need shielding. And if you don't combine it with the banking idea, it would mean that the supercapacitor might be storing dangerously high voltages.

The safety would be a concern anyway. Someone opening up the device would have to tiptoe very carefully around the capacitor's output leads until he makes sure it's discharged. And in the event of a failure it could release energy a lot more abruptly than a burning lithium battery.

A camera is not directly powered by the battery because the various chips require many different, and sometime very low voltages, well below 2 volts. So there is a DC/DC voltage converter to do the job already. And a DC/DC voltage converter can handle a huge input voltage swing when designed to do so... It is not necessary to have a constant voltage at the input.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 05:37 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: What a pity that this sort of energy tech is not yet sufficiently developed to be put in current cameras. If it was, we might actually have mirrorless cameras that didn't run out of power twice a day (or more).

It's all very well carrying extra batteries (although some airlines refuse to let you take more than a few), but for those of us who spend several days at a time in the field, without access to electricity, maintaining a sufficient stock of fully charged batteries can be a real nightmare.

I suspect that many wildlife photographers and war photographers e.g. would like to switch to mirrorless, but simply can't do so because of the very high battery consumption.

@BlueBomberTurbo,
Not all the cameras can be supplied through the USB connector. And I would not rely on this fragile connector to be used in the field. I would only rely on a military-class connector with retainer...

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 05:24 UTC
Total: 808, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »