mirthseeker

Joined on Dec 10, 2011

Comments

Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12
In reply to:

Tons o Glass 0 Class: This has me thinking my A7 II might be in the outlier category - are there any symptoms of these defects that can be uncovered without disassembly? Shutter shock, field tilt?

I shoot adapted lenses. In my case, the sensor plane is not perfectly parallel with the mount plane, as evidenced by a measurable difference in optimal focus at each corner. This occurs with any lens/adapter combo, and my adapters have been measured with calipers to ensure they're not the #1 cause of tilt. My trend is that the sensor corner (and to a lesser extent the sensor side it's on) near the shutter button is closer to the mount than the rest.

While gently/meticulously performing a wet cleaning I noticed that that corner of the sensor can can be pressed down a very tiny amount and an audible click can be felt/heard. Is this normal? Comments?

I have never had it sent in for inspection out of the fear that a defect would fail to be discovered (camera's fully functional). Could the mount be bent?

As Roger notes in his write-up, the cameras with this fault passed all Lensrentals inspections even with the fault, so it's pretty subtle. Tilted sensor would be one indication, another could be less than satisfactory autofocus. The click you hear "could" perhaps be due to a cracked sensor mount moving, who knows? The only way to find out, it seems, is to have a tear-down done if you don't have access to Rogers' testing equipment.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2020 at 03:26 UTC

Exactly what fire services need to take out drones operating near aerial fire fighting operations.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2019 at 00:18 UTC as 57th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Imager of: Yes. Because there’s been soooo many fires on planes because of these. 🤨 So silly!

To Imager of - If electronic devices like mobile phones are not switched off during take-off and landings, there can be interference with radio communications between pilot and control tower, making communication more difficult. The more devices on,the greater the interference. Would you want to be the party responsible for a pilot mistakenly taxiing your plane onto the runway that another plane was landing on?

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2019 at 00:15 UTC
In reply to:

mirthseeker: And the announcement of C-4 Optics on April 1 2015, complete with details of this hypothetical lens "the Flying Saucer, AKA The Light Bender" wasn't a joke after all!
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/04/announcing-c-4-precision-optics/

Roger, you could have waited another month and a bit before posting. That would have been even more awesome. Now what can you possibly post then?

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2019 at 23:43 UTC
In reply to:

mirthseeker: And the announcement of C-4 Optics on April 1 2015, complete with details of this hypothetical lens "the Flying Saucer, AKA The Light Bender" wasn't a joke after all!
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/04/announcing-c-4-precision-optics/

oops, April 1st

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2019 at 23:25 UTC

And the announcement of C-4 Optics on April 1 2015, complete with details of this hypothetical lens "the Flying Saucer, AKA The Light Bender" wasn't a joke after all!
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/04/announcing-c-4-precision-optics/

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2019 at 23:24 UTC as 55th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

abruzzopat: Now that Canon is the only company without IBIS, it's a con. Guess they better get on it.

LOL, somebody is not familiar with the Sony A77ii, A99ii or A68, but then they are DSLT (with ibis through the viewfinder), not DSLR.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2018 at 10:24 UTC
In reply to:

Ryan ConQueso: One feature that SO many cameras don't seem to feature is aperture bracketing. Just like shutter speed bracketing, only the aperture changes for each capture and the exposure remains constant by means ISO or shutter speed compensation (user-configurable) while holding down the shutter release at high-speed continuous shooting. The amount of aperture change between each shot and total shots in a burst should also be user-configurable.

This way a photographer, in a fraction of a second, could have two "versions" of the same image. One with exaggerated bokeh for tiny social media (cellphone) display, and another for large, printed display.

Why this option isn't a standard feature for every single enthusiast, prosumer, and professional camera is beyond me. We shouldn't have to make manual aperture adjustments between each shot when there's such an easy to create and virtually zero-cost option implementable via firmware update on already-released cameras!

Which cameras have this?

Yes please. Add the facility to have multiple images at progressive aperture values, so that they can be combined in post-processing to create an STF effect - much like the Minolta Maxxum 7 film camera did in-camera - and better still, then add the facility to combine these images in-camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2018 at 02:03 UTC
On article Here's why your beloved film SLR is never going digital (296 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cornu: Leica DMR. That was a digital back for the Leica R9 film camera.

except, of course, they weren't digital, but analog backs.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 08:26 UTC
On article Here's why your beloved film SLR is never going digital (296 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cornu: Leica DMR. That was a digital back for the Leica R9 film camera.

1986. Minolta 7000 and 9000 digital backs - SB 70 & SB 90. https://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/onebody/sb-90
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYKtXv0FEBo
http://www.9000.org/index.php?page=backs

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 07:03 UTC
In reply to:

mirthseeker: From a former volunteer firefighter's perspective:
FACT: Aerial support is withdrawn if a drone is sighted near firefighting operations.
FACT: Aerial support is vital for early knock-down of fires in inaccessible terrain, and is a vital part of ongoing wildfire fighting, for suppression, protection of structures, and in emergencies for protection of people. Vital! Hundreds of homes here in Australia have been directly and indirectly saved through water-bombing wildfires in built-up and rural areas.
One idiot with a drone can, and has removed a vital component of modern firefighting processes, whether in USA, Australia, or elsewhere.
Consider whether it might be YOUR family, house or business which was lost because aerial support was unavailable.

Get caught flying your "negligible risk" drone in an area where aerial suppression of a fire is taking place, and you will be treated by the Law the same way an aronist is treated, and rightly so.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2017 at 01:32 UTC

From a former volunteer firefighter's perspective:
FACT: Aerial support is withdrawn if a drone is sighted near firefighting operations.
FACT: Aerial support is vital for early knock-down of fires in inaccessible terrain, and is a vital part of ongoing wildfire fighting, for suppression, protection of structures, and in emergencies for protection of people. Vital! Hundreds of homes here in Australia have been directly and indirectly saved through water-bombing wildfires in built-up and rural areas.
One idiot with a drone can, and has removed a vital component of modern firefighting processes, whether in USA, Australia, or elsewhere.
Consider whether it might be YOUR family, house or business which was lost because aerial support was unavailable.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 01:04 UTC as 29th comment | 2 replies
Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12