Martin.au

Martin.au

Lives in Australia Adelaide, Australia
Works as a Doing PhD stuff.
Joined on Jul 20, 2012

Comments

Total: 188, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

cosinaphile: i have trouble believing they lost money on items like this:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1305108-REG/lexar_lc512crbna3500_professional_512gb_3500x_cfast.html

Are you asking why a 512gb compact flash card with 500+MB/s transfer rate is expensive? Just to clarify, you think it is "small" (as in small in volume?) and should therefore be cheap?

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2017 at 06:37 UTC
On article How water droplets came to life for a Gatorade ad (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kamox: They've created "a beverage with electrolytes"?
In other words, salty water?

It's what plants crave...

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 01:36 UTC

Ya know, I think I'm cool with being a couple of stops down with my Pany 100-400.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2017 at 22:42 UTC as 77th comment
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $900-1200 (476 comments in total)

As soon as I saw the G85 in the list I picked the winner. :D

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2017 at 02:41 UTC as 13th comment

Welll played, little village of Bergün. Well played. :D

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 04:11 UTC as 93rd comment
In reply to:

Erik Ohlson: Now, why didn't I think of that?

What a wonderful idea: focus by undoing some bolts and inserting a spacer - WOW, such INNOVATION !!

The results don't look like much, either. I have better images of airplane wings taken with a Panny ZS19

Oh! I'm sorry - it's "3d Printed" - must be WONDERFUL - so SACRED!

As if I couldn't do better with 1/8" plywood and Elmer's glue.

Just silly.

Well, I bet you couldn't do better with plywood and glue.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 20:11 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: From the looks of it, that lens has a leaf shutter built into it.

Therefore this guy printed a box, which is light sealed when closed, and can hold film and mount a lens/shutter system.

Sure.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Word to the wise; you will NOT get that kind of a result from the $500 made-in-China crappy 3D printers floating around Ebay.

You were complaining about the filament based printers.
Filament costs around $30 a kilo (plus or minus quite a bit). Depending on what you're printing, you usually get over 30 prints from a roll. That's less than a dollar a print.
And, up until recently, our local community fablab, charged $1 per print. They have since gone up in price, but they also have more overhead than just printers and filament.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 08:00 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: From the looks of it, that lens has a leaf shutter built into it.

Therefore this guy printed a box, which is light sealed when closed, and can hold film and mount a lens/shutter system.

Oh. I'm sorry I wasn't precise enough for you.

Well, I'll just wait for you to put the equivalent design together with tape, panels, glue.
Here's a few more shots showing what you need to achieve.
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/05/26/this-custom-made-3d-printed-camera-shoots-6x14-medium-format-negatives/

Perhaps I'll go and print my own camera body (box) while I wait. :D

Happy?

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 02:51 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: From the looks of it, that lens has a leaf shutter built into it.

Therefore this guy printed a box, which is light sealed when closed, and can hold film and mount a lens/shutter system.

Well, I'll just wait for you to put the equivalent design together with tape, panels, glue and a box.
Here's a few more shots showing what you need to achieve.
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/05/26/this-custom-made-3d-printed-camera-shoots-6x14-medium-format-negatives/

Perhaps I'll go and print my own camera while I wait. :D

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 02:27 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: From the looks of it, that lens has a leaf shutter built into it.

Therefore this guy printed a box, which is light sealed when closed, and can hold film and mount a lens/shutter system.

In this thread. Not you specifically. As I said in my first post.

"Why not? Boxes have been built out of plastic for decades--really 2000 years but that's a different story."
Sure, plastic boxes have been made for years. Now, go and duplicate what is shown above with conventional manufacturing. Let me know the cost when you're done.

"3D printing parts, that can be used, and are say watertight, is not as inexpensive as you imply."
I regularly make 3d printed parts, that are used and watertight. I am fairly certain it's a lot cheaper than getting a custom mould set up for injection moulding. As in orders of magnitude cheaper.

"Not at all sure how you got here. But sticking with the cabinet analogy, it's as if someone made a kitchen cabinet with a 3D printer, instead of simply purchasing the wood and joining it."
Well, let us know when you can recreate the above camera, using conventional manufacturing.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 02:04 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: From the looks of it, that lens has a leaf shutter built into it.

Therefore this guy printed a box, which is light sealed when closed, and can hold film and mount a lens/shutter system.

Just some of the comments along the lines of:
"I have nothing against 3D printing but it's the answer to a nonexistent problem. It's a catch phase to imply something innovative and otherwise impossible".
"This substitution of "3D printed" for the verb to make is getting tiresome."

Maybe this device isn't interesting enough, or complex enough for your approval, but without 3D printing, it wouldn't exist.
Partly where 3D printing excels is "parts with complex internal curved spaces that could never be machined for a mold, or machined directly into the final metal product."
However, where 3D printing also excels is in making things that are never going to be manufactured because conventional manufacturing techniques require volume to offset cost.

The tone of this thread is bizarre. It would be like me griping that someone's cupboard that they made with their woodworking skills wasn't sufficiently complex, and on top of that, I don't like their chisels.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 01:29 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Word to the wise; you will NOT get that kind of a result from the $500 made-in-China crappy 3D printers floating around Ebay.

What a load of rubbish.

So you're complaining about the "very, very expensive plastic" (which usually ends up coming out at under a dollar a print).

And your solution is regular machining and die-casting....

Have you ever got a machine shop to price up small batches of products? Ever asked a die-cast manufacturer to develop a custom die for your bespoke needs?

I think a smack with the reality stick is needed here.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 00:53 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Word to the wise; you will NOT get that kind of a result from the $500 made-in-China crappy 3D printers floating around Ebay.

Well duh. It's additive manufacturing. Of course it won't look like die cast or machined products.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 00:47 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: From the looks of it, that lens has a leaf shutter built into it.

Therefore this guy printed a box, which is light sealed when closed, and can hold film and mount a lens/shutter system.

I sense a distinct lack of imagination in this thread.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 00:00 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Word to the wise; you will NOT get that kind of a result from the $500 made-in-China crappy 3D printers floating around Ebay.

You won't get that on any filament based printer. This is manufactured using selective laser sintering printing (zapping powder).

However, some of the $500 "made-in-China crappy 3D printers" are actually pretty good.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 23:50 UTC
In reply to:

AARonron: Great article. I would like to see a follow-up that summarized when each style of shutter is most beneficial and examples of applications each excels at.
For example, I've read more than one photog gush over how great silent shooting is for their portrait work, keeping subjects more at ease and candid.
Conversely, from the article it sounds like e-shutters might be terrible for sports, but is it really? How fast do things need to be moving to cause noticeable distortion? (not rhetorical, I really would like to know)
E-shutters seem like they'd be great for shooting with a fast lens on a sunny day without having to stop down or use an ND filter to avoid blow-out. But, is it that simple?

I shoot roller derby and wildlife with a 1/60 e-shutter. No problems with those scenarios.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 00:24 UTC

Love this attitude.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 04:06 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Azfar: Has dpreview changed its 'Review' format ? Four pages ?

Well, it's a little m4/3s camera, so that's the equivalent of 16 FF review pages.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 00:01 UTC
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)

400mm, f6.3, 67mm filter? Damn. That's cutting it close.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 03:35 UTC as 16th comment
Total: 188, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »