How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Winter is near
Next: CMOS sensors worthless for video?
From: Jeff Jones on 2 Jul 2010 14:22 On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:27:48 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"whisky-dave" <whisky-dave(a)final.front.ear> wrote in message >news:i0knkt$549$1(a)qmul... >> >> "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message >> news:4c2c86a2$0$22165$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... >>> On 01/07/10 12:37 AM, Ray Fischer wrote: >>> >>>> In other words, a "shutter lag" of zero wouldn't help in the slightest >>>> if the camera took 800msec to focus and save the picture. >>> >>> Surely you realize that "shutter lag" is often used to describe the sum >>> of AF lag and shutter lag. In reality it's the contrast detect focusing >>> of the P&S that causes the AF lag, and while it's not as bad as it was in >>> the past, it still is much slower than phase-detect AF, especially in >>> challenging situations. >>> >> >> I've always connsider shutter lag as shutter lag in that it's the >> differnce in time between activate the shutter button (in a sense that's >> the picture you wish to take) compared to the time it takes the >> electronics to open the shutter and store the image in it's buffer. >> Focausing has nothin gto do with shutter lag. >> >> > > >Using your perception, focusing time is included in the parameters you set. Only in the minds of beginner snapshooters. Thanks for revealing that about yourself.
From: Jeff Jones on 2 Jul 2010 14:35 On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 11:22:17 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:tuur265k6hfr11j3emi7k3g40vvsk14jqa(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:27:48 -0400, in >> <4c2df7c0$0$5543$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"whisky-dave" <whisky-dave(a)final.front.ear> wrote in message >>>news:i0knkt$549$1(a)qmul... >>>> >>>> "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:4c2c86a2$0$22165$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... >>>>> On 01/07/10 12:37 AM, Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In other words, a "shutter lag" of zero wouldn't help in the slightest >>>>>> if the camera took 800msec to focus and save the picture. >>>>> >>>>> Surely you realize that "shutter lag" is often used to describe the sum >>>>> of AF lag and shutter lag. In reality it's the contrast detect focusing >>>>> of the P&S that causes the AF lag, and while it's not as bad as it was >>>>> in >>>>> the past, it still is much slower than phase-detect AF, especially in >>>>> challenging situations. >>>> >>>> I've always connsider shutter lag as shutter lag in that it's the >>>> differnce in time between activate the shutter button (in a sense that's >>>> the picture you wish to take) compared to the time it takes the >>>> electronics to open the shutter and store the image in it's buffer. >>>> Focausing has nothin gto do with shutter lag. >>> >>>Using your perception, focusing time is included in the parameters you >>>set. >> >> Not necessarily -- the lens may well be pre-focused. >> > > >Yup! Very easy to do in wildlife photography. Just pick your spot and let >the wildlife come to you. No, it's very easy to do in ALL situations. Half-press on something near your subject or near to where you know it's going to be. (The art of photography is knowing your subject even more than your camera.) Shutter response from half-press to full is near instantaneous at the moment you need to capture the shot. While you're learning this most basic of digital-camera skills, go learn about "hyperfocal" too. No wonder that any of you who post photos never have them properly focused. I swear, don't any of you know how to properly use auto-focusing modes on any cameras? I'd hate to see what would happen with manual-only cameras in your hands. This is why you fools so easily reveal to everyone what base beginners (or never used any camera) that most of you are. And then you wonder how I know. With things this simple and basic to using digital cameras, and you don't even know this much. How much more obvious can you get.
From: Jeff Jones on 2 Jul 2010 14:36 On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 09:55:14 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 02/07/10 8:22 AM, Peter wrote: > >> Yup! Very easy to do in wildlife photography. Just pick your spot and >> let the wildlife come to you. > >LOL, just carry some bait and put it exactly where you want the animal >to be, then pre-focus, and wait. While this would be illegal if you were >shooting the animal with a gun, it'd be okay just for photographing the >animal (unless you're in a place where feeding wildlife is forbidden). >It's the perfect workaround to slow contrast-detect auto-focus. Thanks for proving again that you've never used any camera and that you don't know one thing about wildlife photography as well.
From: Jeff Jones on 2 Jul 2010 14:44 On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 15:49:33 +0100, "whisky-dave" <whisky-dave(a)final.front.ear> wrote: > >I'm wondering when the first camera with pre-shutter trigger will be >released >as standard like auto focus is today. > > Already been done. A few cameras continually capture images at high frame-rates, then it pauses the capturing of frames when you actually press the shutter. Allowing you to select from frames captured previous to the time you actually pressed the shutter button. This allows you to get those images where you sometimes say to yourself, "Damn, I'm going to miss that shot!" Not from any shutter-lag mind you, but from your own senses not being quick enough to predict the unforeseen. This is what you people get for not knowing much, or more often nothing at all, about the P&S cameras that you always go on and on about as ignorantly as you all do.
From: Jeff Jones on 2 Jul 2010 14:45
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 11:20:49 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"whisky-dave" <whisky-dave(a)final.front.ear> wrote in message >news:i0ku9n$7dl$1(a)qmul... >> >> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message >> news:4c2df7c0$0$5543$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com... >>> "whisky-dave" <whisky-dave(a)final.front.ear> wrote in message >>> news:i0knkt$549$1(a)qmul... >>>> >>>> "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:4c2c86a2$0$22165$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... >>>>> On 01/07/10 12:37 AM, Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In other words, a "shutter lag" of zero wouldn't help in the slightest >>>>>> if the camera took 800msec to focus and save the picture. >>>>> >>>>> Surely you realize that "shutter lag" is often used to describe the sum >>>>> of AF lag and shutter lag. In reality it's the contrast detect focusing >>>>> of the P&S that causes the AF lag, and while it's not as bad as it was >>>>> in the past, it still is much slower than phase-detect AF, especially >>>>> in challenging situations. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've always connsider shutter lag as shutter lag in that it's the >>>> differnce in time between activate the shutter button (in a sense that's >>>> the picture you wish to take) compared to the time it takes the >>>> electronics to open the shutter and store the image in it's buffer. >>>> Focausing has nothin gto do with shutter lag. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> Using your perception, focusing time is included in the parameters you >>> set. >> >> Why ? >> >> I like to focus before I intend to capture the image. >> If I'm going to focus say on the 100M runner in 2012 Olympics >> I don;t class that as a 2 year shutter lag. >> My shutter lag will be the amount of time it takes for me to begin >> pressing the shutter to the time it takes for the image to be captured. >> Some might refer to it as a propagation delay which is what I do in >> electronics. >> 'Electricity' travels fast, but at a finite speed. >> >> If it takes 2 years for the event to happen that's not the cameras fault. >> Same with focusing, which is focus lag. >> I remember the days of film changing lags too, which was removed by being >> able to have a 250 exp camera 'back'. >> Friends remember processing lags, as being a wedding photographer >> they used to have to get the film processed and printed within a few >> hours. >> This meant developing the film while driving to the darkroom in the car, >> washing it in meths too, although not while driving. >> >> I'm wondering when the first camera with pre-shutter trigger will be >> released >> as standard like auto focus is today. > > >And this has what to do with your definition? >I am not trying to convince you. That is a waste of time. I just don't want >to see a newbie to be mislead. LOL!!!!!!! Now that's funny. You talking about "newbies" as if they are something other than yourself. HAHAHAHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! |