Pulling Strings With The 70-200 VR2!!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Things are getting a bit spotty with the 500/4 Nikkor!!
Next: But will MS's overheat in the sun, like the Crapple iPad?
From: John McWilliams on 7 Aug 2010 17:48 SneakyP wrote: > Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in > news:2010080209510070933-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom: > >> On 2010-08-02 09:39:19 -0700, "MC" <any(a)any.any> said: >> >>> Larry Thong wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 17:16:19 -0700, Savageduck wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2010-08-01 16:39:29 -0700, Larry Thong >>>>> <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> said: >>>>> >>>>>> I know, I know, this was a job for the good old 200/2, but I was a >>>> bit >> lazy to carry it today so I went on the cheap with the trusty >>>> old >> 70-200 VR2. It worked! >>>>>> <http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm261/Ritaberk/Strings.jpg> >>>>> This is a nice capture, but it is spoilt by shooting wide open and >>>>> having the right arm OF. >>>>> >>>>> I don't know what your actual aperture was, as we have no EXIF >>>>> data. I can only guess you were wide open at f/2.8. I would have >>>>> thought there was more than enough light + VRII to shoot at >>>>> f/6.3-f/12 bringing that arm into focus. >>>> Thanks. I'm content with the arm not being in focus as this is what >>>> I wanted. >>> Why? What was your reasoning behind wanting a big blurred arm acros >>> the bottom of the frame? The whole image is spoiled by it. >>> >>> MC >> I agree. >> Sorry Rita, there is no rationalization fro the OOF right arm. Any >> claim of artistic interpretation, and deliberate intent, would be just >> silly. You can do better that that. >> It remains a good capture spoilt. >> > > OTOH - it reminds one of the movement of a wand across the bow, making > the shot more about the player's pose as he looks down the violin. Ok, then: Photo- 1.5 out of 10 Troll- 8.4 out of 10. -- john mcwilliams
From: SneakyP on 7 Aug 2010 19:17 John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in news:i3kkb0$260$1 @news.eternal-september.org: SneakyP wrote: >> >> OTOH - it reminds one of the movement of a wand across the bow, making >> the shot more about the player's pose as he looks down the violin. > > Ok, then: Photo- 1.5 out of 10 > Troll- 8.4 out of 10. > Speaking of rating: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dWMIuipn_c -- SneakyP To email me, you know what to do.
From: Bill Graham on 7 Aug 2010 20:56 "SneakyP" <48umofa02(a)WHITELISTONLYsneakemail.com> wrote in message > Remember the Iran missile test picture showing not one, but three > missiles? And all that smoke was pretty much a clonejob gone bad. It > was funny that such a faked picture made the headlines of such > prestegious news reporting services. > Back in the 80's, the Stanford Daily (a college newspaper) published a story on April 1st, showing missile silos all over the Stanford campus, together with a story about how the government was using the campus as a military weapons site. The story was done so well that it was picked up by the San Francisco Chronicle, and made their headlines.....And, (of course) it was just an April Fools Day joke......
From: -hh on 9 Aug 2010 09:10 The "Sir, would you like fries with that?" troll wrote: > -hh <recscuba_goo...(a)huntzinger.com> wrote: > > ... > >All of a whopping 30ft; don't you really mean 30m? Yet despite all > >of these grandiose _claims_, you weren't ever able to cite any brand/ > >make/model P&S UW camera system that was able to equal the 1970s > >vintage Nikonos-V's wide angle lens setup. Too late now, though. > > Desperately trolling for my attention again? There is no need to remind you that you're all talk and no substance. But for the benefit of other RPD readers, it was a convenient mechansim to remind them of this older hardware seach topic. Since there were zero acceptable P&S solutions, here's the final configuration: <http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2010/Ike_Canon-7D.jpg> FWIW, I still wouldn't mind having a nice P&S UW system to compliment this, for trips where I'm only going to be snorkeling and for islands with tough landing sites, such as Pitcairn. -hh
From: Superzooms Still Win on 9 Aug 2010 14:59
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 06:10:16 -0700 (PDT), -hh <recscuba_google(a)huntzinger.com> The poor little whiney dSLR-TROLL wrote: > > >> -hh <recscuba_goo...(a)huntzinger.com> wrote: >> > ... >> >All of a whopping 30ft; don't you really mean 30m? � Yet despite all >> >of these grandiose _claims_, you weren't ever able to cite any brand/ >> >make/model P&S UW camera system that was able to equal the 1970s >> >vintage Nikonos-V's wide angle lens setup. �Too late now, though. >> >> Desperately trolling for my attention again? > >There is no need to remind you that you're all talk and no substance. > > >But for the benefit of other RPD readers, it was a convenient >mechansim to remind them of this older hardware seach topic. Since >there were zero acceptable P&S solutions, here's the final >configuration: > ><http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2010/Ike_Canon-7D.jpg> > > >FWIW, I still wouldn't mind having a nice P&S UW system to compliment >this, for trips where I'm only going to be snorkeling and for islands >with tough landing sites, such as Pitcairn. > > > >-hh > Ahhh... now I get it. Just like last time. You want me to give you the information you seek for free. ROFLMAO! How transparently and childishly manipulative can you get? I don't know, this time was just about as lame and blatant as the last time too. LOL! Maybe you should get in contact the "Bozo in a Tank", a.k.a. tony pooper, you can both pretend to be scuba divers together. |