PDA

View Full Version : First picture upload



Jbb
10-19-2007, 06:16 PM
with my new camera....:D
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41502&stc=1&d=1192846597

socalmoney
10-19-2007, 06:26 PM
Focus is off a bit

Jbb
10-19-2007, 06:29 PM
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41504&stc=1&d=1192847377

Jbb
10-19-2007, 06:30 PM
Focus is off a bit
shakey hands...:)

RitcheyRch
10-19-2007, 06:35 PM
Beautiful dogs

Tom Brown
10-19-2007, 06:36 PM
Focus is off a bit
Maggie was closer than the camera could auto focus on.
Here are a few of the EXIF tags (note the subject distance range):
Manufacturer |FUJIFILM
Software |Digital Camera FinePix F40fd Ver1.00
Date and Time |2007:10:19 16:33:39
Compression |JPEG compression
Exposure Time |1/100 sec.
FNumber |f/5.1
ExposureProgram |Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings |800
Exif Version |Exif Version 2.2
Metering Mode |Pattern
Flash |Flash fired, auto mode, red-eye reduction mode.
Focal Length |24.0 mm
Color Space |sRGB
PixelXDimension |640
PixelYDimension |480
Sensing Method |One-chip color area sensor
Exposure Mode |Auto exposure
White Balance |Auto white balance
Sharpness |Normal
Subject Distance Ran|Unknown

Tom Brown
10-19-2007, 06:37 PM
shakey hands...:)
Not shakey. You can see the shot is rear-focused.
It's a good shot, just closer than the AF can handle in normal mode. My Canon wouldn't handle that either, unless I switch it to macro. Your camera could be similar.
Those are good shots for indoor ISO 800 exposures with a compact camera, IMO. :cool:

Jbb
10-19-2007, 06:40 PM
Maggie was closer than the camera could auto focus on.
Here are a few of the EXIF tags (note the subject distance range):
Manufacturer |FUJIFILM
Software |Digital Camera FinePix F40fd Ver1.00
Date and Time |2007:10:19 16:33:39
Compression |JPEG compression
Exposure Time |1/100 sec.
FNumber |f/5.1
ExposureProgram |Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings |800
Exif Version |Exif Version 2.2
Metering Mode |Pattern
Flash |Flash fired, auto mode, red-eye reduction mode.
Focal Length |24.0 mm
Color Space |sRGB
PixelXDimension |640
PixelYDimension |480
Sensing Method |One-chip color area sensor
Exposure Mode |Auto exposure
White Balance |Auto white balance
Sharpness |Normal
Subject Distance Ran|Unknown
she was pretty close...I didnt know there was a too close...:jawdrop:
how did you aquire that info.......?
Are you roaming around in my computer again...?
did you get one yet?

Strippoker
10-19-2007, 06:55 PM
pics are looking great!

AZKC
10-19-2007, 07:03 PM
she was pretty close...I didnt know there was a too close...:jawdrop:
how did you aquire that info.......?
Are you roaming around in my computer again...?
did you get one yet?
The all seeing all knowing Mr Brown:D
Is kinda spooky though:eek:

socalmoney
10-19-2007, 07:26 PM
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41504&stc=1&d=1192847377
This isn't too close and it still looks a little soft to me.
Filename : girls.jpg
JFIF_APP1 : Exif
Main Information
Make : FUJIFILM
Model : FinePix F40fd
Orientation : left-hand side
XResolution : 72/1
YResolution : 72/1
ResolutionUnit : Inch
Software : Digital Camera FinePix F40fd Ver1.00
DateTime : 2007:10:19 16:29:10
YCbCrPositioning : co-sited
Copyright :
ExifInfoOffset : 294
PrintIM IFD : 28Bytes
Print Image Matching Info
Version : 0250
Unknown (0002) : 01 00 00 00
Unknown (0101) : 00 00 00 00
Sub Information
ExposureTime : 1/60Sec
FNumber : F3.8
ExposureProgram : Program Normal
ISOSpeedRatings : 800
ExifVersion : 0220
DateTimeOriginal : 2007:10:19 16:29:10
DateTimeDigitized : 2007:10:19 16:29:10
ComponentConfiguration : YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel : 20/10 (bit/pixel)
ShutterSpeedValue : 1/64Sec
ApertureValue : F3.9
BrightnessValue : EV-0.4
ExposureBiasValue : EV0.0
MaxApertureValue : F2.8
MeteringMode : Division
LightSource : Unidentified
Flash : Fired(Auto/red-eye)
FocalLength : 14.40(mm)
MakerNote : FUJIFILM Format : 430Bytes (Offset:868)
FlashPixVersion : 0100
ColorSpace : sRGB
ExifImageWidth : 640
ExifImageHeight : 480
ExifInteroperabilityOffset : 1290
FocalPlaneXResolution : 4236/1
FocalPlaneYResolution : 4236/1
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit : Centimeter
SensingMethod : OneChipColorArea sensor
FileSource : DSC
SceneType : A directly photographed image
CustomRendered : Normal process
ExposureMode : Auto
WhiteBalance : Auto
SceneCaptureType : Standard
Sharpness : Normal
SubjectDistanceRange : Unknown
Vendor Original Information
Version : 0130
Unknown (0010)2,48 :
Quality mode : 704138F5
Sharpness : NORMAL
White Balance : Auto
Color : NORMAL
Flash mode : Red-Eye Reducing
Flash strength : 842019379/860041266
Macro mode : Off
Focus mode : Auto Focus
Unknown (1022)3,1 : 1
Unknown (1023)3,2 : 1648,1236
SlowSync : Off
Mode : Auto
Unknown (1032)3,1 : 1
Sequence Mode : Off
Unknown (1101)3,1 : 0
Unknown (1200)3,1 : 0
Unknown (1210)3,1 : 0
Blurring warning : No
Focus status : Nice
Exposure status : Nice
Unknown (1303)3,1 : 0
Unknown (1400)3,1 : 1
Unknown (1408)7,4 : Offset:1170
Unknown (1409)7,4 : Offset:1182
Unknown (140A)3,1 : 3
Unknown (4008)3,1 : 0
Unknown (4100)3,1 : 0
ExifR98
ExifR : R98
Version : 0100
Thumbnail Information
Compression : OLDJPEG
Orientation : left-hand side
XResolution : 72/1
YResolution : 72/1
ResolutionUnit : Inch
JPEGInterchangeFormat : 1438
JPEGInterchangeFormatLength : 9816
YCbCrPositioning : co-sited
Camera info
Focus Auto Focus( Single,Continuous, Center,Multi)
AF assist illuminator available
Focus Distance Normal : approx. 60 cm to infinity
Macro:Wide Angle: Approx. 7cm to 80cm
Telephoto: Approx. 30cm to 80cm

Tom Brown
10-19-2007, 08:10 PM
This isn't too close and it still looks a little soft to me.
Are you shitting me? Is your monitor turned on?
That shot is perfectly focused on the face of the bitch on the left.

socalmoney
10-19-2007, 08:34 PM
Are you shitting me? Is your monitor turned on?
That shot is perfectly focused on the face of the bitch on the left.
That hairy bitch looks soft to me and I don't mean to the touch.

Tom Brown
10-19-2007, 09:34 PM
That hairy bitch looks soft to me and I don't mean to the touch.
Fair enough. I could see how you might think that.
What you are interpreting as soft focus, however, is sensor noise from the gain required to achieve ISO 800. High ISO and fast shutter speeds are part of Fuji's technique to reduce camera shake.
The focus in that shot is spot on. I will also add he has not turned up in camera sharpening or used flamboyant color maps like so many cameras do to simulate sharpness where sharpness doesn't exist.
A good camera will produce detail and that image demonstrates a substantial amount of detail. It also demonstrates quite a bit of sensor noise. While the noise is crazy low for ISO 800 in a sub compact camera, it's about at the limit for my taste. The camera might respond well to being bumped down one notch in maximum sensitivity. Of course, then Brian's images will be soft from camera shake. Personally, I'd take the noise but I'd try it at a lower setting to see how bad it is.

djunkie
10-19-2007, 09:53 PM
:D :D :D
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41506&stc=1&d=1192859600
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41507&stc=1&d=1192859600

BadKachina
10-19-2007, 09:55 PM
This isn't too close and it still looks a little soft to me.
Filename : girls.jpg
JFIF_APP1 : Exif
Main Information
Make : FUJIFILM
Model : FinePix F40fd
Orientation : left-hand side
XResolution : 72/1
YResolution : 72/1
ResolutionUnit : Inch
Software : Digital Camera FinePix F40fd Ver1.00
DateTime : 2007:10:19 16:29:10
YCbCrPositioning : co-sited
Copyright :
ExifInfoOffset : 294
PrintIM IFD : 28Bytes
Print Image Matching Info
Version : 0250
Unknown (0002) : 01 00 00 00
Unknown (0101) : 00 00 00 00
Sub Information
ExposureTime : 1/60Sec
FNumber : F3.8
ExposureProgram : Program Normal
ISOSpeedRatings : 800
ExifVersion : 0220
DateTimeOriginal : 2007:10:19 16:29:10
DateTimeDigitized : 2007:10:19 16:29:10
ComponentConfiguration : YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel : 20/10 (bit/pixel)
ShutterSpeedValue : 1/64Sec
ApertureValue : F3.9
BrightnessValue : EV-0.4
ExposureBiasValue : EV0.0
MaxApertureValue : F2.8
MeteringMode : Division
LightSource : Unidentified
Flash : Fired(Auto/red-eye)
FocalLength : 14.40(mm)
MakerNote : FUJIFILM Format : 430Bytes (Offset:868)
FlashPixVersion : 0100
ColorSpace : sRGB
ExifImageWidth : 640
ExifImageHeight : 480
ExifInteroperabilityOffset : 1290
FocalPlaneXResolution : 4236/1
FocalPlaneYResolution : 4236/1
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit : Centimeter
SensingMethod : OneChipColorArea sensor
FileSource : DSC
SceneType : A directly photographed image
CustomRendered : Normal process
ExposureMode : Auto
WhiteBalance : Auto
SceneCaptureType : Standard
Sharpness : Normal
SubjectDistanceRange : Unknown
Vendor Original Information
Version : 0130
Unknown (0010)2,48 :
Quality mode : 704138F5
Sharpness : NORMAL
White Balance : Auto
Color : NORMAL
Flash mode : Red-Eye Reducing
Flash strength : 842019379/860041266
Macro mode : Off
Focus mode : Auto Focus
Unknown (1022)3,1 : 1
Unknown (1023)3,2 : 1648,1236
SlowSync : Off
Mode : Auto
Unknown (1032)3,1 : 1
Sequence Mode : Off
Unknown (1101)3,1 : 0
Unknown (1200)3,1 : 0
Unknown (1210)3,1 : 0
Blurring warning : No
Focus status : Nice
Exposure status : Nice
Unknown (1303)3,1 : 0
Unknown (1400)3,1 : 1
Unknown (1408)7,4 : Offset:1170
Unknown (1409)7,4 : Offset:1182
Unknown (140A)3,1 : 3
Unknown (4008)3,1 : 0
Unknown (4100)3,1 : 0
ExifR98
ExifR : R98
Version : 0100
Thumbnail Information
Compression : OLDJPEG
Orientation : left-hand side
XResolution : 72/1
YResolution : 72/1
ResolutionUnit : Inch
JPEGInterchangeFormat : 1438
JPEGInterchangeFormatLength : 9816
YCbCrPositioning : co-sited
Camera info
Focus Auto Focus( Single,Continuous, Center,Multi)
AF assist illuminator available
Focus Distance Normal : approx. 60 cm to infinity
Macro:Wide Angle: Approx. 7cm to 80cm
Telephoto: Approx. 30cm to 80cm
Do you people actually understand this??????:jawdrop:
and I thought I had too much useless information taking up brain matter.:confused: :)

CBadDad
10-19-2007, 10:13 PM
Is gonna have some great quotes fior signatures....
That shot is perfectly focused on the face of the bitch on the left.
That hairy bitch looks soft to me and I don't mean to the touch.
But this is my favorite...so versatile.
Are you shitting me? Is your monitor turned on?

spectras only
10-19-2007, 10:43 PM
To have half decent sharpness at 1/60 th sec without any stabilizer program one should use a tripod ,shooting non stationary subjects like babies animals etc . I'd use at least 1/125 th to avoid blur.High ISO like 400-800+ is too grainy for my liking .Remember , movie film was 25 ASA [ 15 Din] Eastman colour #98 for 35 & 70 mm in the good ol' days ;) .The key is , have good lighting system so the camera would give a larger # aperture 8.0 + [ smaller opening ] for good depth of field , so focusing wouldn't be so critical. Choose a small aperture like 8.0 or higher with manual speed .The average small aperture is f-16 for film cameras , some professional cameras use as high as f-48-72 .Most flashes on digital cameras are quite inadequate to fill any room , and red eyes are most common .The flash unit needs to be tilted or bounced off the ceiling to get the reflection of the flash away from the eye .Asking people to try not to look directly into the lens works sometime . Only the higher end SLR's have half decent flash systems you can manipulate . Opaque tape , or even a tissue [ diffuser effect] stuck on the flash's lens may help somewhat to avoid red eye for the cheaper camera owners . Nice dogs by the way .:)

spectras only
10-19-2007, 10:57 PM
For photo buffs , I recommend to check out Ansel Adams work . His compositions and subjects are second to none .
http://www.anseladams.com/
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/adams/adams.html
http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/adams_ansel.html

Jbb
10-20-2007, 10:24 AM
To have half decent sharpness at 1/60 th sec without any stabilizer program one should use a tripod ,shooting non stationary subjects like babies animals etc . I'd use at least 1/125 th to avoid blur.High ISO like 400-800+ is too grainy for my liking .Remember , movie film was 25 ASA [ 15 Din] Eastman colour #98 for 35 & 70 mm in the good ol' days ;) .The key is , have good lighting system so the camera would give a larger # aperture 8.0 + [ smaller opening ] for good depth of field , so focusing wouldn't be so critical. Choose a small aperture like 8.0 or higher with manual speed .The average small aperture is f-16 for film cameras , some professional cameras use as high as f-48-72 .Most flashes on digital cameras are quite inadequate to fill any room , and red eyes are most common .The flash unit needs to be tilted or bounced off the ceiling to get the reflection of the flash away from the eye .Asking people to try not to look directly into the lens works sometime . Only the higher end SLR's have half decent flash systems you can manipulate . Opaque tape , or even a tissue [ diffuser effect] stuck on the flash's lens may help somewhat to avoid red eye for the cheaper camera owners . Nice dogs by the way .:)
:jawdrop:

photo chick
10-20-2007, 10:31 AM
Fair enough. I could see how you might think that.
What you are interpreting as soft focus, however, is sensor noise from the gain required to achieve ISO 800. High ISO and fast shutter speeds are part of Fuji's technique to reduce camera shake.
The focus in that shot is spot on. I will also add he has not turned up in camera sharpening or used flamboyant color maps like so many cameras do to simulate sharpness where sharpness doesn't exist.
A good camera will produce detail and that image demonstrates a substantial amount of detail. It also demonstrates quite a bit of sensor noise. While the noise is crazy low for ISO 800 in a sub compact camera, it's about at the limit for my taste. The camera might respond well to being bumped down one notch in maximum sensitivity. Of course, then Brian's images will be soft from camera shake. Personally, I'd take the noise but I'd try it at a lower setting to see how bad it is.
Will you tutor me Tom? I love when you speak...........camera talk!!

Jbb
10-20-2007, 10:32 AM
Will you tutor me Tom? I love when you speak...........camera talk!!
...Oh Brother.....:p

photo chick
10-20-2007, 10:34 AM
Bryon, are you gonna take a pic of the jeep?

rrrr
10-20-2007, 10:35 AM
Will you tutor me Tom? I love when you speak...........camera talk!!
LOL........we need to discuss exposure and aperture openings under low light conditions.......:jawdrop: :D :D

Jbb
10-20-2007, 10:35 AM
There is no Jeep...:rolleyes:

photo chick
10-20-2007, 10:37 AM
LOL........we need to discuss exposure and aperture openings under low light conditions.......:jawdrop: :D :D
Oh yeah!! :D

photo chick
10-20-2007, 10:37 AM
There is no Jeep...:rolleyes:
your pretty lawn?

Jbb
10-20-2007, 10:38 AM
your pretty lawn?
No water..ugly lawn...:jawdrop:

photo chick
10-20-2007, 10:43 AM
No water..ugly lawn...:jawdrop:
something then............geez!!

rrrr
10-20-2007, 10:45 AM
I just point the thingy at the thingy and press the thingy on the top. Am I doing it right? :D
I think so......:D
If someone is worried about getting the perfect photo with a $275 pocket digital, I think they need to lower their expectations or buy a more expensive camera.......except, of course, Tom Brown. He can fix it. He has the answers to all facets of life. :D :D

Jbb
10-20-2007, 12:11 PM
I think so......:D
If someone is worried about getting the perfect photo with a $275 pocket digital, I think they need to lower their expectations or buy a more expensive camera.......
I think Brown might dispute that.....:D

socalmoney
10-20-2007, 02:26 PM
What you are interpreting as soft focus, however, is sensor noise from the gain required to achieve ISO 800. High ISO and fast shutter speeds are part of Fuji's technique to reduce camera shake.
Silly rabbit, grain is for film.
Readout noise is specified both for the CCD sensor and the total system. Noise can be thought of in two ways. First, there is not perfect repeatability each time charge is dumped out of the CCD and digitized. Conversions of the same pixel with the same charge will not always yield exactly the same result from the A/D. The second aspect of noise is the injection of unwanted random signals by the sensor and electronics which ends up getting digitized along with the pixel charge. In addition, every analog to digital conversion circuit will show a distribution or spread about an ideal conversion value. In either case the result is a certain "uncertainty" which is referred to as noise, specified in electrons (e-).
For example, a good noise figure for the Kodak KAF-0402e and KAF-1602e is 13e- typical, while a good number for the entire system is 15e- typical. We have measured systems as low as 9e- total noise and routinely see 10-14 e- performance from our scientific systems using these sensors. If we see a system figure of 13 electrons and assume that the sensor is 11 electrons, this implies that the noise in the rest of the electronics is 7 electrons. This is just an estimate, because we do not know for sure what the sensor noise is. The point here is that in this example the sensor is the major contributor to noise. The lower the noise figure of a camera system, the better its ability to harvest a useful signal from a noisy background in low light conditions, assuming of course that it is not significantly sky limited.
Also, games can be played with the gain of the system to reduce electonics noise or CCD noise. For example, if a camera system produces 2 counts of electronics noise regardless of the CCD noise, and the gain of the system is 10 electrons/count, then the total noise will be 20 electrons (2*10). However, if the gain is reduced to 2 electrons/count, but now the CCD noise dominates, the total noise could end up at 10 electrons with 5 counts of measured noise. Note that our electronics noise floor is 2 counts, so we no longer are limited by our electronics, but by the CCD!
Most applications are not read noise limited, but are limited more by background or dark noise.

Sleeper CP
10-20-2007, 02:45 PM
Bryon, are you gonna take a pic of the jeep?
There is no Jeep...:rolleyes:
Corbra/Jeep thing or Jeep/Cobra thing:confused: I knew what she meant;)
How's the Cobra comming anyway?
Sleeper CP
Big Inch Ford Lover;) :rolleyes:

Jbb
10-20-2007, 02:47 PM
Corbra/Jeep thing or Jeep/Cobra thing:confused: I knew what she meant;)
How's the Cobra comming anyway?
Sleeper CP
Big Inch Ford Lover;) :rolleyes:
It is currently sitting in the corner of my shop...under a tarp...waiting for me to finish a boat Im repairing first...:)

photo chick
10-20-2007, 03:06 PM
Corbra/Jeep thing or Jeep/Cobra thing:confused: I knew what she meant;)
How's the Cobra comming anyway?
Sleeper CP
Big Inch Ford Lover;) :rolleyes:
yeah that's it! :rolleyes: ;)

Tom Brown
10-20-2007, 05:48 PM
Silly rabbit, grain is for film.
If you read a little closer, you will see I wrote "gain".
Most applications are not read noise limited, but are limited more by background or dark noise.
Not at 1/100s. Background and dark noise are light years from being factors at 1/100s shutter speed.
Cameras so not apply a dark filter until much, much slower than 1/100s shutter speed.
What we're seeing in Brian's images is a small sub-compact camera type sensor being gained to the limit as part of Fuji's system of camera shake resistence.
I also notice that camera looks to have a terrific color map and white balance. Most cameras these days are so over saturated on their color rendition, it's like looking at a cartoon.
Personally, I'd back the ISO down to 400. That should clean the image up quite nicely.
The old photographer's rule of thumb is a minimum hand held shutter speed of 1/(focal length). At 24mm (I assume 35mm equivalent), there should still be a nice margin there.
Anyway, shutter speed isn't nearly as relevant when you're shooting flash.

Tom Brown
10-20-2007, 06:18 PM
This isn't too close and it still looks a little soft to me.
The trained eye looks for detail. The untrained eye looks at edges.
Look at the tail and face hair in that shot. That shot has a lot of detail.
Look at the dark area in the dark area in the upper left. That is what we call noise. You can even see it in the white pantry doors.

Tom Brown
10-20-2007, 06:23 PM
I just point the thingy at the thingy and press the thingy on the top. Am I doing it right? :D
No. You need to get a couple of pro line dSLRs and a bag full of L glass so you can know more than the rest of us. :D

Jbb
10-20-2007, 06:24 PM
My eyes are crossed.....ever since I got kicked by a mule..:messedup:

socalmoney
10-21-2007, 11:02 AM
That is funny I read gain as grain. I thought I had you there.
I am trying to keep this going but I have agreed with you since the beginning. It is fun picking Tom's brain. I wonder what hat size he is.
What "L" lenses do you have. I only have the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. Wishing I had bought the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. Not digging the f/4. But it is a nice lens. I also want the EF 85mm f/1.2L II.

rrrr
10-21-2007, 11:10 AM
The trained eye looks for detail. The untrained eye looks at edges.
Look at the tail and face hair in that shot. That shot has a lot of detail.
Look at the dark area in the dark area in the upper left. That is what we call noise. You can even see it in the white pantry doors.
All I see is a couple of fleabitten yappy dogs. No wonder Byran's yard has yellow spots.
:D :D

Tom Brown
10-21-2007, 12:28 PM
What "L" lenses do you have. I only have the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM.
I have three L lenses. 21, 40, and 70. All primes. All pancakes.
They aren't lenses you will care about, though. They're all Pentaxes. :D
You might note the lens that set the Photozone Imatest resolution record is the Pentax 41L prime. That record will be broken in the summer of 2008 but it's proves the current camera world is bigger than Canon and Nikon.
I sold my Canon 20D just over a year ago and switched to Pentax. I couldn't be happier about it but I neither recommend nor discourage the move. It was the right move for me.
Between the cost of Canon glass and a few really outrageously bad service incidents with Canon service, I am not a big fan of Canon anymore but I don't hate them.
If there were no cost difference, I might have chosen a Canon 5D. Might. The 5D's noise properties and dynamic range are truly awesome...... as are those same properties on the lowly Pentax K100D. Both cameras take well useable images to ISO 1600 and marginally useable images to ISO 3200. When I can walk out into the back alley and get a sufficiently lit, sharp shot with my K100, a monopod, and no street lights or back yard lights on..... that's mind blowing to me.
If I were doing studio work, I certainly wouldn't be shooting a K100D and probably not Pentax, although I had a K10D for a while and I find it to be an extremely capable instrument. It's not as capable as the K100 for what I do but it would do a better job in a studio enviroment. I doubt I'll ever do studio work again so I'll stick with my Pentax.
It amazes me how caught up people get in the gear. I used to be like that too, in an extreme way. I shot only mid format, even on personal vacations, and stored my lenses in museum like conditions with desiccant to prevent fungus. These days, I have far more modest gear. I've taken over 10000 shots per year for the last several years. What's more, I'm enjoying it more and I'm learning things you can't pick up with pixel level Internet based analysis.
I love camera gear but my photography would be served pretty much just as well with a Nikon D40, Canon Rebel XT, or even a Canon G9 or Fuji F31fd. Right now, my preference just happens to be with Pentax. So many people talk only in megapixels. It's gotten completely stupid. The megapixel race is turning point and shoot cameras into pieces of crap.
How many people these days are suffering through 60% or more of their shots being blurry and unusable? They probably think they are really shaky or that they need more megapixels. lmao! :D
Give me a sensor with 6~7 micron pixel pitch, a decent lens of f4 or faster, and I'm good to go.
By the way, I've got a Pentax 16-45 that is f4 wide open. People turn up their nose at that lens but it is tack sharp and contrasty as hell at f4. How many f1.8 lenses are useable at f1.8? Before you pay a bunch of dough for faster glass, you might want to check out how useable that glass is wide open. Few lenses are sharp at f4 and extreme few are sharp below f4. There are a few but they are extremely expensive. The Canon 50/1.4 is one such lens. It's useable in most situations at 1.4 but gets better as you stop it down.
Zeiss even makes a 50/1.0 lens. Seriously.... f1.0. It does not image as well as the Canon 50/1.2 but people talk about the Zeiss like it's the second coming.
When have you ever admired a shot on a studio wall and had the photographer tell you it was shot below f2.8.... or even f4?
We need to get away from the specifications and start looking at image quality. There are a lot of wonderful optical instruments out there with capabilities that are nothing short of spectacular.
The sunset shot I posted in the Digital SLR thread was taken with a plain old Pentax 16-45/4 zoom lens. Yep... plain old mid-level zoom lens that is available for about 400 bucks. When is the last time you saw so little flare from a lens with aspherical elements shot directly into the sun? It even has decent bokeh.
Having the most expensive equipment does not have anything to do with doing the best photography. I've had images taken with a Canon ELPH published. They didn't even complain about the quality. It's all about the contents of the shot. The technical aspects of the image are far, far less important.
Rant........ done. :)

Jbb
10-21-2007, 12:51 PM
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41581&stc=1&d=1192999836
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41582&stc=1&d=1193000065

Tom Brown
10-21-2007, 12:54 PM
That camera has some world class white balance and color mapping. It's a treat to look at images with accurate color, instead of the brightly lit cartoons so many cameras turn out these days. :cool:
If you were to shoot something in daylight, that noise will go away. Any chance you could post a shot taken, perhaps outdoors, during the daylight hours?

Jbb
10-21-2007, 01:00 PM
If you were to shoot something in daylight, that noise will go away. Any chance you could post a shot taken, perhaps outdoors, during the daylight hours?
No chance...

Tom Brown
10-21-2007, 01:02 PM
:eek:

Jbb
10-21-2007, 01:19 PM
These were taken earlier this summer with my previous Fuji camera....
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41584&stc=1&d=1193001461
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41585&stc=1&d=1193001688
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41586&stc=1&d=1193001689
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41587&stc=1&d=1193001689

Tom Brown
10-21-2007, 01:20 PM
These were taken earlier this summer with my previous Fuji camera....
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41587&stc=1&d=1193001689
Apparently, that was back when you were gay.

Jbb
10-21-2007, 01:21 PM
Apparently, that was back when you were gay.
:D
No...just looking for contrasting colors...:D
http://www.***boat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41588&stc=1&d=1193002053

rrrr
10-21-2007, 02:29 PM
Apparently, that was back when you were gay.
LMAO!!!!! :D

socalmoney
10-21-2007, 09:25 PM
I grew up shooting Nikon, FM, FE, F3. I have a Pentax Z1 but right when I got it and started shooting with it, the mirror locked up and I haven't got around to fixing it yet. Now I have a 20D and 5D and I really only shoot with the 5D. I use it for studio and location stuff. It is a great camera.