Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Capn_Dave
Page: <<prev 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 next>>
Nov 7, 2013 06:59:58   #
selmslie wrote:
I agree. A complete grasp of the math is not necessary, especially since we should be concentrating on only one sensor size or film format at a time.

A general familiarity with DOF is sufficient and spending too much time on the minutia does not make your pictures any better - it just slows you down.

Comparing film or sensor formats is a mental exercise that only a few of use might enjoy and it does not improve anyone's photography.


In other words you spend a whole bunch of time defending a theory on COC and then say it's minutia and forget about it.
Would of it been easier to say it's there but you cannot notice it. The last thing I worry about is COC when I take a shot, I have other things on my mind. All I care about is hyperfocal distance and DOF depending on what I want to do about it. Then shoot it about a 100 times cause I still didn't get what I wanted. Crap If I am shooting a bird in flight I am lucky to get it in the frame and on the correct side. Then we worry about focus, shutter speed, ISO, and aperture. I just can't think that fast LOL.
:thumbup:
Go to
Nov 6, 2013 13:49:52   #
imagemeister wrote:
I must admit - I have been in photography for 45 years and this is my first exposure to this "theory" ! - which causes me to be very skeptical.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Nov 5, 2013 15:49:27   #
Circle of Confusion: Is trying to get on the healthcare.gov web site and getting answewrs
Go to
Nov 5, 2013 15:27:37   #
Dang Bears :lol:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/eryxAcsTcOA?rel=0 :thumbup:
Go to
Nov 5, 2013 06:40:53   #
[quote=canadiaman]
Nikonian72 wrote:
Q #1: Pixel count and sensor size are not related.
Q #2: DoF is a function of lens aperture, having nothing to do with sensor size.

#1- aren't pixel count and sensor size both involved in resolution? ( or should I have said "definition" to describe the detail present in the photo at full size.)
If not, what determines the detail in a photo?
I certainly have noticed that the 8 mp photos of my iphone don't have nearly 80% the quality of my 10 mp crop DSLR.

#2- is it just me or does depth of field not appear shallower on a full frame?
Q #1: Pixel count and sensor size are not related.... (show quote)


#1 If I have a 18 Mp crop sensor and a 18 Mp full frame sensor, as Hillary would say "What difference does it make"

The difference is pixel size. Yes size does matter. For clarity, lets use the bucket analogy, and substitute buckets for pixels. I have 2 sensors with 18 Mb (Mega buckets) in each. The only difference is the size of the sensor. So how do I fill the smaller sensor with so many Buckets. I'll run out of room. :(
Hey dummy someone sez, :idea: "just use smaller buckets". So there you have it. Full size sensors have bigger light catchers, They hold more light.
See that wasn't so hard wuz it.

Fair Winds
Dave :thumbup:
Go to
Nov 4, 2013 11:28:22   #
tusketwedge wrote:
You can still give them a disk that they can read but also but a block for coping .


If you can get it on a disk.... I can get it off :thumbup:
Go to
Nov 2, 2013 08:31:20   #
Kuzano wrote:
Are you allowing for the Giffengander and Hoofenschnoffel differentials? What about the hypothesis?

Sheldon C
Head Honcho... BBT


:cry: Her Voltstickum disproved the Ghergenschlam Hypothesis last year. Chees it really sucks when people cannot stay up on their math. Next thing you know people will think there is free health insurance

:thumbup: :roll:
Go to
Oct 29, 2013 17:42:22   #
lighthouse wrote:
Run, Forrest, run !!


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Oct 29, 2013 17:41:18   #
Mudshark wrote:
And remember beyond using your Giotto rocket for blow jobs, diffracted photons can be downright dangerous....


And illegal in some states :lol:
Go to
Oct 29, 2013 06:32:06   #
winterrose wrote:
You need to do a lot of reading. Come back in six months.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Oct 29, 2013 06:28:29   #
:P I use the LensPen. I don't like putting liquids on my lens.
The lens pen uses a graphite technology.

http://www.amazon.com/LensPen-DSLR-Camera-Cleaning-NDSLRK-1/dp/B0081ER9KG/ref=sr_1_2/179-9706181-6863747?ie=UTF8&qid=1383042414&sr=8-2&keywords=lenspen :thumbup:
Go to
Oct 26, 2013 08:02:06   #
The one I recommend for wireless and cheap inexpensive is the Yongnuo. Good flash for the dollar
http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Professional-Speedlight-Flashlight-Olympus/dp/B00BXA7N6A/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1382788192&sr=1-1&keywords=yongnuo+flash :thumbup:
Go to
Oct 22, 2013 07:35:06   #
Are we talking books or the software. Magic Lantern does not make software for Nikons.
Go to
Oct 22, 2013 07:27:53   #
I wrap mine in the tin foil, that is left over when I make a new hat :lol:
Go to
Oct 22, 2013 07:16:45   #
:lol: The only snobs around here are the Nikon or Canon owners
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.