Will the prolific expansionism of the MILCs - eventually, kill off the DSLR?
May 20, 2019 23:44:19 #
kenArchi wrote:
All of them. It's in the camera. I used my 100-300 at 2x which took it out to 1200mm.
Now, it only does this in jpeg, not raw. I have a Oly m10 ll.
Now, it only does this in jpeg, not raw. I have a Oly m10 ll.
Wait, now, Ken - you say - IN the Camera? … Do you mean - the 2X Converter is built into the EM 10 Mk. II?
May 21, 2019 01:58:22 #
Chris T wrote:
Not hard to do, Will … the 60s (1960, anyway) was just about 60 years ago, now …
That's when most of us bought rock albums, I'm sure … my 45s - even go back to the 50s …
And, I have some hand-me-down albums from my folks - going back to the 40s, too …
But, that's my point - vinyl will last forever, as long as they're stacked upright, and you're careful, playing them, and keeping them clean and static-free. Tapes, on the other hand - will eventually jam, & wear out!
That's when most of us bought rock albums, I'm sure … my 45s - even go back to the 50s …
And, I have some hand-me-down albums from my folks - going back to the 40s, too …
But, that's my point - vinyl will last forever, as long as they're stacked upright, and you're careful, playing them, and keeping them clean and static-free. Tapes, on the other hand - will eventually jam, & wear out!
I am not certain by what you mean by tapes that "will eventually jam & wear out".
For a friend, I dubbed some 15 or so professionally recorded reel to reel tapes of performances mounted in the 1960's. The fidelity was fine, the tapes ran through my R2R recorder perfectly, and the transfer was competed without a problem. The fidelity was amazing given that these recordings were some 45 years old. Tape, even in its early days, was an incredibly hearty medium.
Caruso
May 21, 2019 02:24:21 #
Carusoswi wrote:
I am not certain by what you mean by tapes that "will eventually jam & wear out".
For a friend, I dubbed some 15 or so professionally recorded reel to reel tapes of performances mounted in the 1960's. The fidelity was fine, the tapes ran through my R2R recorder perfectly, and the transfer was competed without a problem. The fidelity was amazing given that these recordings were some 45 years old. Tape, even in its early days, was an incredibly hearty medium.
Caruso
For a friend, I dubbed some 15 or so professionally recorded reel to reel tapes of performances mounted in the 1960's. The fidelity was fine, the tapes ran through my R2R recorder perfectly, and the transfer was competed without a problem. The fidelity was amazing given that these recordings were some 45 years old. Tape, even in its early days, was an incredibly hearty medium.
Caruso
R-R Tapes ARE a hearty medium, Caruso, but, Will was referring to cassettes (I think!)
It is cassettes which will jam - whether the tape is in audio cassettes, or in video cassettes.
May 21, 2019 13:04:12 #
kenArchi
Loc: Seal Beach, CA
Here is a sample photo, f5.2 1/250s ISO800. Oly M10 ll, 100-300mm Lens. Zoomed out to 234mm X4 equals 960mm. Hand held, single shot. Aperture Priority.
I never took this type of photo(birds, wildlife, etc.) and the camera is new, straight out of the box. At least I knew enough to start with AP.
So I need more practice to get better, sharper results.
And this gear is Sooo Light, you can use one hand.
I never took this type of photo(birds, wildlife, etc.) and the camera is new, straight out of the box. At least I knew enough to start with AP.
So I need more practice to get better, sharper results.
And this gear is Sooo Light, you can use one hand.
May 21, 2019 13:36:14 #
kenArchi wrote:
Here is a sample photo, f5.2 1/250s ISO800. Oly M10 ll, 100-300mm Lens. Zoomed out to 234mm X4 equals 960mm. Hand held, single shot. Aperture Priority.
I never took this type of photo(birds, wildlife, etc.) and the camera is new, straight out of the box. At least I knew enough to start with AP.
So I need more practice to get better, sharper results.
And this gear is Sooo Light, you can use one hand.
I never took this type of photo(birds, wildlife, etc.) and the camera is new, straight out of the box. At least I knew enough to start with AP.
So I need more practice to get better, sharper results.
And this gear is Sooo Light, you can use one hand.
Magnificent, Ken … they BOTH look pretty good to me … but the 2nd seems to have more SNAP!
And ALL from a $650 camera, huh? … Makes you think twice - eh?
May 22, 2019 07:30:19 #
Chris T wrote:
Best of luck with that idea, Cat … a phone in a camera? … Samsung already tried that - had a 4.5" screen, too - but, it didn't go over too well. If you need a cell-phone - buy a cellphone. (I don't!) If you want a decent camera, buy a DSLR … OR a current MILC - your choice. Leave cellphones to the amateurs ….
Are you not an amateur?
May 22, 2019 10:42:08 #
David Taylor wrote:
Are you not an amateur?
David - I'm a Retired Pro Photographer and Photo-Finisher ….
I don't even OWN a Cell-Phone!
May 22, 2019 10:52:10 #
Chris T wrote:
David - I'm a Retired Pro Photographer and Photo-Finisher ….
I don't even OWN a Cell-Phone!
I don't even OWN a Cell-Phone!
So you are now an amateur. Go buy a smart 'phone.
May 22, 2019 11:01:34 #
David Taylor wrote:
So you are now an amateur. Go buy a smart 'phone.
No. I am STILL a retired Pro Photographer and Photo-Finisher.
What on earth do I want a Smart Phone for? … I never even bought a cell-phone!
Those things are for people who can't sit still for a minute, and are always on the Go.
I'm not! ... I am always HERE!!!!
May 22, 2019 11:07:08 #
Chris T wrote:
No. I am STILL a retired Pro Photographer and Photo-Finisher.
What on earth do I want a Smart Phone for? … I never even bought a cell-phone!
Those things are for people who can't sit still for a minute, and are always on the Go.
I'm not! ... I am always HERE!!!!
What on earth do I want a Smart Phone for? … I never even bought a cell-phone!
Those things are for people who can't sit still for a minute, and are always on the Go.
I'm not! ... I am always HERE!!!!
Retired is retired. You're an amateur. You said 'phone cameras were for amateurs. That's you. Go buy one.
May 22, 2019 11:38:08 #
David Taylor wrote:
Retired is retired. You're an amateur. You said 'phone cameras were for amateurs. That's you. Go buy one.
Look, forget the "Retired" Business, willya? … I am STILL a Professional Photographer.
(I am ONLY retired - from my Photo Finishing business!) - got it?
I have absolutely no need for a Cell-Phone.
They cost too damned much - not only to buy, but to run. I cannot afford it.
So, lay off - willya, David …
May 23, 2019 14:22:42 #
CaptainBobBrown wrote:
Always a hot topic...but until MILC's (and cell ph... (show quote)
AMEN BROTHER>>>>> Micky B
May 23, 2019 14:25:53 #
May 23, 2019 14:36:57 #
Hah,.. Try using that good old FD or FL glass that Canon had, on anything they made after 1990!
May 23, 2019 16:22:37 #
MickyB wrote:
Hah,.. Try using that good old FD or FL glass that Canon had, on anything they made after 1990!
Apparently, Mickey - the Fotodiox Adapters, work well with FD lenses!!!!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.