Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
zoom in and refocus
Mar 11, 2023 11:51:33 #
Mar 11, 2023 11:51:50 #
Sidwalkastronomy wrote:
By the way you spell things I s English your second language or you just trying to be hip with your modified spelling, which you fail to be hip
That? What with that?
Due to you past post I totally expect a bunch of sparky replies from you
That? What with that?
Due to you past post I totally expect a bunch of sparky replies from you
Clearly you nevvuh proof read yourself.
Mar 11, 2023 11:55:35 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Then keep dreaming
Yeah ... hes got 40 yrs "on the inside".
(But uncool once hes out the door.)
Mar 11, 2023 11:56:32 #
Mar 11, 2023 11:57:50 #
Mar 11, 2023 12:02:36 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Because the camera is constantly adjusting focus.
Prhaps the 70-200mm might hold as it is a single aperture.
But your others do definitely need refocusing. It is definitely NOT parfocal and you are deluding yourself if you believe that it is.
Prhaps the 70-200mm might hold as it is a single aperture.
But your others do definitely need refocusing. It is definitely NOT parfocal and you are deluding yourself if you believe that it is.
The constant max aperture is an entirely separate thing. If it costs 5 figures $, is marked in T-stops, and all the markings are sideways, then it should be parfocal. Otherwise, nope.
Mar 11, 2023 12:29:21 #
Sidwalkastronomy
Loc: New Jersey Shore
User ID wrote:
Clearly you nevvuh proof read yourself.
Auto correct
Check out Infrared Photography section of our forum.
Mar 11, 2023 12:31:05 #
Sidwalkastronomy
Loc: New Jersey Shore
User ID wrote:
The constant max aperture is an entirely separate thing. If it costs 5 figures $, is marked in T-stops, and all the markings are sideways, then it should be parfocal. Otherwise, nope.
Is that really English?
Mar 11, 2023 12:32:02 #
Mar 11, 2023 12:51:54 #
Mar 11, 2023 12:58:54 #
Sidwalkastronomy wrote:
Is that really English?
100% plain English. No personal stylings.
It is, however, photographic content and perhaps *that* is where you get lost. Ive noticed how that often happens with you, but I will not tailor my posts to the "least common denominator". UHH has inhouse professors and gurus who pretend to do that. Maybe confine yourself to them.
Check out Infrared Photography section of our forum.
Mar 11, 2023 15:36:09 #
User ID wrote:
ZERO CRED
We are talking about consumer zooms.
Only low IQ people like you fail to follow the discussion.
Go back to your lame nonsense in the attic where you belong.
Mar 11, 2023 17:11:36 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Canisdirus wrote:
Ahem...it is still in focus because your lens is making adjustments.
The 200-600 is not parfocal...which would be a friggin' steal if it were.
Take off the continuous AF mode....focus on something at 200mm ... throw the lens out to 600mm...won't be in focus.
The 200-600 is not parfocal...which would be a friggin' steal if it were.
Take off the continuous AF mode....focus on something at 200mm ... throw the lens out to 600mm...won't be in focus.
And why would I take it out of continuous auto focus? Wouldn't that defeat the whole process? Why would anyone do that?
Mar 11, 2023 17:20:14 #
Sidwalkastronomy
Loc: New Jersey Shore
User ID wrote:
100% plain English. No personal stylings.
It is, however, photographic content and perhaps *that* is where you get lost. Ive noticed how that often happens with you, but I will not tailor my posts to the "least common denominator". UHH has inhouse professors and gurus who pretend to do that. Maybe confine yourself to them.
It is, however, photographic content and perhaps *that* is where you get lost. Ive noticed how that often happens with you, but I will not tailor my posts to the "least common denominator". UHH has inhouse professors and gurus who pretend to do that. Maybe confine yourself to them.
Ive should be I've. Guess you're the least common denominator now. Lol rofl
Mar 11, 2023 17:24:10 #
Sidwalkastronomy
Loc: New Jersey Shore
User ID wrote:
Doesnt address your stuff.
Doesn't is the word you're looking for. NOT doesnt.
' ' ' are your friends. Lol
I doubt English is your first language
In reviewing your post to all hoggers your first language is snarky
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.