Posts for: rmorrison1116
Dec 30, 2022 14:27:28 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Yep! It can be hard to tell them apart. 
Actually I was in a fish store and a bait and tackle shop just the other day and it was extremely easy to tell the difference. The bait and tackle shop smelled a lot better.
Dec 30, 2022 14:21:46 #
sodapop wrote:
That was true in the early days of digital. Nowadays digital is as good if not better than analog. Music sounds better on analog because it is older music which is far better than that which is put out today (IIMHO)
Do you have any idea just how ridiculous that sounds?! Older music sounds better in analog because it is older music!
It has absolutely nothing to do with the age of the music or even the actual music itself. It has to do with the nature of sound waves and light waves and sine waves. Sound is analog, it is vibrations in the air. Even digital recording are played back with speakers that vibrate the air to create sound. I'm not going to go into more detail; everything I'm saying may be looked up on the internet. Also, there is a lot of good music being made today, and a whole lot of other music. Just because it may not be your taste in music, doesn't mean it is not good music, and sound waves don't care what kind of music it is or how popular it is.
Dec 30, 2022 13:57:49 #
alexol wrote:
I have two mirrorless cameras, one is brand new Fu... (show quote)
They were not using the phone to take photos, they were using the camera.
Dec 29, 2022 15:53:18 #
alexol wrote:
I can't think of any good reason why, but for whatever reason, using a film camera is just so very satisfying in a way that a digital camera is not.
Maybe it's similar to the difference between vinyl albums and CDs. Somehow, even the very highest definition digital version - and there are formats out there that blow the doors off CDs - just don't sound as good as an analogue recording.
Sometimes - many times - it is is good to be old.
Maybe it's similar to the difference between vinyl albums and CDs. Somehow, even the very highest definition digital version - and there are formats out there that blow the doors off CDs - just don't sound as good as an analogue recording.
Sometimes - many times - it is is good to be old.
Digital sound and digital images are two entirely different things. Digital music isn't as good as analog music simply because the music was created in analog, and digital recording actually changes the sound. High resolution digital images recorded with a quality digital camera, look just the same as a comparable images recorded on film. Sound is a result of vibrations in air, and photos are a recording of light; two entirely different media.
Dec 27, 2022 20:56:55 #
leftyD500 wrote:
I am a long-time Nikon shooter. I did purchase the... (show quote)
I bought my Nikkor 200-500 years ago when they first came out. It's not my largest or heaviest lens but it is one of my favorite lenses. It is usually mounted to either my D500 or D850, the only DSLR's I currently use on a regular basis. My everyday shooters are my Canon R5 and R7.
Dec 27, 2022 18:28:53 #
bobburk3 wrote:
You have no idea how well I take care of my camera.
You are correct, I truly have no idea how you care for your camera gear, and I really don't care.
On the other hand, I am very familiar with WD-40, why it was created and what it's primary function is.
I have been into photography since I was in highschool, and I'm retired now. I have owned several film cameras and over 30 digital cameras, and in the 50+ years I've been doing photography, I've never once used WD-40 on one of them, and I have a can in the garage and in the basement.
You do realize we are talking about a liquid that was originally formulated to displace moisture and penetrate rust. Most folks generally avoid exposing their expensive precision made cameras to excess moisture, and rust.
Also, as WD-40 was never intended to be a general purpose lubricant, and there are lubricants specifically designed for precision equipment, like cameras, lubricants that are way, way better at lubricating than WD-40, why would anyone use WD-40 on a camera?!
Dec 27, 2022 15:14:51 #
qrpnut7 wrote:
Did not recommend a "spray." A small, single drop would do, it's exactly what it's designed for. Remember, "If it moves and shouldn't - duct tape. If it doesn't move and should, WD-40."
WD-40 was not designed specifically as a lubricant and is not nearly as good a lubricant as those that were designed specifically as a lubricant. If your camera is in need of something like WD-40, you are possibly not taking care of it as well as you should.
Dec 25, 2022 21:16:15 #
kerry12 wrote:
We got a little snow, but was gone by the next morning. Woke up to 3 degrees here.
Brrrrrrr. We had a dusting of snow, no big deal. I'm glad the bulk of the storm passed well to the north of here in Southeast PA.
My dogs are from Madagascar and cold is not something they enjoy. Usually when I let them out to do doggie things, they take their time. With this cold they've been running out the door, doing their doggie business as quickly as possible and are back at the door yelling to be let back in. They are so cute...
Dec 25, 2022 21:08:27 #
kenArchi wrote:
'In the right hands' any camera can make beautiful pictures.
Cameras don't make pictures, they record them.
Dec 25, 2022 13:09:27 #
fetzler wrote:
Well smart phones are real cameras only in the sense that Instamatic cameras of the past were real cameras. Yes they make photographs. I have made pinhole cameras that I consider more of a real camera than a cellphone.
Indeed, I don't think of cellphones as particularly good phones, computers, or cameras.
Indeed, I don't think of cellphones as particularly good phones, computers, or cameras.
You have an interesting and very obsolete way of looking at things. The digital camera in my Google Pixel smart phone is just as much a real camera as my Canon 5DSr or my R5 or my R7 or my Nikon D500 or my Nikon D850 or any of my over two dozen DSLR and MILC'S I own. Just as real, just different. I guess compared to a Cadillac, a VW beetle is not a real car.
Dec 25, 2022 13:00:24 #
bobmcculloch wrote:
Okay, cell phones are real cameras, like Minox and Minolta 16's were real cameras back in the day, quality of tiny sensor or film is always behind a larger format. If you want a wallet size photo, small is good , if you want a wall hanging bigger is better as a general rule.
I've been into photography for around 55 years and I became interested in the technology of digital photography about 22 years ago. My first digital camera was a Sony Mavica CD300. It has just over 3 megapixels of resolution and records to a mini CD. I still have it and it still works. My highest resolution camera is my Canon 5DSr, around 50 megapixels. I currently own over 25 DSLR's and MILC's and my current daily shooters are Canon R5 and R7. I own both Canon and Nikon gear and over 35 lenses, Canon EF, EF-S and RF, and Nikon F mount, made by Canon, Nikkor, Sigma and Tamron. my Nikon cameras include a D7200, D500 and D850.
My point is, I understand digital sensors and the technology behind them and what happens when you enlarge an image recorded with a tiny sensor. But the point I was focusing on is, a digital camera regardless of size, lenses and whatever, is indeed a REAL camera. The camera in my Google Pixel 6 smart phone is indeed a real camera, albeit not a dedicated camera, but still as real as the Sun in the sky.
Dec 24, 2022 17:30:06 #
Smart phone cameras ARE real cameras. When are those who believe otherwise going to wake up and taste reality. Sure, they are not dedicated cameras, but they are very real. More photos are taken with smart phone cameras than with dedicated cameras.
Dec 24, 2022 14:47:24 #
Robert Willson wrote:
20 Years ago, My wife and I mover to Florida to get away from the cold and snow. This morning I woke up to 32 degrees in the Tampa area. A friend suggested I put on a Yule Log to warm up, so I turned on the TV a put a You Tube Yule Log video on. Although if looked great, it did not help much, I'm still cold.
Maybe I need to build a fireplace.
Wishing you all a happy and Great Holidays where every you may be.
Bob
Maybe I need to build a fireplace.
Wishing you all a happy and Great Holidays where every you may be.
Bob
That's better than the 5f I woke up to here in SE PA. At least we didn't get any of the snow.
Dec 24, 2022 13:57:49 #
Bill_de wrote:
... Yesterday @ Bombay Hook before the cold set in.
---
---
Nice duck photos...
Dec 22, 2022 18:14:54 #
I also shoot Canon and Nikon. I have shot Canon for 50 years and Nikon for far less. I like both my Canon and Nikon cameras and I have absolutely no need to put down a brand or manufacturer just to validate my purchases.
You say Nikon is better by far. Better by far than what? The images I get from my Canon's are just as good as the images from my Nikon's and Canon's are simply easier to use. Granted, I'm somewhat of a collector, though not so much now that I'm retired. The last Nikon I bought was my D850, and I still use it regularly. The last 2 cameras I bought were a Canon R5 and an R7, both really nice cameras. I looked at the R3 but decided I really have no need for one, besides, they are fairly expensive.
Bottom line, Canon makes excellent cameras and Nikon makes excellent cameras, as does Sony and many other manufacturers. Canon is not better than Nikon and Nikon is not better than Canon. It's a personal preference...
You say Nikon is better by far. Better by far than what? The images I get from my Canon's are just as good as the images from my Nikon's and Canon's are simply easier to use. Granted, I'm somewhat of a collector, though not so much now that I'm retired. The last Nikon I bought was my D850, and I still use it regularly. The last 2 cameras I bought were a Canon R5 and an R7, both really nice cameras. I looked at the R3 but decided I really have no need for one, besides, they are fairly expensive.
Bottom line, Canon makes excellent cameras and Nikon makes excellent cameras, as does Sony and many other manufacturers. Canon is not better than Nikon and Nikon is not better than Canon. It's a personal preference...