«

On Nov 24, 5:41 pm, Marty Fremen <Ma...@fremen.invalid> wrote:
> With the recent sinking of an Antarctic cruise ship by an iceberg, does
> anyone want to offer revised advice about keeping your camera dry, or the
> best clothing to wear during one of these cruises?

I think it was God's way of saying, "ENOUGH penguin photos."

>Wildlife shots
>are especially suited to D-SLRs. I was at the Pinnacles National
>Monument a couple of months ago, and the rare California Condors were
>flying around. No way to get a shot of them without a D-SLR and a long
>telephoto.

Hi

I have some superb shots of Andean Condors in Peru taken with a simple
point and shoot - you can literally see the whites of their eyes -
well, more of a dirty yellow colour in reality, but that could be the
camera or the cheap printer!!! 8^)

I am actually going on an Antarctic trip in early January -
fortunately not booked on the MV Explorer. In preparation for the
trip, I decided to treat myself to a D-SLR and a fairly long lens, so
bought it mail order. When it arrived and after playing with it for
some time, I decided that it just wasn't practical - too bulky and too
awkward changing lenses in a bobbing zodiac so have decided to take my
trusty point and shoot instead; it has served me well on previous
"exotic" holidays. Plus it has the (as far as I personally am
concerned) advantage of taking bog-standard AA batteries, which means
I can cut down on the number of different batteries and chargers I
take, as everything electrical I intend taking all use the same type
of batteries. And potentially of course, I have plenty of spare
batteries available for the camera (I just rob my toothbrush or
whatever).


Regards

KGB

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:03 GMT, m II <> wrote:

>SMS 斯蒂文• � wrote:
>
>> Our two resident trolls will probably chime in with, "see, a
>> disadvantage of a D-SLR is that if your on sinking ship you won't be
>> allowed to take your camera gear with you into the lifeboat, but you can
>> always sneak in a small point and shoot."
>
>
>Don't laugh. The extra weight of a DSLR has also been proven to increase
>the statistical likelihood of an airplane coming down.
<SNIP>


Hi

Quite seriously; when I was in the Merchant Navy, it was accepted that
if you ever had to take to a (motorised) lifeboat, the first thing you
did when it ran out of fuel was to unbolt the engine and throw it
overboard to lighten the lifeboat.

Fortunately, I never had to find out how easy it was to remove an
engine in that situation.

Regards
KGB

In article <4749a874$0$79862$>, SMS ???? ?
says...

> There are some fairy small digital SLRs available. Olympus has some, but
> they're the dreaded 4/3 system, and the image quality isn't that great
> due to the small sensor, but certainly better than a P&S with the tiny
> sensors.

There is nothing dreaded about the 4/3 system and the image quality does
not suffer. But do we have really to restart this discussion?
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E3X0, E4X0 and E5X0 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 08:32:06 -0800, SMS ???• ? <>
wrote:

>m II wrote:
>
>> Don't laugh. The extra weight of a DSLR has also been proven to increase
>> the statistical likelihood of an airplane coming down. Society, as a
>> whole, can not tolerate the menace to humanity presented by these
>> behemoths any farther.
>>
>> How long must we endure the irresponsibility of these misanthropic DSLR
>> owning monsters?
>
>Apparently for quite a while, as D-SLR sales are booming, while P&S
>sales are stagnant.
>

You might want to get your facts straight instead of appearing to be the fool
again. Oh, that's right, you can't help it. It's impossible for you to be
something that you are not. No matter how much you want to try to pretend to be
a photographer, you've proved it time and time again that the most you know
about the subject is what you can read online about it. You might want to go
back and read some reputable trend reports again.

>One amusing thing is that when I'm out hiking or at an event where you
>have to be in the back and can't use flash

YOU? Hike? That's a laugh!

While you're pretending to be in the back of events (you never get out of your
house), I'm up front at REAL events, not using flash.

>, I'm the one that people are
>asking to e-mail photos to them that they couldn't get.

For the sake of your delusion I'll play along. You can't hear how loud that
imaginary camera is so you don't realize what you are saying. But that's okay,
I'll play along anyway.

The only reason that all these (imaginary) people came to you was because your
camera made enough noise to wake the dead. They all HEARD you taking photos
throughout the auditorium. Plus, they always flock to the rank amateurs looking
for attention. They know that they can be convinced to send them FREE photos,
their egos need severe stroking.

>Wildlife shots
>are especially suited to D-SLRs. I was at the Pinnacles National
>Monument a couple of months ago, and the rare California Condors were
>flying around. No way to get a shot of them without a D-SLR and a long
>telephoto.

Good thing that these (imaginary) condors were flying high above you. If they
were nearby the sound of your DSLR would have scared them off. Or maybe they
were nearby at first and you left out the fact that you had to get photos of
them as they were trying to fly away from you. That's the more believable
scenario. Of course, you're not aware of any of this because that imaginary
camera you have doesn't make any noise. (It's just the voices drowning it out.)

What a shame that you aren't talented enough to get shots like that with any
camera with a good zoom lens on it. But then, rank amateurs are like that. (As
well as those who have never held any real cameras in their whole life.)
..

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:14:45 +0100, Alfred Molon <> wrote:

>In article <4749a874$0$79862$>, SMS ???? ?
>says...
>
>> There are some fairy small digital SLRs available. Olympus has some, but
>> they're the dreaded 4/3 system, and the image quality isn't that great
>> due to the small sensor, but certainly better than a P&S with the tiny
>> sensors.
>
>There is nothing dreaded about the 4/3 system and the image quality does
>not suffer. But do we have really to restart this discussion?

You're being trolled by a resident troll.

He doesn't even own a camera.

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 15:28:13 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<> wrote:

[snip]
>Based on the type of cruise that this was, you can be sure that
>virtually every passenger had some very good binoculars, and an SLR with
>multiple lenses (unless Navas and our friendly name-changing troll were
>on the ship, then there would be two passengers trying to get wildlife
>photos with a P&S).
>
>Our two resident trolls will probably chime in with, "see, a
>disadvantage of a D-SLR is that if your on sinking ship you won't be
>allowed to take your camera gear with you into the lifeboat, but you can
>always sneak in a small point and shoot."
[snip]

Image tank and flash cards in a pocket. Easy!

5 years ago I got mugged by four guys in Rio de Janeiro. They took
most of my stuff (watch, money, airline tickets, etc) but what they
couldn't pry out of my bruised, battered and bleeding hands was my
camera. No way were they gonna take that! So I resisted until help
eventually arrived (and the dudes had already taken most of
everything else so they weren't too disappointed at not getting my
camera). Later that evening there was a police bust with armed police
capturing the dudes, but that's a different story...

See pictures here of that trip:
http://www.metalvortex.com/myphotos/...rica/index.htm

So, ya, I'll make some immense efforts to ensure that my precious
images are saved from a sinking.

--
Kulvinder Singh Matharu

Website : www.metalvortex.com
Contact : www.metalvortex.com/contact/

Brain! Brain! What is brain?!

In article <>, real-address-
in- says...

>
> So, ya, I'll make some immense efforts to ensure that my precious
> images are saved from a sinking.
>

Hi Kulvinder,

Just glad to hear that you weren't on the recent trip..

T.
>

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:43:05 -0000, Tony Gartshore
<> wrote:

[snip]
>Hi Kulvinder,
>
>Just glad to hear that you weren't on the recent trip..
>

Hey, Tony, good to see you around.

At least the safety procedures and rescue worked. Also, perhaps most
of the passengers were unusually healthy compared to other cruises:

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?storyID=9623

I'm off in three weeks time so am getting excited. Hope to see
icebergs much bigger than these:

http://www.metalvortex.com/myphotos/...icebergs_2.htm
http://www.metalvortex.com/myphotos/..._iceberg_2.htm

Got waterproof backpack (lined with water proof bags), Gore-Tex
clothes and a bunch of fleeces, long-johns, etc for the cold. About
to buy a bunch of disposable hand-warmers which I'll use for my own
warmth and also to keep the batteries at a usable temperature. I
think that the wind-chill will be the greatest factor here. Only 15kg
luggage allowance on the domestic flight in Argentina so that is
going to be a challenge. All photo gear will be carry-on though. Not
sure whether to take a flash unit...the photographic guidebook for
Antarctica recommends its use but it's just another thing to carry.

--
Kulvinder Singh Matharu

Website : www.metalvortex.com
Contact : www.metalvortex.com/contact/

Brain! Brain! What is brain?!

In article <>, real-address-
in- says...
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:43:05 -0000, Tony Gartshore
> <> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >Hi Kulvinder,
> >
> >Just glad to hear that you weren't on the recent trip..
> >
>
> Hey, Tony, good to see you around.
>
> At least the safety procedures and rescue worked. Also, perhaps most
> of the passengers were unusually healthy compared to other cruises:
>

Indeed, everything seemed to be handled in very good order..

>
> I'm off in three weeks time so am getting excited. Hope to see
> icebergs much bigger than these:

Planning a trip to Namibia for next year, hoping to see none !

>
>
> Got waterproof backpack (lined with water proof bags), Gore-Tex
> clothes and a bunch of fleeces, long-johns, etc for the cold. About
> to buy a bunch of disposable hand-warmers which I'll use for my own
> warmth and also to keep the batteries at a usable temperature. I
> think that the wind-chill will be the greatest factor here. Only 15kg
> luggage allowance on the domestic flight in Argentina so that is
> going to be a challenge. All photo gear will be carry-on though. Not
> sure whether to take a flash unit...the photographic guidebook for
> Antarctica recommends its use but it's just another thing to carry.
>
Lugged a 350D, 24-104L, 100-400L and a Sigma 10-20mm along with a Canon
580 flash around Aus for six weeks earlier this year in a Lowpro
Slingshot.. All fitted in quite nicely and I found it comfortable to
wear..

Tripod had to be checked in though..

Hope it all goes well and you have a great time..

T.
>