Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > SPREADING WIDE FOR THE 40D!

Reply
Thread Tools

SPREADING WIDE FOR THE 40D!

 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-07-2008
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 19:33:38 +1000, Mark Thomas
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:

>And if he's really good, he'll help others make choices - gee, maybe the
>Canon does run rings around other cameras for this work - if anyone can
>show some countering images from other marques (links to other's images
>are fine!), I'd be most interested. There was another guy who shot a
>lot of images like this, in a similarly (somewhat controlled)
>environment - I might try to find his stuff and see what he was shooting
>with.


That's a bullshit premise. If you want to compare the technical
aspects and derived results of equipment, you go to a site that
reviews equipment without bias by manufacturers, that tests under
controlled conditions, and that approaches the comparisons in a
scientific manner.

You don't look to Canon users or Nikon users who produce their shots
and say that the same shot would not have been possible with the
oppo's equipment. What the users can furnish is their own opinions on
the handling characteristics, the ease of navigation in the menus, and
other personal impressions.

If you do find that Brand X is superior to Brand Y according to these
sites, you are not at all guaranteed that *your* results using Brand X
will be identifiably better than your results would be using Brand Y.
You may, in fact, choose Brand Y for factors not included in the
tests.

Looking at Bret's images of the osprey doesn't make me long for a
Canon. It makes me long for a 400mm lens.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-07-2008
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 17:24:08 -0400, "Rita Berkowitz"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>tony cooper wrote:
>
>> Any pokes I've directed at Rita have been pokes for the same reason
>> that I commented on Bret's post: text of the post, but not
>> photographic results. Rita's posted some good shots. Unfortunately,
>> she's not selective enough to link to only her good shots.

>
>You're wasting your breath on that one, Tony. Mark's insane jealousy
>resulting in him creating a mission to criticize D-Mac and others that have
>called him out and exposed Mark's limited photographic skills. In fairness,
>I really did like his spider shots as these were the best in his portfolio.
>
>As for my selectivity Tony, anything I post to Usenet gets scrutinized by a
>nine member panel of judges that certify them to meeting the criteria of the
>"targeted audience" clause in the Usenet Stimulus Project mandate.


The idea of a nine-member panels bothers me. The last choice a
nine-member panel made put GW Bush in office.

>Oh, it's really funny seeing Bret squirm when he spends all that wasted time
>in Photoshop unsuccessfully trying to emulate the beautiful bokeh one can
>only get with a Nikkor.


Will you stop with the irritating yattering away about "bokeh" (some
say the word is properly spelled "boke"). There are some images
where the effect is distracting, but in most images it has all the
importance of the proverbial hill of beans.

Here's a guy who did some tests:
http://www.rickdenney.com/bokeh_test.htm Most viewers are going to
look at those images and wonder WTF he's on about talking about the
distracting bokeh. They're dull, insipid, meaningless shots and the
fact that the out-of-focus highlights are more noticeable with the
120/2.8 Zeiss Jena than they are in the 75-150/3.5 Nikon is actually a
benefit. It gives the viewer something to look at. Surely, nothing
else in the image is worth a look.

What's that have to do with most of Bret's shots? Y'all start
babbling about bokeh before you even open the link. I'm not sure you
really recognize it when you see it. Most of the time it's the degree
that the overall background is in focus and not bokeh that's commented
on. It ain't the same thing just because it ain't fuzzy enough.

There have to be some noticeable highlights in the background before
you can start talking bokeh. In some cases, the highlights are
sharply defined with discernable edges, and they can be a distraction.
Bad bokeh. In some cases, they are properly fuzzy and can contribute
to the image. Good bokeh.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Jun 6, 10:44*pm, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >With a Nikon, all you'd get is a blurry bird or a dog's hairy
> >butthole.

>
> That seems to say that the good pictures are solely the result of good
> equipment. *Does this mean that you feel that you could not take a
> good photograph if all you had available was a Nikon?


No, I'd shoot myself.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Jun 7, 11:31*am, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> Looking at Bret's images of the osprey doesn't make me long for a
> Canon. *It makes me long for a 400mm lens. *


I hear ya. I've been longing for a 400 f/2.8L for about 6 years.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Jun 7, 7:11*pm, donLouis <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> now how about the vertical grip, in terms of weight/balance?


Never used one.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Jun 7, 5:33*am, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com>
wrote:
>*So, given that a certain RB oft posts lengthy tomes on how
> superior Nikon gear is, yet posts shots with abysmal bokeh, poor
> composition and misleading (but I'm sure screamingly funny to you)
> titles, then why is it not ontopic and relevant to show what a competing
> camera can do, and have a brief poke at RB at the same time? *After all,
> you yourself have had the odd poke at Rita


Half of ****in Baltimore has had a poke at Rita.
 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:47:15 -0400, Alan Browne
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>The little war between "Rita" and Bret is most amusing


Perhaps it's because I missed something in much earlier posts, but
this bit about putting "scare quotes" around "Rita" is something I
don't understand.

What prompts the implication of doubt that "Rita" is Rita?

I don't see how it makes a difference if her name is not "Rita"
because many people choose to protect their real identify from online
stalkers. Or, in fact, if "she" is not a she. (Though I see no reason
to doubt this)

I see that you have been the subject of some online stalking. Perhaps
that doesn't bother you, but that doesn't mean that others are not
entitled to be protective about their personal information.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
Rita Berkowitz <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>tony cooper wrote:
>
>> Will you stop with the irritating yattering away about "bokeh" (some
>> say the word is properly spelled "boke"). There are some images
>> where the effect is distracting, but in most images it has all the
>> importance of the proverbial hill of beans.

>
>Sadly, the people that claim bokeh doesn't matter are the ones that don't
>have the great Nikkors and/or have to lamely and unsuccessfully try to
>Photoshop it in. There are no other lenses that can come close to creamy
>goodness of the Nikkor bokeh machine.


Often when I see that term "creamy goodness" it has something to do
with porn. Come to think of it, I'm not sure that this is any
different.

--
Ray Fischer
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 13:21:58 -0400, Alan Browne
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>tony cooper wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:47:15 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> The little war between "Rita" and Bret is most amusing

>>
>> Perhaps it's because I missed something in much earlier posts, but
>> this bit about putting "scare quotes" around "Rita" is something I
>> don't understand.
>>
>> What prompts the implication of doubt that "Rita" is Rita?
>>
>> I don't see how it makes a difference if her name is not "Rita"
>> because many people choose to protect their real identify from online
>> stalkers. Or, in fact, if "she" is not a she. (Though I see no reason
>> to doubt this)
>>
>> I see that you have been the subject of some online stalking. Perhaps
>> that doesn't bother you, but that doesn't mean that others are not
>> entitled to be protective about their personal information.

>
>"scare" quotes? Never heard that one before.


It's an established phrase and widely used. A definition: Scare
quotes is a general term for quotation marks used for purposes other
than to identify a direct quotation. For example, authors might use
quotation marks to highlight special terminology, to distance the
writer from the material being reported, to indicate that it is
someone else's terminology, or to bring attention to a word or phrase
as questionable or at least atypical in some way. It is often intended
to provoke a negative association for the word or phrase enclosed in
the quotes, or at least a suspicion about the appropriateness or full
truth that might be presumed if the quotes were omitted. When
communicating face-to-face, an approximation of scare quotes is a hand
gesture known as air quotes or finger quotes, which mimics the
appearance of quotation marks.

You can Google the term and find many references and usages.

>More on the lines of "so called" quotes.


>
>Interesting how you snip so heavily; don't reply to the key point
>(bokeh);


I initiated the comments in this thread on bokeh. I provided a link
to a study on bokeh. Your comments didn't add anything to what I
said, so there was no need to reply on that subject.

And, yes, I snip. I try to snip out everything except the point or
points that I'm replying to. It makes for cleaner posts.

> focus on what "Rita" is or isn't as it is interesting that your
>posts from Orlando pass through a server in Germany;


As do the posts of thousands of regular newsgroup followers. The
server, news.individual.net, is one of the most reliable newsgroup
servers available. It's through the Free University of Berlin, and
costs 10 euro per year to use. This is 2008...the use of a server in
Germany by a user in Florida is about as "interesting" as a person in
Quebec reading something posted in a newsgroup that reaches Florida,
Australia, and other international points.


> and interesting
>that you take pains to look at my past history here with the various
>trolls who have done so much to damage several photo NG's.


Yes, I Googled your name to see if you had been a victim of a stalker
to see if you might have some understanding of why someone might not
want to make their real name available online. You'll note that I did
not link to that information or provide any names or other
information.

Now, do you choose to explain what prompts you to use scare quotes
when writing "Rita""?
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2008
On Jun 8, 2:02*pm, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > focus on what "Rita" is or isn't as it is interesting that your
> >posts from Orlando pass through a server in Germany;

>
> As do the posts of thousands of regular newsgroup followers. *The
> server, news.individual.net, is one of the most reliable newsgroup
> servers available. *It's through the Free University of Berlin, and
> costs 10 euro per year to use. *


Why would somebody in Florida pay in Euros?

You sure your initials aren't Tony P. rather than Tony C?



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: DSLR lenses not good wide open at wide angle? Dauphin de Viennois Digital Photography 2 07-16-2008 12:29 PM
SPREADING WIDE FOR THE 20D ! Annika1980 Digital Photography 4 03-12-2007 07:01 PM
Wide Screen not wide enough? michelebargeman@yahoo.com DVD Video 31 04-27-2006 08:50 PM
Not many "wide-angle" compacts but, heck, many are wide-angle anyway! JeffOYB@hotmail.com Digital Photography 10 01-09-2006 08:30 AM
char 8bit wide or 7bit wide in c++? Web Developer C++ 2 07-31-2003 08:09 AM



Advertisments