A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Andrew, Feb 2, 2004.

  1. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    Andrew, Feb 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Andrew

    AArDvarK Guest

    Yep:

    File: - DavisTbirdEject.jpeg
    ImageDescription -
    Make - NIKON CORPORATION
    Model - NIKON D1X
    Orientation - Top left
    XResolution - 300
    YResolution - 300
    ResolutionUnit - Inch
    Software - Adobe Photoshop 7.0
    DateTime - 2003:09:14 17:51:18
    YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
    ExifOffset - 276
    GPSInfo - 880
    ExposureTime - 10/10000 seconds
    FNumber - 4.00
    ExposureProgram - Manual control
    ExifVersion - 220
    DateTimeOriginal - 2003:09:14 16:38:21
    DateTimeDigitized - 2003:09:14 16:38:21
    ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
    CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
    ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
    MaxApertureValue - F 4.00
    MeteringMode - Center weighted average
    LightSource - Fine weather
    Flash - Not fired
    FocalLength - 300.00 mm
    UserComment -  
    SubsecTime - 909312000
    SubsecTimeOriginal - 909312000
    SubsecTimeDigitized - 909312000
    FlashPixVersion - 010
    ColorSpace - Uncalibrated
    ExifImageWidth - 3008
    ExifImageHeight - 1960
    SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
    FileSource - Other
    SceneType - Other
    CustomRendered - Normal process
    ExposureMode - Manual
    WhiteBalance - Manual
    DigitalZoomRatio - 1 x
    FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 450 mm
    SceneCaptureType - Standard
    GainControl - None
    Contrast - Normal
    Saturation - Normal
    Sharpness - Normal
    SubjectDistanceRange - Unknown



    "Andrew" <> wrote in message news:bvlm7h$9pi$...
    > A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here:
    >
    > http://w3.kill-9.com/DavisTbirdEject.jpg
    >
    > The EXIF data indicates the photo was taken with a Nikon.
    >
    > Andrew
    AArDvarK, Feb 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Andrew <> writes:

    > A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here:


    > http://w3.kill-9.com/DavisTbirdEject.jpg


    > The EXIF data indicates the photo was taken with a Nikon.


    A D1X on top of the tower. And yes, the F-16 IS heading
    straight for him. Stopped about 100m short of the tower.

    Good set of links at Avweb,

    http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/192-full.html#186627

    --
    Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
    +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
    West Australia 6076
    comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
    Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
    EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
    Paul Repacholi, Feb 2, 2004
    #3
  4. Andrew

    GTO Guest

    That's a real action shot. - I see already a new dimension in action
    photography with cameras like the Nikon D2H. Shortly before the photographer
    and his equipment get into serious troubles, he can transfer an image to a
    central computer belonging to his news agency via WiFi.



    Why do you recommend the Canon 1D Mark II instead of the Nikon D1X? More
    pixels? Why not a Canon 1Ds?



    Gregor





    "Andrew" <> wrote in message
    news:bvlm7h$9pi$...
    > A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here:
    >
    > http://w3.kill-9.com/DavisTbirdEject.jpg
    >
    > The EXIF data indicates the photo was taken with a Nikon.
    >
    > Andrew
    GTO, Feb 3, 2004
    #4
  5. I think he did just fine...

    --
    Colm


    "Andrew" <> wrote in message news:bvlm7h$9pi$...
    : A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here:
    :
    : http://w3.kill-9.com/DavisTbirdEject.jpg
    :
    : The EXIF data indicates the photo was taken with a Nikon.
    :
    : Andrew
    Colm Gallagher, Feb 3, 2004
    #5
  6. Andrew

    Mark B. Guest

    "GTO" <> wrote in message
    news:X8FTb.19249$...
    > That's a real action shot. - I see already a new dimension in action
    > photography with cameras like the Nikon D2H. Shortly before the

    photographer
    > and his equipment get into serious troubles, he can transfer an image to a
    > central computer belonging to his news agency via WiFi.
    >
    >
    >
    > Why do you recommend the Canon 1D Mark II instead of the Nikon D1X? More
    > pixels? Why not a Canon 1Ds?
    >
    >


    The 1Ds only does 3fps to the 1D II 8.5fps.

    Mark
    Mark B., Feb 3, 2004
    #6
  7. Andrew

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Andrew wrote:
    > A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here:
    >
    > http://w3.kill-9.com/DavisTbirdEject.jpg
    >
    > The EXIF data indicates the photo was taken with a Nikon.
    >
    > Andrew


    Great shot, but man, that's one really DIRTY sensor, isn't it? ;-)
    Paolo Pizzi, Feb 4, 2004
    #7
  8. Andrew

    dragon1964 Guest

    Yes, I noticed all the dust spots also...
    mms

    "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    news:tPYTb.19882$...
    > Andrew wrote:
    > > A 1D Mark-II would have been useful here:
    > >
    > > http://w3.kill-9.com/DavisTbirdEject.jpg
    > >
    > > The EXIF data indicates the photo was taken with a Nikon.
    > >
    > > Andrew

    >
    > Great shot, but man, that's one really DIRTY sensor, isn't it? ;-)
    >
    >
    dragon1964, Feb 4, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Shaun
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    661
    Sam Wilson
    Jul 12, 2004
  2. Film Buff
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    494
    Werewolf
    Nov 9, 2004
  3. Dark Wolf
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    435
    Dark Wolf
    Jun 13, 2005
  4. Dark Wolf
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    449
    Dark Wolf
    Jun 13, 2005
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    454
Loading...

Share This Page