Tiptoe...Thru the Water...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by M-M, Aug 8, 2010.

  1. M-M

    M-M Guest

    M-M, Aug 8, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. M-M

    Mike Warren Guest

    Mike Warren, Aug 9, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. M-M

    DanP Guest

    On Aug 8, 11:57 pm, M-M <> wrote:
    > From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg
    >
    > --
    > m-mhttp://www.mhmyers.com


    Given the circumstances this is the best you could get.
    Not bad.

    DanP
    DanP, Aug 9, 2010
    #3
  4. On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 02:45:21 +0000 (UTC), "Mike Warren"
    <> wrote:

    >M-M wrote:
    >
    >>From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>
    >>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg

    >
    >LOL! Egrets are one of my favourite subjects.


    Would have been an okay keeper if it was a little sharper.

    It's actually a Snowy Egret, it's just not in its breeding plumage. Easy to
    tell apart from all others by their black leggings and yellow socks.

    <http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4874800855_e2a5bba485_z.jpg>


    <As always, greatly JPG degraded to entertain the trolls and thieves.>
    Superzooms Still Win, Aug 9, 2010
    #4
  5. On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:24 -0500, Superzooms Still Win
    <> wrote:

    >On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 02:45:21 +0000 (UTC), "Mike Warren"
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>M-M wrote:
    >>
    >>>From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>>
    >>>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg

    >>
    >>LOL! Egrets are one of my favourite subjects.

    >
    >Would have been an okay keeper if it was a little sharper.
    >
    >It's actually a Snowy Egret, it's just not in its breeding plumage. Easy to
    >tell apart from all others by their black leggings and yellow socks.
    >
    ><http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4874800855_e2a5bba485_z.jpg>
    >
    >
    ><As always, greatly JPG degraded to entertain the trolls and thieves.>
    >


    Ooops, I forgot to include the 1:1 crop for the pixel-pervs, gear-freaks,
    and other assorted useless waste-of-flesh role-playing trolls.

    <http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4874962217_068e3df201.jpg>
    Superzooms Still Win, Aug 9, 2010
    #5
  6. On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:58:38 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
    <> wrote:

    >We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    >drugs began to take hold. I remember M-M <> saying
    >something like:
    >
    >>From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>
    >>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg

    >
    >According to the exif, it was 1000mm.


    Note entry ***

    Due to the wide variety of sensor sizes in the digital-camera age (you've
    heard about that, haven't you?), all lenses are described in 35mm
    equivalents so there is a common reference point on perspective and FOV
    between so many camera and sensor types.

    EXIF:
    Orientation of image: 1
    File change date and time: 2010:08:08 18:53:26
    Image input equipment manufacturer: NIKON CORPORATION
    Image input equipment model: NIKON D80
    Software used: Adobe Photoslop Elements 6.0 Macintosh
    Exposure time: 0.002
    F number: 13
    Exposure program: 2
    ISO speed rating: 400
    Exposure bias: 0
    Maximum lens aperture: 7.4
    Metering mode: 5
    Light source: 0
    Flash: 0
    Lens focal length: 1000
    Sensing method: 2
    Custom rendered: 0
    Exposure mode: 0
    White balance: 0
    Digital zoom ratio: 1
    *** Focal length in 35 mm film: 1500
    Scene capture type: 0
    Gain control: 1
    Contrast: 2
    Saturation: 0
    Sharpness: 0
    Subject distance range: 0

    Now kindly go back to your porno or other virtual-life sites online where
    you are more comfortable with those imaginary roles, rather than trying to
    role-play at knowing anything about cameras and photography and always
    making a complete fool of yourself.

    Thanks.
    Superzooms Still Win, Aug 9, 2010
    #6
  7. "Grimly Curmudgeon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    > drugs began to take hold. I remember M-M <> saying
    > something like:
    >
    >>From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>
    >>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg

    >
    > According to the exif, it was 1000mm.


    Perhaps on a crop-frame camera?

    David
    David J Taylor, Aug 10, 2010
    #7
  8. M-M

    Peter Guest

    Peter, Aug 10, 2010
    #8
  9. M-M

    Peter Guest

    "Grimly Curmudgeon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    > drugs began to take hold. I remember Superzooms Still Win
    > <> saying something like:
    >
    >>Ooops, I forgot to include the 1:1 crop for the pixel-pervs, gear-freaks,
    >>and other assorted useless waste-of-flesh role-playing trolls.
    >>
    >><http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4874962217_068e3df201.jpg>

    >
    > Well, that's pretty shit.



    Why bother responding to it.

    --
    Peter
    Peter, Aug 10, 2010
    #9
  10. M-M

    Peter Guest

    "Grimly Curmudgeon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    > drugs began to take hold. I remember M-M <> saying
    > something like:
    >
    >>From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>
    >>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg

    >
    > According to the exif, it was 1000mm.



    Read further down. It shows 35mm equivalent 1500mm.
    I am more interested in 24bit color depth

    --
    Peter
    Peter, Aug 10, 2010
    #10
  11. M-M

    Peter Guest

    "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
    news:2010081008191343042-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
    > On 2010-08-10 08:06:38 -0700, "Peter" <> said:
    >
    >> "Grimly Curmudgeon" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    >>> drugs began to take hold. I remember M-M <> saying
    >>> something like:
    >>>
    >>>> From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg
    >>>
    >>> According to the exif, it was 1000mm.

    >>
    >>
    >> Read further down. It shows 35mm equivalent 1500mm.
    >> I am more interested in 24bit color depth

    >
    > RGB 8bit, 3 x 8 = 24
    >



    My forehead just got flatter.

    --
    Peter
    Peter, Aug 10, 2010
    #11
  12. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <4c6168e2$0$5495$-secrets.com>,
    "Peter" <> wrote:

    > "M-M" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    > >
    > > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg
    > >

    >
    >
    > Nice capture! Who is she running from.



    She(?) was chasing a fish. It was neat to watch the catch. One leg would
    wiggle to lure the fish right to the waiting beak.

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
    M-M, Aug 10, 2010
    #12
  13. "Grimly Curmudgeon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    > drugs began to take hold. I remember "David J Taylor"
    > <> saying something like:
    >
    >>>>From about 300 ft @ 1500mm:
    >>>>
    >>>>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg
    >>>
    >>> According to the exif, it was 1000mm.

    >>
    >>Perhaps on a crop-frame camera?

    >
    > A 1000 is a 1000 is a 1000, doesn't matter what it's attached to.
    > It's fine to note the lens equivalent due to crop factor, but that
    > doesn't change the actual FL of the glass in use.


    Of course not. But it may change what's recorded in the EXIF as the "35mm
    equivalent" focal length.

    David
    David J Taylor, Aug 16, 2010
    #13
  14. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <2010081608435284492-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    > On 2010-08-16 04:25:02 -0700, Grimly Curmudgeon
    > <> said:
    >
    > > We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    > > drugs began to take hold. I remember "Peter"
    > > <> saying something like:
    > >
    > >>>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_24255w.jpg
    > >>>
    > >>> According to the exif, it was 1000mm.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Read further down. It shows 35mm equivalent 1500mm.

    > >
    > > So? And? An equivalent doesn't change the real FL.

    >
    > Probably a 500mm(of some type) + 2xTC on a cropped sensor.



    No, that would not show up as 1000mm in the EXIF.

    Here is the lens and camera that took the photo:

    http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/camera.html#FS


    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
    M-M, Aug 17, 2010
    #14
  15. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <2010081621342916807-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    > > No, that would not show up as 1000mm in the EXIF.
    > >
    > > Here is the lens and camera that took the photo:
    > >
    > > http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/camera.html#FS

    >
    > Very nice digiscope set up.
    > That leaves the question, "How did any lens data get recorded into the
    > EXIF at all?"
    > I can't think of any spotting scope, which has an electronic connection
    > to the DSLR to record the the lens data to the EXIF. I don't believe
    > there is an electrical connection between the camera and the spotting
    > scope
    >
    > I could be wrong. If I am, please explain how the camera reads the
    > scope data. I am mystified as to how that would be accomplished without
    > a connection between the camera and a chip in the lens.


    You use an adapter FSA-L1 to attach the camera to the fieldscope and
    that adapter has an electrical connection to the camera.

    From Nikon:

    Depending on the Fieldscope model used, by setting the selector on the
    body of the FSA-L1, F-number and focal length data will be transmitted
    to the camera.

    http://www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/lineup/dsystem/fsa-l1/index.htm

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
    M-M, Aug 17, 2010
    #15
  16. M-M

    otter Guest

    On Aug 17, 6:02 am, M-M <> wrote:
    > In article <2010081621342916807-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    > > > No, that would not show up as 1000mm in the EXIF.

    >
    > > > Here is the lens and camera that took the photo:

    >
    > > >http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/camera.html#FS

    >
    > > Very nice digiscope set up.
    > > That leaves the question, "How did any lens data get recorded into the
    > > EXIF at all?"
    > > I can't think of any spotting scope, which has an electronic connection
    > > to the DSLR to record the the lens data to the EXIF. I don't believe
    > > there is an electrical connection between the camera and the spotting
    > > scope

    >
    > > I could be wrong. If I am, please explain how the camera reads the
    > > scope data. I am mystified as to how that would be accomplished without
    > > a connection between the camera and a chip in the lens.

    >
    > You use an adapter FSA-L1 to attach the camera to the fieldscope and
    > that adapter has an electrical connection to the camera.
    >
    > From Nikon:
    >
    > Depending on the Fieldscope model used, by setting the selector on the
    > body of the FSA-L1, F-number and focal length data will be transmitted
    > to the camera.
    >
    > http://www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/lineup/dsystem/fsa-l1/index...
    >
    > --
    > m-mhttp://www.mhmyers.com- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Ah, so you weren't using the spray can top and the hose ring for that
    shot.
    otter, Aug 17, 2010
    #16
  17. M-M

    M-M Guest

    M-M, Aug 17, 2010
    #17
    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. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,134
    zachig
    Jul 3, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?U3RlZWx3aW5kMTAx?=

    Seeing files but wont share internet thru router

    =?Utf-8?B?U3RlZWx3aW5kMTAx?=, Dec 15, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    681
    vballjim
    Dec 29, 2004
  3. Dennis Jelavic

    Shared Internet Connection thru Speedtouch 530 modem/Router

    Dennis Jelavic, Jan 13, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    871
    Dennis Jelavic
    Jan 13, 2005
  4. Derek Fountain

    How water resistant is a water resistant lens?

    Derek Fountain, Mar 18, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    334
    Joseph Meehan
    Mar 18, 2005
  5. Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,436
    Shauna
    Aug 26, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page