Random Thoughts... [Photographic Edition]

Aperture priority, mang. I get the impression that Nikons go "woop, not gonna do that, don't care, not listening" while Canons go "oh hey, aperture 00, I don't see a lens, that's pretty cool, whatever dude, here you go". The light sensor's in the body, not seeing a lens doesn't suddenly stop light from hitting it and that really has nothing to do with apertures... so I guess Nikon's being too clever then, eh? [robot]value null, does not compute, error, error, asploding imminent, error[/robot]
 
with m42 you have to use manual aperture setting in the lens, so that when you select f16 it will go to f16 and stays there, not like auto setting when it goes to f16 only when exposuring.. Only drawback to it is the fact that your viewfinder darkens also when using smaller apertures.. but the metering works also like a charm, it doesnt need the aperture info from the lens because the aperture is set to it before shooting a.k.a when metering.
 
Aperture priority, mang. I get the impression that Nikons go "woop, not gonna do that, don't care, not listening" while Canons go "oh hey, aperture 00, I don't see a lens, that's pretty cool, whatever dude, here you go". The light sensor's in the body, not seeing a lens doesn't suddenly stop light from hitting it and that really has nothing to do with apertures... so I guess Nikon's being too clever then, eh? [robot]value null, does not compute, error, error, asploding imminent, error
You can still shoot a Nikon in manual without a lens, it just reads the aperture as "--".

Why does it need to know the aperture? Just measure how much light is coming in.
So, Canon just sets a pseudo aperture without a lens?
 
see my post above, its with canon. It sets it 00 without AF confirm chip and 2.0 with it. It really doesnt need the info because the aperture is set before metering happens, so it measures the aperture limited light.
 
Interesting. So, with Canon, you get metering with "dumb" lenses, but only stop-down metering. With Nikon, you get no metering with "dumb" lenses (on most bodies), but you do still have AF confirm, DOF preview and wide-open viewing.

I guess it's up to you to decide which is more useful. I personally have very few problems guessing at metering and, even if I did, I could just check the screen and reshoot.
 
Last edited:
You can still shoot a Nikon in manual without a lens, it just reads the aperture as "--".
So, Canon just sets a pseudo aperture without a lens?

Canon reads the aperture as "F00" and then meters normally. Since the camera can't stop it down during the photo anyway, it's not like it has to calculate anything.

Interesting. So, with Canon, you get metering with "dumb" lenses, but only stop-down metering. With Nikon, you get no metering with "dumb" lenses (on most bodies), but you do still have AF confirm, DOF preview and wide-open viewing.

I guess it's up to you to decide which is more useful. I personally have very few problems guessing at metering and, even if I did, I could just check the screen and reshoot.

Wait, if you can still do AF, DOF preview and camera-controlled aperture, how's that a "dumb" lens? I was under the impression that a dumb lens had no electrical connection to the camera (i.e. something 100% manual).
 
Last edited:
^ yep.. AF-chipped m42-adapters are available to canon, so you can get the beep when its focused properly..
 
Wait, if you can still do AF, DOF preview and camera-controlled aperture, how's that a "dumb" lens? I was under the impression that a dumb lens had no electrical connection to the camera (i.e. something 100% manual).
Heh, oops, I meant "focus confirm", not "AF confirm".

^ yep.. AF-chipped m42-adapters are available to canon, so you can get the beep when its focused properly..
That probably wouldn't work ideally if you're stopped further down than f/5.6, though.
 
Heh, oops, I meant "focus confirm", not "AF confirm".

Ah, right. When I use a dumb lens (I'm simulating one by rotating the kit lens so the contacts no longer line up), my 500D treats it as manual focus mode and doesn't do any focus confirmation. It does that even when the lens is recognized as long as you have it in MF mode, though, so it might just be because it's a low-end body.
 
Last edited:
Man, I suck at this businessey stuff :\

So, I was able to get a bunch of great shots at the local car club's drag races a few weeks ago because I had on-the-track access as part of an agreement I made with them last year (I gave them a picture to print on t-shirts and posters, I got $100 and on-the-track access).

One of the club higher-ups asked me to shoot the trophy presentations, so I agreed. This was the day of or the day before (I don't remember) the event. Nothing further was discussed about any sort of transaction, so I don't know what assumptions were made.

He's now asking me for the pictures to post online and I'm not sure what to do. On one hand, I think copyright is mostly BS (yeah, yeah, the copyright notice on my website, I know... I'll change it to something else yet) so I should just give him the pictures. On the other hand, I don't want to devalue my work.

The club is a non-profit, BTW. They give grants and stuff.

???????????????????????????
 
Last edited:
This is old news, I know, but I'm curious what everyone thinks about TIME's July cover that they bought from iStockPhoto (full, originating discussion here).

My thoughts:

I think this sums it up nicely...

"Technology giveth and technology taketh away"
- Cory Doctorow

It's basic supply and demand. DSLR kits for $500 means that supply is way up, but demand has remained the same. Do I really need to analogize this to slicing a pie?

If you want to take generic pictures that no one specifically needs but that many might want, you're one in a sea of millions and you're going to get low prices for them. If you have something particularly specific and unique (eg.: a shot of a specific event) that only one customer needs, your odds are much better and you'll get more for it because it's essentially custom work.

So-called "professionals" who keep whining about how this is "ruining the industry" need to give up or learn to change with the market, just like every other business and professional in any given market.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also... daily Dick Dickwell update...

Ren Kockwell said:
This means don't touch anything really nice, because once you do, that thing that you knew you didn't need suddenly becomes something you need and deserve. This is what drives many people to over-extended credit card bills and ultimately a life of debt slavery or the poor house.

If you don't keep your car clean and perfectly well maintained, as soon as you go for a spin around the block in a clean new car, you'll wind up buying one because it's suddenly a necessity you deserve.
Right, I guess that's why I now have a D90, D300, D3, 40D, 50D and tens of thousands of dollars in credit card debt; all because I tried them out in a camera store for fun. Oh, wait...

Rocky and Wellwinkle said:
It happened to me with Leica. I got an M-4P back in December, and as soon as I held it in my hand and moved the controls, ahhhh, now I knew I had found what I needed.
Sounds more like someone has self-control issues...
 
Last edited:
That happened to me once, I saw a slurpee and went "now I need a slurpee" and I bought a slurpee.


Lord Kenneth Rockbottomington said:
blah blah Olympus E-P1 made in China blah blah

Geesh, if camera makers are ashamed about where they make things, why not just make them someplace else? My Apple iPod Touch, the world's most advanced consumer electronics product and the only computer I needed this past week, is made in China, too. The Japanese and Americans simply can't make competitive consumer products with the precision of the Chinese. (Of course American industrial and military products are another story.)

Inorite? And things being made in China definitely has nothing to do with Chinese labour being cheaper than penny candy (15 cents please). Yeah man, his camera and ipod were totally made by the people who cemented the chips onto the boards. The Americans and Japanese had absolutely nothing to do with R&D and software development and making the molds and templates for production, that's all the Chinese doing that stuff, obviously.

bonus lulz at no other consumer electronics in the world being more advanced than an ipod touch
 
Last edited:
That happened to me once, I saw a slurpee and went "now I need a slurpee" and I bought a slurpee.
Yes, but camera stores aren't on every corner of every intersection in all of Winnipeg like 7-11's and Mach's are :lol:

(OT: ever had a slurpee in the US? Apparently, they're completely different and disgusting)

bonus lulz at no other consumer electronics in the world being more advanced than an ipod touch
That one always makes me bust a gut :lol:
 
Last edited:
It's Mac's, not Mach's. Mach's sounds like some diner outside an air force base that serves air force themed food. Even though they use the same machines, Mac's frosters are always too liquidy, 7-11 > Mac's. I don't think I have ever had an american slurpee, but if'n they's different I bet it'sa cuz they use HFCS.

woooot, slurpee capital ten years and counting, wooooot

/me drinks slurpees in the winter

[/OT]
 
Here's one of those tidbits you get from Rockwell (boy, we've got a healthy obsession don't we...) that's actually useful.

epp: Ever wanted to do an exposure longer than 30seconds but didn't want to stand around with your remote? Here's a quote from his F6 review:
The F6 can clock long exposures up to an hour in manual mode as easily as it clicks at 1/250. Enable these long time exposures by: MENU > CSM MENU > b Metering/Exp > 5 Shutter Speed > (Extend Shtr. Spd) > ON. I always leave this set to ON; the only disadvantage is that it takes a few more clicks of the command dial to get all the way to Bulb, but who cares? Who would want to spin all the way down to bulb to have to sit these and hold a remote release for a 15 minute exposure in Bulb when I we set the F6 to clock these all by itself?

The bar graph meter turns off and the F6 won't meter when you've set manual exposure times longer than 30 seconds. The trick is to extrapolate using the bar graph reading when the FG6 is set to 30 seconds.
Great. So they have the technology. We knew that, it's just a change in a couple lines of code.

But they've actually done it in a modern camera! Why the **** can't I set my camera to do 1min, 2min, etc exposures?!?! GRRRRRRR
 
I'm pretty sure the usual 30 second limit is more to do with power consumption than anything else. I did a project last year where I was taking somewhat long exposures (5-15 minutes) and found that from a full charge my camera would be completely out of battery after 3 or 4 exposures. If I was lucky I would have gotten 5. This wasn't helped by the cold weather of course but I guess it does show that there is some logic to the current limit.

With film bodies you can set an exposure for several hours to get nice pretty star trails. I've even heard that if you have a long exposure set and the battery runs out you can just swap the battery for a new one with the camera being none the wiser.

I bought one of the cheap plastic wired shutter releases with the ability to lock and have found it to be fine. The only somewhat annoying thing can be trying to work out roughly what the exposure should be. Luckily you have quite a bit of flexibility so giving or taking 30 seconds or so doesn't make too much of a difference.
 
It's Mac's, not Mach's.
Ugh, I know that. It was a 1:00 am, gimme a break ;)

epp: Ever wanted to do an exposure longer than 30seconds but didn't want to stand around with your remote? Here's a quote from his F6 review:
Yeah, that's always something that's really bugged me. Being able to time exposures longer than 30 seconds is just a few lines of firmware code. Consumption, shmonsumption. If it runs out of power half-way through, kill the exposure the same way that it does in bulb.
 
Last edited:
Also take into account that they (the manufacturers) can sell you an expensive accessory to enable you to take longer exposures. Not many people will buy the "official" remote but some still do. They can't put their profits on the line because of one Canadian and a Duck wanting this! :p.
 
Also take into account that they (the manufacturers) can sell you an expensive accessory to enable you to take longer exposures. Not many people will buy the "official" remote but some still do. They can't put their profits on the line because of one Canadian and a Duck wanting this! :p.

But from a marketing point of view, using a couple lines of firmware code to add $50 worth of "value" to the camera by not requiring a remote to do long exposures should be a no-brainer.

If they tried to prevent 3rd party remotes from working with their bodies, I could see the rationale behind pushing people to buy them, but as it is, they're directing their customers' money towards 3rd party accessory makers instead of including the feature in the body, charging a premium for it, and getting the money themselves.

Obviously, there has to be a reason for why they do it (otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion), I'm just not convinced it's purely to sell more remotes.
 
Top