pic spam....

*do not open if u have slow internet connection, its a LONG photo



this one is short version... (from 7mm)

hahaha willy, sometimes i dunno whats the fuss about those lens with bigger then F1.4... someday if i am rich, i wont even bother to buy a F1.0, i buy a F1.4, open up the aperture and throw it out.... then i got a constant F0.7... come fight la... LOL (must be the coffee talking)

9 got another night scene, but need manual stitch... the PS4 cant detect the stitching point

that wasnt the longest i ever had... the longest i done is this,

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5896/25464499.jpg

forgot how many picture, but was shoot with 200mm (every pic)

---

Added on June 20, 2010, 10:54 pmthe one inside the spoiler... its around 1mb not big, but some ppl might marah marah if not in spoiler

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 20 2010, 10:54 PM

mastering, sooo cute, ur cat?

cheh!



if i recall, its 1700mm F4, eletronically controlled DOF, and it fit up to medium format 120mm...

hahahaha. wildlife? i tot i read somewhere its for spaceship uses? LOL

the thing i admire most is, why the heck the design 2 console controller there, look like a oversized psp... LOL

1:1 is that the subject size is equal to the sensor in live size.

if the subject is 1cm, it should be as big as 1cm on the sensor.

but bigger mega pixel will make it looks bigger, but if every 'MP' sensor picture were to resize to 800px, all pic of the 1:1 should be more or less the same size.

2:1 is bigger then the sensor. for example, FF (35mm cross) normally a 5 cent coin is around 16mm diameter across the sensor, but the 2:1 makes the coin 32mm over the sensor, mean u would capture a near fullsize frame...

1:2 means its half, meaning the coin will looked like 8mm on the 35mm sensor.

William, there is. 2 causes

i) gear stripped at end of gear, unable to af to infinite.
ii) the first element, is calibrata-able, causing changes in infinite/MFD

others is, that...

iii) AF sensor module is off, calibration needed, it detected as infinite, but its pass the infinite where the photo starts to become soft. (like how some 55-200, MF, u turn finish to the end, the photo is soft, turn to AF, the gear stops 1-2mm before the End of gear but infinite photo are sharp..)

---

Added on June 21, 2010, 12:40 pmnaruto, happy birthday!

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 21 2010, 12:40 PM

A2 and 3 series, have entry DRO, yes u can see the diff, but by small margin, best to see if u shoot a sun+shade, u will see the shade slightly brigthen up(2-3%, which is really low).

u can shoot in raw, which it pull out better dynamic range in IDS, (better doesnt mean more, better as the color are more vivid then A2/3's body bionz processing) or pull the slider urself to bring out the effect more.

photoshop can pull shadow out more, but it loses it's color range.

they are the best...? mmm nope, is how good the photographer with strobist that its;

i been using CLS for over a year, and compare to sony, although CLS has more full settings to play with, but to access it, i have already taken 200 photo with alpha by the time i shoot 20 pic with CLS. nikon has too many menu and sub sub sub sub sub sub menus to navigate...

another big weakness of CLS is, it always requires ur flash's IR to face the camera, and it has tendency of 50% did not fired symptom... (my friend(nikon) brought a whole set of Pocketwizard just to overcome this weakness)

i still find nikon cls is much more in control (when i wanted to do manual jobs), but sadly, the IR trigger pisses me off. but thinking of buying triggers, but it defeats the CLS mode (the commander mode, without it, its not CLS anymore, it just WL flash)

100% trigger vs CLS mode. which is more important?

hence why i got so used to sony's flash, its easy, fast, and Reliable.

or grab a 2nd hand A300 for cheap price, sell off urs for a little more lose... margin of 200+- loses.

wahahaha, i hate strobist from direct flash...., to me, worst then mounted direct flash...

all i use is the build in bounce card. (albnok says this a lot in the pass, now my turn to help pass it on... LOL)

your friend N, has never used sony WLflash before. ask those who used 2 system. yes, at first, nikon seem so much better with so detailed settings... but it also made learning HARDER(and read my reply to freddy). sony's is user friendly, has high rate of sucess trigger vs nikon DNF(did not fire) issue

albnok: hey, how are u, MIA for sometime now u... and thanks for the bday wish... forgot to say thanks

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 23 2010, 12:37 PM

gizmo: CLS, not sure, i think so, at first i thought was optically, but after sometime i use it, it requires a signal (data) to know what it needs to fire to trigger. no idea.

sony, optically, but the optical has a pulses that only alpha flash understand.

i used to think those general optically can be trigger by any flash was good flash, used to hate sony for only able to trigger by sony, but after few public strobist, i think it very useful now, noone can kacau ur flash.

there is one time i used SB900 trigger by my alpha (lack of flash that time) and adjust the SU4, and small flashes (even car drive pass, reflection from the sun, the car is at the road which is at least 10meter awayyyy) triggers the flash =.=

---

Added on June 23, 2010, 12:58 pmthe 105 is just snooting it further, still researching, the snoot (DIY), can further increase distance or not, theoretically, it should not.

the 105 is just making the flash more concentrate in one area, but even 105, i ever shoot something 150-200 meter away, full power, iso3200, F5.6, no problem.

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 23 2010, 12:58 PM

i was shooting on top of the hill to downhill(which takes a 10 minute walk down), i'll find the photo back...

not sure 150 up to 200, coz, its a rough figure. maybe its 100m? coz highschool i run 100m, its very short only wor...

the flash MAY reach that far, or MAY NOT. but u have to understand is that, the light was captured by iso3200. i zoomed to 200mm max that time to shoot. wait i find the pic then i show u guys.


hey, why not u guys try tonight, shoot some building far away, with iso3200 (ignore the noise), check the 105mm 1/1power flash can reach how far?

zstan,

F58 = GN58 = 58m @ F1 iso100

@F5.6 58m requires iso1600,

hence F5.6 iso3200 = 116m

albnok corrects me,

F5.6 58m requires iso 3200*

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 23 2010, 06:09 PM

@.@

here is it... i guess my calculation is wrong, it could be just 100m,... (opps albnok, yea 3200/105mm/5.6 = 58m) but, look at this... (and the air in taiwan is much clearer, summore shot inside jungle/mountain away from civilation), it seem like, it did make it more then 56meter? or my perspective is distorted that is actually 58m that i shot, LOL!!!



its pitch black where the children are playing, yes pitch black, there is no light (or light source) bright enough to brighten that area,...



the reason i shoot the pic is because i wonder how far the flash can go, so boosting the iso to max to test...

either u missunderstood, or ur uncle outside misgear or misguide by 'seller/promoter'

it happened about 24-27 years ago, where, when the first AF firstly introduced. canon has to re-engineer the whole mount causing old lenses are unable to be used on the new body with AF, nikon stays with the same mount with minor modification, hence, during that era, canon loses a lot 'fan' and all jump to nikon. to make story short or being pass through 50 people, it becomes, "old lens cant use on new camera" =.=, partly, all u need is "adapter, or, perhaps u only can MF" thats all. BUT its RARE to find a >25 year old lens, mostly will get fungus because that era, drybox arent popular.
(maybe i was wrong and misunderstood ur statement)
and, today people ARE SMART, they wont build something to destroy old market(or maybe they will, like intel socket, LOL)... future camera are "backward compatible" meaning it WILL support older
chips" (like how we have 8 pins on the alphas, but still able to use 15 year old KM50mm with 5 pins)

*btw, sony have a minor share of Tamron, and tamron have given/share exclusive lens design to sony and some of sony lens are tamron design just some cosmetic changes. safe to say, tamron lens are pretty optimized for alphas

btw, i think the word u are looking for is backward compatibility, not reverse engineered. LOL, coz they sound 'back-wards' LOL.

lens backward engineered mean, they make lens only make mount/body. or it could mean, they try redesign similiar design of VR/IS or HSM/SSM from the existing design, which has no issue wor.

also, there is a STANDARD they follow on the each Mount. so, wont differ a lot.

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 24 2010, 12:58 PM

this is nice~

---

Added on June 24, 2010, 5:25 pmzstan: i guess the reason is because he is a canon user, they have several complicated issue back then...

albnok: lol, i guess so LOL blur me

This post has been edited by ieR: Jun 24 2010, 05:25 PM

huh? erm, sony has build sensor way before canon and kodak. our DSLR AF module exist 2 years before EOS and Nikon AF. although minolta's stabilizer (today known as SSS) were reverse engineered from olym's tech.