Breaking All The Laws Of Physics With The 500/4 Nikkor!!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: John Navas on 3 Jul 2010 01:03 On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:57:22 -0700, in <i0mcf4$1br$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >The racing boats are all on the same tack, all at the same angle to the >wind, Close, but definitely not the same. >all professionally sailed. Mostly amateur crew. >Any difference due to crew weights, >sail trim, wind pressure (other than trim; they're all trimmed within >millimeters of one another), Nowhere near that close -- look at the differences in the sails. >distribution of weight: All of these >factors wouldn't have accounted for more than an inch at the bow (or >anywhere else along the length), and the heel of all four vessels would >be withing a meter or so vertically, causing at most a few millimeters >rise or fall of the bow. Actually much more than that, not only because of significant variations between the boats, but also because of bay chop and wind variations. >I didn't say it wasn't close enough; merely that is wasn't perfectly >level. You could measure it yourself. It is perfectly level. There are clues in the image. ;) -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: Noons on 3 Jul 2010 05:54 John Navas wrote,on my timestamp of 3/07/2010 10:49 AM: > Always striving for excellence will give you more and better shots of > anything and everything. I don't want to strive for that kind of excellence, just have fun with photography. In that definition, I don't include ridiculous comments on 1/64" measurements of a fraction of a degree, as some have done here. For me, that falls on the "get a life" bracket: that's not fun, that's obsession. Perfectly happy with the OP's image, it's nice. Couldn't care less if it isn't worth showing at the Smithsonian. Of course: if he wants to showcase with it what can be done with a 500/4 Nikkor, that's a different story and I agree with some of the critiques. But the image on its own? Perfectly fine.
From: Pete on 3 Jul 2010 07:27 On 2010-07-03 10:54:26 +0100, Noons said: > John Navas wrote,on my timestamp of 3/07/2010 10:49 AM: > >> Always striving for excellence will give you more and better shots of >> anything and everything. > > > I don't want to strive for that kind of excellence, just have fun with > photography. In that definition, I don't include ridiculous comments on > 1/64" measurements of a fraction of a degree, as some have done here. > For me, that falls on the "get a life" bracket: that's not fun, that's > obsession. > > Perfectly happy with the OP's image, it's nice. Couldn't care less if > it isn't worth showing at the Smithsonian. > Of course: if he wants to showcase with it what can be done with a > 500/4 Nikkor, that's a different story and I agree with some of the > critiques. > But the image on its own? Perfectly fine. I totally agree. -- Pete
From: John Navas on 3 Jul 2010 09:56 On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 19:54:26 +1000, in <i0n179$clf$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Noons <wizofoz2k(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: >John Navas wrote,on my timestamp of 3/07/2010 10:49 AM: > >> Always striving for excellence will give you more and better shots of >> anything and everything. > >I don't want to strive for that kind of excellence, just have fun with >photography. They're not mutually exclusive. My own fun is enhanced, not impaired, by trying to get the best images possible, not by going to extremes, just by doing the best possible job. "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing well." >In that definition, I don't include ridiculous comments on 1/64" >measurements of a fraction of a degree, as some have done here. For me, that >falls on the "get a life" bracket: that's not fun, that's obsession. It was actually just a lame effort to make a point. >Perfectly happy with the OP's image, it's nice. Couldn't care less if it isn't >worth showing at the Smithsonian. >Of course: if he wants to showcase with it what can be done with a 500/4 Nikkor, >that's a different story and I agree with some of the critiques. >But the image on its own? Perfectly fine. For you and some others like you. Not for some others like me. "Different strokes for different folks." -- Best regards, John <http:/navasgroup.com> "Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment." -Will Rogers
From: John McWilliams on 3 Jul 2010 11:12
John Navas wrote: >> I didn't say it wasn't close enough; merely that is wasn't perfectly >> level. You could measure it yourself. > > It is perfectly level. There are clues in the image. ;) Yes, there are, showing it's not "perfectly" level. About 1.5 degrees off. I'm not going to argue the sailing points, as unless someone is experienced as a skipper or top crew, it's just you vs. me. Anyone? -- john mcwilliams |