What the future is going to bring
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Flowers
Next: What have you photographed with your camera so far,that's helped you solve a mystery ?
From: LOL! on 12 Jun 2010 13:52 On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 06:12:41 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >The problem is that .... > phase focusing, With their front and back focusing problems. What's better? Faster inaccurate focusing so that none of your images are useful? Or slower accurate focusing so that all of your images are useful? (What's better? Someone with your pitiful IQ? Or someone with an IQ above 80?) > larger systems, Requiring heavy and expensive optics that cannot be figured to diffraction-limited precision, extreme shallow DOF at useful wide-apertures (any not affected by diffraction artifacts) so that none of your subject is all in focus at the same time, ungainly weight that you have to haul around for miles, requiring the use of tripods for any focal-length lenses over 200mm, requiring interchangeable lenses that cause dust crud and condensation on your loudly slapping mirror shutter-curtains and sensor, on ad-infinauseum... >mirrored systems. Causing painful delays in shutter-speeds, no high-speed flash sync, noisy and image jarring mirror-slap so that none of your optics can resolve details down to the pixel level, not being allowed into most public events due to the noise that slapping mirror makes, crud and condensation on your mirror which destroys your exposure metering and focusing accuracy, on ad-infinauseum... LOL!
From: Paul Furman on 12 Jun 2010 23:15 Bruce wrote: > Plus, there is the huge benefit for macro work of a greatly > enhanced depth of field. This 'advantage' doesn't exist. A larger camera can always stop down & crank up the ISO for the same thumbnail sized results. The others were good points though.
From: Dudley Hanks on 12 Jun 2010 23:30 Haven't been following this thread since the beginning, so this might already have been mentioned... Given that in-lense stabilization has been around for a while and seems to work quite well, I'm wondering if we might see in-lens perspective correction in the future. Or, maybe it's already in use but I haven't come across it... It seems that the ability to do tilt-and-shift could be tied in with the lens stabilization mechanism (considerably beefed up, of course), and the lens could compensate (within certain limited parameters) to provide a nice straight image... Take Care, Dudley
From: LOL! on 12 Jun 2010 23:51 On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 20:15:04 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote: >Bruce wrote: >> Plus, there is the huge benefit for macro work of a greatly >> enhanced depth of field. > >This 'advantage' doesn't exist. A larger camera can always stop down & >crank up the ISO for the same thumbnail sized results. > While destroying any image quality with diffraction artifacts or noise. You're SUCH a fuckingly useless and ignorant idiot. Keep trying to justify those ignorant choices and that extra expense of yours. It's hilarious! LOL!
From: Ben Dover on 12 Jun 2010 23:56
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 03:30:46 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >Haven't been following this thread since the beginning, so this might >already have been mentioned... > >Given that in-lense stabilization has been around for a while and seems to >work quite well, I'm wondering if we might see in-lens perspective >correction in the future. Or, maybe it's already in use but I haven't come >across it... > >It seems that the ability to do tilt-and-shift could be tied in with the >lens stabilization mechanism (considerably beefed up, of course), and the >lens could compensate (within certain limited parameters) to provide a nice >straight image... > >Take Care, >Dudley > What's the matter Dudley? Aren't your cameras automatic enough yet? Maybe you'd like to see one with robotic tripod legs and a built-in composition mode too where it only automatically trips the trigger when it detects a preset definition of a pleasing composition. Then you can just crank it up at the beginning of the day and send it outside, coming back at the end of the day with better images than anything you can produce now. Then your only claim for having any part in the photography process is owning the camera. Oh wait. That's the only claim that you can make now. Nevermind. |