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: Ben Dover on 13 Jun 2010 00:08 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. p.s. For the record, when I asked locals what unusual odd green colored wading birds were (Green Herons in breeding plumage, which I never saw that brightly colored before) they told me they called them "Steak Birds", because they taste just like steak.
From: Ben Dover on 13 Jun 2010 00:09 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. p.s. For the record, when I asked locals what unusual odd green colored wading birds were (Green Herons in breeding plumage, which I never saw that brightly colored before) they told me they called them "Steak Birds", because they taste just like steak. Ooops, I PS'ed to the wrong post.
From: Dudley Hanks on 13 Jun 2010 00:15 "Ben Dover" <bdover(a)somewhere.org> wrote in message news:bfm816lt5sk0ihfabj6sl50qt3e7047u0o(a)4ax.com... > 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. > > p.s. For the record, when I asked locals what unusual odd green colored > wading birds were (Green Herons in breeding plumage, which I never saw > that > brightly colored before) they told me they called them "Steak Birds", > because they taste just like steak. > > Ooops, I PS'ed to the wrong post. > Like I said, "completely unarmed" ... :) Take Care, Dudley
From: Paul Furman on 13 Jun 2010 00:51 LOL! wrote: > Paul Furmanwrote: >> 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. Exactly correct. The very same.
From: Paul Furman on 13 Jun 2010 01:03
LOL! wrote: > > At large apertures where those deeper DOF's are available Eh? > and at ISO 400 or less in many P&S cameras there is > no image noise. Eh? |