 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>
> Oddly, the way the strap is connected to the Nikon, the camera tends to
> hang at a 45-degree angle with any lens more than a couple inches long,
> leaving the bottom edge to dig into your chest if you let it hang. I
> guess it's hard to fix it, at least without putting (say) swivel mounts
> for the straps or something.
>
That is something I have to agree on, but I've learned how to carry the
camera so that that doesn't bother. To be more precise, Nikon is more
ergonomic _for me_ than Canon, everyone has theier own style to shoot,
therefore it ain't The Only Truth :).
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
>> It means there is a mirror in there.
>
> Fair enough. One has to wonder why there's still a mirror in there. :-)
>
> My Sony lets the light hit the sensor, then puts the display in the
> eyepiece. You don't have to screw around with a whole bunch of internal
> mechanics, waiting for the mirror to get out of the way, trying to draw
> fancy stuff on the viewfinder without having to do things screwy. :-) No
> left-overs from mechanical days. Plus, you can do IR.
It's possible that I just haven't seen the right one, but every single
LCD-viewfinder I've seen has seriously lagged behind the real world,
hence not getting even near optical viewfinder.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> Resolution, colour fidelity, response time.
OK. Resolution on my sony is already better than I can see, and I'm not
going to get faster fidelity or response time out of the camera than it's
giving me on the viewfinder. :-)
> Phase-detect is generally faster, often much faster.
That I noticed, just playing with the live view. Contrast-detect is prett
y
quick on the sony, assuming that's what it's using.
>> I didn't find the circular polarizer to have any noticable effect on
>> my photos, tho.
>
> If you are aiming for the "deep-blue sky" look, you will want to point
> the lens (with polariser) 90° away from the sun. Of course, you al
so
> need to turn the polariser to match.
It's a circular polarizer? I'm pretty sure reflections are linearly
polarized, than that's usually when I want a particular polarizer.
> If you just want to see the polariser in action, look at an LCD through
> it while slowly turning it.
I'll give that a go.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
> It's possible that I just haven't seen the right one, but every single
> LCD-viewfinder I've seen has seriously lagged behind the real world,
My Sony lags one picture behind, basically. If you're in the dark and it's
going to take a 1/2 second exposure to get the picture, it lags half a
second. But you see how bright it's going to be (assuming you're not using
the flash and assuming you're not *way* out of line, like into the >2s
exposures), and if things are moving so fast the viewfinder can't keep up,
chances are the rest of the camera won't keep up either. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Eero Ahonen wrote:
>> It's possible that I just haven't seen the right one, but every single
>> LCD-viewfinder I've seen has seriously lagged behind the real world,
>
> My Sony lags one picture behind, basically.
Plus, of course, if you're in the dark, you can line up the shot with
infrared before you take the shot with the flash. :-) Or without the flash,
for that matter.
Definite benefits either way, I suppose.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> My Sony lags one picture behind, basically. If you're in the dark and
> it's going to take a 1/2 second exposure to get the picture, it lags
> half a second. But you see how bright it's going to be (assuming you're
> not using the flash and assuming you're not *way* out of line, like into
> the >2s exposures), and if things are moving so fast the viewfinder
> can't keep up, chances are the rest of the camera won't keep up
either. :-)
>
It doubles the delay - when you're aiming for the shot you'll need to
stop for a moment to see what you're shooting. Maybe it's me and my
habit to make fast turns etc, but I've found it annoingly disturbing.
>
> Plus, of course, if you're in the dark, you can line up the shot with
> infrared before you take the shot with the flash. :-) Or without the
> flash, for that matter.
Yes, that's a benefit. But missing that on D90 (does it miss that?) it's
because of software, not because of existence of the optical viewfinder.
As you know, with D90 you can shoot video and AFAIK you see the video on
the LCD at the same time, which proves that it's technically perfectly
possible to turn the mirror, catch the light to the sensor and show it
on screen. Nothing (except filtering optics) prevents from using the IR.
Also nothing (except price) prevents from making the LCD turnable so
that you could use it as a viewfinder while shooting over crowd.
> Definite benefits either way, I suppose.
>
Yep, except nothing stops camera makers from implementing the SLR LCD to
work as a viewfinder and getting those benefits. They just haven't done
it, at least not yet.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:23:39 +0200, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
>> Phase-detect is generally faster, often much faster.
>
> That I noticed, just playing with the live view. Contrast-detect is
> pretty quick on the sony, assuming that's what it's using.
It is, but the large depth of field (because of the much smaller sensor)
means that the AF need not be as accurate. The smaller camera also has
much smaller pieces of glass to move when focusing.
>>> I didn't find the circular polarizer to have any noticable effect on
>>> my photos, tho.
>> If you are aiming for the "deep-blue sky" look, you will want to point
>> need to turn the polariser to match.
>
> It's a circular polarizer? I'm pretty sure reflections are linearly
> polarized, than that's usually when I want a particular polarizer.
That is not what "circular polariser" means. A CPL is basically just a
regular linear polariser with a quarter-wave plate on the inside surface.
The effect on the resulting image is the same.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:35:34 +0200, Eero Ahonen
<aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> Yep, except nothing stops camera makers from implementing the SLR LCD to
> work as a viewfinder and getting those benefits. They just haven't done
> it, at least not yet.
They have. It is called "Live view" and is pretty much standard on recent
SLRs.
Another feature that has been standard for years (with both SLRs and
smaller cameras) is that you can hook up the camera to a computer and use
the computer screen as a viewfinder and/or review screen.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> It is, but the large depth of field (because of the much smaller sensor)
> means that the AF need not be as accurate.
True. The sensor is both smaller and has fewer pixels on the sony.
> The smaller camera also has
> much smaller pieces of glass to move when focusing.
It's not *that* much smaller. I'm not talking about a point-and-shoot here
as such. :-)
> That is not what "circular polariser" means. A CPL is basically just a
> regular linear polariser with a quarter-wave plate on the inside
> surface. The effect on the resulting image is the same.
Oh! Well, I thought it selected out the circularly polarized light, but a
quick wikipedia check explains it. Very cool. I'll definitely try it again.
I had tried it before and not gotten a noticable result, but I must have
messed it up.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
> It doubles the delay - when you're aiming for the shot you'll need to
> stop for a moment to see what you're shooting.
If the lens is big enough, the delay becomes trivial. I don't notice a 1/10"
delay, myself, and almost all my daytime shots are faster than that. YMMV.
It certainly takes longer to focus than to get the image from the lens to
the LCD. :-)
>> Plus, of course, if you're in the dark, you can line up the shot with
>> infrared before you take the shot with the flash. :-) Or without the
>> flash, for that matter.
>
> Yes, that's a benefit. But missing that on D90 (does it miss that?)
As far as I know, yes.
> it's because of software, not because of existence of the optical viewfinder.
Well, no, it's because the D90 doesn't have an infrared filter that drops
down over the lens when you say "use infrared." :-)
If you had an optical filter and you're trying to line things up with
infrared, you *eye* would have to be seeing the infrared.
> As you know, with D90 you can shoot video and AFAIK you see the video on
> the LCD at the same time, which proves that it's technically perfectly
> possible to turn the mirror, catch the light to the sensor and show it
> on screen. Nothing (except filtering optics) prevents from using the IR.
Sure. I was just discussing some of the benefits of LCD viewfinder over
optical viewfinder.
> Also nothing (except price) prevents from making the LCD turnable so
> that you could use it as a viewfinder while shooting over crowd.
Indeed.
>> Definite benefits either way, I suppose.
>
> Yep, except nothing stops camera makers from implementing the SLR LCD to
> work as a viewfinder and getting those benefits. They just haven't done
> it, at least not yet.
Sure they have. That's exactly what I'm talking about hte Sony F707 doing,
aren't I? That's basically just what the Sony does, except it has an LCD in
the back and another behind the viewfinder.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
