Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Distressing amount of flare from those candles. On Mar 26, 2010, at 2:47 AM, Vince Passaro wrote: > Also on the just go out and shoot front I dumped my card onto my > computer > tonight and discovered I'd taken 400 and some pictures in the last > 30 hours. > I was working on a couple of projects and ideas; alas many of these > images > are dull and redundant but -- I do shoot. > > Did I ever post my said pictures of the fallen pine and the four > days of > blackout? Followed by the arrival of spring, coming in after that > mayhem > like a late and overweight hero? Here they be: > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/toast+eatin_+bog+man/ -- and go > to first > gallery featuring the guy sawing the tree. All photos taken with G1 > and > 14-45 kit zoom. > > For fans of Scrabble, the pictured game ended at 295 to 286, my favor. > Closest game I've played. With the baby and other trials of a cold > cold dark > house it took three nights to finish. > > > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Nathan Wajsman > <photo at frozenlight.eu>wrote: > >> You over-analyze everything, Vince. I have a simple suggestion: >> remember >> that rule of thumb in the 35mm world about using 1/focal length as >> the >> slowest handholdable speed? (Allowing for individual variation in >> ability to >> handhold). Apply the same rule in the digital world, but now using >> the >> effective focal length of the lens. So, for example, the 45mm on a >> MFT >> camera is equivalent to a 90mm lens on a 35mm camera and therefore >> you >> should shoot at speeds of 1/90 sec. or faster. >> >> Or just forget even the simple rules above, just go out and shoot >> and make >> your own decisions based on what you see. >> >> Nathan >> >> Nathan Wajsman >> Alicante, Spain >> http://www.frozenlight.eu >> http://www.greatpix.eu >> http://www.nathanfoto.com >> >> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0 >> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws >> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mar 26, 2010, at 7:40 AM, Vince Passaro wrote: >> >>> OK so -- clearly I don't get what's going on inside these wee camera >>> thingies we like to play with. This is what I'm wondering about >>> -- the >>> camera 'enlarges' the image? Blows it up as we would on an >>> enlarger in >> the >>> old days or in Photoshop or LR now? But it doesn't take the 20mm and >> "blow >>> it up" to 40mm? It only takes the larger 45mm and "blows it up" >>> to 90mm? >>> Somehow the smaller image blows itself up? Ergo watch out for camera >> shake >>> at 45mm? I have the 14-45 zoom so there's more effect of camera >>> shake at >> the >>> 45mm end because of this blowing up? >>> >>> I can understand the following: the medium is 36 x 24 and you're >>> using a >>> 35mm lens so it looks like "X". You cut the medium in half, so >>> the image >>> becomes cropped and to some degree magnified by a factor of 1.5 >>> and if >>> halved again, cropped and magnified to 2 times "X". >>> >>> So where does this englarging and camera shake issue come in? >>> Only at 45? >>> Why not at 20? Isn't (then) a 20mm image on a mFT camera twice as >>> 'shaky' >> as >>> a 20mm image on a 35mm film camera? And shaky exactly to the >>> extent of a >>> 40mm lens on a 35mm camera? Same going from 45 to 90? Only more so? >>> >>> Huh? >>> >>> My confusion on this point will look absurd to people who >>> understand what >>> they're talking about; my hope is that someday, looking back on >>> it, it >> will >>> look absurd to me as well. >>> >>> Vince >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information