rec.photo.digital Google Group

Re: Photos of Aratingas

2009-11-26T01:45:23Z

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:35:15 -0500, "mmyvusenet"
More injured, abused, or sick tropical birds in cages. This just gets
sadder and sadder.
HUAW PERU (Humanitarian Association for Animal Welfare)
Website: [link]
Office: (511) 446-6179
Location: República de Panamá 6584 - Barranco
Lima, Peru

Re: Dpreview post many have waited for

2009-11-26T01:05:53Z

By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.
Bob

Re: Suggestions for digital camera which has 1920x1080 video

2009-11-26T00:47:43Z

Seems there's quite a few in the Panasonic Lumix line that also do 1080p.
From their new interchangeable micro-4/3 format to the waterproof compacts.

Re: Suggestions for digital camera which has 1920x1080 video

2009-11-25T23:50:52Z

In article <867htf4yef....@blue.stoneheng e.com>,
Randal-
I understood the rationale for a 4GB limit, was that was how much would
fit on a DVD. I wonder if the DVD limit was based on the FAT Filesystem?
Fred

Re: Dpreview post many have waited for

2009-11-25T23:48:20Z

Hardly. I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
children in those forums.

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T23:29:49Z

Thank all for the suggestions up to now have taken note and will be looking
at them in more detail, I at least have a start point now while realising
there is probably many more that would be within my description.
MP

Re: Fall Back, U.S.A!

2009-11-25T22:08:06Z

That's why NTP exists and software using it can generate and
apply adjustment terms to internal computer clocks. It's even
possible to measure and counteract the drift of the hardware
realtime clocks on computer mainboards.
-Wolfgang

Re: Suggestions for digital camera which has 1920x1080 video

2009-11-25T22:40:39Z

Thanks, that's definitely a contender.

Photos of Aratingas

2009-11-25T22:35:15Z

Hello:
Today I did these photos these old Aratingas:
[link]
[link]
[link]
Thanks for your technical comments about photography.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T22:24:37Z

I think you would have to reword that to "you have a camera attached to
your 628mm diamter lens?"
Allen

Re: Circles on digital images

2009-11-25T22:03:10Z

The slime would have to *buy* a camera to take off a lens cap.
It's far easier to *steal* DSLR shots from flickr and 'show'
them using tiny sizes and anonymous and soon (if not always)
invalid URLs instead of ones like
and claim they're the slime's handheld, shot in complete darkness,
etc. etc. etc. P&S shots. Which explains the "hundreds of

Re: Circles on digital images

2009-11-25T21:58:02Z

Old (used bought) 550ex flash with a ... uhm, somewhat darkened
flash window. Released slight, but clearly visible smoke curls
from said slightly opaque plastic whenever fired at full power.
Looked like smoke from a burning cigarette.
And that's a comparatively huge window ...
-Wolfgang

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T18:48:31Z

Not true, he only makes generalizations from everything that
does not fit his preconcived opinioins.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T18:07:31Z

You're trying to educate someone who is only interested in being an
asshole troll.
FYI.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T18:06:50Z

Someone like you.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T18:06:14Z

This is how troll killer kills its prey.
...head on the wall, next!

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T17:35:45Z

LOL!!!!!!!!!! You wasted all that time to try to convince your
pretend-photographer's troll self that your chosen ideal of a camera MUST
be better. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, too fuckin' funny. Good thing I don't have to pay for this
entertainment.
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T17:34:09Z

I've had the Panasonic Lumix LX1 for about three years. Before that I
bought a newP&S every few months, trying to get one that was good
enough to keep. I suspect the later models are at least as good.
Landscapish photo from last month in West Texas:
[link]

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T17:15:14Z

No, that's relevant to all things that matter in photography:
- DOF
- light sensitivity
- softening due to diffraction
Can't have it only the way you decide, you should take all things into
account.
Here is "DSLR-Troll Killer"'s reasoning for anyone with half a brain
in need of a good laugh, even P&S owners (which are quite nice

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T16:45:40Z

That's only relevant to DOF.
Holy fuck are you DSLR-Trolls ever fucking idiots.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T16:44:36Z

That's only relevant to DOF.
Holy fuck are you DSLR trolls ever fucking iditos.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T16:37:34Z

Don't worry you're still wrong.
Comparing effective focal lengths but ignoring sensor pixel sizes is
your mistake.
What does focal ratio mean to you anyway?
With respect to things that matter in photography (light sensitivity,
DOF, softening due to diffraction) when you compare EFLs of P&S to
DSLR you should also calculate "effective aperture ratio", which in

Re: "The Adobe Photoshop CS4 Book for Digital Photographers" by Scott Kelby or Bob "on this" Larter calls somebody a torll..pot/kettle?

2009-11-25T16:24:01Z

"Usenet Legends bobandcarole ?" <usenetlegends00...@gmail.com> wrote in
message
x-no-archive:
YOU calling somebody a torll??? YOU ... the inept former FNVW of
AUK who couldn't keep the vote tallies in order or even have a
regular
ko0k awards ballot? Maybe ya spent too much time sucking scott's dick

eat more meat

2009-11-25T15:43:20Z

[link]

Re: "The Adobe Photoshop CS4 Book for Digital Photographers" by Scott Kelby or Bob "on this" Larter calls somebody a torll..pot/kettle?

2009-11-25T15:28:01Z

x-no-archive:
YOU calling somebody a torll??? YOU ... the inept former FNVW of
AUK who couldn't keep the vote tallies in order or even have a
regular
ko0k awards ballot? Maybe ya spent too much time sucking scott's dick
and trying to get me an award? :-) I do need a bigger tagline ...
--

Re: Photos of Pterois volitans

2009-11-25T15:15:51Z

On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 02:12:35 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2004)
Registered Description: "the 'owner of several troll domains' needs a group where he'll stay on topic."

Re: Photos of Pterois volitans

2009-11-25T16:12:35Z

Or electronics...

Re: Pixel count forecast

2009-11-25T15:02:25Z

On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:57:25 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2004)
Registered Description: "the 'owner of several troll domains' needs a group where he'll stay on topic."

Re: Pixel count forecast

2009-11-25T15:57:25Z

LOL.

Re: DSLR Cameras

2009-11-25T14:52:05Z

On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:39:27 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2004)
Registered Description: "the 'owner of several troll domains' needs a group where he'll stay on topic."

Re: DSLR Cameras

2009-11-25T15:39:27Z

[...]
LOL.
Those rare times that I care to sell
Well yeah - you can't show something that doesn't exist.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T14:34:02Z

Ooops, got carried away with typing EFL instead of true focal length in the
equations. It was so much easier to type.
An ignorant and idiot pretend-photographer DSLR-Troll would say that, yes.
2197mm EFL / 1.7 (digital zoom) = 1292mm EFL
1292mm EFL / 6 (sensor crop factor) = 215mm true focal length

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T14:29:45Z

An ignorant and idiot pretend-photographer DSLR-Troll would say that, yes.
2197mm EFL / 1.7 (digital zoom) = 1292mm EFL
1292mm EFL / 6 (sensor crop factor) = 215mm EFL
215mm EFL / 3.5 (aperture) = 61.5mm required physical diameter.
Nearly all teleconverters for all P&S cameras have more physical diameter

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T14:14:37Z

So, what you're saying is, you have a 628mm diameter lens attached to
your camera?

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T12:16:54Z

In article <hehppi$2g...@news.albasani.ne t>, "MP" <m.par...@tesco.net>
wrote:
There are dozens of point and shoot cameras that meet your needs quite
fine. Check out [link] and a good local camera store to
get an idea of the digital camera that would work best for you.

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T09:50:11Z

MP wrote:
Panasonic Lumix LX3
[link]
[link]
[link]
I've had one for a few months now and it's near perfect... ;-)

Flip Video Flip UltraHD 8GB Flash Drive HD Camcorder

2009-11-25T09:04:13Z

Flip Video Flip UltraHD 8GB Flash Drive HD Camcorder
[link]

Re: Photos of Pterois volitans

2009-11-25T07:59:09Z

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:29:24 -0600, Dartagnon
...your nuts are so numb it's good for humanity you can't reproduce.
cg

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T07:30:47Z

If a small-sensor camera is acceptable, I might look at the Panasonic
range, for example:
[link]
[link]
and there is a group test here:
[link]

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T07:21:44Z

MP wrote:
Your requirements are pretty mild.
A lot of cameras will do what you want.
Look especially at Panasonic Lumix TZ4
Even smaller but not quite so versatile is the Canon SD 970.
Bob Williams

Re: New archive DVDs...

2009-11-25T06:48:54Z

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:35:09 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2004)
Registered Description: "the 'owner of several troll domains' needs a group where he'll stay on topic."

Re: New archive DVDs...

2009-11-25T07:35:09Z

Not that you're paranoid of anything...
LOL. It figures that you're the kind of schizophrenic nutcase who
imagines that he's made major discoveries.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T06:05:41Z

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:44:02 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Are you aware that all the zoom lenses for DSLRs are just slapping lenses
on other lens arrays to achieve those longer focal lengths? The only
difference is that you buy them that way already attached together in a
single lens barrel. In P&S cameras you just happen to have the front

Re: Dpreview post many have waited for

2009-11-25T05:33:18Z

In article <YrOdnUkGWe8JJpHWnZ2dnUVZ_tmdn ...@giganews.com>, Rich
the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
*you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
forum.

Dpreview post many have waited for

2009-11-25T05:07:32Z

This follows on the heels of that Youtube entry about Dpreview and pixel
peeping.
The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
speaks volumes. They guy is right about some of the more prolific
posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because of
the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.

Re: Digital landscape camera

2009-11-25T04:14:13Z

What is your budget? Olympus makes the E-P1 Pen Digital, which looks
and feels like a pocketable P&S but is actually a very sophisticated
interchangeable lens camera that is in the same category as DSLRs
without the bulk. It is kind of, but not completely, analagous to a
rangefinder 35mm like a Leica as compared with a 35 SLR like a Nikon F.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T02:44:02Z

me wrote:
Forget the blurring from motion, look at the fuzziness from spherical
aberration and the gross chromatic aberration! You can't just slap a
"lens on a lens" and expect it to work well.

Re: P&S junk. Adding a teleconverter just makes it worse

2009-11-25T02:11:03Z

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:35:56 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Even worse RichA BS. All photos are taken at 1/200s or less shutter
speed. With camera only 35mm equiv fl of 485-500+ let alone add
theTC. Just one 1/160s with the FZ-18 is shown for comparison with
the conclusion the FZ-18 is superior to the FZ-35.

Re: Photos of Pterois volitans

2009-11-25T02:09:30Z

On 11/24/09 4:31 PM, in article qinog5t6p5ql27fc1dmgipq01tekpt 9...@4ax.com,
You illiterate sack-o-shit, that commenter was just as full of crap as you
are about photography and ichthyology.
FYI: My "Mister Tee" has been doing well on goldfish for over four and a
half years now.
Moron.

Re: Photos of Pterois volitans

2009-11-25T02:03:56Z

On 11/24/09 2:52 PM, in article llhog5ti1ic38dom8ji18qo1i1qhh0 j...@4ax.com,
You stupid pissant piece of pussyfied stentching fantasy, I was talking
about in my aquarium, asshole!
Do us all a favor and check yourself into a resting spot on a train track
and stop producing CO2 for Al Gore's sake, OK?