If you spin the dial on a Nikon D3100,P mode lets you trade speed for aperture.
For instance suppose Auto recommends f/5.6 at 1/500s. P would allow you to the dial to f/4,1/1000s, or f/8,1/250s. It's a good learning tool. But since it readjusts aperture and shutter speed each time you meter, sometimes it defaults to undesirable values. A landscape at f/1.4 and 1/8000 s? A bird flapping its wings at f/11, 1/60s? But baby steps, baby steps...
Maybe Canon doesn't even allow the user that flexibility. I haven't shot a Canon, so who knows?
My lenses are a 18-55mm kit, a 200mmf4 manual, and a 50mmf1.4 manual. The two manual lenses are more fun to use--but are rubbish for action shots.
Or a prequel. We might even be able to see things we people wouldn't believe, Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.
We really need to commit those memories to celluloid before they're lost in time, like tears in rain
Camera automatically adjusts shutter speed and aperture for optimal exposure in most situations.
On my camera, which is not a D3, the only difference between P and Auto is that "Auto" prevents you from changing the shutter speed/aperture. I shoot using "M" mode. The lenses are cheaper.
I forget-- is blurring the background to draw the viewers eye good photojournalistic practice? If so, adjusting the aperture is considerably easier on DSLR's.
. At a focus distance of 4 feet, the iPhone 4S still has a somewhat shallow (for f/18.38, mind you!) total depth of 8.38 feet while the iPhone 4 has a total depth of 46.9 feet!
The hyperfocal distance of the iPhone 4 is 4.354618 feet while the hyperfocal distance of the iPhone 4S is 6.333142 feet.
This makes sense - if the point of journalism is to deliver high-quality photography of the kind that other photographers will appreciate. So much of old-fashioned journalism is a gigantic circle-jerk. It has been repeatedly proven that nobody needs this sort of hugely expensive photography in order to tell a story. Have a look at some the Pulitzer prizes for photography.
Those photographs are pretty powerful. They help tell a narrative, and the appeal extends way beyond photographers.
"But how will anyone win the Pulitzer Prize?!?!" Yeah, the local newspaper won't win that anyway. It's more of a political award than an acknowledgement of talent
Although the Sun-Times hasn't won a photography pulitzer in a good many years, it is still a major metropolitan daily.
Embedded camera in cell phone is necessarily restricted in terms of optics. You can play with the sensor all you want, but the optics simply cannot do the sorts of things a good camera can do.
The EF mount was introduced in 1987. The EF-S mount was introduced in 2003 source
Nikon has been using the F mount since 1959. However, only certain lowend Nikon DLSRs (D40,D3100, etc) can actually use the oldest lenses. More expensive models are limited to using AI lenses (made after 1977).
However, this expanded lens compatibility comes at a price-- no metering on non CPU lenses, and no autofocus on non-AFS/AFD lenses.
So, if you have a Nikon D3100, as I do, you can use the Nikkor-S Auto f/1.4 50mm (1962), which won't meter, and won't autofocus, or you can use the AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D (1995) which will meter, but won't actually autofocus, or you can use the AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1:1.4G (2009) which finally brings autofocus to the low end DSLR user. Of course, it is f/1.4, so it costs $439.
I have the 1975 version Considerably cheaper, but no metering and no autofocus.
I suppose that if I had an EOS Rebel, the equivalent lenses would be just as inexpensive, but fully functional. Ah well.
Just put an older lens, like a canon 50/1.0, on a modern camera and enjoy you cell-phone pic like sharpness.
like a f/1.0?
Why the f/1.0? The f1.0 produces a razor thin focal plane, and lets in a lot of light. Unless you were shooting in the dark, or needed than shallow depth of field, you'd probably pick another lens-- a sharper lens. Either way, the result is beyond the cell phone's capabilities.
Video autofocus is a relatively recent innovation-- and manual focus is relatively silent. An aperture ring is useful because otherwise the camera is apt to change it for you, with unpredictable results.
Let's redouble our efforts to despoil the Earth then. the world of bladerunner may be a shithole, but at least it's got off-world colonies. Pollute, and the rest shall follow.
0. Amdahl’s parallelism law: If a computation has a serial component S and a parallel component P, then the maximum speedup is (S+P)/S. 1. Amdahl’s balanced system law: A system needs a bit of IO per second for each instruction per second: about 8 MIPS per MBps. 2. Amdahl’s memory law: alpha=1: that is, in a balanced system the MB/MIPS ratio, called alpha, is 1. 3. Amdahl’s IO law: Programs do one IO per 50,000 instructions.
Corollary:
In any discussion of computer architecture, at least one member of the set of Amdahl's laws is bound to be relevant.
I though one of the common complaints of gamers was that the XBox 360 and PS3 were holding back development. If the XBox One has 8 GB, "ports" of Xbox One games will also be written to take advantage of more than 2 GB of memory.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out the 35mm 1.8f AFS-G lens- it's a great prime lens for most situations.
Will do. Thanks.
If you spin the dial on a Nikon D3100,P mode lets you trade speed for aperture.
For instance suppose Auto recommends f/5.6 at 1/500s. P would allow you to the dial to f/4,1/1000s, or f/8,1/250s. It's a good learning tool. But since it readjusts aperture and shutter speed each time you meter, sometimes it defaults to undesirable values. A landscape at f/1.4 and 1/8000 s? A bird flapping its wings at f/11, 1/60s? But baby steps, baby steps...
Maybe Canon doesn't even allow the user that flexibility. I haven't shot a Canon, so who knows?
My lenses are a 18-55mm kit, a 200mmf4 manual, and a 50mmf1.4 manual. The two manual lenses are more fun to use--but are rubbish for action shots.
Or a prequel. We might even be able to see things we people wouldn't believe, Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.
We really need to commit those memories to celluloid before they're lost in time, like tears in rain
I'm also interested in seeing the baby spiders.
In the D3 manual, Nikon has it as Programmed Auto
Camera automatically adjusts shutter speed and aperture for optimal exposure in most situations.
On my camera, which is not a D3, the only difference between P and Auto is that "Auto" prevents you from changing the shutter speed/aperture. I shoot using "M" mode. The lenses are cheaper.
I forget-- is blurring the background to draw the viewers eye good photojournalistic practice? If so, adjusting the aperture is considerably easier on DSLR's.
Can an iPhone focus?
According to this, the iPhone doesn't need to focus, though it does have a "tap to focus" gesture.
. At a focus distance of 4 feet, the iPhone 4S still has a somewhat shallow (for f/18.38, mind you!) total depth of 8.38 feet while the iPhone 4 has a total depth of 46.9 feet!
The hyperfocal distance of the iPhone 4 is 4.354618 feet while the hyperfocal distance of the iPhone 4S is 6.333142 feet.
It's not as if it sports a 50mm/f1.4.
This makes sense - if the point of journalism is to deliver high-quality photography of the kind that other photographers will appreciate. So much of old-fashioned journalism is a gigantic circle-jerk. It has been repeatedly proven that nobody needs this sort of hugely expensive photography in order to tell a story.
Have a look at some the Pulitzer prizes for photography.
2013
2012
2011
Those photographs are pretty powerful. They help tell a narrative, and the appeal extends way beyond photographers.
"But how will anyone win the Pulitzer Prize?!?!" Yeah, the local newspaper won't win that anyway. It's more of a political award than an acknowledgement of talent
Although the Sun-Times hasn't won a photography pulitzer in a good many years, it is still a major metropolitan daily.
The Nikkor 1200mm-1700mm supertelephoto was designed for photojournalists. It costs $60 grand.
Isn't "P mode" more or less equivalent to "Auto"?
Embedded camera in cell phone is necessarily restricted in terms of optics. You can play with the sensor all you want, but the optics simply cannot do the sorts of things a good camera can do.
Extrapolate that too much and you'll end up with large format photography.
You don't need a $10k camera to "record history".
History is often wet and muddy. Generally, more expensive DSLRs are more durable.
The iPhone makes artistic decisions?
Press photography was once summed up as "f/8 and be there". Wider apertures are for artistes.
Nikon has had Matrix Metering since 1983.
The EF mount was introduced in 1987. The EF-S mount was introduced in 2003 source
Nikon has been using the F mount since 1959. However, only certain lowend Nikon DLSRs (D40,D3100, etc) can actually use the oldest lenses. More expensive models are limited to using AI lenses (made after 1977).
However, this expanded lens compatibility comes at a price-- no metering on non CPU lenses, and no autofocus on non-AFS/AFD lenses.
So, if you have a Nikon D3100, as I do, you can use the Nikkor-S Auto f/1.4 50mm (1962), which won't meter, and won't autofocus, or you can use the AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D (1995) which will meter, but won't actually autofocus, or you can use the AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1:1.4G (2009) which finally brings autofocus to the low end DSLR user.
Of course, it is f/1.4, so it costs $439.
I have the 1975 version Considerably cheaper, but no metering and no autofocus.
I suppose that if I had an EOS Rebel, the equivalent lenses would be just as inexpensive, but fully functional. Ah well.
Just put an older lens, like a canon 50/1.0, on a modern camera and enjoy you cell-phone pic like sharpness.
like a f/1.0?
Why the f/1.0? The f1.0 produces a razor thin focal plane, and lets in a lot of light. Unless you were shooting in the dark, or needed than shallow depth of field, you'd probably pick another lens-- a sharper lens. Either way, the result is beyond the cell phone's capabilities.
Some have opined that the Nikon 1.8 and 2.0 are sharper at the f/2.8 the video was shot at.
Video autofocus is a relatively recent innovation-- and manual focus is relatively silent. An aperture ring is useful because otherwise the camera is apt to change it for you, with unpredictable results.
Is the Nikkor 50mm f//1.4 that much better than the Canon equivalent?
A man from above told me. I'm just looking for a chance to begin again.
I read Dyson's book. Fascinating.
Over a liter per person! Wow. That ranks up there with... Utah? During Prohibition?
beer consumption per capita
Let's redouble our efforts to despoil the Earth then. the world of bladerunner may be a shithole, but at least it's got off-world colonies. Pollute, and the rest shall follow.
Amdahl's laws are many.
Here are four of them.
0. Amdahl’s parallelism law: If a computation has a serial component S and a parallel component P, then the maximum speedup is (S+P)/S.
1. Amdahl’s balanced system law: A system needs a bit of IO per second for each instruction per second: about 8 MIPS per MBps.
2. Amdahl’s memory law: alpha=1: that is, in a balanced system the MB/MIPS ratio, called alpha, is 1.
3. Amdahl’s IO law: Programs do one IO per 50,000 instructions.
Corollary:
In any discussion of computer architecture, at least one member of the set of Amdahl's laws is bound to be relevant.
Is this a laptop only chipset, or does intel have goodies for those who like to be chained to their desks?
I though one of the common complaints of gamers was that the XBox 360 and PS3 were holding back development. If the XBox One has 8 GB, "ports" of Xbox One games will also be written to take advantage of more than 2 GB of memory.