All Forum Comments
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on New Weekly competition started here on this forum at 06/07/2007 - 12:18
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on New Weekly competition started here on this forum at 06/07/2007 - 10:58
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on New Weekly competition started here on this forum at 04/07/2007 - 13:05
Going back to your first question, you're right in that an object will be the same 'size' on film or digital, but imagine that you took a photo of a tennis ball, using a film body and a K10D, using the same lens, all things being equal.
That ball forms an image on the film and sensor that's, say, 5mm across.
We then blow up prints from both to 12" x 8". The film is 36mm along it's longest edge, so to get that to 12" takes about 8.3x enlargement. The digital image is only 24mm along it's longest edge so needs 12.5x enlargement.
The image of the ball is similarly magnified, so is 41.5mm across on the print made from film, and 62.5mm across on the digital one.
Any camera shake is magnified by the same amount, so if it's not quite noticable on the print from film, it might be visible in the digital one.
Now, if we want the ball to be the same size on the prints, we don't need such a long lens for the digital shot, so we could use a 200mm on digital and a 300mm on film, hence the common confusion (which I know you're not having, I'm just finishing the illustration), that lenses change focal length when used on digital.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Tokina 500mm mirror lens + use with DL2 at 01/07/2007 - 23:50
(Cheque is in the post, Dan)
Well done Tim, and all who entered. Look forward to the next weeks images...
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Weekly Competition - The Number Six at 08/07/2007 - 17:21
They used a K100D with the DA 50-200mm.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Please look at this person's shots... at 30/06/2007 - 13:24
Chris has dropped the K10D price by £100, so in about a months time...
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Some info... at 29/06/2007 - 11:40
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2007/06/af-200fg-flash.html
Looks a bit of a lump to me (for a 'small' flash), no focus assist lamp, but basic flash compensation controls. No indication of pricing though.
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on AF-200FG Flash Pics at 29/06/2007 - 11:18
First thing I would try would be to wiz the dial backwards and forwards a few times, just to make sure there's not a little bit of dirt in there that's making it do funny stuff.
That might work, but then if it does, there's always the possibility that it might return at any time...
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on K10 D problem. Please help! at 29/06/2007 - 09:42
Can you be sure there's no CA at the edges of your vision? Can't look to be sure, can you!
Dan
Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Why does the eye not suffer from Chromatic Aberration? at 29/06/2007 - 10:38


Thanks to Dan for the inspiration
Dan