Daniel Bridge

Joined: 21st March 2006

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

Daniel Bridge
Tim (Thoughton), I just deleted your comment from the Buddha photo, as any comments should be here, rather than with the entries themselves.

For anyone that missed it, Tim said:

Quote:
I just spent 5 minutes searching the large version for the decorator! The ladder in the lower left threw me off the scent for a while. The whole experience was a lot like Where's Waldo

I finally found him, closed that window and then and only then read your description. Doh!
Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Weekly Competition # 134 "Size Contrast" at 29/01/2010 - 13:44

Daniel Bridge
nathanever82 wrote:
so???
how long for a reply????

after all this effort... come on people!!!


lol
Some of us have to work!

Well, there's definitely some colour fringing in the f/4 shot, some greens and a little magenta, looks like longitudinal CA to me.

But I think this isn't as high contrast as some testers have used, so perhaps that's a factor?

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on 300mm f4 vs 200mm2.8+TC at 28/01/2010 - 18:11

Daniel Bridge
Don, you'll love it! Even more so as it's a bargain for you.

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on First results Pentax SMC DA*300MM F/4 at 26/01/2010 - 15:34

Daniel Bridge
johnriley wrote:
That is a bit harsh! You mean the ones that proudly claim to have an "Optical Lens"?
One of these?

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on New Pentax Optio cameras fully leaked at 26/01/2010 - 15:07

Daniel Bridge
It's referred to here on the Photozone review (with a sample photo, not a test chart), but personal experience is always better than 3rd hand info.

Undoubtedly too, the lens + teleconverter will be a more flexible solution.

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on 300mm f4 vs 200mm2.8+TC at 26/01/2010 - 00:22

Daniel Bridge
Anvh wrote:
Looks different then angle of view right?
If it is always referring to the vertical field of view, then yes, that would be different to the photographic AoV, however, the term might have a specific meaning within that software, so may not always refer to the vertical. It would certainly make more sense to talk about horizontal fields of view in most instances, as far as I can see.

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on FoV vs AoV at 26/01/2010 - 00:18

Daniel Bridge
cardiff_gareth wrote:
Anyone have a 48 AF-1 and if so how do they find it ?
They just open their camera bag and it's there!

Sorry, I just couldn't help it, it must be this thread. Although I don't have one, I've only heard good things about them. I'm sure you'd be happy with it.

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Metz update 30-12-2009 at 25/01/2010 - 23:59

Daniel Bridge
Possibly strictly speaking 'Field of View' would be expressed as a distance measurement, binoculars often use this and it's described as, for example, 106ft at 1000ft (you can see 106ft across your field of view at a distance of 1000ft), whereas 'Angle of View' is the, er, angle of view...

But they're describing the same thing (assuming the above is correct), just in a different way.

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on FoV vs AoV at 25/01/2010 - 23:56

Daniel Bridge
iceblinker wrote:
Your joining-in is appreciated, Dan
Not by me! I'm supposed to be sorting out photos for a talk on Thursday, and I keep getting caught up on here instead!

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on Full Frame Pentax!!!!!!! at 25/01/2010 - 22:44

Daniel Bridge
I've never noticed purple fringing with my 300mm. Example here.

Dan

Comment by Daniel Bridge posted on 300mm f4 vs 200mm2.8+TC at 25/01/2010 - 22:41

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo