All Forum Comments
What are you talking about?
Comment by Tyr posted on Another pointless thread at 17/03/2011 - 15:14
I see... I'll re-examine the bag because it has something on the back. Just can't remember what.
Comment by Tyr posted on Camera bag that does not look like a camera bag? at 17/03/2011 - 15:13
Erm...
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/3693/Used-Pentax--istD-Digital-SLR-with-Pentax-...
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/5746/Used-Pentax-K100D-Super-DSLR-Body-with-18-...
Personally I'd go for the latter with SR and SDM contacts.
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/3693/Used-Pentax--istD-Digital-SLR-with-Pentax-...
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/5746/Used-Pentax-K100D-Super-DSLR-Body-with-18-...
Personally I'd go for the latter with SR and SDM contacts.
Comment by Tyr posted on Wanted: K100d Super or *istD models at 17/03/2011 - 15:07
No, I meant that it can stretch the corners a lot. Nothing unusual about that with any rectilinear WA lens.
The thing with the Samyang is having the option of doing a rectilinear projection from the stereographic fisheye. The stereographic projection of the Samyang has a more natural look and fell as things stay more in proportion across the frame than with say the DA10-17 or an UWA lens.
Perhaps this is just LBA coming back. I thought I'd been cured
The thing with the Samyang is having the option of doing a rectilinear projection from the stereographic fisheye. The stereographic projection of the Samyang has a more natural look and fell as things stay more in proportion across the frame than with say the DA10-17 or an UWA lens.
Perhaps this is just LBA coming back. I thought I'd been cured
Comment by Tyr posted on Samyang 8mm f/3.5 at 17/03/2011 - 14:46
not a good situation.
Just get the FA31!
You know you want to!
Oh, wait, you could get 7 DA35s for the same price!
Just get the FA31!
You know you want to!
Oh, wait, you could get 7 DA35s for the same price!
Comment by Tyr posted on I must be strong at 17/03/2011 - 14:41
A local shop has some Samyang stock they seem to want to shift, this included K-mount Samyang 8mm f3.5 lenses.
I don't have any lenses that I consider particularly wide. The DA*16-50 is the widest lens and sometimes I find it is not wide enough.
I'm not sure about getting a wide rectilinear lens as it can cause strange distortion to keep lines straight. The Samyang has near stereographic projection so produces more natural looking images. Does anyone have this lens?
If so, what do you think of it? It seems to be better in terms of resolution chromatic aberration and purple fringing when compared to the DA 10-17.
And can I have a file to try and de-fisheye to see how it works as a UWA rectilinear lens?
I don't have any lenses that I consider particularly wide. The DA*16-50 is the widest lens and sometimes I find it is not wide enough.
I'm not sure about getting a wide rectilinear lens as it can cause strange distortion to keep lines straight. The Samyang has near stereographic projection so produces more natural looking images. Does anyone have this lens?
If so, what do you think of it? It seems to be better in terms of resolution chromatic aberration and purple fringing when compared to the DA 10-17.
And can I have a file to try and de-fisheye to see how it works as a UWA rectilinear lens?
Comment by Tyr posted on Samyang 8mm f/3.5 at 17/03/2011 - 14:31
Don wrote:
Or anything else earthed for that matter. The radiators for central heating are often earthed, except in newer houses where the piping is plastic, not copper.Mannesty wrote:
If the lens is indeed electrically charged with static, there is only one way to dissipate it. Cloths, lens pens, etc will not dissipate an electrical charge.
The one and only way to equalise the electrical charge on the lens is to make an electrically conducting circuit between it, and ground.
One way to achieve this would be to remove your shoes and socks, go out side with the lens and stand on bare earth. Then remove the lens cap and touch the front element for a few seconds. Now you have a fingerprint to clean off, but the static will have discharged through your body. Now, the ground, you, and the lens, will all be at the same electrical potential.
This effort will all be useless however if your home is filled with artificial fibres, the generators of the static in the first place.
Perhaps the household also needs a new vacuum cleaner?
or you could just touch your kitchen sink/faucet...If the lens is indeed electrically charged with static, there is only one way to dissipate it. Cloths, lens pens, etc will not dissipate an electrical charge.
The one and only way to equalise the electrical charge on the lens is to make an electrically conducting circuit between it, and ground.
One way to achieve this would be to remove your shoes and socks, go out side with the lens and stand on bare earth. Then remove the lens cap and touch the front element for a few seconds. Now you have a fingerprint to clean off, but the static will have discharged through your body. Now, the ground, you, and the lens, will all be at the same electrical potential.
This effort will all be useless however if your home is filled with artificial fibres, the generators of the static in the first place.
Perhaps the household also needs a new vacuum cleaner?
Comment by Tyr posted on Static charge - how to remove? at 17/03/2011 - 14:27
I'll just have to do better next time. I'm looking forward to the next subject.
Comment by Tyr posted on Entries for Competition # 63....Subject Noir (Black) at 17/03/2011 - 13:38
Strange... It shouldn't affect image quality though unless it ends up caked in dust.
Or you could walk around the house with it to dust your house! Dust magnet!
Or you could walk around the house with it to dust your house! Dust magnet!
Comment by Tyr posted on Static charge - how to remove? at 17/03/2011 - 13:29
mille19 wrote:
As a photographer I only use Lightroom, I have an old copy of Paint Shop Pro that I probably use about twice a year for cloning that I can't achieve in LR.
This is what spot removal abuse is for! Very useful as it is easier to control than the clone tool or other heal brushes available in photoshop. I can get exactly what I want using the correct sections of the photo. I can use several hundred spots sometimes to reshape photos. Who needs photoshop then?As a photographer I only use Lightroom, I have an old copy of Paint Shop Pro that I probably use about twice a year for cloning that I can't achieve in LR.
Comment by Tyr posted on CS5, Lightroom 3.2 or both? Any Suggestions please. at 17/03/2011 - 13:26
