If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
First
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote: As Nikon describes it, data from the exposure system is integrated in the Auto Focus for tracking (not for focusing). which means it's part of the autofocus system, exactly as i said. No, it is part of the exposure meter. it's both. otherwise it could not affect the choice of focus points. No, it is part of the exposure meter. The information generated by the exposure meter is used in a number of ways. By the shutter, for example, by the viewfinder too, etc etc. That doesn't make the RGB sensor part of the viewfinder, nor part of the shutter. And it is not part of the auto focus module system. Probably the most significant distinction is that the information passes through the CPU to get to the auto focus system. everything passes through the cpu. |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
First
nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: As Nikon describes it, data from the exposure system is integrated in the Auto Focus for tracking (not for focusing). which means it's part of the autofocus system, exactly as i said. No, it is part of the exposure meter. it's both. otherwise it could not affect the choice of focus points. No, it is part of the exposure meter. The information generated by the exposure meter is used in a number of ways. By the shutter, for example, by the viewfinder too, etc etc. That doesn't make the RGB sensor part of the viewfinder, nor part of the shutter. And it is not part of the auto focus module system. Probably the most significant distinction is that the information passes through the CPU to get to the auto focus system. everything passes through the cpu. That is a bit of a silly statement. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#143
|
|||
|
|||
First
In article , nospam wrote:
Sandman: Your reading comprehension problems is of no concern to me. You jumped into a thread where I have been talking about focusing sensors for many posts and you misunderstood simple english and decided to post about the obvious. nospam: how is it you get a free pass on 'the obvious' but whenever anyone else says it's obvious, you say it's unproven, hot air, etc. Sandman: Difference is that Floyd posted about the obvious, not me. He joined the thread and posted obvious things that I had been saying all along. actually he was pointing out where you were wrong. Incorrect. -- Sandman |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
First true rangefinder
In article , nospam wrote:
nospam: plus as you would say, "it's obvious". Sandman: It would be obvious if any of those camera had stepples EXIF data, which they don't. Still waiting for support. i never said stepless exif data. that's you moving the goalposts, again. "i've seen non-standard f/stops in images." How would you have seen it if not in EXIF? nospam: i cited info from nikon that supports what i said, and one look at the lens mount confirms it anyway. Sandman: The issue was the actual EXIF data in the images. You know, the thing you said you've seen in all cameras. nope. it never was. It was. Sandman: So they shoot in f/8.222 but record f/8 in the EXIF? nospam: i've seen non-standard f/stops in images. nospam: you're just spewing the hot air bull**** because you can't admit you're wrong, again, Sandman: I always admit when I'm wrong, when contradicting facts are shown to me. I'm still waiting. no you definitely do not. I definitely do that. All the time. -- Sandman |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
First "true" digital rangefinder camera
On 2015-02-28, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says... On 2015-02-26 22:29:38 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On 26 Feb 2015 16:02:41 GMT, Whiskers wrote: On 2015-02-26, Sandman wrote: Konost is going to release a full frame digital rangefinder camera in 2016 http://konost.com/?page_id=6654 [...] The Leica M has frames for several different focal lengths built in. Some lenses that are not accommodated by the built in frames come with "bug eyes" that adjust the field in the finder. .... and the viewfinder frames move to adjust for parallax as the focusing distance is changed, and are sized to ensure that nothing visible within the appropriate frame will be beyond the edge of the actual picture. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rich completely confused (was: True to form, Canon releases anothermediocre "film" lens) | Wolfgang Weisselberg | Digital SLR Cameras | 13 | September 8th 08 12:08 AM |
True to form, Canon releases another mediocre "film" lens | Robert Coe | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | September 4th 08 05:31 AM |
True to form, Canon releases another mediocre "film" lens | Jake | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | September 2nd 08 07:59 PM |
when will "true" medium/large format digital be affordable? | Scott Speck | Digital SLR Cameras | 27 | October 15th 06 01:54 AM |
Help A " Differently Abled Man's" Dream Come True | disabledmanneedshelp | Digital Photography | 4 | July 17th 06 12:46 AM |