countrydweller
Aug 19, 09:49 AM
There will be a way to turn it off(better be), it's not working yet either.
thatisme
Mar 29, 10:09 AM
QUOTE=flosseR: Thatisme, please read this, and read it CAREFULLY...�
These are the complete comments to all your relevant posts:
"To the previous post about focal lengths, the difference in perceived focal length comes into account when you factor in the 1.6 cropped sensor. Since the sensor is physically smaller than a Full Frame or 1.3 crop sensor, it is essentially taking the image from the center portion of the lens.
So, you WILL get different focal lengths from 2 identically marked lenses where one is an EF-S lens and the other is an EF lens."
--INCORRECT on the same body you will get the EXACT same image. Show me images with EXIF data in tact, and no cropping done in post
"Nikon also created a FULL FRame camera a while back that also had the ability to create a "cropped" image to increase it's rate of capture to achieve results in FPS that were similar to canon's 1D series bodies. Effectively if it captured less pixels per image, it could do so faster."
-- ALL Nikon Cameras can use ALL Nikon made lenses. And no, that wasn't the main reason to do that. Never made any mention of Nikon mounts not working on all bodies. And please do enlighten everyone here what the purpose of "high-speed crop" is on that Nikon body...
"YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length."
-- This is pulled out of you mind because it does not make sense at ALL and is so incorrect it's not even funny.. the lens is NOT adjusted to the focal length.. the length is the same.. the EFFECTIVE focal length (or Field of VIEW) comes from the sensor.. NOT the lens!!! Yep. I made that point a number of times already. The Actual Focal length (the mm) doesn't change.
"ok. this is getting comical.
From your post, blasting me....
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6"
-- NO YOU WONT!!! what are you? a troll that needs feeding??
I compared BOTH lenses mounted on a 7d to BOTH lenses mounted on a 5d� if you crop the BOTH images from a 5d you have the same as BOTH from a 7d.. DONT #$@$$ CROP!!!!!!!!!!
If you take BOTH shots from a 7d .. they are the SAME.. and they are the same if you shoot them both on a 5d..
GET
IT
IN
YOUR
BRAIN!
THE SENSOR MATTERS!!! NOT THE LENS.. EXACTLY. NEVER SAID IT DIFFERENTLY. THE 1.6 IS FROM THE CAMERA SENSOR, NOT THE LENS. NEVER DID I STATE THAT DIFFERENTLY
geezz�. END QUOTE
These are the complete comments to all your relevant posts:
"To the previous post about focal lengths, the difference in perceived focal length comes into account when you factor in the 1.6 cropped sensor. Since the sensor is physically smaller than a Full Frame or 1.3 crop sensor, it is essentially taking the image from the center portion of the lens.
So, you WILL get different focal lengths from 2 identically marked lenses where one is an EF-S lens and the other is an EF lens."
--INCORRECT on the same body you will get the EXACT same image. Show me images with EXIF data in tact, and no cropping done in post
"Nikon also created a FULL FRame camera a while back that also had the ability to create a "cropped" image to increase it's rate of capture to achieve results in FPS that were similar to canon's 1D series bodies. Effectively if it captured less pixels per image, it could do so faster."
-- ALL Nikon Cameras can use ALL Nikon made lenses. And no, that wasn't the main reason to do that. Never made any mention of Nikon mounts not working on all bodies. And please do enlighten everyone here what the purpose of "high-speed crop" is on that Nikon body...
"YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length."
-- This is pulled out of you mind because it does not make sense at ALL and is so incorrect it's not even funny.. the lens is NOT adjusted to the focal length.. the length is the same.. the EFFECTIVE focal length (or Field of VIEW) comes from the sensor.. NOT the lens!!! Yep. I made that point a number of times already. The Actual Focal length (the mm) doesn't change.
"ok. this is getting comical.
From your post, blasting me....
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6"
-- NO YOU WONT!!! what are you? a troll that needs feeding??
I compared BOTH lenses mounted on a 7d to BOTH lenses mounted on a 5d� if you crop the BOTH images from a 5d you have the same as BOTH from a 7d.. DONT #$@$$ CROP!!!!!!!!!!
If you take BOTH shots from a 7d .. they are the SAME.. and they are the same if you shoot them both on a 5d..
GET
IT
IN
YOUR
BRAIN!
THE SENSOR MATTERS!!! NOT THE LENS.. EXACTLY. NEVER SAID IT DIFFERENTLY. THE 1.6 IS FROM THE CAMERA SENSOR, NOT THE LENS. NEVER DID I STATE THAT DIFFERENTLY
geezz�. END QUOTE
navguy
Jan 11, 03:02 PM
New StreetPilot in app store ... fast update to app, must have known of all these issues before CES release ... step in the right direction, and encouraging to see their commitment to updates
What's New in Version 6.5.3
�Improved audio quality - Voice instructions are now clearer and easier to understand
�Map storage size increased - browse even more maps offline that you've previously downloaded
�Listen to music without interruptions - New setting toggles voice instructions on/off during navigation
�New volume control added to navigation map menu for quick access
�Faster map downloads
�Minor bug fixes
What's New in Version 6.5.3
�Improved audio quality - Voice instructions are now clearer and easier to understand
�Map storage size increased - browse even more maps offline that you've previously downloaded
�Listen to music without interruptions - New setting toggles voice instructions on/off during navigation
�New volume control added to navigation map menu for quick access
�Faster map downloads
�Minor bug fixes
snberk103
Jun 22, 04:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snberk103
I'm just wondering *why* Apple is choosing this time to introduce built in SD card readers.
"This time" being last summer, when they started including them in MacBooks?
They don't really need a reason besides pretty much every consumer camera using SD media these days.
Was it really that long ago? Time flies, eh? Anyway.... They could have added it to the Mini back then quietly and without redesigning the whole case, similar to the way that the 5th USB port was added, if it was to satisfy photographers.
And they didn't need to immediately go to the top end SDXC.... most consumer cameras aren't using those cards yet. Once the low or middle speed SD card reader was added, it would have been easy to upgrade it to the top end SD card reader in a few years when those cards were more widely used. This would have been more in line of Apple's philosophy of increasing specs and features and keeping prices down. i.e. Today's new Mini has plain SD card reader, and in a year they "add" the faster reader to make a "new" new Mini.
I think there is something more to this... we'll just have to stay tuned, eh?
Originally Posted by snberk103
I'm just wondering *why* Apple is choosing this time to introduce built in SD card readers.
"This time" being last summer, when they started including them in MacBooks?
They don't really need a reason besides pretty much every consumer camera using SD media these days.
Was it really that long ago? Time flies, eh? Anyway.... They could have added it to the Mini back then quietly and without redesigning the whole case, similar to the way that the 5th USB port was added, if it was to satisfy photographers.
And they didn't need to immediately go to the top end SDXC.... most consumer cameras aren't using those cards yet. Once the low or middle speed SD card reader was added, it would have been easy to upgrade it to the top end SD card reader in a few years when those cards were more widely used. This would have been more in line of Apple's philosophy of increasing specs and features and keeping prices down. i.e. Today's new Mini has plain SD card reader, and in a year they "add" the faster reader to make a "new" new Mini.
I think there is something more to this... we'll just have to stay tuned, eh?
more...
tenshin5426
May 1, 06:34 AM
give em hell kid! really fantastic going lets just hope apple are far to busy skirmishing with samsung then picking on young businessmen rofl
Dont Hurt Me
Oct 10, 07:36 AM
I doubt very much Macbook is getting updates at the same time Pro Models do. Thats not how Apple operates. First the pro models will be updated then that tech will show up months later in Macbook with some crippling like in the Gpu.
more...
ipedro
Apr 19, 09:06 PM
Actually there is an option to turn the indicator light on, in System Prefs. I think quitting, closing and opening apps is perfect the way it is.
... to apease old school folks like yourself. It's off by default. OSX has always been about not having to think about managing the OS and focusing on being productive, creative and enjoying the purpose of the computer. Letting the OS manage system resources is the next logical step.
Apps don't need to be running if they're not being used. If the OS saves all work and opening an app is nearly instantaneous, then there is no difference between a running app or a closed app running some services in the background.
Nonetheless, the ability to turn the lights back on is a temporary transitional ability. It will no doubt be gone in the OS after Lion and only few people clinging to the past will look to turn them on.
... to apease old school folks like yourself. It's off by default. OSX has always been about not having to think about managing the OS and focusing on being productive, creative and enjoying the purpose of the computer. Letting the OS manage system resources is the next logical step.
Apps don't need to be running if they're not being used. If the OS saves all work and opening an app is nearly instantaneous, then there is no difference between a running app or a closed app running some services in the background.
Nonetheless, the ability to turn the lights back on is a temporary transitional ability. It will no doubt be gone in the OS after Lion and only few people clinging to the past will look to turn them on.
calcvita
Apr 5, 06:48 PM
It's so you can have analog and digital audio and video, remote control commands, and various types of protocols coming out of one port. All the user needs to do is buy the one they need.
ok! thx to you too :)
ok! thx to you too :)
more...
zimv20
May 23, 04:49 PM
aw, crap. now i gotta get tiger.
wackymacky
Nov 8, 02:03 PM
No spy chips, thank you.
http://spychips.com
Umm. Doesn't my cellphone already have a unique identify number that it comuncates with my carrier while it is switched on and tells them where I am within the cell network. (And with the GPS chip I can be pin-pointed withing a couple of meters).
Ummm... I wonder..... Does Apple track when ever a iPhone onwer enters a Apple Store, Or Wallmart? They have the technology.
http://spychips.com
Umm. Doesn't my cellphone already have a unique identify number that it comuncates with my carrier while it is switched on and tells them where I am within the cell network. (And with the GPS chip I can be pin-pointed withing a couple of meters).
Ummm... I wonder..... Does Apple track when ever a iPhone onwer enters a Apple Store, Or Wallmart? They have the technology.
more...
aafuss1
Nov 14, 09:37 AM
I wonder if British Airways and Qantas wil offer this. After all it's one up on Zune.
kdarling
Dec 28, 03:59 PM
This is nothing more than manufactured non news.
You're right. So is most stuff on this forum.
It doesn't stop people from being interested in reading about carrier fumbles. It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.
You're right. So is most stuff on this forum.
It doesn't stop people from being interested in reading about carrier fumbles. It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.
more...
Stridder44
Apr 21, 01:22 PM
4S. I like the name, and it makes sense to keep continuity with the previous naming scheme (3GS). I guess we'll see a true iPhone 5 next summer.
ciaran00
Jun 10, 04:43 PM
If T-mobile gets the iPhone maybe they will have better data plans than AT&T
They already do. I've been on Tmo with my iPhone for 3 years now.
Just unlock and go over. Or sit on your hands and wait for official.
They already do. I've been on Tmo with my iPhone for 3 years now.
Just unlock and go over. Or sit on your hands and wait for official.
more...
citizenzen
Mar 11, 07:47 PM
It must be nice having so much money that you can base your car purchase on a political statement ... though I understand you folks are working with the best intentions.
But an automobile and its upkeep are too expensive to justify "buying American" alone. If the product isn't up to par then you're not only hurting yourself financially, you're sending the wrong message to the manufacturer's who'll think they don't have to produce quality cars.
Now I'm not saying that good American-built cars don't exist. I haven't shopped for one in over ten years. I don't know. I do know that it's one product where it's wise to set aside socio-political motivations and simply buy the best car on the market.
A crowbar on the other hand ...
But an automobile and its upkeep are too expensive to justify "buying American" alone. If the product isn't up to par then you're not only hurting yourself financially, you're sending the wrong message to the manufacturer's who'll think they don't have to produce quality cars.
Now I'm not saying that good American-built cars don't exist. I haven't shopped for one in over ten years. I don't know. I do know that it's one product where it's wise to set aside socio-political motivations and simply buy the best car on the market.
A crowbar on the other hand ...
mrwheet
Nov 18, 10:12 AM
So a 17 year old can do it but a gigantic company with $50 billion lying there can't. Seems logical to me. :rolleyes:
Wake up Steve. Seriously.
Well, if rumours about the reason for white iPhone delays are correct (i.e., leakage from the white casing affecting camera performance), then he's just selling Apple's rejects. Fair enough, I suppose, if people are willing to pay for them (especially that much $$$). It would be interesting to hear reports about camera performance after the conversion.
Wake up Steve. Seriously.
Well, if rumours about the reason for white iPhone delays are correct (i.e., leakage from the white casing affecting camera performance), then he's just selling Apple's rejects. Fair enough, I suppose, if people are willing to pay for them (especially that much $$$). It would be interesting to hear reports about camera performance after the conversion.
more...
peharri
Aug 14, 01:22 PM
...if you're selling soap.
If you're selling computer platforms though, it's a major mistake. The days of the Amiga may be long behind us, but people do still feel strongly about their choice of computer, they do become personally attached to what they got, and this isn't like the car industry where there are so many manufacturers you can do a little spoofing of your competitors without anyone feeling it's directed at them.
Car analogies are old hat so if you'll forgive me, I'll use a sports analogy instead. I don't really know sports, except to know that fans of teams tend to be just as irrational as fans of computer platforms. By which I mean the entire spectrum of fandom tends to be represented. But everyone does, in the end, whether it's a team or a computer platform, end up opinionated and either loving or hating it.
Imagine the following. You're Apple's ad agency, and you've been hired by the Reds, the local sports team. A few miles away is the home of the Blues, and in your town, the Reds make up the team affiliation of about 80% of the population, with the Blues making up the other 20%. There's a degree of rivalry between the teams.
The Reds want more people coming to their stadiums. They need increased revenue ticket sales. The only people to attract now are the Blues. The Blues obviously like your sport, otherwise they wouldn't have chosen a team in the first place, but they're not willing to consider, as yet, seeing Red team games. How do you attract Blue supporters?
If you're Apple's ad agency, your ad goes something like:
Blue: "I'm a blue player"
Red: "And I'm a red player"
Blue: "Duh. I can kick this ball, duh, look" (*kicks at ball several times, finally actually hitting it the 7th time*)
Red: *smugly bounces a ball on knee* "Red scored the highest last season, and we're consistantly the best team"
Blue: "Hey! Hey, watch this" *attempts to balance ball on nose, ball consistantly rolling off and away. Blue chases after ball*
Red: *Kicks ball up, bounces on knee, headbutts it, and catches it with one hand behind him* "We have some really skilled players"
(Ad continues ad-nausium. By which I mean it's an ad that makes you nauseous.)
Now, another approach might be to run an ad that consists of a bunch of shots from your stadium. You show some pretty good playing, stuff people will find impressive and will have wished they saw. You show the Reds most often, but, hey, there are two teams in every game. In other words, instead of taking sides based upon the team, you show people that if they come to your stadium, they're going to have a good time. They're going to see some impressive playmanship. Even if it's not their team, there's reason for them to want to go and see the next game.
Which type of ad would sway you? Which type of ad would get you to go to a stadium owned by your team's rival?
The current "I'm a Mac" series doesn't work because it appeals to fanboism, but in doing so, it also ends up being fanboism's victim. It doesn't appeal to PC owners, it just cements existing Mac user's sense of superiority. Except me. I cringe every time I see them.
If you're selling computer platforms though, it's a major mistake. The days of the Amiga may be long behind us, but people do still feel strongly about their choice of computer, they do become personally attached to what they got, and this isn't like the car industry where there are so many manufacturers you can do a little spoofing of your competitors without anyone feeling it's directed at them.
Car analogies are old hat so if you'll forgive me, I'll use a sports analogy instead. I don't really know sports, except to know that fans of teams tend to be just as irrational as fans of computer platforms. By which I mean the entire spectrum of fandom tends to be represented. But everyone does, in the end, whether it's a team or a computer platform, end up opinionated and either loving or hating it.
Imagine the following. You're Apple's ad agency, and you've been hired by the Reds, the local sports team. A few miles away is the home of the Blues, and in your town, the Reds make up the team affiliation of about 80% of the population, with the Blues making up the other 20%. There's a degree of rivalry between the teams.
The Reds want more people coming to their stadiums. They need increased revenue ticket sales. The only people to attract now are the Blues. The Blues obviously like your sport, otherwise they wouldn't have chosen a team in the first place, but they're not willing to consider, as yet, seeing Red team games. How do you attract Blue supporters?
If you're Apple's ad agency, your ad goes something like:
Blue: "I'm a blue player"
Red: "And I'm a red player"
Blue: "Duh. I can kick this ball, duh, look" (*kicks at ball several times, finally actually hitting it the 7th time*)
Red: *smugly bounces a ball on knee* "Red scored the highest last season, and we're consistantly the best team"
Blue: "Hey! Hey, watch this" *attempts to balance ball on nose, ball consistantly rolling off and away. Blue chases after ball*
Red: *Kicks ball up, bounces on knee, headbutts it, and catches it with one hand behind him* "We have some really skilled players"
(Ad continues ad-nausium. By which I mean it's an ad that makes you nauseous.)
Now, another approach might be to run an ad that consists of a bunch of shots from your stadium. You show some pretty good playing, stuff people will find impressive and will have wished they saw. You show the Reds most often, but, hey, there are two teams in every game. In other words, instead of taking sides based upon the team, you show people that if they come to your stadium, they're going to have a good time. They're going to see some impressive playmanship. Even if it's not their team, there's reason for them to want to go and see the next game.
Which type of ad would sway you? Which type of ad would get you to go to a stadium owned by your team's rival?
The current "I'm a Mac" series doesn't work because it appeals to fanboism, but in doing so, it also ends up being fanboism's victim. It doesn't appeal to PC owners, it just cements existing Mac user's sense of superiority. Except me. I cringe every time I see them.
Squonk
Nov 14, 09:40 AM
so then... maybe...
flyPod?
... just a thought.
I like that! :cool:
flyPod?
... just a thought.
I like that! :cool:
BlizzardBomb
Jun 1, 10:03 AM
I've edited the original post. I've changed "Mac Software" to just "Software". Making it more of a hybrid of the previous options.
whatever
Nov 14, 11:54 AM
Good point (truly) ... but I stand by what I said too. I think if your scenario wwas true then we would see Creative Zen adapters or SanDisk Snasa adapters on the market - at least they have proven marketshare against the iPod. Still ... it will be interesting to see how this will pan out.
What i wonder is if the Wifi the Zune uses for file transfers will be banned on planes. If it's not, then i want to be able to use Wifi for any device on a plane.
You currently are not allowed, by law, to broadcast any signals on airwaves on an aircraft while in the air. Bluetooth, WiFi, phone, etc.
What i wonder is if the Wifi the Zune uses for file transfers will be banned on planes. If it's not, then i want to be able to use Wifi for any device on a plane.
You currently are not allowed, by law, to broadcast any signals on airwaves on an aircraft while in the air. Bluetooth, WiFi, phone, etc.
sumit.dpfoc
Jan 12, 02:46 AM
Hey,
jwong3854
Mar 11, 12:51 PM
Stonebriar Frisco update, about 60 in line. Apple rep going down line asking if we have any questions and will try to give us answers.
Asked about what and when accessories are available
Ask about how many per person
Asked about qnty of each available
Asked about flow when doors open at 5:00
And if we do not want personal setup is there an express pay lane
Thanks
DP
And also they might give out tickets around 3
Asked about what and when accessories are available
Ask about how many per person
Asked about qnty of each available
Asked about flow when doors open at 5:00
And if we do not want personal setup is there an express pay lane
Thanks
DP
And also they might give out tickets around 3
Snowy_River
Nov 14, 10:40 PM
... a 'Jovial Hog Raping Day'...
ROTFLOL!
Thank you for the great laugh! :D
ROTFLOL!
Thank you for the great laugh! :D
rmitchell248
Mar 18, 04:09 PM
1,53�/L
todays exchange rate thats $8.21/gallon
todays exchange rate thats $8.21/gallon
No comments:
Post a Comment