Risked life and limb to get this shot and the $7000 piece of crap let me down again

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

 

First, I hope you have seen the smiley under my statement.

 

Now I will look at my favorite Chinese restaurant with a new consciousness at the mountain image with built-in backlight, on which a waterfall rushes for ever visible down.

Until now I always thought that as terrible kitsch.

 

All inflationary makes tired, so the constant soft waterfall pictures, that I already get to see in addition to the LFI preferred photo journal "The Outdoor Photographer" for many years.

 

One might just philosophize about the fact, that the quest for a faster shutter speed in our cameras represents the longing for retaining a small little piece of our constantly ongoing and coming to the personal end of life.

But I'm no philosopher but just an amateur photographer, who likes in oposite to the current fashion crisp and sharp photos of waterfalls and softboxes for the portraits of older ladies.

[250swb]

But I'm no philosopher but just an amateur photographer, who likes in oposite to the current fashion crisp and sharp photos of waterfalls and softboxes for the portraits of older ladies.

 

Fashions come and go, the only constants are the creation of artificial rules in which people have to be against something in order to express themselves.

 

Being against things is a time saver however, instead of considering whether a certain technique feels appropriate to the photograph it's possible to dismiss entire genre's without any further thought. It is the epitome of the wonderful expression 'I know what I like' in art, and it must save minutes every day in pointlessly thoughtful photographic critique.

 

Steve

[AlanG]

Fashions come and go, the only constants are the creation of artificial rules in which people have to be against something in order to express themselves.

 

Being against things is a time saver however, instead of considering whether a certain technique feels appropriate to the photograph it's possible to dismiss entire genre's without any further thought. It is the epitome of the wonderful expression 'I know what I like' in art, and it must save minutes every day in pointlessly thoughtful photographic critique.

 

Steve

 

Yes and consider technology and features in general. Some will say, they hate the idea of a "smile shutter" feature until dwbell explains how it can be used to allow one to interact with the subject and get very spontaneous looking expressions. I never thought of using it that way. His post made me try out that feature on my Nex 6 for the first time. Thanks to him I now have a new way to use a camera and will be looking for appropriate situations.

[Surge]

Client to engineer

"Have you done all the necessary tests to ensure a 46 tonne lorry is safe to cross the new road bridge?"

 

'Engineer' to client

"No, why would I, I'm only going to walk across it!"

 

I'm beginning to think you aren't perhaps an engineer, because they are rare nowadays, and are instead the modern shadow of an engineer, what is known to the poor sods who have to deal with them as a 'fitter'. You exchange components until the machine works, just as you exchange the parameters of a test until it suits your requirements.

 

You proved your camera is completely free of the light leak problem by testing it to the (lower) limit of how you use it. And you think that is the answer, and go around telling everybody else to get their cameras fixed. That is some engineering mind you have, one perfectly attuned to building a house of cards.

 

Steve

 

It doesn't make any scientific sense that if you have no light leak at say 8 seconds, you'd have one at 30 seconds. But I retested it anyway at 30 seconds, and guess what, no leak!

 

You can continue to mistrust my assertions… I cannot remove your disbelief in others.

 

(And yes, I am a professional engineer. And your post doesn't make much sense… I test it for how I use it, that's the point.

If I were building a foot bridge, I wouldn't need to test it by driving a lorrie over it, would I? That kind of thinking leads to massive cost overruns, and invariably, poor quality products that don't meet users' needs…

But that is another story.

 

Happy New Year everyone.

 

The cameras are not perfect. But they don't affect all units (I'm sure I'm not the only one with a non-flawed mount.)

But thanks for bringing this up to others' attention.

 

Just relax and enjoy taking photos!

[AlanG]

It doesn't make any scientific sense that if you have no light leak at say 8 seconds, you'd have one at 30 seconds.

 

What kind of science did you study? 30 seconds of exposure is nearly 4 times the amount of light as 8 seconds. There is always a threshold value for detectable exposure over pure black and a two stop increase in exposure certainly could show evidence of a light leak that did not otherwise show up. As a matter of fact it could be almost two stops brighter than pure black under the right circumstance.

 

The issue for conscientious photographers is to learn under what circumstance their camera might produce a light leak. That way they can avoid using it that way or take steps to block the light.

[mirekti]

I don't do long exposures, and this issue isn't a big deal for me. I will also use a scrunchie if needed.

I put a 135mm APO, didn't remove the lens cap, and brought camera into sunlight. I was turning the camera slowly so each part of the mount would be led by the sun light.

The exposure was 45 seconds, and here is the result:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It doesn't make any scientific sense that if you have no light leak at say 8 seconds, you'd have one at 30 seconds. But I retested it anyway at 30 seconds, and guess what, no leak!

 

 

Was it a very bright match or did you use a candle? Also, did you notice that the effect was most marked when the mount was lit near the 2 o'clock position?

[algrove]

Sell the lens and then sell the camera! They are both not worth keeping.

[dwbell]

If I were building a foot bridge, I wouldn't need to test it by driving a lorrie over it, would I?!

 

From memory, UK foot bridges are designed with a distributed vertical load of 5kN per meter squared. So yes, you could drive a truck over it. If it were wide enough of course.

[kdriceman]

It doesn't make any scientific sense that if you have no light leak at say 8 seconds, you'd have one at 30 seconds. But I retested it anyway at 30 seconds, and guess what, no leak!

 

 

 

The same light leak would exist at both 8s and 30s. Whether it is detectable on the sensor is a function of the duration of the exposure, the light intensity, the angle of the light, the sensitivity of the sensor, etc...

 

Seal the front of the lens, get a bright beam, shine it on the flange at about 2:00 (facing the camera) and perpendicular to the axis of the lens - or go out in mid day bright sun and take a 30s+ exposure. Then drop the raw file into a Dropbox folder and share your results with the LUF. Then we can have a fair discussion about how your flange doesn't leak light.

[IkarusJohn]

While I'd agree that there is a trend for the same long exposure picture to be made a million times by a million photographers all standing in the same spot, showing the flow of water does have a valid intellectual justification on a wider scale. Water goes somewhere, it flows, it carves the landscape, it is an elemental force that continues long after we all die, it is a contrast to the hard landscape. With a long exposure it reveals eddies, the current, it emphasises the dominance over rock by revealing the flow that carved it, it creates a spiritual connection to the timelessness of nature by showing the passing of time. I think its a bit low brow to say any of these things should no longer be in the language of photography just because technology has now given you an effing shutter speed of 1/2000th; although if trout photography is your specialisation fair enough, but some people want to see beyond their inner trout and work on more complicated sensations.

 

Steve

 

 

The problem with a technique like this is that it becomes very tired very quickly. If you're photographing a waterfall, the question is then one of degree. Neil's long exposure does introduce an ethereal quality which is interesting.

 

Trout or no trout, are you taking an image of the river or the water? I'm too distracted by the sound of one hand clapping!

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Sell the lens and then sell the camera! They are both not worth keeping.

+1

[250swb]

 

(And yes, I am a professional engineer. And your post doesn't make much sense… I test it for how I use it, that's the point.

If I were building a foot bridge, I wouldn't need to test it by driving a lorrie over it, would I? That kind of thinking leads to massive cost overruns, and invariably, poor quality products that don't meet users' needs…

But that is another story.

 

!

 

If you were an engineer it would be hoped that you'd read the brief and designed a road bridge as was stated. It becomes symptomatic of your general lack of attention that you can't spot the clues given in plain sight.

 

Steve

[250swb]

I don't do long exposures, and this issue isn't a big deal for me. I will also use a scrunchie if needed.

I put a 135mm APO, didn't remove the lens cap, and brought camera into sunlight. I was turning the camera slowly so each part of the mount would be led by the sun light.

The exposure was 45 seconds, and here is the result:

 

That is the typical result so thank you for adding to the group knowledge.

 

Steve

[MarkP]

Yes and consider technology and features in general. Some will say, they hate the idea of a "smile shutter" feature until dwbell explains how it can be used to allow one to interact with the subject and get very spontaneous looking expressions. I never thought of using it that way. His post made me try out that feature on my Nex 6 for the first time. Thanks to him I now have a new way to use a camera and will be looking for appropriate situations.

 

His idea was a stroke of genius!

[farnz]

... (And yes, I am a professional engineer. And your post doesn't make much sense… I test it for how I use it, that's the point.

If I were building a foot bridge, I wouldn't need to test it by driving a lorrie over it, would I? That kind of thinking leads to massive cost overruns, and invariably, poor quality products that don't meet users' needs…

No, you must test it for worst case, which in the instance you invented would be the maximum number of people you could get onto the bridge each carrying the maximum load they could carry amend then add, say, 20% to allow for ageing and the unexpected because bridges don't fail a little bit in the same way that people don't get a little bit dead. In Engineering Design this is known as the Safety Margin. If you consider this to be "cost overrun" then clearly you are not a Design Engineer and there's a small room with bars on the window waiting for you at the conclusion of the enquiry when the bridge fails. This is Engineering Safety Design 101.

 

Lord protect us against Project Managers who think they can do the work of Design Engineers.

 

Pete.

[jdsheepdog]

No, you must test it for worst case, which in the instance you invented would be the maximum number of people you could get onto the bridge each carrying the maximum load they could carry amend then add, say, 20% to allow for ageing and the unexpected because bridges don't fail a little bit in the same way that people don't get a little bit dead.

 

Pete.

 

Interesting anecdote, if OT, some years ago a celebration was planned for the 50th (I think) anniversary of the Golden Gate Bridge. The bridge was to be closed for the party, bands played, food and drink flowed wonderfully, and the citizens came at regimental strength to dance and rejoice in the life of the wonderful bridge.

 

The bridge that was designed without computers and with the simple math of Euler, Newton, catenary curves, using slide rules, and drawn by hand. With pencils.

 

An engineer did a routine check on the bridge loading for the party and turned grey when he discovered that this party would subject the bridge to the greatest load it had ever experienced. Fortunately, still inside it's overload factors of safety, but I am sure he had quite the moment.

[steveclem]

We've got a wobbly bridge in London, and for the record the same architect custom built a not very good concert venue in Glasgow which opened last year and has attracted puzzlement and dismay from visiting productions.

Bring back the slide rules and notebooks I say, just step away from the AI of your computer program and look at the real world.

Hence why the 'scrunchy' solution works. It just works, pretty it may not be (perhaps try a different hue?) but lets leave pretty to the pictures a trout leaping preferably.

 

Edit:

For those with masses of disposable income a special one off artisan commission could provide a unique,status infused symbol of ones standing in the world,perceived or otherwise.

[farnz]

... An engineer did a routine check on the bridge loading for the party and turned grey when he discovered that this party would subject the bridge to the greatest load it had ever experienced. Fortunately, still inside it's overload factors of safety, but I am sure he had quite the moment.

There was a similar moment concerning London's beautiful, old, Albert Bridge during the Second World War when it was discovered that the footfall of troops marching in formation across the bridge approached the bridge's resonant frequency and could cause it to collapse. There is to this day a large notice at either end of the bridge saying 'Troops crossing the bridge are to break formation'.

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Delcredere]

Yes and consider technology and features in general. Some will say, they hate the idea of a "smile shutter" feature until dwbell explains how it can be used to allow one to interact with the subject and get very spontaneous looking expressions. I never thought of using it that way. His post made me try out that feature on my Nex 6 for the first time. Thanks to him I now have a new way to use a camera and will be looking for appropriate situations.

 

I have tried and failed to find the dwbell post cited. Please could I trouble you for the link? Thank you and Happy New Year.