Super-Zoom P&S Camera Beats DSLR (again) - Film at 11

On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:55:27 -0600, AlderWeathermore
wrote:

Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs

Uh, yeah. That's why scale models are always *so* much more highly
detailed than the full-size originals. :/

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:53:08 GMT, John A.
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:55:27 -0600, AlderWeathermore
wrote:

Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs

Uh, yeah. That's why scale models are always *so* much more highly
detailed than the full-size originals. :/

Come back again after you've hand-ground and polished a diffraction-limited 16"
diameter mirror for a telescope and a diffraction-limited 6" diameter one.
You'll realize that your analogy is about as stupid as they get. Your
ignorance-based red-herring bull**** is just that.

Ignorant trolls remain ignorant - Film at 11

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems ChaseOslo [email protected] wrote:
Come back again after you've hand-ground and polished a
diffraction-limited 16" diameter mirror for a telescope and a
diffraction-limited 6" diameter one. You'll realize that your analogy
is about as stupid as they get. Your ignorance-based red-herring
bull**** is just that.

Your analogy is no better, because you're only referring to ease of
manufacture, not the relative effectiveness of the different lens/mirror
sizes.

A defect of a similar size affects a large mirror far less than a small
mirror. Not to mention allowing for much more light gathering. The
smaller things are, the tighter the necessary tolerances, and thus the
cost tends to go up, all else being equal.

Nevermind that if you were truly concerned with image quality you
wouldn't be relying on your eyeball to accurately grind your mirrors.

Ignorant trolls remain ignorant - Film at 11

....Don't let the mirror hit you on your way out.

- Solomon
--
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org
Melbourne, FL ^^ (mail/jabber/gtalk) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:32:21 +0000 (UTC), Stuffed Crust
wrote:

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems ChaseOslo [email protected] wrote:
Come back again after you've hand-ground and polished a
diffraction-limited 16" diameter mirror for a telescope and a
diffraction-limited 6" diameter one. You'll realize that your analogy
is about as stupid as they get. Your ignorance-based red-herring
bull**** is just that.

Your analogy is no better, because you're only referring to ease of
manufacture, not the relative effectiveness of the different lens/mirror
sizes.

The analogy is a perfect one. Trying to hold a perfect curve to far less than
1/4th the wavelength of light over the full distance of 2-inches is much easier
to accomplish than trying to hold that tolerance over a distance of 3-inches.

You apparently don't know much about optics nor fabrication principles. (BTW,
we're not talking about the things that you fabricate in your own mind when
replying to posts on newsgroups.)


A defect of a similar size affects a large mirror far less than a small
mirror. Not to mention allowing for much more light gathering.

Now I know that you don't know what you are talking about. A 1 light-wavelength
of error over a 16" mirror will change the airy-disk the same as a 1-wavelength
of error from an 8" mirror. HOWEVER, the airy-disk from a 16" mirror will be
much smaller in size, so the amount of degradation to details is much less due
to loss of the same diffraction-limited intolerances.

(For upcoming paragraph -- reader's edifice for the math/geometry challenged:
"~" = "similar to")

In a related way, this isn't too far different from the advantages people have
found to smaller pixels at higher densities. When the density is high enough
(smaller pixels ~ smaller airy-disk) then the noise from those pixels
(noise~diffraction) becomes much less apparent in the resulting image. That
tightly-packed sensor can actually create a better image with the noise and
smaller pixels than the same amount of noise on larger pixels. Smaller pixels is
like imaging from a 16"-mirror~1/2.5 sensor (vastly greater detail from smaller
airy-disk overwhelming any diffraction problems/noise) as opposed to a
4"-mirror~APS-C sized sensor (larger airy-disk = less detail but less noise).

Thanks for displaying your ignorance. In trying to educate you I just now
discovered something new on my own, see previous paragraph. Those who have been
studying this seemingly contradictory observation will find this most
interesting. (I solve koans for a hobby.) This now supports why it's true.
Smaller pixels and many more of them, even with the noise, can produce a nicer
image. It's certainly true in telescope optics. A smaller airy-disk with noise
is better than a larger airy-disk with the same noise, the same holds true for
the size of photo-sites on sensors. This now wholly explains this "better images
from smaller sensors" contradiction that's been observed and reported.

The
smaller things are, the tighter the necessary tolerances, and thus the
cost tends to go up, all else being equal.

Contrary to your ignorance, the larger diameter glass needs much more precision
to retain those diffraction-limited tolerance over wider spans of glass. Tell
me, which is easier to machine perfectly flat ... a metal 10cm ruler? Or a metal
ruler that extends for 10 meters? Which one requires more "precision" on your
part to keep it perfectly flat? If you answer that the effort and precision
needed is the same for both, then you clearly don't know anything about
machining and fabrication. The further the distance the more precision and
complexity is required to attain the same tolerance levels across that surface.


Nevermind that if you were truly concerned with image quality you
wouldn't be relying on your eyeball to accurately grind your mirrors.

Au-contraire mon-idiot. The final diffraction-limiting figuring over the surface
of a mirror is done by eye-ball. There are no machines in existence that can
adequately determine that curvature. It must be done by reflecting knife-edge or
ronchi patterns off of that curve and then, determined by the patterns they
make, figuring out just how close you are to "perfection". Done by eye-ball. If
the knife-edge method or ronchi patterns don't match to the right patterns then
you have to go back and shove some more of those glass surface molecules around
until you get that diffraction-limited optic correct.


Ignorant trolls remain ignorant - Film at 11


Don't let the mirror hit you on your way out.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:17:36 -0600, ChaseOslo [email protected] wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:53:08 GMT, John A.
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:55:27 -0600, AlderWeathermore
wrote:

Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs

Uh, yeah. That's why scale models are always *so* much more highly
detailed than the full-size originals. :/

Come back again after you've hand-ground and polished a diffraction-limited 16"
diameter mirror for a telescope and a diffraction-limited 6" diameter one.
You'll realize that your analogy is about as stupid as they get. Your
ignorance-based red-herring bull**** is just that.

Ignorant trolls remain ignorant - Film at 11


How about showing us a photo taken with YOUR p&s of the mirror that
YOU hand polished; if you can find one that isn't full of noise and
fringing, that is.

Sorry for the top post, but it's too painful for anyone to read our
troll's current rant all the way to the bottom.

But I will observe that he seems to be a perfect example of someone,
who in the timeless words of Jerry Clower, is educated beyond his
intelligence.

Now to our troll: It's still not too late for you to post images that
demonstrate your credentials as a true "pro" who has any clue at all
about how to actually use a camera to make meaningful photographs.







On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:06:42 -0600, Jackie Feinstein
wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:32:21 +0000 (UTC), Stuffed Crust
wrote:

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems ChaseOslo [email protected] wrote:
Come back again after you've hand-ground and polished a
diffraction-limited 16" diameter mirror for a telescope and a
diffraction-limited 6" diameter one. You'll realize that your analogy
is about as stupid as they get. Your ignorance-based red-herring
bull**** is just that.

Your analogy is no better, because you're only referring to ease of
manufacture, not the relative effectiveness of the different lens/mirror
sizes.

The analogy is a perfect one. Trying to hold a perfect curve to far less than
1/4th the wavelength of light over the full distance of 2-inches is much easier
to accomplish than trying to hold that tolerance over a distance of 3-inches.

You apparently don't know much about optics nor fabrication principles. (BTW,
we're not talking about the things that you fabricate in your own mind when
replying to posts on newsgroups.)


A defect of a similar size affects a large mirror far less than a small
mirror. Not to mention allowing for much more light gathering.

Now I know that you don't know what you are talking about. A 1 light-wavelength
of error over a 16" mirror will change the airy-disk the same as a 1-wavelength
of error from an 8" mirror. HOWEVER, the airy-disk from a 16" mirror will be
much smaller in size, so the amount of degradation to details is much less due
to loss of the same diffraction-limited intolerances.

(For upcoming paragraph -- reader's edifice for the math/geometry challenged:
"~" = "similar to")

In a related way, this isn't too far different from the advantages people have
found to smaller pixels at higher densities. When the density is high enough
(smaller pixels ~ smaller airy-disk) then the noise from those pixels
(noise~diffraction) becomes much less apparent in the resulting image. That
tightly-packed sensor can actually create a better image with the noise and
smaller pixels than the same amount of noise on larger pixels. Smaller pixels is
like imaging from a 16"-mirror~1/2.5 sensor (vastly greater detail from smaller
airy-disk overwhelming any diffraction problems/noise) as opposed to a
4"-mirror~APS-C sized sensor (larger airy-disk = less detail but less noise).

Thanks for displaying your ignorance. In trying to educate you I just now
discovered something new on my own, see previous paragraph. Those who have been
studying this seemingly contradictory observation will find this most
interesting. (I solve koans for a hobby.) This now supports why it's true.
Smaller pixels and many more of them, even with the noise, can produce a nicer
image. It's certainly true in telescope optics. A smaller airy-disk with noise
is better than a larger airy-disk with the same noise, the same holds true for
the size of photo-sites on sensors. This now wholly explains this "better images
from smaller sensors" contradiction that's been observed and reported.

The
smaller things are, the tighter the necessary tolerances, and thus the
cost tends to go up, all else being equal.

Contrary to your ignorance, the larger diameter glass needs much more precision
to retain those diffraction-limited tolerance over wider spans of glass. Tell
me, which is easier to machine perfectly flat ... a metal 10cm ruler? Or a metal
ruler that extends for 10 meters? Which one requires more "precision" on your
part to keep it perfectly flat? If you answer that the effort and precision
needed is the same for both, then you clearly don't know anything about
machining and fabrication. The further the distance the more precision and
complexity is required to attain the same tolerance levels across that surface.


Nevermind that if you were truly concerned with image quality you
wouldn't be relying on your eyeball to accurately grind your mirrors.

Au-contraire mon-idiot. The final diffraction-limiting figuring over the surface
of a mirror is done by eye-ball. There are no machines in existence that can
adequately determine that curvature. It must be done by reflecting knife-edge or
ronchi patterns off of that curve and then, determined by the patterns they
make, figuring out just how close you are to "perfection". Done by eye-ball. If
the knife-edge method or ronchi patterns don't match to the right patterns then
you have to go back and shove some more of those glass surface molecules around
until you get that diffraction-limited optic correct.


Ignorant trolls remain ignorant - Film at 11


Don't let the mirror hit you on your way out.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:18:01 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:52:17 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:34:09 -0600, ReplyingToFools

you do know that, don't
you? Have fun trolling someone else. I've outted your stupidity and nonsense so
many times you're nothing but boring now. Let someone else reveal how everything
that you type is total and utter bull****. It's clear to me now. I don't need to
prove it to myself anymore.
You don't even know what a troll is, do you? Definition: Look in a mirror.
What irony! A guy who creates a new identity (within the last 10 days or
so) and posts ad nauseum only to photo groups ostensibly to put down
'the troll' is himself a pest.

Just who were you, "Stephen" before you became such?


If you think I'm a pest, just ignore me. I've not had any issues
with you whatsoever. Why start?

Because what you're doing is for your own amusement only.

At the end of the day, isn't that why anyone wastes time on usenet? Be
honest now.




Unless, however, you are yet another false persona of our p&s friend,
posing as one of his allies? Just who were you, John, before you
began to take offense at things that don't concern you?

My history is long and very readily apparent, if not pretty boring.



You, however, are a newly created "personality" and have descended on
the photo groups with a vengeance. So I asked you politely what other
nyms do you post under (the 'who are you, dude' part), hoping for some
sort of response of a direct and civil nature. Civil I got; thanks for
that. So far I am simply reminded of Steve Young, a fine lad from Ohio.


Actually, I am fairly new to this forum and have no other personnas
other than for a brief time I peeked in here over a year ago.

If the response of others to the current troll's antics offends you,
simply ignore these threads. It's a simple matter, they are very
well-contained. It's just like changing the channel on your TV if
you find a show you don't like... unless, of course, something keeps
bringing you back.. :-)

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:21:40 -0500, Stephen Bishop wrote:


Sorry for the top post, but it's too painful for anyone to read our
troll's current rant all the way to the bottom.

But I will observe that he seems to be a perfect example of someone,
who in the timeless words of Jerry Clower, is educated beyond his
intelligence.


Dear Resident-Troll,

Your reply is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:



1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
larger format cameras.

2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.

3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/...7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. See this side-by-side
comparison for example
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca..._results.shtml
When adjusted for sensor size, the DSLR lens is creating 4.3x's the CA that the
P&S lens is creating, and the P&S lens is resolving almost 10x's the amount of
detail that the DSLR lens is resolving. A difficult to figure 20x P&S zoom lens
easily surpassing a much more easy to make 3x DSLR zoom lens. After all is said
and done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in
order to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you
are investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.

5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.

7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)

9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_...%26_Flash-Sync without
the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
(focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ch...istortions.jpg
do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
repair costs, etc.

11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
bricks.

12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.

13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
valuable part of human history one day.

14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
shot when it happens.

15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
come from.)

16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
reality and nature.

17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
any camera.

19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
(which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.

21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
ISO1600 and more.

22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
$100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
begin with. The irony is that, by them thinking that they only need to throw
money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
them their ****-poor photography skills.

23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.

24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
that you'll lug it around again some day.

25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
inexpensive to replace.

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:33:19 -0500, Stephen Bishop wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:18:01 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:52:17 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:34:09 -0600, ReplyingToFools

you do know that, don't
you? Have fun trolling someone else. I've outted your stupidity and nonsense so
many times you're nothing but boring now. Let someone else reveal how everything
that you type is total and utter bull****. It's clear to me now. I don't need to
prove it to myself anymore.
You don't even know what a troll is, do you? Definition: Look in a mirror.
What irony! A guy who creates a new identity (within the last 10 days or
so) and posts ad nauseum only to photo groups ostensibly to put down
'the troll' is himself a pest.

Just who were you, "Stephen" before you became such?


If you think I'm a pest, just ignore me. I've not had any issues
with you whatsoever. Why start?

Because what you're doing is for your own amusement only.

At the end of the day, isn't that why anyone wastes time on usenet? Be
honest now.




Unless, however, you are yet another false persona of our p&s friend,
posing as one of his allies? Just who were you, John, before you
began to take offense at things that don't concern you?

My history is long and very readily apparent, if not pretty boring.



You, however, are a newly created "personality" and have descended on
the photo groups with a vengeance. So I asked you politely what other
nyms do you post under (the 'who are you, dude' part), hoping for some
sort of response of a direct and civil nature. Civil I got; thanks for
that. So far I am simply reminded of Steve Young, a fine lad from Ohio.


Actually, I am fairly new to this forum and have no other personnas
other than for a brief time I peeked in here over a year ago.

If the response of others to the current troll's antics offends you,
simply ignore these threads. It's a simple matter, they are very
well-contained. It's just like changing the channel on your TV if
you find a show you don't like... unless, of course, something keeps
bringing you back.. :-)



Resident-troll SMS/AASAR disappears, resident-troll Stephen Bishop appears.
Coincidence?

:-)

When resident-troll Bishop disappears, a new one will crop up. Occasionally
peppered with old aliases, just as this one is.


Dear Resident-Troll,

Your reply is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:



1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
larger format cameras.

2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.

3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/...7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. See this side-by-side
comparison for example
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca..._results.shtml
When adjusted for sensor size, the DSLR lens is creating 4.3x's the CA that the
P&S lens is creating, and the P&S lens is resolving almost 10x's the amount of
detail that the DSLR lens is resolving. A difficult to figure 20x P&S zoom lens
easily surpassing a much more easy to make 3x DSLR zoom lens. After all is said
and done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in
order to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you
are investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.

5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.

7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)

9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_...%26_Flash-Sync without
the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
(focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ch...istortions.jpg
do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
repair costs, etc.

11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
bricks.

12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.

13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
valuable part of human history one day.

14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
shot when it happens.

15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
come from.)

16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
reality and nature.

17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
any camera.

19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
(which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.

21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
ISO1600 and more.

22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
$100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
begin with. The irony is that, by them thinking that they only need to throw
money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
them their ****-poor photography skills.

23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.

24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
that you'll lug it around again some day.

25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
inexpensive to replace.

There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.

The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:

"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:33:19 -0500, Stephen Bishop wrote:


If the response of others to the current troll's antics offends you,
simply ignore these threads. It's a simple matter, they are very
well-contained. It's just like changing the channel on your TV if
you find a show you don't like... unless, of course, something keeps
bringing you back.. :-)




Note the double-spaces between all sentences, it's most easily revealed typing
habit. Yes, it's our unloved resident-troll ASSAR. Had to flee when proved wrong
just one too many times. Trying to wipe away those 8,593 cartons of eggs on its
face.