Latest model of Canon cameras

dj_nme wrote:
Jerry Avins wrote:
dj_nme wrote:

Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article
, dj_nme
wrote:


Fair enough, but I'm curious about the (slr styled) EVF cams.
Most of them don't seem to have an external cover that can slide
across (and protect lens and sensor).
So if one were careless enough to leave it lens-up in bright sun I
wonder if damage may result?

I don't know. The lens would have to be focused at infinity. But I know
that these sensors don't particularly like to be pointed at the sun for
very long.

I have a gut feeling that the Bayer CFA could get burnt unevenly off
the sensor surface, leading to some funky looking images.
Or it could just burn a hole into the sensor, just like the shutter
of a Pellix.

Is the shutter of the Pellix cloth or metal?

That was too long ago for me to remember.


I did half-heartedly Google for the answer, but couldn't find a
definitive website that would say one way or the other (metal or cloth).


Please stop cross posing to comp.dsp. It is totally off topic here.

jerry

Your post is OT to this discussion thread.
It's also taken you two weeks and over 20 posts in a thread to complain
about cross-posting.
If you have no desire to follow this discussion, single click on the
first post and then press "k" to ignore this discussion.

I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting that
FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates you to post
on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means 'computer' and
'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'

Regards,
John

On 10/18/2007 6:18 AM John Monro spake thus:

dj_nme wrote:
Jerry Avins wrote:
dj_nme wrote:

Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article
, dj_nme
wrote:


Fair enough, but I'm curious about the (slr styled) EVF cams.
Most of them don't seem to have an external cover that can slide
across (and protect lens and sensor).
So if one were careless enough to leave it lens-up in bright sun I
wonder if damage may result?

I don't know. The lens would have to be focused at infinity. But I know
that these sensors don't particularly like to be pointed at the sun for
very long.

I have a gut feeling that the Bayer CFA could get burnt unevenly off
the sensor surface, leading to some funky looking images.
Or it could just burn a hole into the sensor, just like the shutter
of a Pellix.

Is the shutter of the Pellix cloth or metal?

That was too long ago for me to remember.

I did half-heartedly Google for the answer, but couldn't find a
definitive website that would say one way or the other (metal or cloth).

Please stop cross posing to comp.dsp. It is totally off topic here.

Your post is OT to this discussion thread.
It's also taken you two weeks and over 20 posts in a thread to complain
about cross-posting.
If you have no desire to follow this discussion, single click on the
first post and then press "k" to ignore this discussion.

I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting that
FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates you to post
on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means 'computer' and
'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'

But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip
I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting that
FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates you to
post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means 'computer'
and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'


But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)

You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother reading
or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?

On 10/18/2007 7:01 PM dj_nme spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip
I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting that
FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates you to
post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means 'computer'
and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'

But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)

You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother reading
or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?

"OT"? So then why are you still crossposting to comp.dsp?

And "Cannon"? Pu-leez.

dj_nme wrote:
David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip
I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting
that FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates you
to post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means
'computer' and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'


But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)

You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother reading
or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?

I would add that it should not have appeared in comp.dsp to begin with.
Remove comp.dsp as a destination for your messages and you won't hear
from me again.

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 10/18/2007 7:01 PM dj_nme spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip
I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting
that FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates
you to post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means
'computer' and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'

But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)

You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother reading
or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?

"OT"? So then why are you still crossposting to comp.dsp?

And "Cannon"? Pu-leez.

And why are you cross posting to comp.dsp?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 10/18/2007 7:01 PM dj_nme spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip
I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting
that FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates
you to post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means
'computer' and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'

But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)

You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother reading
or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?

"OT"? So then why are you still crossposting to comp.dsp?

And "Cannon"? Pu-leez.

So, dj_nme, why DO you post on comp.dsp? Because it's there?

Regards,
John

John Monro wrote:
David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/18/2007 7:01 PM dj_nme spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip

I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting
that FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates
you to post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means
'computer' and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'


But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)


You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother
reading or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?


"OT"? So then why are you still crossposting to comp.dsp?

And "Cannon"? Pu-leez.


So, dj_nme, why DO you post on comp.dsp? Because it's there?

Regards,
John

So why do you post in alt.photography?

dj_nme wrote:
John Monro wrote:
David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/18/2007 7:01 PM dj_nme spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip

I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting
that FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates
you to post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means
'computer' and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'


But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)


You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother
reading or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?


"OT"? So then why are you still crossposting to comp.dsp?

And "Cannon"? Pu-leez.


So, dj_nme, why DO you post on comp.dsp? Because it's there?

Regards,
John

So why do you post in alt.photography?

Actually, it was carelessness: I was reading the post of dj_nme on the
comp.dsp group and replied in the usual way, not noticing that
Thunderbird was going to cross-post. Sorry, Photo Groups, it won't
happen again.

Regards,
John

dj_nme wrote:
John Monro wrote:
David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/18/2007 7:01 PM dj_nme spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
snip

I can understand that you think your discussion is so interesting
that FOUR photo groups should benefit from it, but what motivates
you to post on comp.dsp as well? Do you realise that 'comp' means
'computer' and 'dsp' means 'digital signal processing?'


But, duuuuh, don't digital cameras use DSP? Huh? Huh?

(Not disagreeing w/you here. I don't do smiley faces.)


You very complaint is OT to this discussion.
If you both have nothing to say on Canon cameras, don't bother
reading or replying to the messages in this message thread.
What do you have that is constructiive to add to this discussion on
Cannon cameras?


"OT"? So then why are you still crossposting to comp.dsp?

And "Cannon"? Pu-leez.


So, dj_nme, why DO you post on comp.dsp? Because it's there?

Regards,
John

So why do you post in alt.photography?

Because he, like me, hit "Reply".

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯