Full Moon Handheld

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 06:15:08 -0400, M-M wrote:

In article ,
He's So Funny! wrote:

only fools and idiots buy DSLRs

That is a statement that shouldn't dignify a response, but WTF...

I own 2 P&S's. They have their uses to be sure. But they are largely
gathering dust now.

I bought a DSLR because I got tired of:

- noise on long exposures

Get a better P&S camera
or
Use lower ISOs
or
Educate yourself on the art and talent of using NR software.

- shutter lag

0.05 second is shutter lag to you? You must have the reflexes of superman.

LOL

- power-up wait

I'm beginning to see your situation now. You're an idiot that walks around with
the camera stuck to your face while it's powered off. Then you power it on and
watch for the slight delay. All my P&S cameras are up and running from the time
I pick them up by the time I get them to my eye. I recall one time getting a
shot of an eagle in flight while I was riding in a vehicle. The P&S camera was
powered OFF sitting in the bag on the floor of the vehicle. I spotted the eagle,
reached for the camera and by the time I got the camera to my eye I captured
that eagle in flight. Power-up waits, shutter-lag, problems focusing? Yeah
right. Tell it to someone who is as stupid as you are. Only those people will
believe you.

You're just an idiot when learning how to select a use a P&S camera. That seems
to be the prevailing problem. Just like all DSLR proponents --- TOTAL IDIOTS!!!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- focus hunt
- inability to manually focus quickly and accurately

ALL cameras, ALL DSLRs also, have a problem in auto-focusing in extreme
situations. Don't give me this focus-hunt bullcrap as an excuse. EVERY camera
will work better or worse depending on the circumstances. Do you want me to
compile the 2,330,122 google hits of DSLRs that have problems focusing???

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Again, you admit what a ****ed up idiot you are, one that doesn't know how to
properly use ANY camera. What you are looking for is the ULTIMATE P&S camera
that will do EVERYTHING for you because you're an idiot without a clue nor an
iota of talent to be a photographer. You just proved it!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- DOF limitations.

The ONLY limitation here is your intellect and lack of experience and talent in
knowing how to get shallow DOF out of ANY camera.

- blackouts between continuous shooting that make it impossible to
follow a moving object.

OH LOOK, the ****ing idiot is proving to everyone again that he's an idiot and
doesn't know how to buy the right P&S cameras nor how to use them properly.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- monitor VF's and EVF's in general

Enjoy that DOF preview that stops the light so low that you can't see anything.
While I enjoy being able to focus and compose a scene in the complete darkness
by using built-in IR illumination alone.


So I wanted something that would enable me to get all those shots I just
missed with the P&S because either I had to wait for the camera to be
ready or otherwise just weren't possible. And I can afford it so cost
which seems to be your sole criterion for camera choice is not a factor.

OH LOOK! He's proving he's an IDIOT again!


You really can't compare the two. You may be quite happy with a 5 dollar
road map to get you where you're going, but I prefer my GPS.

Do you always like to pride yourself on displaying how ****-poor you are at
selecting and buying things? Wow, if I bought P&S cameras like you bought I'd be
move to a piece of **** DSLR too.

Do your homework. The only thing that disappointed you in P&S cameras was your
own stupidity in how to select which ones are best.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:24:11 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
rnclark)" wrote:

Cynicor wrote:
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
And you are off on the price of the camera (too high).

Wait, you paid MORE than $15,000 for your DSLR? Where did you go,
Circuit City??

If $15,000 is *too high* ......

The 1D Mark II was $4500, the 500 f/4 L IS was $5400,
and the 2x TC was about $200 for a total of ~$10,100.

Roger

And you're PROUD of that????

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He's So Funny! wrote:

Nothing original.

--
lsmft

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:12:04 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
rnclark)" wrote:

He's So Funny! wrote:
Otherwise you would have had
NO reason to try to reproduce a hand-held image of the moon. YOU are a ****ING
LIAR and we ALL KNOW IT!

Wrong. 1) it is a challenge. 2) it allows me to quantify the
resolution I can achieve because I sometimes do wildlife action
hand held. Quantification helps improve my technique.
I determined in this test that I can achieve 2-arc-second
hull-width-half-maximum on the point spread function.
Next I might try Jupiter and Saturn (tougher challenges and lower
light).

As far as the resolution and spatial detail goes. Let's not forget that the S3's
image was taken THROUGH the smoke and heat-waves of dense county-wide fires.

Try again. Maybe someday you'll actually learn the
difference.

Poor poor distraught and childish little Roger, boo-****ing-hoo ... he doesn't
know what to do now after seeing that TWO P&S cameras from two different
companies costing less than $400 each can beat or nearly equal his crap DSLR and
L-glass.

Factors of 10 in resolution, and not in your favor. Your the one
crying and so jealous your foul mouth spews hate and lies.

Try this with your P&S:

SPAMMER'S LINK SNIPPED

No thanks, I've already seen your CRAP PHOTOGRAPHY.

I have no desire to waste even one more byte of my bandwidth on your wastes of
time. You're right up there with the other newsgroup trolls like Annika and
Rita. They've been added to my troll-filter long ago. There's not ONE photo
they've ever posted that was worth the effort in the past, they'll never get any
better either, they've proved that.

Nor are yours worth the effort to go see them any longer. I've since learned
that nothing you post will ever disprove what's already been proved about your
stupidity and total lack of any talent.

You've already managed to PROVE what I long suspected. That you can't do ONE
THING better with a $10,000 DSLR that can't be done just as well or better with
a P&S camera for under $400.

THANKS! For being the biggest usenet fool of all, the one that wasted the most
money and the most time and effort to prove that P&S cameras are the only
intelligent choice for talented photographers.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I bet if you bought a new $20,000 computer that you'd think it would turn you
into a better typist too. Such is the absurdity of your reasoning and evidence
of your stupidity.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:59:50 -0400, M-M wrote:

In article ,
He's So Funny! wrote:

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 06:15:08 -0400, M-M wrote:

I bought a DSLR because I got tired of:

- noise on long exposures

Get a better P&S camera
or
Use lower ISOs
or
Educate yourself on the art and talent of using NR software.


What P&S camera can do ISO 1600 and do it well? Sometimes one needs to
use higher ISOs. Bad comeback.

Tsk tsk, you lame-brained DSLR ignoramuses really need to get your heads out of
your asses and start researching the newer cameras for the last 4 years.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



- shutter lag

0.05 second is shutter lag to you?


Your S3 has a full press lag of 1/2 sec and a lag of 5.5 seconds to go
from wide to tele. That is way too long to photograph children or other
wildlife.



LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Taken from Canon's own pages:

S-Series Zoom Speed: 36mm-432mm or 432mm-36mm

slow = 6 seconds (available in single-shot & movie mode)
medium = 4 seconds (available in movie mode)
high-speed = 1 second (available in single-shot mode)

It's actually less than 1 second. I timed it on one that a friend has.

Any TALENTED and INTELLIGENT photographer would know how to get ANY camera's
shutter delay to near zero. I'll let you figure out how to get that. For the
record, the time it takes for your piece of **** DSLR camera to flip that
disgusting, impact inducing, image jarring, detail destroying, noise-ridden,
easy to damage mirror out of the way and back again is LONGER than the time it
takes for ANY of my P&S cameras to respond -- IN TOTAL SILENCE!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



- power-up wait

All my P&S cameras are up and running from the
time
I pick them up by the time I get them to my eye.


You really should try a camera that has zero power-up time. I'm sure
you'd appreciate it.


I have those! They're called P&S cameras! I've also had DSLRs, and gladly sold
my used ones to idiots like you who don't know any better. Why do you think I
choose the convenience, same image quality, and higher adaptability and
portability of P&S cameras? This is why I KNOW of what I speak.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!



- monitor VF's and EVF's in general

I enjoy being able to focus and compose a scene in the complete
darkness
by using built-in IR illumination alone.


OK, but I like to take photos in the daylight.

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!! Because you HAVE TO!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He's So Funny! wrote:
What P&S camera can do ISO 1600 and do it well? Sometimes one needs to
use higher ISOs. Bad comeback.

Tsk tsk, you lame-brained DSLR ignoramuses really need to get your heads out of
your asses and start researching the newer cameras for the last 4 years.

So are you saying that smaller sensors are better than larger sensors
for collecting light?

Any TALENTED and INTELLIGENT photographer would know how to get ANY camera's
shutter delay to near zero.

Sure they can.

I'll let you figure out how to get that. For the
record, the time it takes for your piece of **** DSLR camera to flip that
disgusting, impact inducing, image jarring, detail destroying, noise-ridden,
easy to damage mirror out of the way and back again is LONGER than the time it
takes for ANY of my P&S cameras to respond -- IN TOTAL SILENCE!

Prove it.

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:12:04 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
rnclark)" wrote:
: He's So Funny! wrote:
: Otherwise you would have had
: NO reason to try to reproduce a hand-held image of the moon. YOU are a ****ING
: LIAR and we ALL KNOW IT!
:
: Wrong. 1) it is a challenge. 2) it allows me to quantify the
: resolution I can achieve because I sometimes do wildlife action
: hand held. Quantification helps improve my technique.
: I determined in this test that I can achieve 2-arc-second
: hull-width-half-maximum on the point spread function.
: Next I might try Jupiter and Saturn (tougher challenges and lower
: light).
:
: As far as the resolution and spatial detail goes. Let's not forget that the S3's
: image was taken THROUGH the smoke and heat-waves of dense county-wide fires.
:
: Try again. Maybe someday you'll actually learn the
: difference.
:
: Poor poor distraught and childish little Roger, boo-****ing-hoo ... he doesn't
: know what to do now after seeing that TWO P&S cameras from two different
: companies costing less than $400 each can beat or nearly equal his crap DSLR and
: L-glass.
:
: Factors of 10 in resolution, and not in your favor. Your the one
: crying and so jealous your foul mouth spews hate and lies.
:
: Try this with your P&S:
: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...-v1.6-700.html
: It is performance like this that illustrates why higher end
: cameras perform so much better than a P&S, and simple physics
: tells us why.
:
: Until you learn that different tools have different purposes and
: no one tool can do everything, you are simply showing your ignorance and hate
: here.
:
: Roger

Roger, you're in a ****ing contest with a skunk. For God's sake, give it a
rest.

You don't have to prove anything to us. We've seen your work and your
credentials. Some of us even know what and where MIT is. (I once worked there,
and my grandfather graduated in the Class of 1894.) Most of us own DSLRs.

Heezo is a pathetic, neurotic twerp who craves our attention. Let's stop
giving it to him.

Bob

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 17:49:02 GMT, He's So Funny! wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:59:50 -0400, M-M wrote:

In article ,
He's So Funny! wrote:

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 06:15:08 -0400, M-M wrote:

I bought a DSLR because I got tired of:

- noise on long exposures

Get a better P&S camera
or
Use lower ISOs
or
Educate yourself on the art and talent of using NR software.


What P&S camera can do ISO 1600 and do it well? Sometimes one needs to
use higher ISOs. Bad comeback.

Tsk tsk, you lame-brained DSLR ignoramuses really need to get your heads out of
your asses and start researching the newer cameras for the last 4 years.

Which one? Give us a model, and post or link to some low-light shots.
Then show that it can take better low-light pictures than a DSLR. Bear
in mind that that the DSLR offered in opposition will be a Canon 5D with
a 50/1.4 lens.

-dms

(Joseph*Miller) wrote:

" If one looks carefully near the bottom of the picture,the southern
edge, one sees that the craters there and only there have shadows in
them. How can that be? Usually the shadowed craters run along a line
that goes north-south. The moon's orbital plane is tilted with respect
to the earth's orbital plane. This means that the direction the sun's
rays shine toward the moon and the direction from which we view the moon
are not exactly the same at full moon unless there is a
perfectly-centered eclipse of the moon and we are in the exact right
place. In this image there is a significant difference between the
direction the sun's rays are hitting the moon and how we view it, but in
a north-south direction, so the shadowed craters are near the south
pole. We get to see "under" the south pole compared to how the sun
"sees" the moon. It's not exactly a north-south tilt, but pretty close.
That's not often recorded so nicely in pictures. The moon missed getting
eclipsed pretty far this month. "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

One doesn't need to look carefully to see the
dark spots on the moon (all on the lit side)
where the dust has been scraped off of the
surface.

And, as the recent large asteroids have hit,
you can easily see where some of the dust
has been re-deposited. (star-like patterns)

He's So Funny! wrote:
[snip]

I have no desire to waste even one more byte of my bandwidth on your wastes of
time. [snip]

Thank GOD!


--

Len