Ditto, although I do wish he would stop using Nikons and start on real cameras
This might interest you.
Argh! Stop the 'x zoom' madness! 50mm is not '1x zoom'...it's just a good match to the perspective that the human eye sees. 'x zoom' ONLY refers to the ratio of the longest to the shortest focal lengths on a zoom lens.
'1x magnification' is something to do with macro photography that I've not quite got my head around yet. I think that 1x magnification means that the image of the subject as projected onto the film plane/digital sensor is the same size as the subject itself.
But that's got nothing to do with zoom!
'1x magnification' is something to do with macro photography that I've not quite got my head around yet. I think that 1x magnification means that the image of the subject as projected onto the film plane/digital sensor is the same size as the subject itself.
But that's got nothing to do with zoom!
Then what you should buy is a point and shoot camera. As XCNuse says, the image quality you'll get from a modern P&S is very good. Bear in mind that those cameras you were using in South Africa were probably professional cameras with professional lenses costing thousands of pounds. A 400D with the kit lens won't give you that same quality.
About a month ago
There's this 18-55mm IS lens for less than $200. There's also this 55-250mm IS lens which would probably go for about $300 in the US (though they're apparently not releasing it there).You've got a point there, but you only have to do the white balance thing once for any set of lighting conditions...it's not like you have to re-do it for every shot.
That's true to a point, but I wouldn't want a 6x4 printout of a 1.2 MP image...
Last edited by StewartFisher, .
What does the 400D or D40X (or any other SLR) give you that you can't do with your Dad's CyberShot? I've yet to see you explain why you think you need an SLR. I'm not trying to persuade you that you don't need one, I'm trying to work out what you think you're gaining compared to a compact digital camera.
I'm not sure I understood that. That 'bit' you weren't keen on seems to be the whole art of taking a photo! If you're not keen on thinking about apertures and shutter speed then I'd steer well clear of an SLR. While we're on the subject of apertures, could you explain the effect of aperture on depth of field? Or image sharpness? It's not just about letting more or less light through the lens.
Why have you now changed your mind about the D40X? I'm not trying to persuade you to buy a Canon over a Nikon, I just want you to think about the decision. Before you go buying anything, go here and read some reviews:
http://www.dpreview.com
At the very least, read this page:
Nikon D40X, Canon 400D and Olympus E-410 Comparison
Then you do NOT want an SLR! If that's all you want it for, I'd even be cautious buying a 'bridge' camera because you still have most of the portability issues of an SLR. Get a decent compact digital camera which fits in your pocket and enjoy it.
Last edited by StewartFisher, .
Not true. There are plenty of lenses available for under £200 (approx. US$400)
This is a bad thing because...?
Not true. The 400D can take any Canon lens made since the EOS system was introduced in the mid-80s and, with the exception of one obscure lens, they all autofocus. The EF lenses can be used on any EOS camera, the EF-S lenses can only be used on APS-C dSLRs like the 400D.
It's pretty much the same price as the D40X, which is the more comparable camera (6 vs 10 MP).
That's not a problem if it's really what he wants. I'm also a little unsure why your camera requires 'constant maintenance'. What are you doing with it?
Utter nonsense. Anything which has an auto mode on my 400D can be switched to manual. Of course the camera doesn't always get it right, but there are decades of photography experience built into each modern SLR...why do you want to spend ages doing all the work yourself?
I'm probably going to be accused of being a Canon fanboy (I'm really not), but I couldn't let that post go by uncommented. To be honest there's very little to choose from between the D40X and the 400D, except you lock yourself into Canon or Nikon for the forseeable future.
Last edited by StewartFisher, .
Well, Sony have made at least 12 CyberShot cameras with 7.2 MP sensors, so you've proved nothing here except ignorance.
What made you go for the Nikon? Does their lens range impress you more than Canon's? Can you borrow kit from a friend/relative who also has a Nikon?
The D40X is tiny. It's pretty much the smallest dSLR you can buy. You really should realise that a dSLR is not something you stick in your pocket before you go out for the evening.
NO! I even tried explaining it to you! 'x zoom' means precisely NOTHING...please understand this! Of course you can buy a telephoto lens to allow you to bring distant objects closer, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with 'x zoom'.
For that money you should look at the Nikon D40 (or D40X) or the Canon EOS 400D. I recently bought a 400D and I love it.
Having said that, you appear to know little about SLR photography, so unless you're willing to learn, I'd buy a higher-end point and shoot rather than an SLR.
'10x optical zoom' is utterly meaningless without reference to focal lengths. A zoom lens is one on which you can change the focal length. The 'optical zoom' is simply the longest focal length divided by the shortest focal length. Hence a 2-20mm lens and a 20-200mm lens both have '10x zoom' but are for completely different things.
The only reasonably-priced '10x' SLR lens I know of is the Nikon 18-200mm for about £450. That's just the lens...you'll also need the camera itself which will probably cost you about £400. For your budget of £300-£400 you're only going to be able to get the camera plus the standard 'kit lens' which is usually a 17-55mm (i.e. 3x zoom).
Having said that, you appear to know little about SLR photography, so unless you're willing to learn, I'd buy a higher-end point and shoot rather than an SLR.
'10x optical zoom' is utterly meaningless without reference to focal lengths. A zoom lens is one on which you can change the focal length. The 'optical zoom' is simply the longest focal length divided by the shortest focal length. Hence a 2-20mm lens and a 20-200mm lens both have '10x zoom' but are for completely different things.
The only reasonably-priced '10x' SLR lens I know of is the Nikon 18-200mm for about £450. That's just the lens...you'll also need the camera itself which will probably cost you about £400. For your budget of £300-£400 you're only going to be able to get the camera plus the standard 'kit lens' which is usually a 17-55mm (i.e. 3x zoom).
Last edited by StewartFisher, .
So the three people who stay the extra 4 days should pay almost three times as much as the people who left after 3 days? Doesn't sound very fair to me.
I did it this way:
3 people staying 7 days = 21 people days
2 people staying 3 days = 6 people days
TOTAL = 27 people days
$750/27 = $27.78 per person per day
So the two people staying three days pay $27.78*3 = $83.33 each.
The three people staying seven days pay $27.78*7 = $194.44 each.
I'll leave you to argue over the remaining $0.02
3 people staying 7 days = 21 people days
2 people staying 3 days = 6 people days
TOTAL = 27 people days
$750/27 = $27.78 per person per day
So the two people staying three days pay $27.78*3 = $83.33 each.
The three people staying seven days pay $27.78*7 = $194.44 each.
I'll leave you to argue over the remaining $0.02
FBM CoG location (x,y,z) = (-2.422513E-06, -0.1604072, 0.2783999)
FBM Fuel Tank (x,y,z) = (0, -0.16, 0.1703217)
Looks like the tank is situated pretty much (to 3 decimal places) directly below the CoG, so the balance shouldn't change with fuel load.
FBM Fuel Tank (x,y,z) = (0, -0.16, 0.1703217)
Looks like the tank is situated pretty much (to 3 decimal places) directly below the CoG, so the balance shouldn't change with fuel load.
Count me in! I'm a mechanical engineer and I work for a small consultancy which does research and development into engine exhaust and aftertreatment systems.
Going to a cinema avoids breaking the law...
Maximum of 604 pixels in either dimension
To be honest there's not much more I would do to it! I did have a quick play with the colour balance and tone curves but nothing I did seemed to improve things...it's a good shot!
I'm limited to pretty basic tweaking myself, but that's often all that's needed, assuming you take the photo properly in the first place
I hope you don't mind, but I've had a very quick go at editing your photo the way I would do it.
It was a nice shot but, as XCNuse said, putting the subject in the centre of the picture often isn't the best way to frame a shot. I've cropped your picture to match the framing I would probably have chosen. I'm not saying that it's perfect, just the way I would have done it. I'm a little unhappy with the large dark cloud in the top left corner...if I were to spend a little more time on it I'd probably vignette the other three corners to push the viewer's eyes back toward the centre.
I've also edited out the red/pink ghosting above and to the right of the sun and got rid of some of the bright speckles in the dark field using the clone tool in the GIMP.
If I were to suggest one more thing, it would be to add some negative exposure correction before taking the picture. That will help to preserve some highlight detail around the sun rather than leaving it white. It will also make the fields and clouds much darker, but you can fix that (if you wish to) by using the curve tool in Photoshop/GIMP/etc...
Bear in mind that this is how I would have done it, not how you should do it
What on earth are you talking about? LFS isn't getting more 'grip related' (whatever that actually means), it's getting closer to a realistic vehicle simulator. That means that it's always getting closer to becoming the best racing simulator and the best drifting simulator all the time...as far as I'm aware Scawen is concerned with pure vehicle physics, not 'drift' or 'grip'.
Seems to be the faster cars (i.e. GTR and Formula). I've attached a couple of replays of AI cars at KY Oval. The BF1s don't slow down in time and get penalties. The UF1s do slow down in time but they all miss their pit boxes! A couple of the UF1s also miss their garages at the end of the race because they collide.
Why can't you just time your throttle lift to match the gear change pull? I don't understand why people find this difficult. Maybe 5+ years training in GPL is now paying off in LFS!
I would love to join, but I'm afraid the extra typing might wear out my keyboard...
Yes, that's what I meant...I didn't realise the strings were repeated elsewhere. I'm sure I can live with it!
I've just tested it on the XFG 'Overtaking' traning session by crashing through the barriers where the RallyX circuit joins the back straight. I was sent to 'spectate' mode and some text appeared in the top left of the screen saying 'Not recording'. The escape key didn't work so I had to Alt-F4 out of LFS. I did manage to get back to the pits using Shift-P but the escape key still didn't work.
A really, really tiny 'bug' in the interface...the transmission descriptions don't begin with capital letters (e.g. 'sequential gearbox' instead of 'Sequential gearbox').
It's not really a bug I suppose, but it looked wrong to me.
It's not really a bug I suppose, but it looked wrong to me.
If no bugs are found then I assume that X30 will become Y, but it's likely that a few days of community testing will lead to X31, X32, etc... before Y is finalised.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG