I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and as
soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you pressing
the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face &
nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works when
she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression would
trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

On 25/07/2015 23:14, David Lang wrote:
I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and as
soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you pressing
the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face &
nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works when
she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression would
trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

Wouldn't be any good for taking passport photos then - you're not
allowed to smile!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

--
Davey.

On 25/07/2015 23:43, Davey wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

You can pretty much override it, but it's so piggin clever you would
rarely need to.

On 25/07/2015 23:57, David Lang wrote:

You can pretty much override it, but it's so piggin clever you would
rarely need to.


It's not the software in your camera that's doing it. It's much more
like pilot-less drones taking out terrorists. There is a employee back
in the Nikon factory monitoring what you camera is doing and pressing
the remote button when a pet or smiling kid comes into frame.

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 00:19:01 +0100
alan_m wrote:

On 25/07/2015 23:57, David Lang wrote:

You can pretty much override it, but it's so piggin clever you would
rarely need to.


It's not the software in your camera that's doing it. It's much more
like pilot-less drones taking out terrorists. There is a employee
back in the Nikon factory monitoring what you camera is doing and
pressing the remote button when a pet or smiling kid comes into frame.


I have a spare metal hat for sale if you would like it.....
The little propeller for the top is extra, though.

--
Davey.

In article , Davey wrote:

....

I have a spare metal hat for sale if you would like it.....

This *is* uk.d-i-y. Emergency metal hats are easily fashioned
out of household tinfoil. For a more durable item, start with a
household colander[1]. Line with tinfoil[2]. You may need to
modify the shape of your head to fit the colander. A good excuse
to use your power tools Even better, a good excuse to buy more power
tools!

The little propeller for the top is extra, though.

Huh, raid the kiddie's toybox. One of those handheld windmills is
easily cannibalised to suit.

[1] In the good ol' days the coal scuttle/bucket would have been
a better starting point. But these are now only found in
antique shops.

[2] A colleague admitted he used to line his cycle helmet with
tinfoil for early season road races. Helped keep his head warm
and dry. Claimed he got the idea from an ex-professional rider
he saw doing this.
--
Dennis Davis

On 26/07/2015 00:19, alan_m wrote:
On 25/07/2015 23:57, David Lang wrote:

You can pretty much override it, but it's so piggin clever you would
rarely need to.


It's not the software in your camera that's doing it. It's much more
like pilot-less drones taking out terrorists. There is a employee back
in the Nikon factory monitoring what you camera is doing and pressing
the remote button when a pet or smiling kid comes into frame.

I'd actually believe that.

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

More fool you.

I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

More fool you.

I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

Room lights? We're talking cameras here, Wodney. You really are a plonker.
LMFAO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viLK8cMKUnY
Here's an idea, why don't you **** off to some other ng and give us a break?

On 26/07/2015 01:57, bm wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

More fool you.

I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

Room lights? We're talking cameras here, Wodney. You really are a plonker.


You get some pretty weird looking indoor photos if you don't take
lighting into account, although you can adjust that later in software

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

There's no doubt that auto white-balance, auto-focus,
auto-exposure, and red-eye detection can be a real boon .
However presumably having too many options can create problems
of its own.

So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long
are you going to be standing there before you realise your
mistake ?

Same if you've chosen the "smiling person" option by mistake
when you're trying to take a photo of Rover. More especially if
Rover happens to be a boxer. Although with some breeds samoyeds
maybe, you'd possibly be o.k



michael adams

.....

On 26/07/2015 13:30, michael adams wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

There's no doubt that auto white-balance, auto-focus,
auto-exposure, and red-eye detection can be a real boon .
However presumably having too many options can create problems
of its own.

So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long
are you going to be standing there before you realise your
mistake ?

Same if you've chosen the "smiling person" option by mistake
when you're trying to take a photo of Rover. More especially if
Rover happens to be a boxer. Although with some breeds samoyeds
maybe, you'd possibly be o.k


Always a possibility I suppose, but unlikely since it tells you what
mode you are in.

"David Lang" wrote in message
...
On 26/07/2015 13:30, michael adams wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

There's no doubt that auto white-balance, auto-focus,
auto-exposure, and red-eye detection can be a real boon .
However presumably having too many options can create problems
of its own.

So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long
are you going to be standing there before you realise your
mistake ?

Same if you've chosen the "smiling person" option by mistake
when you're trying to take a photo of Rover. More especially if
Rover happens to be a boxer. Although with some breeds samoyeds
maybe, you'd possibly be o.k


Always a possibility I suppose, but unlikely since it tells you what mode you are in.

That's if you can remember what any of the symbols are supposed
to mean in the first place without looking them up in the manaual.
I've never bothered with any of these "special modes" maybe
for that very reason. Especialy if there were loads of them
to recognise and remember.

Plus I always choose the option to keep the screen/viewfinder
as uncluttered as possible apart from the crosshairs. As OTTOMH
I wouldn't have a clue about what many of the other symbols mean
apart from the shutter speed and f stop. Most of which are completely
unnecessary IMO, same as the histogram display, unless things have
gone badly wrong.


michael adams

....

On Sunday, 26 July 2015 13:30:15 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long
are you going to be standing there before you realise your
mistake ?

I suppose it depends on whose wedding you're at.

https://weddingpros.files.wordpress....pg?w=326&h=485

Owain

wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 26 July 2015 13:30:15 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long
are you going to be standing there before you realise your
mistake ?

I suppose it depends on whose wedding you're at.

https://weddingpros.files.wordpress....pg?w=326&h=485

Owain


I think you need pointy ears on top of the head.

Just a guess, mind.


michael adams

....

michael adams wrote
Rod Speed wrote

I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

There's no doubt that auto white-balance, auto-focus,
auto-exposure, and red-eye detection can be a real boon .

Yes.

However presumably having too many options can create problems of its own.

Apple does that pretty well with their iDevice cameras.

So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long are you
going to be standing there before you realise your mistake ?

Pretty quick I bet with all but the worst of the technoklutzes.

Same if you've chosen the "smiling person" option by mistake when you're
trying to take a photo of Rover.

Dogs do actually smile but I bet the camera doesn’t allow for that.

More especially if Rover happens to be a boxer. Although with some breeds
samoyeds maybe, you'd possibly be o.k

Not a great idea to use it for the cat.

On Sunday, 26 July 2015 13:30:15 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


I much prefer a system that can learn what I normally do and
do that for me so that I don't have to tell it what to do all the
time, particularly with stuff like room lights and stuff like that.

There's no doubt that auto white-balance, auto-focus,
auto-exposure, and red-eye detection can be a real boon .
However presumably having too many options can create problems
of its own.

So that if you're trying to take a wedding photo say, and you've
selected the "dogs and cats" option by mistake, then how long
are you going to be standing there before you realise your
mistake ?

Could be even worse if you get a 'good' picture of the misses
and she finds out you set the camera for photographing dogs ;-)


Same if you've chosen the "smiling person" option by mistake
when you're trying to take a photo of Rover. More especially if
Rover happens to be a boxer. Although with some breeds samoyeds
maybe, you'd possibly be o.k

One day they'll be auto everything and the camera will decide what photos it takes rathe rthan the human behind it.

Reminded me of a joke.
I got new camera, but every time I take a picture of my pet Giraffe it
cuts the head off.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

--
Davey.

"Davey" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Conjures up an image of family members with a variety of broken limbs
Only room for one control freak per household!

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:03:33 +0100
"Richard" wrote:

"Davey" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons
face & nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it
takes a photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial
expression would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Conjures up an image of family members with a variety of broken
limbs Only room for one control freak per household!

I hear a Monty Python Black Knight in the background...

--
Davey.

You won't remember where the feature is when you want it - or you won't
remmeber you have it until after you have take the photos.

"DerbyBorn" wrote in message
2.222...

You won't remember where the feature is when you want it - or you won't
remmeber you have it until after you have take the photos.

Feature? What feature?

Is this the knight of which Davey spake?

On Sunday, 26 July 2015 09:03:38 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"Davey" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:14:35 +0100
David Lang wrote:

I got a Nikon Coolpix L830 for my birthday.

Started to read the 204 page instruction manual online. It has a
function called 'pet portrait' where you point & frame the shot and
as soon as it detects a cat or dog it shoots 3 frames without you
pressing the button!

Ever spookier it has 'smart portrait' where you frame a persons face
& nothing happens until they smile. Then and only then it takes a
photo!

Tried (the latter) function on my beautiful No 2 daughter. It works
when she smiled showing teeth or not, but no other facial expression
would trigger it.

I'm slightly scared of it!

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Conjures up an image of family members with a variety of broken limbs
Only room for one control freak per household!

but at least they're smiling in the pictures.

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At least
half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter speed,
aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

--
Davey.

On 26/07/2015 15:23, Davey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

Film! As yes, I remember that. Fumble about loading, winding on, send to
chemist, wait a week, get 4 out of 36 useless, stick them in albums.

I'm ging to miss that. Not.


The Coolpix comes with a small internal memory so I decided to buy and
SD card. Me, being me, I went for the biggest one the shop had. It
holds around 8,000 photo's!

On 26/07/2015 15:37, David Lang wrote:
On 26/07/2015 15:23, Davey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

Film! As yes, I remember that. Fumble about loading, winding on, send to
chemist, wait a week, get 4 out of 36 useless, stick them in albums.

I'm ging to miss that. Not.


The Coolpix comes with a small internal memory so I decided to buy and
SD card. Me, being me, I went for the biggest one the shop had. It
holds around 8,000 photo's!



If it has wifi you can auto upload to your PC. Must admit I haven't bothered

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:37:37 +0100
David Lang wrote:

On 26/07/2015 15:23, Davey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like
shutter speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my
Olympus OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

Film! As yes, I remember that. Fumble about loading, winding on, send
to chemist, wait a week, get 4 out of 36 useless, stick them in
albums.

I'm ging to miss that. Not.



Yup, hence the desire for a digital pack to replace it.

--
Davey.

On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 3:37:03 PM UTC+1, David Lang wrote:
On 26/07/2015 15:23, Davey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

Film! As yes, I remember that. Fumble about loading, winding on, send to
chemist, wait a week, get 4 out of 36 useless, stick them in albums.

I'm ging to miss that. Not.


The Coolpix comes with a small internal memory so I decided to buy and
SD card. Me, being me, I went for the biggest one the shop had. It
holds around 8,000 photo's!

Or wait a year to use up the 36 exposures

On 26/07/2015 15:42, Huge wrote:
On 2015-07-26, David Lang wrote:

[21 lines snipped]

The Coolpix comes with a small internal memory so I decided to buy and
SD card. Me, being me, I went for the biggest one the shop had. It
holds around 8,000 photo's!

Big mistake when it goes wrong and loses all the photos from that "holiday
of a lifetime".



You just copy them to your phone so you have two or more copies.

In message , Huge
writes
On 2015-07-26, David Lang wrote:

[21 lines snipped]

The Coolpix comes with a small internal memory so I decided to buy and
SD card. Me, being me, I went for the biggest one the shop had. It
holds around 8,000 photo's!

Big mistake when it goes wrong and loses all the photos from that "holiday
of a lifetime".


Well, you don't have to use all of the space.

For things like holidays where we don't want to lose all the photos and
might not be able to copy them we take multiple memory cards, rotate
them when we remember, and keep the others away from the camera in a
different bag.

Keep meaning to get a doubri so they can be copied to a phones SD card
--
Chris French

Davey wrote in :

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.


I used to think the same - after acquiring lenses for an SLR. Sensor size
was th eissue back then.

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:23:26 +0100, Davey wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

I have a hankering for a similar 'upgrade' for my venerable Chinon CX
SLR. The only downside being its use of the Pentax M42 lens adapter mount
rather than the later, more popular, bayonet style mount.

TBH, I'm disappointed that no enterprising company has come up with a
digital 'film back' adapter kit to revitalise pretty well just about
every film SLR camera that's ever existed.

Triggering an 'exposure event' could easily be achieved by using an
integrated microphone to detect the 'sonic signature' of whatever film
SLR you cared to name (perhaps even implemented by using a 'training
algorithm' - even very very quiet models such as that Olympus OM-2 will
still produce enough sound level to act as a trigger - the mic *will* be
internal so should get a clear enough sonic signature even with the
quietest of cameras).

I guess we'll have to wait for full frame sensors to become sufficiently
commonplace with the most expensive of DSLRs before they're likely to be
commoditised sufficiently to make it an economically viable proposition.

--
Johnny B Good

On 26/07/2015 19:21, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:23:26 +0100, Davey wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

I have a hankering for a similar 'upgrade' for my venerable Chinon CX
SLR. The only downside being its use of the Pentax M42 lens adapter mount
rather than the later, more popular, bayonet style mount.

TBH, I'm disappointed that no enterprising company has come up with a
digital 'film back' adapter kit to revitalise pretty well just about
every film SLR camera that's ever existed.

There was one a long time ago, it didn't sell very well.
The electronics were in the "cassette" and the sensor in the film "tongue".


Triggering an 'exposure event' could easily be achieved by using an
integrated microphone to detect the 'sonic signature' of whatever film
SLR you cared to name (perhaps even implemented by using a 'training
algorithm' - even very very quiet models such as that Olympus OM-2 will
still produce enough sound level to act as a trigger - the mic *will* be
internal so should get a clear enough sonic signature even with the
quietest of cameras).

Why?, you get light on the sensor when the shutter opens and you use
that as the trigger.


I guess we'll have to wait for full frame sensors to become sufficiently
commonplace with the most expensive of DSLRs before they're likely to be
commoditised sufficiently to make it an economically viable proposition.

The biggest problem is that old style lenses aren't very good compared
to modern digital ones. Even something like a four thirds digital will
exceed what an old film SLR and lens can achieve.

On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 7:29:49 PM UTC+1, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Johnny B Good
wrote:

TBH, I'm disappointed that no enterprising company has come up with a
digital 'film back' adapter kit to revitalise pretty well just about
every film SLR camera that's ever existed.

Why would anyone bother?

--
"I love the way that Microsoft follows standards.
In much the same manner as fish follow migrating caribou."
- Paul Tomblin, ASR

Like he said. I do recall a startup company about a decade ago proposing to do this, but unsurprisingly the idea went nowhere - indeed there's an article on it over on dpreview:-

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/480...n-film-project

or, if that wraps,...

http://preview.tinyurl.com/ode8sy9

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:23:26 +0100, Davey wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

You might be onto something with that idea...

On 26/07/15 21:45, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:23:26 +0100, Davey wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

You might be onto something with that idea...

The problem is that the advantages of 'digitala' are not just replacing
the film. And indeed a 35mm sized CCD has been a huge challenge as well.

The advantages are all to do with metering and focussing by analysing
the digital signal.

Although its taken a long time to get that simpler - my D200X has no
less than 27 possible ways to autofocus... and a lot of ways to merter
as well.

Finally the digits are starting to be a help, not a hindrance.




--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 26/07/2015 13:38, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At least
half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter speed,
aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.


Some of the new features are very useful..
I like the remote viewfinder on my phone..
you can do things like putting the camera on a monopod and holding it up
in the air so you can avoid chopping the head of your pet giraffe.

In message , Cursitor Doom
writes
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control away
from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At least
half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter speed,
aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

Yes and no.

Sure it's fun, and can get you better photos.

But sometimes it's nice just to pick up the camera and take a photo
knowing that the camera will probably do a decent job of it
--
Chris French