MISS YOU : Defection Confession

[Roman]

Yeah, I agree, too, a TLR forum is really needed - they don't even have a decent one on photo.net.
Oh, and I shoot SLRs, too; they do the job; they work; trouble-free, versatile, good tools - they just don't have that certain 'je ne sais quoi' of RFs and TLRs 😉

Roman

 

[Fred]

Daniel,

It's been really good to read your comments from past threads. Please stay with the RF forum and pop in from time to time with the odd question or view.

The FM3a is a remarkable piece of kit, I'm already green with envy for your purchase.

For me there will allways be a place in my heart for an RF be it a Zorki/Kiev/Leica or a fixed lens but there's also plenty of room for SLR's and Percy Pixel digital, even video!.

Keep in touch with the forum but above all enjoy photography, Have fun Daniel.

 

[Theo-Prof]

> Yeah! Who said we were one-dimensional anyway?
We are at least two-dimensional here at RFF. Otherwise all of our pictures and text would be a straight line going down the left side of the monitor. .

Not to be too technical, (but hey, I like being too technical), a one dimensional object would be an infinitesimally small point. A line is a two-dimensional object since it exists on a plane.

Sorry, I could not resisit.

Kevin

 

[Kin Lau]

I shoot SLR's too, 35mm & 120, TLR's, even a 4x5.... and _gasp_ digital 😀

Primes for manual focus slr's such as Minolta MD, Pentax M42, Canon FD etc are _cheap_, and don't run into the same q&a issues with FSU glass. My 50/1.4's are _much_ cheaper than any RF equiv, FSU or not. My Minolta X-570 + 45/2 is a pretty sweet combo for a package where I can go with aperture priority or full manual and I even get TTL flash.

The majority of my shooting is still a DSLR + 400/5.6 tele, but I usually keep an RF with me as well. The Oly XA is working out to be a good match.

 

[richard_l]

Not to be too technical, (but hey, I like being too technical), a one dimensional object would be an infinitesimally small point. A line is a two-dimensional object since it exists on a plane.

Sorry, I could not resisit.

Kevin

A point is 0-dimensional. It has no dimensions. A point can be embedded in a plane or in space, but that doesn't change its dimensionality.

A line is 1-dimensional. It's only dimension is length. If it is embedded in a plane, it is still 1-dimensional, but it becomes a 1-dimensional submanifold of 2-dimensional plane.

A plane is 2-dimensional. It's dimensions are length and width.

Etc.

Ex-Math-Prof

 

[parks5920]

Oh brother! 🙄

 

[Little Prince]

Hey Richard, is your avatar a self-portrait? If so, you sure do look like a math prof! (whatever that means 🙂 ).

Yes, quite right. We are not point objects. As many are suggesting, we are not even lines. We are planar 😀 . Two-dimensional, here on RFF.
Three-dimensional in real life. Some say there are more dimensions 😱 . That wouldn't make us look very good would it?

 

[richard_l]

Hey Richard, is your avatar a self-portrait? If so, you sure do look like a math prof! (whatever that means 🙂 ).

Keeping this on topic, that's me as seen by a wide-open 50mm Leica Summicron in available light, recorded on Ilford XP-2 Super in a Leica M6. 🙂

 

[snaggs]

Thanks for the kind words gents. Of course your right, theres no reason I can't stay around for the film and photo discussions. Might be interesting to see if anyone can "spot the slr photo" amongst the pack!

PS. My avatar is a photo of my son, on velvia of all things!

 

[SolaresLarrave]

However dimensional we be, Daniel, ownership of a rangefinder camera ain't a requisite for signing up in the RFF. 🙂

Now... down to the nitty-gritty: what kind of underwhelming performance did you get from your former Leica gear? Just wondering... 😕

 

[egpj]

I am sure that he will be able to point out something off the MTF charts and we will all go, "ooooo, yeah I understand." 😛

 

[parks5920]

Might be interesting to see if anyone can "spot the slr photo" amongst the pack!

Yes, and those who post those horrid SLR photo's should be forced to use a Wal-Mart disposable for one year! 😀

 

[peter_n]

Daniel that's a great looking kid you have there! Glad you're sticking around... 🙂

 

[XAos]

Black and white photographs ARE at least three dimensional. X, Y, brightness. Dimensions are just what you measure. You could measure the temperature of each pixel too, but it would be meaningless, and doesn't really count as a dimension. You might could measure grain size and sharpness but they're actually derivatives intensity with respect to x and y. Color photographs would then be 5 dimensional.

Here's my most recent infraction

 

[richard_l]

Black and white photographs ARE at least three dimensional. X, Y, brightness. Dimensions are just what you measure.....

However, there are still only two degrees of freedom, since the three variables are not independent.

X and Y, the coordinates of points on the photo, are independent variables. The third coordinate Z is a dependent variable. Z=B(X,Y) is the brightness of the photo at the point having coordinates X and Y. The geometrical representation of the photo is the graph of the function Z=B(X,Y), which will be a 2-dimensional curved surface living in 3-dimensional space.

 

[DougK]

Richard, now I remember why I switched my major from math to history when I was in college 🙂. Just kidding, I still have a soft spot for math.

Snaggs, glad to hear you've decided to stick around. Most of us shoot multiple varieties of cameras and film formats, so of course you're welcome here. I've been away from here for a bit while life has intruded but I still love coming to visit with the fine folks here when I can.

And Roman, right on! I'd love to see a TLR forum myself, since if I'm not shooting my digital camera it's likely my Lubitel or Seagull that I'm using.

 

[XAos]

Now that I see Richard is in NC there's a good chance I slept through your classes

 

[richard_l]

Now... down to the nitty-gritty: what kind of underwhelming performance did you get from your former Leica gear? Just wondering...

According to a thread over at APUG, Snaggs equipment problems were that the lens flared and the camera meter seemed to be inaccurate.

Now that I see Richard is in NC there's a good chance I slept through your classes

I never forget your kind. I'll know when I see you at one of the NC get-togethers. 🙂

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Yes, all of that is true BUT the phase information is lost with most optics.

(I just wanted to say that because I rescued some Optics from the trash that preserve phase of the image.)

 

[Doug]

I'll join the "either and" chorus; no real need, is there, to be exclusive about shooting only RF or only SLR or whatever else. I don't talk about it much here, but I use (um, counting on my toes...) 15 Pentax cameras in three film formats and 4 lens mounts. And 4 Olympus SLRs, three of them half-frame. I shoot mostly RF though. Probably too many old cameras, but it's fun to reconnect with an old friend for a new project.