Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 25, 2004, 1:49 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

gee!!! and i thought i was harsh.

most entertaining though.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 1:50 PM   #22
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 21
Default

Sorry Mr. BA in EE I had no clue you had no Idea your comments were so lame and tactless so lets get right down to brass tax...

I dont think you have a BA in EE and applied physics, you own a crap load of cameras not becuase they are better suited for different suituations but becuase you are a TECHNOLOGY junky.

I dont hate on you becuase you own abunch of cameras.... I hate on your becuase you are the anthesis of ignorence in places like this. You act as if you know everything yet.. offer nothing constructive, you claim alot and kick out alot of buzz words ... but say very little.

Quote:
Stay in school... you'll be safer there then among real people who might call you out on your absurd comments... can't take the heat.. get out of the kitchen..
Ther is just the point there Buddy THIS WAS your INTENT the entire time... to "CALL me out" I didn't need calling out becuase I never claimed that I had build a DSLR or That I KNEW how It could be done.... so if you called me OUT on my speculations then KUDOS for you! QUICK SOMEONE buy this MAN A COOKIE! He figured out that I dont know if its possible to make a DSLR camera!... Which oddly enough is what this Thread was about! Good for you buddy way to go READIN is fundamental!

So why dont you go and Take your Canon D300 and your nikon D70 and go do some SERIOUS EXTREEME photography where you need both... Becuase every professional knows Its a good Idea to invest in multiple systems of lenses and cameras that way you can spend 2 times as much money and see almost NO real world gain for it!

$50 dollars says that I will build a digital camera before you will ever grow a brain....
KaptinKABOOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 2:04 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 325
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaptinKABOOM
.... I hate on your becuase you are the anthesis of ignorence in places like this. ..
Thank you

BTW: You may want to invest in a thesaurus and dictionary so you can insult people when you intend to rather then pay compliment to them LMAO

Found a nice prototype for you on the web :lol:
mrkryz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 3:34 PM   #24
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 62
Default

Gentlemen:

It is not my intention to dowse the flames but getting back to the subject ....

The point of my origonal post was that I had concluded that the concept would most likly be more effort/cost that the end result would justify unless there is some specific goal that can not be obtained by purchaseing off the shelf equipment. I am familar with mechanical design and machine shop capabilities. I believe that the mounting problems could be overcome but that they would be minor compared to the electronics, programing and parts replacement after the first prototype went wrong. I believe this would be true even if one tried to simplyfy the associated problems by such measures as:

1) Manual focus
2) Aperture priority metering
3) SBIG is a complete camera package (all be it exspensive) minus a lens.
4) Using a laptop because programing tools are more comonly avaialbe.

What would one would probably wind up with is a very espensive dSLR with quality that might be subject to question.

==================================

Having said all of the above: The link to "nucoretech" does present some interesting information. There is a availability of a wide range of "C" mount lens, however these are designed for television resolution and one might get a very fuzzy image with a 5MP sensor behind them.


==========================================
mrkryz

I fell for the "magnifaction factor" hype before I purchased my dSLR (shame on me) --- so it is a bit of a sore point.

One point that everyone seems to forget is that because the magnification of the lens remains the same the perspective stays the same --- you just have less data (I am speaking of area not pixels) to work with. So please pardon me if I keep shouting it from the mountain tops: a 50mm lens is a 50mm lens is a 50mm lens!


At least with "Digital Zoom" the camera manufacturer has some effort involved.



====---- Yet another Rube Goldberg idea -------=====
KaptinKABOOM

As long as you are considering "possibilities" and currently in school studying physics let me toss a question into the fray.

Many people (including myself) have tried digiscopeing with mixed results primarily (I believe) because we are mixing optic system that have cross purposes. Most people have tried to adapt the scope to the camera (ie special eyepieces). I am thinking the oposite aproach might work better.

My physics training (such as is was) is about a quater of a century old and somewhat fuzzy. I have recently reviewed some of the optics material but frankly the following question is deeper than I am.

Would be possible (practical) to desing/produce a "relay lens" system to adapt a fixed lens digital camera to a Telescope Eypiece such that result would more consistent that the current alternatives.

Put it another way: Is it possible to design/produce a "relay lens" that would make a fixed lens digital camera at its lowest focal length emulate the human eye ?

Seems to me it could be done, but I do not have the knowledge, practical experience or resources to form a defintive answer.


"How hard could it be ??"
LewTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 4:25 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
bradg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 819
Default

come on guys, there is no need to get in a pi$$ing match about something like this...
bradg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 4:27 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
bradg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 819
Default

btw, i would like to thank mrkryz for being such a good sport....
thank you, mrkryz
bradg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 5:42 PM   #27
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 21
Default

I do have a dictionary..... I guess you dont:

anthesis - 1. The Blooming or time of full bloom of a flower,
2. a pinicle or peak of value
ANTI-thesis - 1. Direct contrast ; opposition 2. The Exact opposite

So I said you were the PINICLE of IGNORENCE..... ... not the OPPOSITE of IGNORENCE... although thank you for proving my point.

now with this said I am truly DONE.... Finished..... I have a project due tommarow and I went to check my email and Explorer was still was still on this page and I ... in all my ingorence ... decided to check the message boards.

No more .... I am finished .....
Cute camera tho... I got a chuckle

LewToo Those are good points after some checking around I have noticed that moding a consumer based digital camera with a mounting bracket and using the mounting bracket to attach a better quality manual lense is probally the best bet.... Although It does make me wonder about putting a auto focus lense on there.

I mean Maby there is a Type of autofocus lense that is simple enough to trick a cmaera into focusing it as if it were its own?... actually now that I mention this fact I dont rightly know exactly how a Consumer Digital Camera Focuses.........

I read on one website about the Dx 6440 that I putz around with and it claimed that it used a focusing method on the seosor itself? the wording was wierd I think it was on the page about it over at dpreview.com

I mean I figure when a camera is auto focusing it basically either goes one way ot the other on a motor to bring the subject into the proper focus.... am I just over simplyfing this?
KaptinKABOOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 6:10 PM   #28
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 21
Default

Just Read the rest of your post Didn't Really answer it properly since I read only the top and not the bottom.

(NOTE to LewToo: Anything I define I am not assuming you dont know it... I just dont know what you know... so I figure I will define stuff... also for the benefit of other readers)

I honstly dont know the answer to the question.

I mean Digiscoping seems to be a relitively simple conecpt for a fixed legenth but when a Telescoping eyepece becomes involved it (by telescoping I guess you mean Using a eyepece that allows for different magnifications factors to be used?) would seem to me that through different extensions you might get different amounts of lense abberation in the resultant image. Basically the Image would have to be EXTRA clean before it even got projected into the digital camera at all.

Then as for emulating the human eye It depends on exactly what you mean by emulating it... The Human eye changes the focus of accomidation (the process of squeesing the lense of the eye causing it to flaten for close objects and loosen up and curve for further subjects). I dont know exactly how you would make a lense do this unless you made oit out of some funky Jell-o Jiggler Esq compound (YES that is the technical term hah)... although it is a really kick ass Idea.

I did find a web site with a quick search that sells mounting brackets for Digiscoping here:

http://www.digiscopingukbirds.homest...pingindex.html

It was kinda cool to read.. when you first asked I knew about how the human eye worked but had no Idea what digiscoping was... that is a very cool idea though and next time I bump into my E&M prof I will make sure to bring it up (he knows alot more about Light porpagation and Optic construction then I do).
KaptinKABOOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 6:14 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 325
Default

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pronunciation: an-'thE-s&s
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Greek anthEsis bloom, from anthein to flower, from anthos
: the action or period of opening of a flower
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anĚtheĚsis ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-thss)
n. pl. anĚtheĚses (-sz)
The period during which a flower is fully open and functional.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess you didnt do your vocabulary homework yet for this week LMAO

Nice try for a recovery though... manufacturing a new definition for anthesis... which is specifically applied to horticulture. It has nothing to do with "a pinicle or peak of value"
lest it be directly applied to flowers. LOL
mrkryz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 6:19 PM   #30
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaptinKABOOM
The Human eye changes the focus of accomidation (the process of squeesing the lense of the eye causing it to flaten for close objects and loosen up and curve for further subjects). I dont know exactly how you would make a lense do this unless you made oit out of some funky Jell-o Jiggler Esq compound (YES that is the technical term hah)... although it is a really kick bottom Idea.

http://www.research.philips.com/Info...amp;lNodeId=13
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:24 AM.