Forum Replies Created
Thanks David,
I recommend a small cooler chest with a carrying handle in the middle. Easy to transport the battery pack and protect it from water.Given you are lying on the sand, I would definitely use the water resistant S2 versus the Nikon. The water shedding lens coating is a big help on the S lenses. Does Nikon have that?
JackThis is a landscape using the 24. This is a 2.5 to 1 crop of the slightly vertical shifted full frame. I encourage you to examine the detail. This is a test shot of an eventual enlargement that will go over six feet wide. The shot was taken out of a window that precluded the use of a tripod. I shot it at 1/250 braced, but when one enlarges it to this size, I think on the reshoot I will up the shutter speed.
JackDavid,
The S can take waves better than your lights. Where are your lights placed?
As I have reported, I have had waves wash over my S2 multiple times while on a wave runner photographing sailboats up close. Absolutely no issue. But your lights must have been behind you where?JackKipper,
I suggest you offer to lead a Farkas experience called “Fashion Models” this November.
No, “Fun in the sun” sounds like a better title. Why November? Because we will have enough CS lenses by then.JackOuch!
Very sorry to see your name attached to this post.I believe that the fix is not as difficult as one would think. You send it back, they do a software fix and it's solved. Of course, that means sending it back.
I know there was a program someone did for M8 files that allowed you to accomplish it yourself, but of course on each and every file after the fact. You want it before.
Call the Leica Specialist in NJ. David or Josh probably have dealt with it too, but they are off on the Everglades trip.
Jack
JackRVB,
Yes .8 times 24 is indeed 19.2 not 18.6.
This was a test for Josh and David and either:
1. neither saw my error in reporting or
2. were too nice to think they should correct the error, or
3. starting to worry that I would want to return the lens to Solms to have them make it a 23.25 mm.
4. Too busy preparing for the Everglades trip to notice.
5. Told me the number is 18.6 until after the price increase and then it goes to 19.2.The answer is #4.
JackThis is the full frame of the 24mm on top matched for size with the full frame of the 18mm of the WATE shown below the 24mm. Having the plane of the sensor nudge a half an inch or so in location may make more a difference than 18mm vs 18.6mm. While they were both on the same tripod sequentially, I was not as precise as I wanted to be. I used the same leveling tools on both cameras and there was a 0.7 degree difference that I straightened for these images.
I did this to confirm that I can sell the WATE should I want to.
Does the new S have really precise leveling meters?
JackThanks Richard,
I really don't foresee a need to merge 24mm shots. I took that as a record keeping shot of a location, and was curious how it would merge.I shot this photo with the 24 to check on the distortion of the 24mm vs the 18mm of the WATE on the M9. The WATE is a zoom, so no surprise that the prime is superior.
JackI had said that I was tired of merging three 35mm shots to get to what the 24 gives me.
But the 24 gives me 88 degrees, not 180 degrees. Today I was trying to capture 180 degrees with three 24mm shots. This could work for landscapes, but with architecture it's a bit of a problem. If you want to see more detail of the steps, just ask.Jack
