22 Megapixels...Whoa!!

Have another mate... wanna try that link again

Megapixels.. drool..

If this doesn't work...hic..... just cut & hic.... paste....hic

Wolfie

Haha

That is awesome definition and color. Its all good wolfie, the beers are flowing here in Melb.

GOT IT!!!!!t

me too if I could afford it.

I still havent gone digital, prefering to shoot Velvia, hell I only just upgraded to autofocus :-). After having almost all my equipment stolen twice.
So much money can be tied up in those little polycarbonate boxes, or more correctly the pieces of highly polished rock that attach to the front of them, that some of us can't part with them until we have to. The wife and I are going digi soon, and we will stick to out trusty Canon EOS range. I note Canon has a 14 MP camera now but I have not seen it.

David O
my pics

for some reason the link below my name didn't work so www.djolsen.com is it. I'll see if I can get it to work here ->
my pics

One word..........

WOW!!!!

I bet not many here know about these, why don't you give it a plug?

Cheers

Wolfie

Give my photos a plug???
Well thanks Wolfie!

Most of the photos were taken on a recent trip to SA and NT. I had worked as a freelance lens man for years, but had all my gear stolen twice in those early years, and shooting sport at the time meant I had some very expensive lenses. I gave up in digust some 8 or 9 years ago, and swore I'd never own a camera again.

After I married (at 40 years of age) my wife learned of my past exploits and encouraged me to get back into it. I resisted, until we got into the 4wd scene. Once we began planning THE BIG TRIP, I knew I would have to take a camera. We bought an old T90 and some low end lenses from a friend (hence the vignetting in some shots).

When we got back we showed the pics to some old contacts, and next thing you know, I am getting some commisioned work again. Then my old MTB friends get asked to do a TV series, and I see them in the news, so I ring to congratulate and make contact with them, and next thing I am back shooting MTB races again.

Justine and I have contributed a few trek notes, and now we are working on some stories for a couple of magazines. I love the outback and we plan many more trips. We are about to print a number of these photos in very large sizes and will be exhibiting them soon.

Many of Kata Tjuta, I can't publish, because I wasn't well informed and I was taking pics where commercial photography isn't allowed- I am applying for some of them to be approved for publication.

Anyhow, enjoy them, and if anyone wants to purchase a size that is not listed, ie really BIG prints, send me an email.

Dave O

Steve, can't be quoted on these, because I'm not in the market, but some of the medium format stuff & one lens can go around $20,000.00 AUS, which is more than either of my vehicles.

My lecturer at Uni always reminded us of a particular lens, that cost more than his car!

Cheers

Wolfie

Must've drove a Toyota!

That is scary!

When I was a kid growing up at Woomera, Dad used to work for NASA out at Island Laggon, before Nurrungar was built. There used to be a telescope there called Baker Nunn, Huge resolution.

One has to wonder about the advances we are seeing in CCD & CMOS technology, as we have had satellites up for a long time now, and you can be guaranteed that they were WAAAY better than 22 Megapixels even back in the Eighties..

Funny thing though, we have all heard about Hubble, and how it is now obsolete, and it's successor, can't remember it's name.......... Well, consider this........... all the GOOD telescopes ARE NOT POINTING OUT IN SPACE!!!! Think about that for a while..........

Cheers

Wolfie

WOW!!! I just zoomed in on a car and read it's numberplate.

That's scary!

Mike

A 2.5 Gigapixel photo may sound impressive, but it wasn't taken as a single photo. It's a series of photos connected together. Zoom in on the Bus travelling along the road on the right hand side and you can see the ghostly image of a car in the middle of the bus from where the photos were blended together.

It's still a very impressive photo though...

apparently, from the orbit these sattelites operate and using the equipment available, 3 metres is the resolution, so for instance late in the day they can see the shadows of a group of people but may not see the people. Still thats pretty damn good from that distance and looking through the haze.

PS you can request to buy a photo of any location on earth taken at pretty much anytime you nominate for around $2000.

You're not ignorant - quite correct actually.

The photo is quite clear, probably a product of the lens system it was taken through, however the image on the web site is only 650 x 487 pixels in size (a grade total of 0.3megapixels) and only 112kb. The original file would probably have been 30-40mb for a 22Mp raw image.

All of the comments on that website are probably said by people who spend an awful lot of time trying to read things into images and make great pontifications in an attempt to sound knowledgeable. How can you really comment on the quality of an image when you are seeing only 1.3% of the original image...

I'm the first to admit I am picky about quality in my digital camera and will spend a lot of money in the future on a nice Digital SLR package with high grade lenses. But if I want to show off the quality to my friends - I'll have to send them a CD of the image - the original files wouldn't fit in most e-mail inboxes...

Just my 2 cents worth, which in the age of rounding means bugger all...

DavidT

David, What would the crieria be for that nice Digital SLR and high grade lens?

As I won't be able to buy it for probably 12 months or so, I'll be looking towards the likely replacement for the Nikon D70, which I would guess will be about 8Mp by then. (It didn't take too long for Canon to replace the 10D with the 20D - a rise from 6 to 8 Mp - I realise the 10D is probably better compared to the Nikon D100 - but there is very little between the D70 & D100) The standard lens that is on the D70 is from Nikon's mid range series of lenses, not the usual consumer series lens that comes with most SLR packages. My father in law has a couple of these lenses already for his D100, and I have been impressed with their performance.

Cheers
DavidT

We will be going for the D20 Canon. At 8 MP it is capable of doing a pretty good cover photo for magazine, something that couldnt be contemplated until about 6 MP became available. You need roughly 5.5 MP do do an A4 cover justice- much more if you want really high quality. A D20 retails for about $2600

As for lenses, Canon really have two main ranges of lens. The pro range means you will pay something approaching 2 grand for a wide zoom, sometimes more if you go to f2.8. In telephoto, a 70-210 f2.8 retails for about $2600 but I've seen them new for around $1700 on ebay.

I shoot a lot of sport as well, and f2.8 teles are the order of the day, though I do prefer to shoot things like mountain biking with an ultrawide lens held real close to the subject and panned. One cover photo I did for Australian Mountain Bike resulted in a damaged 20mm lens because I wanted to "drag" my camera in front of the handlebars, as the rider flew past. In a practice run setup for the pic, I was holding the camera at arms length firing off shots with a low shutter speed and a flash. Unfortunately the handlebars hit the lens!!!! ouch!!!!

A rival magazine editor described it as the best cover shot he had seen to date, which made me feel alot better, but I've taken better since, and besides it didn't really make up for the damaged lens, at least not financially. But I digress LOL

I am a fan of Marli's work. Very consistent.

Actually, there is a lot of good work on that forum.

Cheers

Wolfie

I have never come across that. What sort of resolution were you getting, and what size were the RAW files?

I have heard & read about the triple array, which is quite good.

Cheers

Wolfie

It was yearas ago, so it's a bit foggy - but somewhere near 8Mb per image - which was pretty good in the late 90's!!