Time to be with your loved ones

Time to be with loved ones

by sat

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

14,044 reputation
13158
bio website coderscentral.blogspot.com
location Colorado Springs, CO
age 49
visits member for 3 years, 8 months
seen Apr 3 at 5:48

Started programming on a Control Data mainframe in FORTRAN IV, back when that was still a new thing. Was apparently quite masochistic, because I kept programming anyway. For that matter, I still do...

Gold C++ badge #20
Gold C badge #12
Legendary badge #35


Feb
12
awarded  Good Answer
Feb
4
revised What is the 18% gray tone, and how do I make a 18% gray card in Photoshop?
added 1302 characters in body
Feb
4
awarded  Good Answer
Nov
27
awarded  Good Answer
Jul
28
awarded  Yearling
Jul
15
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
28
awarded  Nice Answer
Mar
25
awarded  Caucus
Mar
25
awarded  Constituent
Mar
18
awarded  Guru
Mar
11
awarded  Good Answer
Feb
5
awarded  Good Answer
Jan
25
awarded  Nice Answer
Nov
7
awarded  Enlightened
Oct
26
awarded  Nice Answer
Oct
24
comment Should the depth of field in the viewfinder be the same as the final images with the aperture set to wide open?
@BBking: One body, tripod, swapping FS.
Oct
23
comment Should the depth of field in the viewfinder be the same as the final images with the aperture set to wide open?
@MattGrum: That matches my experience pretty closely -- but the question here is how closely what you see in the viewfinder will match what you'll see in the picture. At least with most current stock viewfinders, the answer is "not very" (though manual focus cameras matched much more closely).
Oct
22
comment Should the depth of field in the viewfinder be the same as the final images with the aperture set to wide open?
@mattdm: In each case I focused so the near end of the DoF (as it appeared in the viewfinder) just about included the 5 of 135 (I.e., it was visibly blurred, but still readable). With the "L" screen, the apparent DoF matched that in the picture pretty closely (the 5 is blurred, but readable). With the stock ("G") screen, that 5 was readable in the viewfinder, but isn't even close in the picture (and I'm confident that reducing the reproduction size won't make it readable either).
Oct
22
comment Should the depth of field in the viewfinder be the same as the final images with the aperture set to wide open?
@whatsisname: If I hadn't changed the focus, then yes, they'd be identical. What I did, however, what changed the focus so that in both cases, what I saw in the viewfinder was the 5 in 135 being visibly blurred, but still readable.
Oct
22
revised Should the depth of field in the viewfinder be the same as the final images with the aperture set to wide open?
Added pictures demonstrating effect being discussed.