phule

<p>[[Other than the Canon C300/C500, I'm not aware of any low-end cameras that capture 4K video.]]</p> <p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_4K_video_recording_devices<br> <br> You may be surprised by this list. </p>

<p>[[No. I want to come home and tell everyone I dragged a net around the lake and got a couple of big ones. Maybe take a picture of me next to a net full of fish to show off. <br /> To each his own, I guess.]]</p> <p>Which is why you still shoot only daguerreotypes, right? Because anything more than 1 frame per hour is an abomination? </p>

<p>If you believe the rumor mills, the 100-400 may be updated this year. But I don't put a ton of stock in the rumor mills, so I'd contact Canon to see what the repair cost would be.</p>

<p>Shooting 4K video allows you to pull out 8MP frames. At that point, I would argue, there is no longer a blurry line. For all but very large prints, the line is gone. </p>

<p>I have a small (older) digital point and shoot for just this task but more often these days I just use my phone.</p>

<p>Sony RX100, RX100 Mark II or RX100 Mark III depending on your budget. </p>

<p>[[i shoot a lot outside, the lack of seals on the t3 concerns me as well as the plastic case.]]<br> <br> Always a good time for some fun: <br> <a href=" <a href="

<p>[[i wouldn't store a mechanical camera or lens on top of a speaker for that reason or the vibrations.]]</p> <p>Just to note: I believe the OP is talking about a scanner.</p> <p>http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00cRHc</p>

<p>[[if you want the best results do as Larry suggested and embed via Flickr or other photo host.]]</p> <p>Indeed. If you are interested in the presentation either don't upload to FB directly or follow the guide to make the best of a bad situation. </p>

<p>[[i'd like to take a video that would have a smaller size (less mega pixels) for emailing.]]</p> <p>Don't email video files. Use a service that allows your contacts to download them or view them from their own devices. </p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/site-help-forum/</p>

<p>There is no reason to think that Elements 12 will not work with 10.9. The fact that the box was printed with the OS version that was available at the time should be fairly obvious. </p> <p>You will not harm your computer by installing Elements.</p> <p> </p>

<p>[[My temporary conclusion is not to use the software filters but to use real glass filters and later convert to black and white without using Photoshop filters.]]</p> <p>This is an erroneous conclusion.</p>

<p>You would benefit from shooting RAW for your B&W conversions. Obviously, there is only so much information in the files to work with. If you apply extreme color changes, you're likely to see noise. </p>

<p>Anna,<br> Sorry to hear about the broken mount. It does appear, at first glance, to be an easy fix, but there are often thin cables under there that may break easily. If you are able to get Panasonic to send you the part (and be able to receive it, wherever you may be), I would replace the part with the utmost caution. </p> <p>Alternatively, you may consider ordering a new 14-42mm and attempt the repair another time. </p> <p>Photos or not photos, I do look forward to reading more about your travels in South America. </p>

<p>I realize this is a little beyond the scope of the question but:<br> I use SSD's in external drives for travel backups because there are no moving parts. I have external cases that are USB 3.0 despite the fact I do not yet have any USB 3.0 connections on my computers. I've future-proofed it a bit. The Crucial MX100 series is a more budget friendly SSD for just this sort of operation.</p>

<p>[[Never Do a Lens Test Again?]]</p> <p>This is the best advice I've read on photo.net in years.</p>

<p>Is your subject the mountain or is your subject the mountain and its surroundings? If your subject is the mountain itself, then shouldn't you choose a focal length that allows you to fill as much of the frame as possible with your subject?</p>

<center><img src="http://cetan.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/20080401211333_024_2-flickr-sm.jpg"></center>

<p>[[Made me realize I need to pay a bit more attention to my surroundings when I'm out shooting]]<br> Or just to wear pants. :) </p>

Canon's tech support staff are great at sales.

<p>Why would you say that, Jamie? This is not the first time the question has come up. </p>

<p>http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_support_faqs.asp?id=1501#7</p>

<p>[[Objects close to medium distances away are not very sharp but OK but anything a good distance away look out of focus. I hate to say this but my wife's Canon A570 any my A590 point & shoot cameras takes better pictures.]]</p> <p>[[in general your depth of field will be lower than that of a P&S.]]</p> <p>Yes, this is very likely the case here, though sample images would help. </p> <p>Frank, a point and shoot, due to the design of the sensor and lenses will often give you everything from the foreground to infinity in focus. This is usually a problem, not a benefit, to most photographers (I realize I'm generalizing here). A DSLR, such as a T5, will allow you more opportunities to separate your subject from your foreground and/or background. Isolating the subject, bringing into focus (no pun intended) the true intent of your photograph, is one reason why photographers choose a DSLR system. </p>

<p>[[may be this is too much of worry !]]</p> <p>Yes. I feel you are making too much out of this.</p>