Be shocked:
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/3051/dsc01472576error.jpg
Even good zoom lenses show that kind of distortion when you use them completely zoomed in or out.
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/3051/dsc01472576error.jpg
Even good zoom lenses show that kind of distortion when you use them completely zoomed in or out.
Last edited:
Markus a lens will only exhibit pincushion distortion at the wide angle end, not the zoom end. Again, in his original image, I don't see any appreciable pincushion distortion. This image you have posted is what? Is that the raw image Dr. Geddes originally took before cropping? Is it something you cooked up? What are the red spots on the side of the speaker, is this something you did to illustrate the pincushion distortion? If it was there in any appreciable way the sides should bend in as well as the tops for all straight lines. This means that if a box was drawn around the image, then we should see the line more toward the center of the distortion center point than at others. This is not what I am seeing in the image, but I'm looking at it on a small laptop image right now.
Why not zoom in? Then you'd see what's going on.
You'll see distortion at both ends of the zoom. Yes, correct terminology is barrel and pincushion distortion. But that's not the point. Everybody that doesn't see that - even in a smaller resized version of the image - is definitely NOT a pro.
You'll see distortion at both ends of the zoom. Yes, correct terminology is barrel and pincushion distortion. But that's not the point. Everybody that doesn't see that - even in a smaller resized version of the image - is definitely NOT a pro.
as I said, I'm looking at it on a 13" laptop screen and I can't see it, but it's a small image. I can take a look at that image later on photoshop with my main computer. I have a plugin that will measure the distortion of the straight lines in the image, for fixing this issue, and then we can get a percentage of how bad it is. None the less, whatever it is, it seems so minor as to not be a big deal. If he is showing pincushion distortion, as in distortion caused by the wide angle of the lens, then it would show up with any camera used with any lens for that range. The most that could be done about it is adjustments with photoshop.
Markus has some points, but he also obsesses about things that others don't. I can see the "pincusion" when he points it out, but there is no way that I would have ever noticed this without the red lines there. I mean the amount being shown there is truely insignificant. And quite honestly Markus only you seem to care about these kinds of things. You must be tough to live with.
The worst part about the photos, and I have seen this in some, is the vibration from the long time exposures and the long lense. I have noticed that the VR tends to do some funny things and I'm not sure that I like it. I think that I'd rather have it obviously blurred or not, but not this "kinda blurred" effect that you get with VR.
Interesting, I know the general origin but not the specifics. I will pick that up but frankly as a species I am not sure we aren't hard programmed to look for disagreements and look at people not of our group as inferior. It is very interesting to me as you see it even in the forums here. I don't know that I am a ying/yang person but there is no question that if there is a liberal there will be a conservative, etc, etc ad infinitum. Something is hard wired in us to be king or some equivalent of our groups. It transcends logic and intelligence (maybe we aren't).
Last edited:
Why not listen to some Bose cubes? I'm sure they are "good enough". Only minor distortion issues
Some of us don't care that much about visual reproduction but care quite a lot about sound reproduction...
There's nothing wrong with that. But there's also nothing wrong with people that care about both, especially when it's their profession.
What really bugs me is Taj making insulting statements. He obviously doesn't know what he's talking about or has very, very low quality standards. The pictures I posted prove just that.
Best, Markus
My, thats funny
Now that I have shown my ugly face here, I will comment that I think the Gedlee site is quite nice, compared to many others
Oh, one thing I miss
A famely photo of all members together, to see their relative size
Question
Why are high frequency differnt on various models, even when using same driver
Now that I have shown my ugly face here, I will comment that I think the Gedlee site is quite nice, compared to many others
Oh, one thing I miss
A famely photo of all members together, to see their relative size
Question
Why are high frequency differnt on various models, even when using same driver
Last edited:
Oh, one thing I miss
A famely photo of all members together, to see their relative size
I agree that this would be nice, but I have not had the whole line at any one time. Most likely I could paste together the pictures scaled properly.
This would be a nice dream, but not possible. Size is very much a limiting factor in sound quality and bigger is better. People want -and marketing promises to deliver - sound quality that is independent of size, but its simply not feasible. This is why marketing is so important. To convince you that you really are getting the sound quality that you want in the size that you desire. They are not going to tell you that "you can't have both" - thats un-American and its simply not done! This is modern day marketing - "we can do it all - just ask and ye shall receive" ( an empty promise that is.)
The tweeter in the Nathan and Abbey won't even fit in the Harper, let alone be a total waste of money.
Yeah, I deleted the part about using same tweeter, as I realised its only the harper that have a cheaper one
And from size its probably not much smaller than nathan
So, harper is probably a nice offer fore diy on a budget
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.