Currently 92. This has been his jam for quite some time.
[He's still been putting out solid art in the past four years[https://www.artsy.net/artist/richard-estes?major_periods%5B0%5D=2020], which is very impressive.
Vine borers? I bravely (stupidly) went for it again thos year and things seem to be growing pretty well so far. Fingers crossed! I am applying a liberal dose of insecticidal soap weekly this year.
Got it, thanks!
Thanks for the review!
Why would a round emitter surface be worse than a square one? It seems like round would work better in a reflector for a uniform beam.
If you were trying to get in and out quickly, that could explain the soft photo. You might be able to figure out where the camera was trying to focus using Canon's image editing software, whatever that might be (sorry, not a canon person).
I agree with the sentiment of the post above this one, so I'm chiming in here.
At 55mm and 1/125, this photo stood a good chance of being sharp unless you have very unsteady hands. Where was your intended focal point? That could help point to what went wrong (eg the intended focal point could be better located, the camera missed focus, the camera moved during the exposure causing blur, etc).
Glad you found the site useful! Good luck in your quest.
If volume is your sole consideration, the G1X III will be hard to beat. if you didn't already try it, here it is dropped into the comparison.
As for advances in IQ, IMO the gains haven't been that large. The big changes are:
Other than that, everything else is largely quality of life. Easier AF, faster sensor readout that enabled me to keep my A9 in electronics shutter mode basically all the time, overall speed (focus fast and take a ton of photos), computational photography (like high resolution shots, etc).
I have a 3k digital picture frame and when photos from my old D40 show up on it, I'm always surprised by how well they hold up. Great colors, good dynamic range, etc.
For anyone scratching their heads (my D5300 had a built in GPS!) - most current cameras rely on a companion phone app for GPS coordinates. Some do this better than others. Here's my experience, based on my understanding of how each system works.
Three ideas.
First, are you taking photos of static or dynamic subjects? In other words, can you push your shutter speed down to make up for lost light? If yes, it doesn't really matter which sensor format you go with. As an added bonus, M43 stabilization is stupid good so you might even be able to skip the tripod.
Second, there's no beating a fast FF lens on a FF body but those are going to be big and expensive. Here's a quick comparison. The Sony lens is 1.7 pounds and costs $2,000 new vs the Oly's 0.9 pounds and $1,200 price tag. There are super fast third party E-mount options that will save some $$, but no weight (hi Sigma), and slower first and third party options that will save $$ and weight, but will also start to eat into the two stop advantage FF sensors enjoy in low light. For example, Sigma's 50mm f/2 lens, which weighs 0.75 pounds and costs $640, will leave you with around 2/3 stop advantage in low light. It's still an advantage, and it even costs and weighs less than the Oly, but it's not a large advantage in terms of dynamic range.
Finally, with a fast FF lens you're going to be facing a fairly narrow depth of field wide open. That 50mm f/1.2 FF lens will give you a 0.11m depth of field wide open with a subject that's 2m away. If you want the extreme background of your image sharp, everything closer than 35m will be out of focus. Conversely, that 25mm f/1.2 MFT lens will give you a 0.23m depth of field with a subject that's 2m away and with infinity acceptably sharp you'll have a sharp foreground subjects 17.5m and further away from the camera. Stopping down the FF lens will increase its depth of field, but will again eat into the inherent advantage a FF body has over a M43 body.
Pros:
Cons:
Bottom line:
I've been interested in photographing bees recently. Rather than buy a macro lens, I spent $32 on a 10mm and 16mm Meike extension tube. Photos are with an A9II + Sigma 35mm f/2, which normally offers a 0.18x magnification. All four are taken as close as the lens will focus. I'm very happy with image quality, especially given that this lens doesn't have a super flat focal plane at its minimum focal distance.
For anyone who tries an extension tube for their first time: you won't be able to focus very far in the distance (beyond about 1 foot in my case). Be ready to get up close and personal.
When I planned these beds I spaced them far enough apart to get my lawn tractor in-between them, but getting between them and the fence involved my weed whacker. As anyone with a fence has found out, maintaining the grass at the base of a fence is a pain.
I'm 3/4 of the way done with the edging. It's 10" tall with something like 6" or 7" of it buried. It does a good job of keeping grass out of our other beds, so I'm sure it will do a good job here. The downside is the most effective way of installing it is to trench first, put the edging in, and then refill the trench. If you try to use one of those big pizza peel looking things to make a narrow slide the will usually get wavy due to variation in trench depth.
I mowed to basically ground height between the beds, weed whacked around the beds, and put in a layer of that thick paper builders will use to protect flooring below the mulch. Some areas for cardboard instead, but we just didn't have enough cardboard to cover it all. Hopefully it will be enough to kill the grass and hopefully that results in less grass appearing in my raised beds.
Topped by deer and it looks like Lily beetles are a thing here now :(
I got tired of remaking my sisal trellice every season, and didn't like using nylon netting, so I went with something more long term. The downside? Vine removal in the fall will likely be a slog.
No banana for scale, but let's say that it's not too big and not too small. The dimensions are 295mm tall, 270mm wide, and 240mm deep. If I had to do it again, I would be tempted to go a bit wider and touch less deep. It's probably better to be large in one of these dimensions as opposed to both of them.
Here's the top. It has a jack for charging, a connector to program the DSP, a switch to turn it on and off, and a battery gauge.
The speaker also has a built in handle that's way chunkier than it appears, but is still particle.
The big BOM pieces are a Dayton Audio LBB-5Sv2 for the BMS (battery management system), a Dayton Audio KABD-250 2 x 50W for DPS, amplification, and Bluetooth, a Peerless by Tymphany BC25SC08 tweeter, and an Italian-but-made-in-India woofer (a Coral PRF 165).
The print itself is three pieces: the bottom bit (black), the middle bit (white, blue, and white again thanks to not having enough white left to do it all in white), and the black top. Here's a CAD view that more clearly shows the three pieces:
the three pieces are held together with heat-sets and m3 bolts. There's also a tong and groove like joint to help the enclosure leak less air. I haven't noticed any evidence of air leaks while listening.
The amplifier and battery board mount to the bottom like so:
The middle was printed with some supports for the driver overhangs, but the ports and everything else were designed to print in place without supports.
This is certainly not meant to be audiophile build, but it's surprisingly decent. This isn't my first blue-tooth speaker, or even my first printed loudspeaker enclosure, but it is the first that was somewhat intentionally designed to have OK bass response while also being reasonably compact.
It measures fairly well. Frequency response, along with harmonic distortion, is pretty good. There's zero windowing or smoothing on this plot. I suspect the distortion spikes at 1 kHz, 2 kHz, etc are induced by the Bluetooth stack the board is running since they've shown up in multiple different enclosures and with multiple different drivers.
There's no nasty ringing, caused by either the drivers or the enclosure, so life is pretty good:
It's certainly worth mentioning, especially if you're talking about industrial automation.