There are not a lot of you Tube videos I will watch a second time. I've watched this 5 times so far and it is hilarious. I sent the link to a few friends too. Very well done!
If you don't understand German, yes. The text has nothing to do with what they are saying - which kills the humor pretty much. If you'd understand what they were saying and who that is you'd find that tasteless too.
“To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
― Edward Weston
If you don't understand German, yes. The text has nothing to do with what they are saying - which kills the humor pretty much. If you'd understand what they were saying and who that is you'd find that tasteless too.
I can see its not as funny if you know german, than you might listen to the texts more than reading the subs..
But it's just mocking, everyone knows who hitler is. I think its just as entertaining as political cartoons and this:
everyone their opinion of course but i found it hilarious
But it's just mocking, everyone knows who hitler is. I think its just as entertaining as political cartoons and this:
everyone their opinion of course but i found it hilarious
The clip is from a well known documentary style movie that is based
on actual history. It recounts more than any movie before what Hitler
actually thought and said - and there is absolutely no such thing as funny
in what he says in the clip. It is not a parody (which would be absolutely fine)
nor a joke. It just looks like someone who doesn't speak a word of
German put the subs in there. One of the hundreds of Hitler parodies
on utube that would've worked perfectly fine with the subs.
“To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
― Edward Weston
The clip is from a well known documentary style movie that is based
on actual history. It recounts more than any movie before what Hitler
actually thought and said - and there is absolutely no such thing as funny
in what he says in the clip. It is not a parody (which would be absolutely fine)
nor a joke. It just looks like someone who doesn't speak a word of
German put the subs in there. One of the hundreds of Hitler parodies
on utube that would've worked perfectly fine with the subs.
Just MHO, but chill, dude. Hitler will be the human face of evil for all eternity (with Osama bin Laden giving him a run for his money in the modern era), but there's plenty of healthy, cathartic humor around Hitler's foam-at-the-mouth oratorical style. Laughing at this in no way implies endorsement of his sickness; and yes, you are most surely distracted by your understanding of what's actually being said above the subtitles. Again, just MHO.
Understood. I turned off the sound, and laughed. It is a harsh comparison, but used as an extremity for the laugh. Athough they could have cut out the deutsch
Canon 50D vs 5DMark II
Andy, not sure this is the right place but got here from your website on discussing gear. I am looking at upgrading from 40D to either of these cameras. I shoot mostly high school football at night with L Series 70-200mm IS f/2.8 and Indoor Cheerleading Competitions. I want a higher ISO but am concerned about speed sacrifice with 5D but interested in full frame. Any advice? thanks Patrick
The 5D is great camera for landscapes and studio portraits. It is not great for high speed sports shooting. You will be much happier with a 40D, it will focus faster and has a much higher frame rate.
I own and use both, so I have no axe to grind here.
The 5D is great camera for landscapes and studio portraits. It is not great for high speed sports shooting. You will be much happier with a 40D, it will focus faster and has a much higher frame rate.
I own and use both, so I have no axe to grind here.
Andy, not sure this is the right place but got here from your website on discussing gear. I am looking at upgrading from 40D to either of these cameras. I shoot mostly high school football at night with L Series 70-200mm IS f/2.8 and Indoor Cheerleading Competitions. I want a higher ISO but am concerned about speed sacrifice with 5D but interested in full frame. Any advice? thanks Patrick
I'll be using my 70-200 f2.8 IS tonight w/ my 5D MkII at basketball if you're curious how that goes I can send you the link to photos later. I'll probably post some in the sports section on the forums. However the speed of the drive is not as fast as the 40D for FPS, so we'll see how long I use one body vs. the other.
The Canon 50D is worse than the 40D on a per-pixel level, but it has more pixels. On a per-print-size basis, at the same ISOs, they look very similar. Plus the 50D has more detail at low ISOs and more high-ISO selections (even though ISOs beyond 3200 may have limited applications.)
Click the above link, select the SNR 18% tab, and select the "Print" measurement. The 50D tests just slightly better than the 40D according to these criteria.
They also have an article to describe why this is so:
50D was worth getting over 40D until 7D came out.
Now it makes no sense.
You wanna get cheaper body - get 40D.
You wanna get (vastly) superior body - get 7D.
Canon's 70-200 f/4 is infinitely better than Nikon's.
I used to dream all day about f/4 lenses for Nikon... That's than until I realized how I am always using ISO 1600 and up for my work with a 2.8 lens.
IMO, f/4 is a half ass'ed 2.8 lens. But that's just me, and the type of work I do.
Transformation complete. I have just sold off all of my Canon Gear and now only have Nikon D800, Zeiss wide angles. I rent as needed, Nikon 80-400 and 200-400 long teles for wildlife. Oh and further transformation, I own the µ4/3s Panasonic GH3 and a few lenses as well. Fun times! I miss having something to pee in Harry's pool about, though
A little early for April Fool's, aren't we? Nah, that's cool. If I was a landscaper I'd probably do the same! But instead of an m4/3 kit I'd go with a Fuji XE-1 for my "compact" rig. Did you consider that?
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Transformation complete. I have just sold off all of my Canon Gear and now only have Nikon D800, Zeiss wide angles. I rent as needed, Nikon 80-400 and 200-400 long teles for wildlife. Oh and further transformation, I own the µ4/3s Panasonic GH3 and a few lenses as well. Fun times! I miss having something to pee in Harry's pool about, though
Took you long enough to see the light. :smack
Like Andy I was impressed with the GH3 in Kenya. B&H will be getting an order from me for the GH3 very soon.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
I don't have a "dog in the fight" and certainly coming in on the "tail" end BUT, my "two cents!"
Started out with Kodak box camera, graduated to the "fancy" box camera w/chrome, first adjustable was a Kodak Pony II. Skip ahead several years, Canon became the choice. Ended with F1, motorized winder and bag of gadgets. Thankfully, sold the F-1 when it was worth something. Still have a FX and AE-1.
Amtrak trip in 2008, 10,000 miles, necessitated a modern camera. Went with Olympus w/ kit lenses. (Do Canon and Nikon have "kit" lenses?)
Reason for this biographical memory trip, with the miniaturization (whew) of electronics why are top of the line cameras so big and heavy? The computer industry builds fast machines, consumers use 1/10th of the speed and computing power. I feel the same with cameras. I am still learning my E-620 and will for quite awhile. If all else fails, select "reset!"
Are we really better for all the gadgets and gizmos, the whizbang and chrome! Are we allowing the camera to dictate creativity. Simple actuate the shutter, create a "masterpiece!"
I sometimes yearn for the days of "box" cameras and their simplicity. Call me nostalgic.
... why are top of the line cameras so big and heavy? ...
I presume you mean the single-digit Canon and Nikon bodies with built-in portrait grip?
If so, then the answer is partly because of the type of construction (large, full chassis of cast and machined magnesium with a full external body for the human interface and protection), the intrinsic durability (200,000-300,000 actuations typical) and system speed of 10-12 frames-per-second (FPS) for the bodies designed for sports. (As the FPS speed doubles, it takes typically 4-times the power for the same moving mass in the shutter box and mirror box assemblies.) Add the extra real-estate of the built-in grip and the need for keeping everything in alignment at those outrageous FPS speeds, and we're pretty lucky that the bodies don't weigh more than they already do.
... The computer industry builds fast machines, consumers use 1/10th of the speed and computing power. I feel the same with cameras. I am still learning my E-620 and will for quite awhile. If all else fails, select "reset!"
Are we really better for all the gadgets and gizmos, the whizbang and chrome! Are we allowing the camera to dictate creativity. Simple actuate the shutter, create a "masterpiece!"
I sometimes yearn for the days of "box" cameras and their simplicity. Call me nostalgic.
I can produce much better work today with my digital cameras, than I could not that many years ago in film (... and that includes working with a 4" x 5" view camera and some pretty nice lenses, which I still own). That's the metric I choose to use to determine progress.
Comments
If you don't understand German, yes. The text has nothing to do with what they are saying - which kills the humor pretty much. If you'd understand what they were saying and who that is you'd find that tasteless too.
― Edward Weston
I can see its not as funny if you know german, than you might listen to the texts more than reading the subs..
But it's just mocking, everyone knows who hitler is.
everyone their opinion of course but i found it hilarious
The clip is from a well known documentary style movie that is based
on actual history. It recounts more than any movie before what Hitler
actually thought and said - and there is absolutely no such thing as funny
in what he says in the clip. It is not a parody (which would be absolutely fine)
nor a joke. It just looks like someone who doesn't speak a word of
German put the subs in there. One of the hundreds of Hitler parodies
on utube that would've worked perfectly fine with the subs.
― Edward Weston
__________________
www.browngreensports.com
http://browngreensports.smugmug.com
Andy, not sure this is the right place but got here from your website on discussing gear. I am looking at upgrading from 40D to either of these cameras. I shoot mostly high school football at night with L Series 70-200mm IS f/2.8 and Indoor Cheerleading Competitions. I want a higher ISO but am concerned about speed sacrifice with 5D but interested in full frame. Any advice? thanks Patrick
Canon 1DM3, 20D & 40D, Canon f/2.8 70-200mm IS, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8
I own and use both, so I have no axe to grind here.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Canon 1DM3, 20D & 40D, Canon f/2.8 70-200mm IS, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8
I think so, and so does Nikolai as well.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I'll be using my 70-200 f2.8 IS tonight w/ my 5D MkII at basketball if you're curious how that goes I can send you the link to photos later. I'll probably post some in the sports section on the forums. However the speed of the drive is not as fast as the 40D for FPS, so we'll see how long I use one body vs. the other.
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
Malte
(I'm a canon boy, my girlfriend is a nikon girl...
www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
Is this compared to the 40D? DPreview said it was worse. Just wondering.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page31.asp
The Canon 50D is worse than the 40D on a per-pixel level, but it has more pixels. On a per-print-size basis, at the same ISOs, they look very similar. Plus the 50D has more detail at low ISOs and more high-ISO selections (even though ISOs beyond 3200 may have limited applications.)
DXOMark.com has a per-print-size comparison:
http://tiny.cc/dhyvV
Click the above link, select the SNR 18% tab, and select the "Print" measurement. The 50D tests just slightly better than the 40D according to these criteria.
They also have an article to describe why this is so:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Insights/More-pixels-offsets-noise!
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Now it makes no sense.
You wanna get cheaper body - get 40D.
You wanna get (vastly) superior body - get 7D.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Keith Tharp.com - Champion Photo
I used to dream all day about f/4 lenses for Nikon... That's than until I realized how I am always using ISO 1600 and up for my work with a 2.8 lens.
IMO, f/4 is a half ass'ed 2.8 lens. But that's just me, and the type of work I do.
Psst, Nikon does not make an f4 version of a 70-200mm zoom. It's a joke.
A lot of Nikon owners do wish for such a beast however.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Keith Tharp.com - Champion Photo
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Nope. Not after actually using the GH3 in Africa.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Took you long enough to see the light. :smack
Like Andy I was impressed with the GH3 in Kenya. B&H will be getting an order from me for the GH3 very soon.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Started out with Kodak box camera, graduated to the "fancy" box camera w/chrome, first adjustable was a Kodak Pony II. Skip ahead several years, Canon became the choice. Ended with F1, motorized winder and bag of gadgets. Thankfully, sold the F-1 when it was worth something. Still have a FX and AE-1.
Amtrak trip in 2008, 10,000 miles, necessitated a modern camera. Went with Olympus w/ kit lenses. (Do Canon and Nikon have "kit" lenses?)
Reason for this biographical memory trip, with the miniaturization (whew) of electronics why are top of the line cameras so big and heavy? The computer industry builds fast machines, consumers use 1/10th of the speed and computing power. I feel the same with cameras. I am still learning my E-620 and will for quite awhile. If all else fails, select "reset!"
Are we really better for all the gadgets and gizmos, the whizbang and chrome! Are we allowing the camera to dictate creativity. Simple actuate the shutter, create a "masterpiece!"
I sometimes yearn for the days of "box" cameras and their simplicity. Call me nostalgic.
I presume you mean the single-digit Canon and Nikon bodies with built-in portrait grip?
If so, then the answer is partly because of the type of construction (large, full chassis of cast and machined magnesium with a full external body for the human interface and protection), the intrinsic durability (200,000-300,000 actuations typical) and system speed of 10-12 frames-per-second (FPS) for the bodies designed for sports. (As the FPS speed doubles, it takes typically 4-times the power for the same moving mass in the shutter box and mirror box assemblies.) Add the extra real-estate of the built-in grip and the need for keeping everything in alignment at those outrageous FPS speeds, and we're pretty lucky that the bodies don't weigh more than they already do.
I can produce much better work today with my digital cameras, than I could not that many years ago in film (... and that includes working with a 4" x 5" view camera and some pretty nice lenses, which I still own). That's the metric I choose to use to determine progress.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
That was then (2009), this is now. And a fine performer it is according to all reports.