Editing Talk:1855: Telephoto

<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and not delete this comment.-->
Notice the "webcam" placed on the front element, and the cable running through the extenders and converters back to the camera body?  The extenders and converters are only being used for mechanical support, to place the webcam near the bird, and not optically. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.125|162.158.79.125]] 15:16, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
<br>
I understood it to be that the webcam was mounted on the side of the extender, allowing for a live stream in addition to the up close picture being taken. [[User:Rajakiit|Raj-a-Kiit]] ([[User talk:Rajakiit|talk]]) 16:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
:That's how I took it, but the webcam and wires are drawn in a lighter line, possibly insinuating that the webcam and wires are inside the extenders and converters. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

It depends on how tall Randall actually is, but using an average of 1.7 m for humans, that camera is about 32 feet, 4 inches long (it's about 5.8 times the length of Cueball). [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 17:04, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
:Your comment makes me cringe. Apparently you measure people in metric but camera lengths (not focal length!) in imperial. So here you have it: 9,85m camera length! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.226|141.101.76.226]] 20:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
::Fair point, I'll simplify the equation. Cueball is 0.00845063 furlongs tall, the camera is 0.048984751 furlongs long. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 11:33, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
:::That's 1 and 5.8 Smoots respectively for those of you who don't live in an empire. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.16|172.68.54.16]] 00:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
While I am at it I think using commas for decimal places is wrong. [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 13:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
:It is common practice in Germany and many other places in Europe, which can along with the difference between imperial and metric units and the naming of 10^9 (billion in English, Milliarde In German, while Billionen in German is 10^12) lead to a lot of confusion when workign with texts of unknown origin, or with translations of unknown quality. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

;Incorrect definition of telephoto

A telephoto lens is actually a lens of which the physical length is shorter than the nominal focal length. For instance, I have a 90mm Leica lens that is about 67mm long; this is accomplished through the optical design. A ''long-focus'' or '' long '' lens is a lens with a comparatively long focal length: on 35mm cameras, this is generally any lens 85mm and up. They are sometimes called portrait lenses. A ''zoom'' lens is one with a variable focal length, e.g., 70mm – 140mm. It is not necessarily a long lens.

The distinction is especially important to large format photographers, and the conflation of the terms is common among lay speakers.

Randall has conflated a telephoto lens with a long lens, as does the current explanation.

See http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Telephoto#Long-focus_.28Telephoto.29 for on the topic.
[[User:Seezee|Seezee]] ([[User talk:Seezee|talk]]) 18:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
:It would be nice if you could enhance the explanation by this matter. I'm not an expert on photography but I believe Randall is just talking about a ''telephoto'' which is often also called ''telephoto lens''. And his ''telephoto'' even doesn't need a single lens. Randall hasn't conflated anything, it's the explanation. I.e. instead of "100 foot lens" it should be "100 foot telephoto without lenses", and similar to other sentences.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:01, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I am sure something like the contraption here will be a Long and Telephoto lens... like a telescope, yes you can get a lot of zoom under 200 mm lens length but then if you could do that they wouldn't have long telescopes.[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 13:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Could this also be a reference to all those phone camera attachment advertised online. I don't know if there's any truth to their claims (somehow I doubt it), but if anyone knows better, please chime in.{{unsigned ip|162.158.6.94}}

Were it not for the added weight of the tripod on the left, the right end would be on the ground. --[[User:Pascal|Pascal]] ([[User talk:Pascal|talk]]) 11:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Latest revision		Your text
Line 29:		Line 29:

	Were it not for the added weight of the tripod on the left, the right end would be on the ground. --[[User:Pascal\|Pascal]] ([[User talk:Pascal\|talk]]) 11:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)		Were it not for the added weight of the tripod on the left, the right end would be on the ground. --[[User:Pascal\|Pascal]] ([[User talk:Pascal\|talk]]) 11:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
−
−	Ahh this comic is documenting how those iPhone ads that says "taken with an iPhone" was taken. Technically an iPhone was involved. Technically.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.140\|162.158.88.140]] 17:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)