No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:04 pm Posts: 2017 Location: St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Greg Beetham wrote:
No I don’t think I have seen any CAD simulation printouts, I used to always have a CAD program on the system for things like having to juggle the best way of cutting a sheet of ‘something’ up into a number of smaller pieces, to reduce the potential wastage had I cut it up differently. But the printouts I did do always seemed to be of first class quality, with CAD I do believe you really need an A3 printer, but the program will happily print the same thing on two A4 sheets so you can glue them together. I remember I did detailed drawings of various dinosaurs once to make archery targets with a difference, the kill and wound zones matching to the IFAA standards, I think from memory the T-Rex target printed out on 24 A4 pages which had to be carefully cut, lined up and glued onto a cardboard backing. Greg
Are we really sure where the kill zones are on the T-Rex? I have a hunting trip planned with Time Travelers Inc. to the Cretaceous Period and was really hoping to bag one, but you know how nasty they can be if you don't put them down on the first shot!
I don't think I'll go for the archery tag, I want really BIG gun for T-Rex!
Dusty
_________________ A couple of a350's, an a700, even more lenses.
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm Posts: 5343 Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Yeah Dusty I see your point about the kill and wound zones, I looked at most of the existing Group 1 animal IFAA targets (Group 1’s are shot at maximum distance) and took my que from them and I think I did a reasonably good job in the end with all of the group sizes, (4 x Group 1’s, 4 x Group 2’s, and the Group 3’s and 4’s I forget how many there is exactly in an IFAA animal course). It is basically a fun round (even though the scores matter), so there is always a bit of poetic licence with the targets, I mean who is going to fire an arrow at a Kodiak bear for instance, certainly not me that’s for sure, somewhere from 30-06 through to .458W for me if I had to shoot one to stop from being eaten, .375H&H sounds about right. But when it comes to something like a REAL T-Rex take an Abrams M1A1 MBT along as a backstop or somewhere to hide I think, if you want to give the cretaceous critters a sporting chance maybe the Barrett light 50 could be one to consider. The T-Rex had belly armour under the scales so you need something that’s going to penetrate through that heavy duty tackle, I think full patch military projectiles for sure, no hollow points, maybe even AP shot. Hmmm a T-Rex head on the living room wall complete with 6 or 8 inch dental ware…there’s something to think about. Greg
Attachment:
Barrett-light-50.jpg [ 36.63 KiB | Viewed 1175 times ]
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:36 am Posts: 598 Location: Southern California
Greg Beetham wrote:
It is basically a fun round (even though the scores matter), so there is always a bit of poetic licence with the targets, I mean who is going to fire an arrow at a Kodiak bear for instance, certainly not me that’s for sure, somewhere from 30-06 through to .458W for me if I had to shoot one to stop from being eaten, .375H&H sounds about right.
There ARE people who will do that kind of hunting with a bow.
For example, back in the 1950s, Fred Bear (founder of Bear Archery), successfully hunted all of the major big-game species in the world with a bow. In addition to Kodiak and Grizzly Bear, he took down Bengal Tiger, African Lion, African Elephant, and Cape Buffalo with a bow - plus a number of other rather dangerous creatures.
However, I doubt that even Fred would have gone after T-Rex with a bow . . .
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:04 pm Posts: 2017 Location: St. Louis, Missouri, USA
UrsaMajor wrote:
Greg Beetham wrote:
It is basically a fun round (even though the scores matter), so there is always a bit of poetic licence with the targets, I mean who is going to fire an arrow at a Kodiak bear for instance, certainly not me that’s for sure, somewhere from 30-06 through to .458W for me if I had to shoot one to stop from being eaten, .375H&H sounds about right.
There ARE people who will do that kind of hunting with a bow.
For example, back in the 1950s, Fred Bear (founder of Bear Archery), successfully hunted all of the major big-game species in the world with a bow. In addition to Kodiak and Grizzly Bear, he took down Bengal Tiger, African Lion, African Elephant, and Cape Buffalo with a bow - plus a number of other rather dangerous creatures.
However, I doubt that even Fred would have gone after T-Rex with a bow . . .
With best wishes, - Tom -
Yes. The Nuge (Ted Nugent, for those of you who are not fans) even wrote a song about him. Ted's a big bow hunter himself.
Dusty
_________________ A couple of a350's, an a700, even more lenses.
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm Posts: 5343 Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
I knew/heard about Fred Bear (I don’t think I remember Ted Nugent) but I for one still wouldn’t go out and fire an arrow at big game….on purpose, too many things can go wrong, the most obvious one is, you get killed. Greg
24 MP sensor 11 AF points 4 fps ISO range: 100-6400, with hi-ISO of 12800 Improved video functionality The Nikon D3200 will have some kind of a Wi-Fi connection that is supposed to offer few very interesting new features Announcement in April, 2012
I think the mp game is still very much on, but can you imagine how many entry shooters will be able to use those 24mp it's going to be a bit of a shocker for them
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm Posts: 5343 Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
The phone network is the new 'connect' with pictures, an entire alternative internet outside the existing one, cameras aren't connected with that system and are in danger of dwindling because of it, actually I think it will be a massacre in no time (for P&Ss’ especially) if cameras don't get connected to the phone network in some fashion soon (telecoms will rub their hands together, more bandwidth they can charge for). We may witness the death of the P&S as we know it in our lifetime. Maybe the camera should have some kind of port/cable to connect too the phone because if the camera had its own network id and independent access then you would probably need to pay for another connection…or maybe it might not be classed as a phone and the connection could be lot cheaper than an actual phone who knows? But some camera manufacturers have seen the writing on the wall for sure I think. Greg Ps there is already a phone cam with 40MP's on a tiny sensor (it does binning so the end pic is only 5-8MP) so cameras are a long way behind in the MP race.
Ps there is already a phone cam with 40MP's on a tiny sensor (it does binning so the end pic is only 5-8MP) so cameras are a long way behind in the MP race.
it's about 5x the size of your average phone sensor, almost Nikon CX size.
I can see the complaints now with these new 24mp cams esp entry ones "my shots are not in focus" "my photos are not sharp" "I need a new hard drive as my 2TB one is full up" "My computer is too slow processing raw files"
It's a consumer game and a well planned one I will give them that
There are also rumours about 24mp entry Nikon's turning up soon as well
Questions are:
1: Who's complaining 24mp isn't enough? (I'd love to hear that) 2: When is it going to stop?
No doubt someone will come out with "more pixels" and beat 24mp. But I think we've reached the point of "adding more" adds little
I wish I could find that link to a lecturer who's basically said we're hitting a wall and adding more resolution won't have any real advantages for the end user.
Of course it's still the same flash crippled camera with a tiny VF it always was and the £800 price is a bit shocking too. Nikon are mastering marketing over substance..where next 24mp to 36mp on APS-C?
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm Posts: 6036 Location: Kelso, Scotland
Richard went to the Nikon conference yesterday. He wasn't over-excited, everyone thought the 5200 was coming, and they produced exactly what was predicted. No phase detect AF.
I've been doing comparative tests on the D600 and A99 today. There's no doubt the Nikon high ISO is superior, combined with typically more generous exposure - anything between 1/3rd and 2/3rds of a stop, depending on the ISO setting. The A99 in turn is more generous than the A77, which typically underexposes by 1/3rd to 2/3rd stops. The difference between D600 and A77 is quite often one full stop on a simple subject. The Nikon does have an exposure global fine tune setting, and I'm going to set a permanent minus 0.3EV on the camera we have. If the A77 had it, I should setting a permanent +0.3. I'm happy with the A99 but it certainly doesn't overexpose in many conditions.
If the 5200 is similarly ahead of the A77/NEX-7, as the D600 is ahead of the A99, it will be attractive for tele wildlife, safari, concert gigs etc. It should be fully useful at 3200. So not an uninteresting camera.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
certainly not me that’s for sure, somewhere from 30-06 through to .458W for me if I had to shoot one to stop from being eaten, .375H&H sounds about right.
How many fast 32gb cards do you have in your camera bag? 
