That’s a relief. Honestly, I don’t keep track.
Not at all, but those had expansion slots so I could interface with stuff how I like. Even my old TiBook has a cardbus slot so that I still have ports if a bad device fries my Firewire or USB. My experience has been that real ports for everything is far more reliable than relying upon lots of adaptors.
I said I’d rather have a SparcBook, not that I do have one. My “workstation” laptops are old Apples and MPCs.
Cables and adapters are already available to go from nearly all possible combinations. It’s all 100% electrical and spec compatible.
Which gets somewhat tough with the cheaper compact cameras, which have at best a neutral density filter instead of a proper aperture, and lack manual focus.
I spent the entire fucking today trying to find a camera that would be scriptable (read: run CHDK, which limits the choices to not-cutting-edge Canons), would have acceptable macro, acceptable size/weight for casual carrying, and would be affordable (read: pretty cheap). With CHDK you can at least somewhat compensate the lack of the manual adjustment of the crucial variables, for the price of dealing with the menu instead of having it right on the cam’s selectors; native support would be more ergonomic, though. Of course the budget segment has very limited feature sets, despite them being more than easy to add; but the manufacturer of course knows better. I want the schematics and the firmware sources so I can just add the features in; would take less time than hunting for a model that fits the specs. Am I asking for that much?!?
(I decided to hunt for one after a semi-failure of photographing the eclipse today, because the cameras I have now lack manual settings and the better one has poor macro with blurry edges. And don’t let me start on the issue of the memory cards! Why would Sony hold to that MemoryStick crap for so long when everybody and their dog already settled on SD?)
all the wood behind one arrow!
You mean increase the f-number or increase the aperture size? Terminology around f-stops—other than “stop down” and “open up”—can be confusing.
Probably focusing in the right spot is more important, anyway, not to mention the only thing you can control on a phone cam.
At least that! So if it gets frustrating, I can hack in the other connector, replacement or in parallel (yay for multistandards).
Good to know, thanks! 
[quote=“jerwin, post:43, topic:54066”]
In photography, there’s a concept called depth of focus.
[/quote]Actually, the term you are looking for is “depth of field.”
“Depth of focus” is about a different concept: how far the film/sensor plane can be moved while still maintaining focus at the focal point. Essentially, it’s depth of field with the optical system reversed.
The physical size of the displayed image and the viewing distance are two other important considerations.
Both magsafe adapters habve the same number of ins in the same orientation, so that wouldn’t tell you much. The difference is the size and dimensions of the plugs (the magsafe 2 is thinner and wider), and you can see the difference in the photograph.
You can, albeit somewhat poorly.
A side-by-side comparison using the same angle and if possible with a ruler or other size-reference object would be admittedly way better.
TBH, I honestly did not know that the significant difference between the plugs was the number of pins - as you say.
In my experience, the difference was that the shape and size of the damn things is different and they don’t fit in each others holes - and I could see that just fine in the first picture.
I maybe this pic (found by scrolling down google image search a bit further Apple MagSafe vs. MagSafe 2: photos of the two incompatible power connectors) allows you to count the difference in the number of pins better…
Though, maybe the white-balance needs tweaking a little?
White balance can be fixed in post. Depth of field can’t–unless you use an lytro, and fo all I know, those might be be rubbish at macro photography,
Focus stacking. Quite more involved than just mucking around with rgb curves, but still doable. Example here, using the Hugin software:
Todo: try it myself.
Well, you do have to remember to shoot the additional frames.
As soon as I clear my work table of the projects I’m currently working on, I’ll be able to set up my copy stand, and experiment a bit. I have a 40mm micro Nikkor waiting to be put through its paces. The working distance of this lens is a bit obnoxious, though.
CHDK script for the win! 
Isn’t there any kind of transducer that can be used for digital holography? Using coherent light might be easier than layering lots of separate, diffuse images.
Conventional 3d-scanning and object reconstruction as a model may be a cheaper, easier route.
I’ve read that wiki, but I thought it was sketchy on transducers. It sounds like they were talking about scanning with regular CCDs. With analog holography one can simply wrap film into a cylinder and capture it in three-hundred-sixty degrees.
Magic Lantern can’t do this?
Maybe using the panoramic/landscape mode with a lot of bright light would get more depth?
Yes, because every other manufacturer is so consistent with AC adapter sizes from generation to generation!
Please. This isn’t an Apple problem, this is a laptop problem. But putting “Apple” in the headline gets the clicks, right?
I feel like anyone who can say this with a straight face doesn’t remember what it was like trying to get anything to work reliably over a serial port.
