Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Well now, this might be of interest to a few here.

    I'm patiently awaiting my copy of the recently released TTArtisan 50mm f/0.95 for use on my Panasonic S1R and Sigma fp using the Leica M-L adapter, and on searching around on the web for news/reviews on the lens, stumbled across this -

    50mm f0.95 | Chan'Blog

    It's in Chinese, but your browser should be able to do a decent translation job on it.

    And yes - it looks as if the image circle on the lens is large enough to cover a crop MF sensor...

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.
    Thanks 3 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Looking forward to trying this with my X1D2. Results on the GFX look promising.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    West Yorkshire,United Kingdom
    Posts
    323
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    I think the Noctilux is in a unique world and untouchable.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by B L View Post
    I think the Noctilux is in a unique world and untouchable.
    Is that questioned in the review, or are you presenting a general platitude that a $12.5K lens is superior to a $750 lens?

    Returning to the original medium format topic, do you know whether the current Noctilux projects an image circle that would cover a medium format sensor, such as the GFX and X1D? Iíve looked and couldnít find any samples.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    West Yorkshire,United Kingdom
    Posts
    323
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Here someone used it on GFX. Looks quite sharp. I understand we must make room for the newcomers.
    Flickr
    Also a quick search

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by B L View Post
    Here someone used it on GFX. Looks quite sharp. I understand we must make room for the newcomers.
    Flickr
    Also a quick search
    Those are with the Noctilux, yes?

    Which vignettes hard in the corners, and so every image you link to is cropped, yes?

    As is actually mentioned on the blog you link to - "Here are some pictures with the 50mm Noctilux. This lens has much more vignette than the 75mm and a crop becomes essential. Once cropped it is almost equal to 50mm field of view".

    So my read of that is that if you use the Noctilux on a 33x44 MF sensor, you don't really gain much because you have to crop back down to a 24x36 frame (which presumably is what the blogger means by "once cropped it is almost equal to 50mm field of view"). So basically the Noctilux has an image circle that just covers a 24x36 frame.

    Struggling to understand what the point of putting it on a MF sensor is then. But perhaps I'm missing something.

    What does this mean? -

    I understand we must make room for the newcomers.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    West Yorkshire,United Kingdom
    Posts
    323
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    [
    What does this mean? -[/QUOTE]
    Gerald, I meant any new cameras and lenses. Thanks.

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    9,229
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    ... So basically the Noctilux has an image circle that just covers a 24x36 frame.
    Struggling to understand what the point of putting it on a MF sensor is then. But perhaps I'm missing something.
    What does this mean? -
    I have several Leica M and R lenses that I've adapted to my Hasselblad 907x. By and large, most of them vignette a little at the corners on the full 33x44 sensor, but work fine at 33x33 square crop. Even if I had to crop to 24x36, there is one benefit from using them on the 907x: the CFVII 50c back's sensor is a full 16bit sensor, so the tonal range and dynamic range of a capture is much broader than the 12 or 14mm sensors in my M or SL bodies was. (I don't know which Fuji camera's sensor this benefit applies to as I understand that not all of them are 16bit sensors.)

    Some of the lenses do cover the full format well enough to be used without cropping too, in particular the Macro-Elmarit-R 60 and 100mm lenses when used for work in the close-up range (1:4 magnification and higher). This makes the adaptation very useful to me.

    I haven't seen too much value in going for ultra-fast lenses adapted to the larger sensor, however. Just by going to the larger format, you've reduced the depth of field by a stop or so, so an f/4 lens behaves like an f/2.8 lens would on 35mm FF with respect to focus zone and background blur. Most of the time, an f/2 or faster lens used wide open nets so little DoF it's just neither particularly useful nor aesthetically pleasing.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Having owned and shot with several versions of the Noctilux over the decades, including the latest, I appreciate that we can now enjoy the sharpness along the plane of focus, rather than just the Ďdreamyí out of focus areas of all prior versions of the Noctilux (because letís be honest, prior versions of the Noctilux were expensive character lenses).

    One should expect that level of performance, though, for the investment in premium glass, as, for example, one should expect top performance from the best funded Formula One teams. The challenge for manufacturers is approaching the performance bar set by the best with a far lower budget, and that is the allure, to me at least, with experimenting with the Far East glass.....to be potentially surprised by an unforeseen combination, such as the X1D II and the latest VC 35mm f/1.2 III, which covers the medium format frame with correctable vignetting, as shown in the attached corrected image (though with magenta cast at the periphery in color). I left some vignetting, because I donít mind some in a shallow DOF environmental portrait. The vignette mostly disappears around f/5.6. Unexpected, and interesting......at least to me (not so much to my wife).
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	23FA2126-AA6F-41DB-A052-0E29B9C4F3A1.jpeg 
Views:	13 
Size:	338.8 KB 
ID:	150191   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	85593A08-DBA2-4C54-9DAC-A5EF62B5A3DF.jpeg 
Views:	3 
Size:	386.0 KB 
ID:	150198   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2CB3F0A5-6B41-4DEC-B492-02B895734AE4.jpeg 
Views:	4 
Size:	183.1 KB 
ID:	150206  
    Last edited by leitztozeiss; 2 Weeks Ago at 20:11.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Fuji GFX50R + Leica 50mm Summilux-M ASPH
    ACROS-RED Jpg from Camera.
    F11, ISO 100, 1/500th, FULL 8256x6192 resized to 1280 for the forum...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	In_camera_GFX6867.jpg 
Views:	2 
Size:	172.9 KB 
ID:	150192

    Shadow Lift

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	In_camera_GFX6867-2.jpg 
Views:	2 
Size:	196.4 KB 
ID:	150193



    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    Struggling to understand what the point of putting it on a MF sensor is then. But perhaps I'm missing something.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by Satrycon View Post
    Fuji GFX50R + Leica 50mm Summilux-M ASPH
    ACROS-RED Jpg from Camera.
    F11, ISO 100, 1/500th, FULL 8256x6192 resized to 1280 for the forum...

    [...]

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    [...]Struggling to understand what the point of putting it on a MF sensor is then. But perhaps I'm missing something.

    Gerald was challenging why mount a lens, such as the latest Noctilux, which would need cropping down anyway to near the full frame size. He's not questioning adapting lenses in general, as he's the OP.

    Regarding the original topic, Gerald, I have a TTartisan 50/0.95 arriving in later this week, so I'll share results with the X1D here.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,078
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    I have a 50mm 0.95 Noctilux on extended loan but no M to X adapter for the X1D or 907x/CFVII to test it

    I've read that the IC does not cover the sensor, so that consideration combined with the lack of focal plane shutter on the X1D (and read out time of the ES) hasn't had me curious enough to buy an adapter.

    I enjoy the Noctilux quite a bit and it can provide some special results. I have trouble nailing focus with moving subjects even on the Z6, so it can be a frustrating lens to use for my own uses. I can't imagine hitting focus at 0.95 on a larger sensor would be any easier. Perhaps I just need to practice more....or perhaps my toddler needs to sit still a little more My biggest gripe with the Noctilux though is its minimum focusing distance is not close enough for my uses.

    That said, the TTArtisans stuff does look interesting and I may need to check it out (33x44mm coverage or not). Fraction of the price of a Noctilux and has a 2.3' close focusing distance as opposed to the 3.3' of the Noctilux
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post

    I haven't seen too much value in going for ultra-fast lenses adapted to the larger sensor, however. Just by going to the larger format, you've reduced the depth of field by a stop or so, so an f/4 lens behaves like an f/2.8 lens would on 35mm FF with respect to focus zone and background blur. Most of the time, an f/2 or faster lens used wide open nets so little DoF it's just neither particularly useful nor aesthetically pleasing.

    G
    Not sure I quite follow you here. If you're talking about a lens designed for MF that is f/2 or faster being neither particularly useful nor aesthetically pleasing, then I would definitely challenge that by bringing up the Mamiya 80/1.9 which I found to be sublime when I had my IQ180.

    If you are talking about a lens designed for 35mm that is faster than f/2, then if - as you say - you are reducing the depth of field "by a stop or so" when using it on MF, then the implication is that the lens would behave like an f/1.4.

    Ergo, an f/1.4 (or faster) lens on 35mm shot wide open is neither particularly useful nor aesthetically pleasing?

    FWIW, I also shot with the Canon 85/1.2 on FF MFDB and it, also, was wonderful.


    Jeez. So much negativity from people in this thread about the potential to use this interesting and (relatively) very affordable lens on MF, I'm beginning to wonder why I even bothered to share the news.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    9,229
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Gerald:

    Note that I said "most of the time", not "all of the time". There are indeed moments when ultra fast lenses used at their large apertures have value if they image well. It's why I'm likely going to get the XCD 80mm f/1.9 as my next Hasselblad lens: by all reports and by the examples I see, it has lovely imaging qualities wide open as well as superb performance when stopped down. What could be wrong with that?

    I wouldn't go out and spend $12K for a Noctilux for my MF digital camera, but I might spend a few hundred or even the $4500 or so that the 80/1.9 costs since they supposedly cover the format nicely. By and large, I've found that most of such purchases end up sitting on the shelf a good bit of the time, that's all.

    As a practical matter, the moments when such ultra narrow focus zone proves to be the "best" solution to creating a beautiful photograph are somewhat few and far between IMO, but despite that, an inexpensive ultra fast lens is always interesting anyway.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    293
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    On a sidenote because there was so much talk about Leica lenses in this thread: did anyone try the Zeiss 50mm 1.5 C-Sonnar on an X1D / 50R? I've been tempted by this lens for a while now but cannot quite justify its purchase as I already have a few very nice 50mm lenses.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    106
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by anyone View Post
    On a sidenote because there was so much talk about Leica lenses in this thread: did anyone try the Zeiss 50mm 1.5 C-Sonnar on an X1D / 50R? I've been tempted by this lens for a while now but cannot quite justify its purchase as I already have a few very nice 50mm lenses.
    Here's a review of that combination.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    293
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Thank you, I knew this review already but wondered if anyone here has first hands experience with it.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    i love using my 50 summilux on the GFX50r..and also the 90 APO summicron, both have slight soft vignetting which can be killed in 2 seconds..other lenses i tried have hard vignetting which means a slight crop..from what ive read the adapter is quite important, i use novoflex M>G-mount

    this might help

    https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-wor...-fuji-gfx-50s/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Gerald:

    Note that I said "most of the time", not "all of the time". There are indeed moments when ultra fast lenses used at their large apertures have value if they image well. It's why I'm likely going to get the XCD 80mm f/1.9 as my next Hasselblad lens: by all reports and by the examples I see, it has lovely imaging qualities wide open as well as superb performance when stopped down. What could be wrong with that?

    I wouldn't go out and spend $12K for a Noctilux for my MF digital camera, but I might spend a few hundred or even the $4500 or so that the 80/1.9 costs since they supposedly cover the format nicely. By and large, I've found that most of such purchases end up sitting on the shelf a good bit of the time, that's all.

    As a practical matter, the moments when such ultra narrow focus zone proves to be the "best" solution to creating a beautiful photograph are somewhat few and far between IMO, but despite that, an inexpensive ultra fast lens is always interesting anyway.

    G
    Apologies - I did not take your use of the word "value" in the comment I quoted in its literal, financial, sense, which is clear now what you meant.

    I too would never have purchased a Noctilux for MF when I was shooting that format. For me, there were better lenses to spend that $12k on - particularly considering the Noctilux doesn't get close to covering even a crop MF sensor.

    $800 however is a whole different ballpark, and especially for those with more limited financial resources, perhaps there is "value" there to be had, even considering the moments where it could be the best solution are few and far between.

    Kind regards,


    Gerald.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    I have several Leica M and R lenses that I've adapted to my Hasselblad 907x. By and large, most of them vignette a little at the corners on the full 33x44 sensor, but work fine at 33x33 square crop. Even if I had to crop to 24x36, there is one benefit from using them on the 907x: the CFVII 50c back's sensor is a full 16bit sensor, so the tonal range and dynamic range of a capture is much broader than the 12 or 14mm sensors in my M or SL bodies was. (I don't know which Fuji camera's sensor this benefit applies to as I understand that not all of them are 16bit sensors.)

    Some of the lenses do cover the full format well enough to be used without cropping too, in particular the Macro-Elmarit-R 60 and 100mm lenses when used for work in the close-up range (1:4 magnification and higher). This makes the adaptation very useful to me.

    I haven't seen too much value in going for ultra-fast lenses adapted to the larger sensor, however. Just by going to the larger format, you've reduced the depth of field by a stop or so, so an f/4 lens behaves like an f/2.8 lens would on 35mm FF with respect to focus zone and background blur. Most of the time, an f/2 or faster lens used wide open nets so little DoF it's just neither particularly useful nor aesthetically pleasing.

    G



    I was under the impression that the CFV II was the sensor as the X1D, which is the same as the Fuji GFX 50S and 50R.

    Shown to be 14 bit only, not true 16 bit which is found in the newer GFX 100..

    I feel I have seen it mentioned a number of times that the claim of 16 bit is a bit of marketing by Hasselblad?

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Just a heads-up for anyone who is thinking of purchasing this lens, whatever you do, do NOT place an order on eBay with "3c_photography".

    They are scammers who pretend they have stock, take your money, don't respond in a timely manner to enquiries, and then, when threatened with fire and brimstone, finally admit they have no stock and have no idea when or if they will get any.

    And now the fun begins,.

    For the purposes of SEO -

    3c_photography, Leica, TTArtisan, eBay, scammers, con-merchants, thieves.

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    9,229
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by wallpaperviking View Post



    I was under the impression that the CFV II was the sensor as the X1D, which is the same as the Fuji GFX 50S and 50R.

    Shown to be 14 bit only, not true 16 bit which is found in the newer GFX 100..

    I feel I have seen it mentioned a number of times that the claim of 16 bit is a bit of marketing by Hasselblad?
    (bolded) I was too, which is why I presumed that the Fuji GFX50R had 16 bit output.

    I can only go by the data I see in the Hasselblad spec sheet with regards to the CFVII 50c and X1D II which says 16bit raw files, and the claim seems to be backed up by evidence of the sensor's dynamic rangeóit proves substantially greater than the 14 bit sensors I've had in other cameras by the evidence shown in test photos I've made with it.

    I don't know what "true 16 bit" means: Since the output of a imager sensor is an analog voltage signal which is rendered to discrete integers by an A->D converter, it's quite possible for the sensor in two different cameras to be the same part yet the data stored in the digital domain to be different. That's a matter of what the camera does upon readout in sampling and digitizing the data. I guess it also matters where the A->D conversion is taking placeóif the A->D conversion is an embedded part of the chip and the chips have the same part number, it would be most likely they have the same output in the two cameras. If, however, the chip outputs its raw voltage signal for the camera to process, then the A->D conversion and resultant range of output values is whatever the camera supplies as part of the data handling chain. Lacking the insight of an electrical engineer who's dismantled the device for analysis, and the part numbers/specs for all the chips, I tend to trust the manufacturers' specification listing.

    In the end, it doesn't matter at all to my photography what these specifications might be: I'm delighted with the CFVII 50c sensor performance regardless. It's the best sensor I've used in a camera so far, the performance it delivers is simply outstanding.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    404
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by wallpaperviking View Post



    I was under the impression that the CFV II was the sensor as the X1D, which is the same as the Fuji GFX 50S and 50R.

    Shown to be 14 bit only, not true 16 bit which is found in the newer GFX 100..

    I feel I have seen it mentioned a number of times that the claim of 16 bit is a bit of marketing by Hasselblad?
    X1D cameras use a 14-bit sensor. It seems that Hasselblad uses 16-bit in-camera calculations and produces files with 16-bit data. GFX100 sensor generates 16-bit of data. Unfortunately, it seems that OSPDAF banding degrades GFX100 images so that 14-bit is practically as good as 16-bit. I shoot GFX100 always in 14-bit mode.

  24. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Guelph, Canada
    Posts
    247
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    (bolded)
    In the end, it doesn't matter at all to my photography what these specifications might be: I'm delighted with the CFVII 50c sensor performance regardless. It's the best sensor I've used in a camera so far, the performance it delivers is simply outstanding.

    G
    I am still amazed at the quality and malleability of the files coming from my Phase One IQ250, which is an early implementation of the same sensor. The only things calling me to the upgrade well are outside of the raw sensor performance; BSI for tech cam usage, live view performance and readout speed, electronic shutter (which other have with the same sensor, just not Phase, and sensor size. The size of the "crop" sensor in and of itself is not an issue for me; only since I am using it within the Phase One ecosystem do I deem it an issue.

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,078
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Quote Originally Posted by med View Post
    I am still amazed at the quality and malleability of the files coming from my Phase One IQ250, which is an early implementation of the same sensor. The only things calling me to the upgrade well are outside of the raw sensor performance; BSI for tech cam usage, live view performance and readout speed, electronic shutter (which other have with the same sensor, just not Phase, and sensor size. The size of the "crop" sensor in and of itself is not an issue for me; only since I am using it within the Phase One ecosystem do I deem it an issue.
    I agree re: quality and malleability of the Sony 50mp sensor (IMX161 I think?). I don't have an IQ250 but have had a 645z in the past and currently have an X1D and CFVII 50c. I was surprised at how much I was able to pull out of the X1D files last time I took it out in less-than-ideal lighting conditions. It's pretty amazing how much mileage manufacturers have gotten out of that little sensor, which is now at least 6-6.5 years old.

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    9,229
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 50mm f/0.95 for Fuji GFX

    Doing a little further reading on imager sensors, the CCD chip design is as I said earlier, its output is an unquantized analog signal that the camera renders to digital domain through an A>D converter. CMOS chips, however, produce a quantized output and the number of bits in that output is indeed fixed at the chip interface; the Sony IMX161(?) indeed produces a 14-bit output range.

    However, Hasselblad's specs on the X1D II and CFVII 50c never refers to the chip but to the raw files, which are noted as containing 16-bit data, so that means their data handling, filtering, etc, expand the numeric base from 14-bit to 16-bit, which minimizes any potential losses and degradation as the signal is put through filtering and other operations and eventually written to the raw file.

    I used to do this sort of thing with the sensor data when I was at NASA working on the radar imaging system in the middle 1980s! The physical output of the digital capture devices we were using (tape recorders, essentially) was limited to 10-bit (and later 12-bit) quantized data, but we achieved much better quality data for the later stages of image processing by up-sampling the device data to 16-bit space for handling through the system. It also sped up the processing by a small increment because although the data volume went up by a third, we could simplify the algorithms in implementation by using more efficient instructions in processing rather than having to bookkeep the data with byte level instructions and bit manipulations.

    It's good to hear that "the more things change, the more they remain the same" in this domain.

    That was my Geeky Moment for the day. I think I'll go look at some photographs now.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •