HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: czichon@psyche.csc.ti.com (Cary Czichon)
Subject: Re: Olympus Stylus Recommendations
Keywords: Olympus
Organization: Texas Instruments
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:20:50 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.072737.17055@hemlock.cray.com> n3022@cray.com writes:
>I am thinking of getting a point-and-shoot instamatic-type
>35mm camera.  The one I really like is the Olympus Stylus.
>It is pocket size, has built in flash, auto-everything (focus,
>exposure, advance, and rewind), red-eye reduction system,
>and the list goes on.
>
>My goal is to have a camera that I can bring with to places where a
>35mm SLR would be too conspicuous.  Also, I want the camera to easily
>fit in my pocket.
>
>Does anyone have any experience positive or negative with
>the Olympus Stylus?

I own two 35mm cameras, a Stylus and a Maxxum with assorted lenses and filters.
They're used for outdoor photography (mountains, etc.).  The Stylus gets
loaded with Ektar 100; the Maxxum get loaded with K64 or Velvia.  The
Stylus is used for snapshots.  It's carried in my pocket in its gray velvet
bag.  Exposures are clear enough for enlargements to 8x10.  11x14s are too
grainy and blurry.  Serious shots are always done with slide film in the
Minolta, usually with a circular polarizer.

Cary Czichon
czichon@csc.ti.com




Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Color balance setups for specific films
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 08:50:03 GMT

hsong@ardour.bellcore.com (G. Hugh Song) writes:
: In article <BzD8qI.7Bt@javelin.sim.es.com>, rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs) writes:
: |> 
: |> In my opinion, this is one of the reasons that so many of people's lab-
: |> produced prints look so BAD.  The built-in analyzer makes an assumption that
: |> the frame should average to gray.  It then dumps in a LOT of correction when
: |> it sees a predominant color in the frame.
: 
: So, isn't it a good idea to have a standard filter setup for some of your favorite
: films and to get rid of that analyzer?   What do you do in your home darkroom?
: Most of you do not have an analyser in your home darkroom, do you?

Nope. The filter pack varies, depending on the particular batch of film,
the batch of paper, the chemicals and processing of the film and the chemicals
and processing of the paper. You can get a "starting pack" - but an analyzer
is still handy. Even an analyzer is not perfect - you still usually have to
make the final decision by inspection of the dried test print.

If you do much printing, an analyzer pays for itself in a fairly short time.
It saves wasting a lot of paper making test prints.

Bill
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: thomass@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu (thomas stocker)
Subject: panoramic cameras ?
Originator: thomass@ko.ldgo.columbia.edu
Organization: Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, Columbia University, New
	York
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 17:06:25 GMT


Hi,
I am new to this group and this may be a FAQ.
I consider buying a panoramic camera and was 
wondering whether anybody has experience with
the Widelux F8 (35mm) camera.

I would appreciate some critical comments and 
advice either to the net or to me directly:

thomass@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu

Thank you!

Thomas Stocker
Lamont-Dohery Geological Observatory
Palisades, NY 10964

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: michael9@nadine.cs.mun.ca (Michael Sullivan)
Subject: Need good quality lens
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 16:44:51 GMT


	My set up : Minolta X-700


	I need suggestions for a good quality 28mm lens.  I see quite a variation
in the prices of the lens from different companies, is there really that
much of a difference in quality?

  Suggestions please!

  
-- 
|uunet!garfield!michael9|'"Proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing,"|
|michael9@odie.cs.mun.ca| says God.  "But you have given us proof," says      |
|POB 756,St.John's,Nfld.| man, "Therefore you do not exist. QED." "Oh, my,"   |
|A1S 1G8                | says God, and disappears in a puff of logic.'       |
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 13:41:08 GMT

In article <BzypJF.2Js@jrd.dec.com>, diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:
> In article <1992Dec28.031152.9205@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>In <BzyIHq.KoC@jrd.dec.com> diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec25.032603.25071@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>>>In <BzszB1.ICv@jrd.dec.com> diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:
>>>>>In article <1992Dec24.205338.11007@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
...
>>The SB-25 accomplishes FP-sync (I believe), by simply keeping the flash
>>tube illuminated for the full duration of the shutter being open.
> 

I would expect that the flash runs ~100k slashes per sec in FP mode, just like
a Xenon Arc light.

>>The trick is to change the brightness of the flash, rather than the duration.
> 

No, you fiddle the duration of each flash. Trying to control the flash current
any other way would result in *HUGE* power dissapation in the control circuit.

Maybe some kind sole with access to an SB-25 and a high speed photocell and
CRO could have a look for us.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: How do they know?
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:15:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Dec22.054431.23588@ultb.isc.rit.edu> fjcppr@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In the most recent Del's ad in Shutterbug, Tony "who knows Leica" says
>that you can stand on a Leica without damaging it. Should I believe
>that Tony or someone he knows has actually done that? Has anyone
>out there in Rec.photo every stood on any camera? If so, please 
>include your weight in your reply. Also, did you stand on the camera
>with its bottom or its back to the ground? 

I don't know about that, but I did see a dealer toss a pair of Leitz
binoculars into the air and let them land on the (hard) floor.  Of
course, it is hard to tell whether or not binoculars have been knocked
out of alignment by just looking at them.

  -- David Jacobson
From: milan@italia.boeing.com (Milan Richter)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Advice sought on slide projectors
Date: 22 Dec 92 19:12:59 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services

I am planning to buy a slide projector, and would like to ask for 

1. opinions about the usefulness of different features
2. recommendations for particular makes/models

I need something in the "middle of the road", not a cheap stuff but also not
a high-end professional equipment. It's for home use. I think I should have
an autofocus and perhaps a remote control (wire is fine).

Please reply directly if you have suggestions. Many thanks!

-- Milan Richter, Seattle
From: parsons1@applelink.apple.COM (Don Parsons)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Is SB-25 that much better than SB-24??
Date: 21 Dec 92 23:49:07 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <28835@oasys.dt.navy.mil>, goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark
Goldberg) wrote:
> 
> I currently own the sb24 with my 8008s-based system.  If I were buying
> a new flash today, I would definitely go for the SB-25.  It is more
> powerful than the 24.  It has a built-in bounce card.  It has a diffuser
> that enables it to cover a 20mm lens.  It also has features to interface
> with the latest camera body, the N90.  It does everything the 24 does.
> 
> I do not plan to trade in my SB-24.  But when I buy a second flash
> ( I have two camera bodies), it will most likely be the 25.
> 
>    /|/| /||)|/  /~ /\| |\|)[~|)/~   |   Everyone's entitled to MY opinion.
>   / | |/ ||\|\  \_|\/|_|/|)[_|\\_|  |      goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil
> ========Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein=======

I also have an 8008s and an SB24. I plan to get a second flash, and it WILL
be an SB25 (for the reasons that Mark stated above). I also plan to get a
second
body (it may or may not be an N90, I have not decided yet). If however, you
WILL NOT be getting an N90, and you don't have, or plan on getting, a 20mm
lens,
you might want to see if you can find a great deal on an SB24. If you can't
find a GREAT deal, I would go with the SB25.

Just my opinion...

Don
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Where to post this...
Date: 27 Dec 92 04:33:54 GMT

In <1992Dec23.220245.13281@acd4.acd.com> gvb@TEFS1.acd.com (gvb@acd4.acd.com) writes:

>Start Captured Text:

	[ Text had been liberated! :-) ]

>         :End Captured Text.

Why would I pay money to send pictures to this place?

>Gregg.

ACS
-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: <None>
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 13:46:31 GMT

In article <PD.92Dec30212624@horus.sics.se>, pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:
> In article <1992Dec30.151756.24872@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN) writes:
...
> It is based on a test by the magazine "Aktuell Fotografi". The Tamron
> 90/2.5 macro and the Zeiss PLanar T* 85/1.4 got the highest ratings in
> a test of 34 short telephoto lenses from 85mm to 135mm. All the major
> brands were represented.
> 

Per, what distance did they test the lenses at? If it was infinity, the results
at macro distances are useless.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Longish macro lens for EOS. (was Re: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?)
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
	<1992Dec28.161527.12775@eua.ericsson.se> <BzzBo5.3r9@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
	<1992Dec29.122948.26657@eua.ericsson.se>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 00:42:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.122948.26657@eua.ericsson.se> Harald.Brandt@eua.ericsson.se (Harald Brandt) writes:

   or/and 45 mm TS, 100/2.0 USM, 100/2.8 Macro, 50mm/2.5 macro, Extender X2.  
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Don't buy that one. Buy the Tamron 90mm macro instead. It is the best
macro lens around 100mm, and since the Canon lens doesn't have a USM
it has no advantage at all over the Tamron.
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pdn@fc.hp.com (Paul Nuber)
Subject: pinhole camera
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 06:08:30 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]


When building a pinhole camera, what is the optimum size for the pinhole?
I thought I read once that it was about 1/200th of the focal length.

--
Paul Nuber
pdn@fc.hp.com
Hewlett-Packard Co.
Fort Collins, CO
From: JEFF-G@cup.portal.com (Jeff - Griffin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Nikkormat For Sale
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 04:15:56 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

Pre-AI Nikkormat s/n FT2 5195264
Black Body
50mm 1.2 (Nikon) & 28mm 2.8 (Soligor)
Softshell Case
 
$235. obo (you pay UPS/COD charges)
 
Interested? Email to: JEFF-G@cup.portal.com
From: barryg@hplsla.hp.com (Barry Gunn)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:23:19 GMT
Subject: Re: EOS lens list
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

>/ hplsla:rec.photo / acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih / 12:00 am  Dec 13, 1992 /
>In <92346.134219DCROWE@GTRI01.GATECH.EDU> <DCROWE@GTRI01.GATECH.EDU> writes:
>
>>The list is very good, and since it includes the 28-105mm zoom is a recent one.
>>It does omit the new 35-350mm lens, however, which has been described in detail
>>in this group.
>
>I wouldn't worry too much.  It's not like anyone buys lenses based on the
>number of elements and groups!  (This is why so much rec.photo bandwidth
>is spent on begging around for lens test info!)
>
>ACS

I do use the close focus distance information when choosing one lens over
another. And as I stated in another post, the close focus distance of the
28-105 is listed as 2.3ft in my Canon brochure(sp?). Could someone who
owns one or has seen one, please confirm this? If the close focus is 
really .5 meters, I'd be alot more exited about it.

     _
    |[o] Barry Gunn x2281
     /|\ barryg@lsid.hp.com
From: atomas@geloser.login.qc.ca (J-F Bissonnette)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Disc Cameras
Date: 31 Dec 92 05:02:02 GMT
Organization: Gentleman Loser System, Montreal/Qc/Cdn

don@vestek.com (Don Labutay) writes:

> Whatever happened to the disc cameras that kodak first introduced a few
> years ago.  I don't see them being sold anymore.  I had one of their first
> models and the picture quality wasn't that good. But, I was thinking a 
> few years more, they would have improved it, maybe a 35mm disc with autofocus
> But it looks like they didn't. What happened?
> 
Well, I'd rather not see these again and the reasons I say so is
very comprehensive.  You see the size of the negative is so small
that you wont get anything very good for picture quality, specialy
if you want to get one enlarged.  Also, the processing machine for
these are different than the ones used, well, let's say that the
piece of equipment needed for the printing are different and
the C-41 processor is totaly different and rather inneficient
comparing to the C-41 for other films (35mm, 2 1/4).  Also
I hate those because of the difficulties we get printing them;
it's already hard to see anything good with the 110 format, it
becomes HELL when you want to see the principal subject on a
disc film, even if we had (cause we dont do it anymore...) a
little magnifier to help.  In other words, for a technician
disc film sucks!   But who knoes!

It's just a opinion!

J.F.


--
atomas@geloser.login.qc.ca
Gentleman Loser System -- Montreal, Qc, Canada
From: STAN@VM.TEMPLE.EDU (Stan Horwitz)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Panaromic photo CD images?
Date: 26 Dec 92 22:55:00 GMT
Organization: Temple University - Computer Services

This past summer, my housemate bought a throw away panaromic 35mm camera.  The
results were interesting, but just like other throw away cameras, it came with
poor quality grainy film.

In any  event, I  was wondering if  one of these  little throw  away panaromic
cameras could be put  onto a Photo CD like conventional  35mm images.  Is this
possible?  I suspect it  is possible, but only by breaking  up the long images
into manageable  sizes.  This would, of  course, sort of defeat  the panaromic
effect of the pictures.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: PXY@ECLX.PSU.EDU (Pen-Li Yen)
Subject: For Sale: Cheap Nikon Cameras and many list
Organization: Penn State Engineering Computer Lab
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 19:48:20 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

Nikon N2020 and 35-70 AF lens for sale:

1. N2020: Autofocus body, w/shutter speed 1-1/2000, bulb, Program,
	high speed program, dual program, shutter priority automatic,
	AE lock, AF lock, self timer, built-in motor drive for contiunous
	or single shot, DX mode, ASA 12-3200, continuous focus or
	lock focus.

2. 35-70 Autofocus lens f:3.3 Nikkor

1+2 sell for $380 + Shipping (COD or prepay)

Camera new in box, including original manuals and genuine Nikon case ($20 in 
	the market)

Yuesea

also: N-2000 body, F body, Nikkormat FS body, 43-86 Nikkor, 50 Nikkor
	Canon F-1, Canon EOS, Pentax etc.

	will sell 15% off the best price you can find.

	above all are in near mint condition

Thank you.
From: TSOS@uni-duesseldorf.de (Detlef Lannert)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Which old Pentax S/M models ?
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 17:17:46 GMT
Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet, Duesseldorf
NNTP-Posting-Host: lannert.rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
Summary: need a body

In article <1218@racerx.bridge.COM> ken@Bridge.COM (Ken Hardy) writes:

>I've a fair selection of decent screw-mount lenses, and an old, old
>Pentax H1a, which has neither meter nor hot-shoe.  Santa was good to me
>this year, but not quite good enough for that band-new Nikon.  So I'm
>thinking of hitting a local photo show in two weeks to look for a good
>used Pentax body that takes my current lenses, but has one or more of
>these features (listed in order of importance):
>
>	1. TTL meter
>	2. Flash hot shoe
>	3. Aperature-priority A/E mode
>
>Acceptance of screw-mount lenses, of course, is a must.

The ES II meets these requirements (and its predecessor, the ES). 
It has TTL metering, a hybrid shutter (1s .. 1/1000s electronically in 
auto exposure mode, or even longer than 1s; 1/60 .. 1/1000 mechanically
without metering and with dead batteries!), an x hot shoe, and metering 
at open aperture. I used one of these birds for 15 years and was very 
satisfied with it.

Price: around 200..300 US$ equiv. hereabouts, incl. standard lens.

Using the K adaptor on a bayonet body, as another poster suggested, 
restricts you to stop-down metering and manual aperture control and is 
not very convenient.

Hope this helps.

Detlef
--
Detlef Lannert      DC3EK      E-Mail: tsos@rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
"Gedanken sind nicht stets parat,
man schreibt auch, wenn man keine hat."             Wilhelm Busch
From: rkou@skat.ucs (Roger H. Kou)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Fungus on lens
Date: 22 Dec 92 21:11:32 GMT
	<1992Dec22.095521.17861@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Distribution: rec
Organization: USC Computing Services, Los Angeles
NNTP-Posting-Host: skat.usc.edu
In-reply-to: appy@churchill.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM's message of Tue, 22 Dec 92 14:55:21 GMT


same thing happened to my Nikomat. I just expose it under the sun for
few hours, for a week. then they went away. I don't think it's a great
way to do it, but it might help.

happy holidays!

-RK
From: rusty@groan.Berkeley.EDU (Rusty Wright)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: A very simple question by a beginner
Date: 1 Jan 93 14:21:55
Organization: Computer Center, UC Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: groan.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: dwing@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu's message of 31 Dec 92 14:16:28 GMT

Somebody else responded that the "eye start automation" on the Minolta
cameras isn't that big of a deal (probably some sour grapes Canon or
Nikon owner, heh).  For me it's sort of like having a microwave oven;
it's one of those things that before you had it it didn't seem like
such a big deal, but after you've got it you wouldn't want to give it
up.  For fast action it's handy.  Also, I'm rather a klutz and not
good at doing the "1/2 depress" thing.

The auto power zoom is useful when you're using a card that uses it.
For example, I have the child card and use it for taking pictures of
my dog (my surrogate child) and the child card has a feature where it
will zoom the lens to get the subject at a size you specified.  Again,
it's handy because it quickly gets the composition to a good starting
point and I can fiddle with it from there.

But if I had a 7000i or some other autofocus+autoexposure camera, I'd
stick with that and wait for some future generation.  Having to fiddle
with changing cards or bar code readers is dopey.  The new Nikon where
you can plug it into some Sharp electronic wizard is a move in the
right direction; memory is cheap so they ought to be able to put lots
of it in cameras and then you can use the electronic wizard to
download many programs, and then you should be able to switch between
them easily.
From: Jimmy.Tung@dartmouth.edu (Jimmy Tung)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Remote shutter releases
Date: 22 Dec 92 16:48:25 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <43399@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com>
jslee@nrtc.nrtc.northrop.com (John Lee <jslee>) writes:

> Does anyone know of a remote shutter release that will work on a
> Canon? I need the function of a 10-15 ft shutter release cord, but
> know that an infrared wireless trigger is the right thing to get.
> JSLee

You don't mention what kind of Canon you have. A remote shutter release
is available for both manual focus and EOS cameras.  I recall the
manual focus version was simply a little doodad that pressed the
shutter release whenever you triggered the handheld remote transmitter.
Some delay before triggering also was inserted to give you some time to
get back into position, if needed.  These may have been 3rd-party
devices, so may work on all cameras with a threaded shutter release. 
The Elan (and I assume the EOS-10s and EOS-1, see the [great] EOS FAQ
sheet) has remote capability built-in.  I was under the impression that
2 flavors existed, an electronic and an IR version.  Again, a  delay of
0, 2, or 10 sec. is possible.  The IR was supposedly much more
expensive (>$100). I don't really believe that price, but haven't
looked into it further due to a current shortage of available liquid
assets.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rdb1@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (ronald.j.deblock..jr)
Subject: Early AF SLRs 
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:31:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.083347.18560@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>Well, I don't know when the F3AF and Penteax MEF came out relative to the
>T80, but I can't imagine they were out much sooner.  Though the T80 was
>a disaster, Canon managed to get it right in the end.
>
>ACS

Konica C35 AF: 1977 - the first production AF camera, a point-and-shoot with
		      a passive rangefinder AF mechanism.
Poraroid SX-70: 1978 - first AF SLR, an instant camera with an ultrasound
		       ranging AF system
Pentax MEF: 1980 - first TTL AF system, a full production system with body
		   and several lenses, based on the ME Super.  K-mount
		   lenses with batteries and motor in lens
Nikon F3AF: 1982 - TTL AF system, batteries and motor in lenses, based
		   on the F3 and F-mount lenses
Canon AL-1: 1982 - this camera contained a focus sensor for FOCUS ASSIST,
		   but not autofocus.  Used FD lenses.
Olympus OMF: 1982 - also focus assist
Ricoh XRF: 1982 - also focus assist

At the 1982 photokina, Olympus showed an AF SLR with motor and batteries in 
lens.  Also, Contax showed an AF camera/lens with the motor in the body, the 
first use of this configuration.  Neither camera went into production.

In 1983 and 1984, several manufacturers produced AF lenses for MF cameras.
These had a rangefinder, motor and batteries built into the lens.

Canon T80: 1985 - batteries in the body and (large) motor in the lenses.
		  FD lenses work with this body with focus assist!  

Minolta Maxxum 7000: late 1985.  First truly successful 35mm AF SLR system.
                     It's interesting to note that this is also the first
                     AF system that is completely incompatible with the
                     manufacturer's MF systems.

Canon showed a prototype, the Canon AF, in 1963(!).  I have no other 
information about this camera, anyone know more?

The first production AF device was the Honeywell Auto/Sharp 652 slide 
projector in 1964.

Reference (recommended reading):
	W.L. Fadner, "The Origins of TTL Autofocusing", _Shutterbug_,
	Vol. 22 No. 2, December, 1992
-- 
Ron DeBlock  rdb1@homxb.att.com  (that's a number 1 in rdb1, not letter l)
AT&T Bell Labs   Somerset, NJ  USA
Newsgroups: rec.photo