HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: GE.DWS@forsythe.stanford.edu (Drew W. Saunders)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Vivitar Ring Flash Question
Date: 11 Dec 1992 14:32:58 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

Does anyone know anything about the Vivitar 5000 macro ring flash?
It seems to be a good price (about $52 from B&H), much better than
trying to find a good used Canon ringlight for my FD macro lens.

Specifically:

How does it mount to the lens?

Does it have more than one light?  (For side-flash)

What is the guide number?

Does it have an Auto Thrystor or some such sensor?

Does it allow for 1/2, 1/4 etc. power settings?

Yes, I could write to Vivitar, but I thought someone out there might
know a thing or two about it.  If there's interest, I'll summarize
and post.  If nobody has heard of it, I'll write to Vivitar and
post.  (If I still have my job by then...)

Thanks in advance,

Drew
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: green@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Mike Green - Unix Support)
Subject: Nikon F3HP system for sale
Keywords: Nikon, F3HP, for sale
Organization: University of North Texas
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:41:17 GMT

Christmas is here and I'm broke so I'm selling one of my cameras.  I know
what the market prices are for this equipment, but I'm motivated and
willing to negotiate.

Body:
Nikon F3HP - VERY lightly used and in excellent condition

Lenses:
Nikkor AI 28mm F2.8
Nikkor AI 50mm F1.4
Nikon E 70-210mm F4

Misc:
Nikon leather case (body & normal lense) w/ strap
Misc filters
LowePro Compact35 case
Bogen Tripod

All equipment is in excellent, like-new, condition.
I would prefer to sell everything as a set but will split for the right offer.

-- Mike Green, 214-432-0124
From: reuel@blivet.houst.sgi.com (Reuel Nash)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Studio Flash Kits (Q)
Date: 14 Dec 1992 18:22:44 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: blivet.houst.sgi.com


In article <11DEC199221471050@cvdv99.mayo.edu>, fisk@cvdv99.mayo.edu writes:
> In article <1ga2f0INNk9n@rave.larc.nasa.gov>, rlc@cyclone.larc.nasa.gov (Robin Cravey) writes...
> > 
> >SUBJECT: Studio Flash Kits (Q)

I agree with Fisk. I got a similar kit, but mine didn't have the variable power
stuff. Were I to be buying again, I'd buy the more powerful variable power
heads. Also, the accessories are light-weight and may not put up with a lot of abuse
or even a lot of normal use.

I had one of my heads go out after about a year. I'm going to check the fuse
inside the unit like Fisk did. If I can't fix it, I'll toss it and buy a 
Rokunar variable-power head. (Maybe I'll keep it for spare parts.)
 
It's about the cheapest way I know of to get into multi-flash stuff.
"You get what you pay for" really does apply here. If I were taking portraits
for money, I'd want better stuff. But I've gotten great shots of the kids at
home that I wouldn't have gotten with a simple 283 and didn't require more
expensive equipment.

The pictures started coming out better after I got a flash meter! 
Guide numbers are pretty hard to deal with when you use multiple umbrellas 
and ceiling bounce.

--
Reuel Nash	(713)293-9292	FAX (713)293-0503
Silicon Graphics, 11490 Westheimer Suite 100, Houston, TX  77077

Visualize Whirled Peas
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mkuhn@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Martin W Kuhn)
Subject: Re: 127 film
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:04:21 GMT

In article <1gme4rINNf1k@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal) writes:

>taking ens.  It takes 127 film and he can't find any.  Does anyone
>out there know of a source for this film??

127 Kodacolor should be available at most large camera stores (especially
those that specialize in old equipment)

The only other 127 film available (in the US) that I know of is EFKE 127
(B&W, panchro) which is available from a limited number of stores, one of
which is Columbus Camera Group,  (Columbus, OH.)


                          --Marty


Xref: sparky rec.photo:21834 misc.forsale:33455 austin.forsale:2753
From: nks@nishin.uucp (Naresh Kermer Sharma)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,misc.forsale,austin.forsale
Subject: For sale: Nikon N6000 and lens
Date: 15 Dec 92 00:27:01 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: TANDEM Computers, Inc (CS2)

FOR SALE : 

	Nikon N6000 Body
	Nikkor AF35-70/f3.3-f4.5
	Nikon SB-23 flash
	Nikon L1BC 52mm skylight filter

	I am interested in selling the whole outfit for $460.00. The whole
	outfit was bought from B&H for $540.00 in feb,1992. Only 8/9 rolls
	have been shot by this camera. Warranty is still valid for Body, lens, 
	and flash. Warranty card is not filled. All of them are in excellent
	condition and look like new. All of them are available with original
	boxes and manuals. Buyer pays shipping.

	Reason for selling : Switching to Pentax.

	Please send e-mail to nks@mpd.tandem.com or halley!nks

-Naresh Kumar Sharma
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: Nikon MF lenses on AF bodies
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:29:27

     there any performance penalty in using
     MF lenses on AF bodies (for Nikon)?  I'm
     just wondering, as someone told me once that
     you lose 2/3 of a stop of lens speed.

There's no light loss, but the 8008 at least is a pain to focus
precisely with the electronic rangefinder.  I wish they had a split
image screen for it, as they do for the f4.
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Prints from Slides
Date: 16 Dec 92 02:23:42 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

hasn@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
: I just processed some slides [...]
: I wanted to send some of these as prints as chrismas gifts so I
: took it over to the photo shop who printed directly
: from the slides for about a little over buck a print.  
: They suck.

Making R-prints is not trivial.  If you want good results, my advice
is to find a good *professional* color lab in your area.

(There are mail order slide printing labs.  I don't know much about those.)

When I get R prints done, I pay $8 for an 8x10.  I am lucky that the least
expensive pro lab in town also makes the best R prints!  Make sure you do
not have to pay for the work unless and until you are satisfied.  Then it
is in the lab's best interest to do a good job.

: They seem to be totally underexposed
: and the color is dingy and dark.

In going directly from transparencies to prints, some brilliance and color
saturation is generally lost.  Keep in mind that the print is second
generation, and that it is reflective rather than transmissive, which
imposes some limitations.  Also, there is much room for improvement in R
printing technology, and you will not get as good results from it as if
you had used color negative film and C prints.

With this in mind, if the transparency is good, you should have fairly
good results.

-- 
Jay Ts
uucp mail: uunet!myrddin!tscs!metran!jay
phone: (813) 979-9169
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: EOS 630 (650 and RT) Interchangable screens - any experience?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:31:35 GMT

Has anyone used any of the alternative screens available for the EOS 630
series of cameras? Are they difficult to install? Is there any metering
problem with non-standard screens? The Canon literature I have doesn't
seem to mention any problems, but at the back of my mind I seem to recall
that somewhere I saw something to the effect that metering could be a 
problem.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: tnelson@ncrcan.Canada.NCR.CA (Tim Nelson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Should I buy Tamron or Sigma?
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:03:38 GMT
Organization: NCR Canada Ltd. Mississauga, Ontario

In article <1992Dec13.123351.7996@muddcs.claremont.edu> ahay@jarthur.claremont.edu (God) writes:
>Yes, I did read the FAQ.  I'm afraid I couldn't get as much out of it as I
>wanted.
>
>Within the next few weeks I hope to buy a ~80-300 mm lens for my Maxxum 8000i.

I asked exactly the same thing just about 2 weeks ago, but they were for
the range of 28-200, and for a Nikon F401.  The response I received all
indicated that the better lenses are Tamron.  Apparently the quality of the
Sigma lenses is just not up to that of Tamron.

Hope that helps.

tim
-- 
Tim.Nelson@Canada.NCR.CA
NCR Canada +1 416 819 4112
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: briang@atlastele.com (Brian Godfrey)
Subject: Re: MF Rangefinders (Was Re: More Medium Format Questions?)
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:01:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.234108.29175@atlastele.com> briang@atlastele.com (Brian Godfrey) writes:
   (That's me!)

>   I have a Fuji GS-645.  It is the folding Fuji.  I don't know why those
>   knuckleheads quit making the GS-645 - it is the handiest good quality
>   camera I have every seen!  It is very simple: 75/3.5 lens, rangefinder,
>   metered manual exposure.  It is very light in weight - much lighter 
>   than the 35mm P&S cameras, and is only slightly larger when folded.  I
>   travel internationally in my current job, and the GS-645 takes up 
>   less space in my briefcase than the Vivitar 285 which I also carry.

   I forgot to mention: another criteria was quietness.  My Fuji is quiet, 
   both in winding and in clicking.  (It goes "ping!", the RZ goes "click,
   WHOMP!, ping, WUZZZGA, WUZZZGA, WUZZZGA.)

>   Interesting connection.  Actually, the revolving back isn't the problem;
>   at least, not with the Mamiya cameras.  There is a set distance from the
>   lens mount to the film plane.  The smaller you can make that distance, 
>   the shorter of a focal length lens you can make of a "normal" design
>   before having to "resort" to retrofocus.

   I forgot to finish this thought.  (Must be getting old.)  Since the film
   plane is right at the front of the revolving back, I don't see how that
   could make a difference in the depth from lens mount to film plane.  The
   mirror is right in front of the back (now there's a convoluted thought)
   so it ... hey, I know:  The entire mirror must be bigger because of the
   revolving back, so that does, indeed, increase the distance from lens
   mount to film plane.  I must apologize for my earlier misleading
   statement.  I guess having a revolving back does force you to use 
   retrofocus for longer focal length lenses than would be necessary on a
   camera without the revolving back.

-- 
--Brian M. Godfrey
  atlastele.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ioannis@isis.sce.carleton.ca (Ioannis Lambadaris)
Subject: Ektachrome SE Duplicating Film. Please help!!!
Organization: Systems & Computer Eng. Dept., Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 20:59:01 GMT

I am planning to use the Kodac Ektachrome SE Duplicating Film SO 366
(process E-6) film this weekend. I would like to copy some slides
using my SLR with a bellows/slide copier unit and a Rodenstock enlarging
lens. Unfortunatelly I can not find the SPEED of this film. The instructions
that came with the film suggest a flash exposure of the order of 1/1000 sec
and nothing more! It would be nice to know the film speed since my
camera (Oly OM4-T) can take care of the flash exposure automatically.
Has anybody used this film before? Opinions/experiences will be of great
help.

Thank you,
John.
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: WD-40 Remover?
Date: 18 Dec 92 16:38:41 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

jimc@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Jim Cathey) wrote:
> poole@bnr.ca (Thomas Poole) writes:
>> When I got the camera, I could not turn the lens to focus so I sprayed it
>> with a little WD-40 and let it sit.
> GACK!  WD-40 is something like 40-weight motor oil with a volatile solvent
> in it.  This thins it down so that it gets everywhere.  Once the solvent's
> gone, you will find all the squeaks in your lens cleared up as if by magic...
>> Can someone suggest something to dissolve this stuff?
> You are going to have to disassemble it pretty thoroughly, use a
> solvent to get all the crap out of it, and then re-lubricate it.
> I've done similar cleanups on my Stereo Realist and an old Ikonta
> camera I bought for $15.  I used ether to clean out the gunk,
> a can of starting fluid from an auto parts store works just fine.

Linguistic warning: what USAns call "ether" is a low-molecular-weight
hydrocarbon, not diethyl ether (which is what the rest of the world means
by the term).  They dissolve different things.  Probably neither is very
safe around modern plastics; the light oil is more likely to degrade rubber
and the ether more likely to attack celluloid (both of which might occur in
an old camera).

Wouldn't the safest measure be complete disassembly and ultrasonic cleaning
in detergent followed by distilled water?

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
From: GE.DWS@forsythe.stanford.edu (Drew W. Saunders)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Zone VI 4x5 view comments ?
Date: 18 Dec 1992 14:55:10 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <724740148snx@rats.demon.co.uk>,
ian@rats.demon.co.uk ("Ian A. Young") writes:
>              [about the Zone VI camera vs Calumet Wood Field]
>
>Minor Deficiency: you can't close it with a lens mounted.  I used to be
>able to do this with my little Linhof, and I had got used to it.  Again,
>this is not an unusual restriction, although I vaguely recall that this
>was an option with one of the cameras Calumet sold; oddly enough, I can
>find no evidence of this now that I'm looking for it.  No doubt some
>kind soul will remind me.
>
>   -- Ian

That was the discontinued "Wood Field" which was offered along with
the "Wood Field XL" (or someting with an X in it).  They
discontinued the more limited, smaller one, and dropped the added
letters on the more advanced one.  The old Wood Field was an awfully
small 4x5 camera, I used one in a class long ago.

Drew
From: lakhindr@ESD.3Com.COM (Lakhinder Walia)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Pentax 67 is a good medium format camera ?
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:45:44 GMT
Distribution: rec

The other day I went to a local shop to see this camera: 6x7
I was surprised by this following bonus feature:
If you remove the prism-housing, in order to put it back you have to FIRST
remove the lens, then put the prism back, and then the lens..! 
(I am talking of the prism finder with TTL meter built-in. )
I guess the standard finder, which does not have the meter, does not have
such caveats..
You can see a metal chain which connects this Prism Housing to the body: 
for lens coupling to light-meter. Did not look like a good engineering design, 
although I am no expert on internals of other cameras-- or as such.

I have no idea about the lenses and other main quality issues. 
Viewfinder shows about 90 percent picture area.

Looking at the booklet for Pentax 6x7, page 4, it says :
"The ideal 6x7 format is not only superior in image quality but also more 
versatile and efficient in darkroom work than other medium and smaller
formats"
I wonder if that is really true.. !! I mean against 6x6 format.
Thanks

-Lakhinder Walia
From: bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Hasselblad Film Flatness
Date: 15 Dec 1992 10:48:13 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


I have to intervene here to make only one point.  Resolution of magazine
printing is far below the resolution of even poorer quality lenses.  Anyone
who has shot for publication knows that the printed image will be a major
leap downward in quality from the original.

HOWEVER... the medium IS sensitive to the quality of the original image.  A
poorly focussed shot in a magazine will always look worse than a sharp one.

That said, I would not recommend using printed media as a way to judge
lenses..there are too many variables from the quality of the
color separations to the quality of the press, screen size and so on,
not to mention the care and interest of the printers.

brian
From: ecldco@ultb.isc.rit.edu (E.C. Loyd)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Looking for a 30 or 35mm to 70 or 75mm zoom for Olympus OM-1
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:59:45 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Originator: ecldco@ultb

Subject line says most of it.  I'm looking for a zoom lens in the
30-75mm neighboorhood (28-100 would be fine, 35-70 would be okay,
30-75 would be best).  It's for an Olympus OM-2r, so any Zuiko
should fit.

-- 
Eric C. Loyd                            ecldco@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
ISC/Data Center Operations              Phone: (716) 475-7320
Rochester Institute of Technology       FAX:   (716) 475-5306
Rochester, NY  14623  USA               All-In-One: LOYD EC (@a1.isc.rit.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jromao@bragg.bio.purdue.edu
Subject: STUCK Fujichrome 34 prints: help!
Reply-To: jromao@bragg.bio.purdue.edu
Organization: Purdue University, Dept. of Biological Sciences
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:21:27 GMT


	Does anyone know how to separate Fujichrome Type 34 prints that got
stuck face-to-back during mailing?
	Can reply to jromao@bilbo.bio.purdue.edu
	Thanx.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mrb@sei.cmu.edu (Mario Barbacci)
Subject: Suggestions for locations in Florida
Keywords: Scenic B&W Photograpy, Everglades, Lake Okeechobee
Organization: The Software Engineering Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 10:46:08 EST


I will be in Miami the week after Christmas and I would like to do
some B&W photography in the Everglades or lake Okeechobee.

Could anybody familiar with the area suggest interesting places to
try?  Send EMail to me and I will post the collection.

Thanks,

Mario R. Barbacci,
Director, Real-time Distributed Systems Program
Software Engineering Institute,  Carnegie Mellon U., Pittsburgh PA 15213
Tel: +1 (412) 268-7704; FAX: +1 (412) 258-5758



Mario R. Barbacci,
Director, Real-time Distributed Systems Program
Software Engineering Institute,  Carnegie Mellon U., Pittsburgh PA 15213
Tel: +1 (412) 268-7704; FAX: +1 (412) 258-5758
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: N800*s, FM2 or EOS RT : advice needed
Date: 16 Dec 92 04:49:44 GMT

In <wf=WAuu00Uh7M3okpW@andrew.cmu.edu> Christophe Dumay <cd2t+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>I am planning to buy a new camera (and some lenses too).
>I have collected a lot of informations about the three camera bodies
>quoted above but I need opinions to make a decision.

>I think I will shoot most of the time landscapes and macro-photographs (and
>perhaps some wildlife).
			[ ... ]
>   I have heard that the mirror of the EOS RT may be a source of problems in
>case of dust ? Why.

The mirrors in most SLRs is difficult to clean without actually damaging
the mirror.  In the case of the RT, the mirror stays down so you can still
see through the viewfinder in "Real Time".  However, that means that a
dirty mirror *will* affect picture quality.  So will a bad attempt at
cleaning it.

Also realize that that mirror costs 2/3 stop.  If you want to shoot in
low light, this can be a pain.

The EOS 630 is a similar camera.  The only feature you might miss is
centre-weighted metering.

>    By the way, is mirror lock up really very important ? I understand it is
>necessary to obtain a very good sharpness when shooting through long focal
>length telephotolense but as I cannot afford buying such big guns does
>it matter to have MLU or not ?

There was a thread on this just a few days ago.  It seems that it's camera
dependent.  It's best to test things out on the bodies in which you are
interested.
>  
>   I think I will need a remote for macro work and maybe for wildlife. 
>I have no idea of the prices and referencies of the different remotes available
>for the N8008s, FM2 and EOS RT. If somebody could provide with informations
>concerning these devices I will be very pleased.   

For the RT/630, you need to buy the GR20 accessory grip.  It provides the
necessary socket for the 60T3 electronic cable release.  There is also an
IR remote module.  (Built into the 10s and Elan...)

>Finally, any opinion regarding the general sturdiness of these cameras will be
>very welcome.

I have a 630 and find it pretty good.  It's a whole lot less expensive than
an 8008s too!

Also note that the 8008s cannot AF with Nikon's bigger AF lenses, like
the 300/2.8 AF-I and the 600/4 AF-I, whereas the 630/RT work with all of
Canon's EF-mount lenses (which now go to 1200/5.6!!!)

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: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: How autofocusing is done in SLR cameras
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 04:36:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <nyarko.723920325@ee.ualberta.ca> nyarko@ee.ualberta.ca (David Nyarko) writes:
>Hi,
>Could someone explain how autofocusing is done
>in autofocus SLR cameras. I read something about
>phase-detection could anyone elaborate on this ?
>I understand the IR distance measurement systems
>of point and shoot autofocus cameras and realize
>this is different from the passive system used in
>larger cameras.
>			David


In short, it is almost exactly the way a rangefinder works, but
electronically.  Usually the main mirror is half-silvered, and
behind/below the mirror is an AF sensor.  It two parts, one "looks"
through the left side of the lens and the other looks through the
right side of the lens.  When these two see the "same" thing, focus
has been achieved.  Now the trickier part is to determine what "same"
means and if they are not the same, which way to turn the lens.  The
typical detector is a linear CCD array.  A little computer computers
the correlation between the two CCD arrays as a function of shift
amount, and finds, I think, the shift that gives the max correlation.
For one sign of the shift the lens is driven forward, for the other
sign, backward, and the max is at zero shift, focus has been achieved.
Figuring the correct way is left as an exercise for the reader.

  -- David Jacobson