HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du)
Subject: Re: Nikkor 180 AF lens: close focusing ability?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 08:21:59 GMT

In article <430089@hpmwnpd2.sr.hp.com> allana@hpmwtd (Allan Armstrong) writes:
>Can anyone tell me about the macro abilities of the Nikkor 180mm f2.8
>EDIF AF lens? How close can it focus and what is the maximum macro
>magnification?
	Nikkor 180/2.8 EDIF-AF focuses down to 1.5m, which gives about
	1:5 macro magnification.
>I currently have a 75-200 f3.8 zoom with 1:4.5 macro feature at 200mm
>which I consider to be extremely useful. If I go Nikon, I'll want to
>have a 180 or 200mm macro lens for mushrooms and flowers. I'd much
>prefer to get the 180 f2.8 AF than the 200mm f4 MF because I would be
>able to use it for cyclocross too.
	180/2.8 would be a better choice of you are not specialized in
	macro photography.
>Would it be practical to use extension tubes with the 180 lens? Do they
>have to couple meter functions? I'd be willing to give up AF when using
>tubes. Who makes such tubes? I'd like to get magnifications to at least
>1:4, preferably 1:3 or 1:2.
	I think you can use extension tubes with the 180. Nikon PK-13(27mm),
	PK-12(14mm) and PN-11(52mm) tubes can be used, and you don't have 
	to worry metering. You will lose AF though. With two PK-13, you can
	probably get to about 1:3. With two PN-11, about 1:2. The disadvatage
	of tubes is that you can't vary macro ratio very much. They only
	work in certain range. Therefore, two PK-13s will be more versatile
	one PN-11. But PN-11 has a tripod mount.
>I would use this lens not only for mushrooms, but possibly also for
>insects. 
	Remember that 180/2.8 is not a micro lens. It will not give you the 
	same quality of a 200/micro for 2D object. But since your photograpgic 
	objects are not flat, the image quality will be very close if you
	compose carefully. I have used Nikkor 200mm/4(non-micro) with PN-11 
	with good results. Try to avoid maximum aperture. Usually f8 would
	be the best. 

---------------------------------
 Li Du | duli@prony.colorado.edu
---------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: blue@sequent.com (Gil Delavous)
Subject: Re: How do they know?
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 11:59:22 GMT

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? 

Ah Ah Ah! I like this one!!!
Seriously now, I always thought that cameras were made to take pictures.
Standing on it doesn't even mean that its robust; you can stand on a glass
but if you let it fall on the ground see what happen. Under certain 
circumstance I'm also pretty sure that I could stand on my all-plastic EOS A2 
without damaging it.

Next year, advertise will say: "With the new CaKon F-EOS-0.5 you can play 
football or dig the ground without damaging it. The only problem is that it
can't take pictures anymore" :-) :-) :-)

Gil.
From: ken@Bridge.COM (Ken Hardy)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Which old Pentax S/M models ?
Summary: need a body
Date: 28 Dec 92 06:49:05 GMT
Organization: Planet Earth

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.

I'm not familiar with which Pentax models have which features.  Can any
kind and knowledgeable soul educate me?  I'd like to know what to look
for walking in the door, and maybe to have researched prices beforehand.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Velvia processing
Date: 25 Dec 92 03:45:11 GMT

In <343@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:

>fhd@panix.com (Frank Deutschmann) writes:
>: 
>: Is there a (visible) difference when Velvia is processed CR-56
>: (whatever that is, new Fuji thing it must be) rather than E-6?

>CR-56 is Fuji's reverse-engineered E-6 process.  I have been informed by
>a Fuji USA Technical Support rep that the two processes are virtually
>identical.

Some posters have said that the CR-56 process prescribes more agitation
and that for types of exposures, yields better results with Velvia.
Hopefully someone can repost their findings.

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: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: 8008s/801s Questions
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 09:24:03 GMT

limhl@hpsgm2.sgp.hp.com (Hui Lin LIM) writes:
: 
: Now the camera will only fire when in Manual and set at 1/250.  All
: other settings will not work.  Even when it does fire the film does
: not advance...  Trying to initiate film rewind does nothing; as does
: multiple exposures...
: 
: Anyone with more suggestions?

Try a fresh set of batteries. My Nikon 8008 locked up solid on me once.
The batteries seemed to be good, even worked my stobe fine. However, when
I put in a new set of alkalines, the camera started working correctly again.

Bill
From: kjm@ubbpc.tredydev.Unisys.COM (Ken J. McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: 8008s remote shutter contacts
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:32:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Unisys UNIX Portation Center, Blue Bell, PA

In article <1992Dec22.200248.19074@netcom.com> micki@netcom.com (Michelle Stone) writes:
>kjf388@tijc02.uucp (Ken Fisher          ) writes:
>
>>I can't find any specific information regarding the remote shutter
>>contacts in the operators manual for a new 8008s.  
>
>.... and when you lose that little cover.... just try and find
>a replacement for it!  I swear that even the local experts can't 
>find it in their catalogs!  I hate little stuff like that.  I 
>always lose it!  I can count on it.  That was one of the things
>that I knew would happen when I bought the machine.

Doesn't Del's (from Shutterbug) usually advertise having weird items like
this?

---
Ken McFadden                     tredysvr!ubbpc!kjm@gvls1.vfl.paramax.com
Unisys Corporation               burdvax!ubbpc!kjm
Open Systems Marketing Services  (215) 986-3326
!!! NOTE THE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS (STRANGE, I DON'T WORK FOR PARAMAX) !!!
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photographing people; need permission?
Date: 3 Jan 93 16:15:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24541
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ

In article <346@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:

> In the U.S., at least, you would be breaking no laws by doing this (but I
> hear things are different in Saudia Arabia...).  You have the legal right
> to photograph anything you have the legal right to see with your own eyes.

Hogwash!

A photograph is a copy, which means that photographing any copyrighted
material requires permission from the copyright holder.

This applies, among other things, to performances of plays, concerts,
dance, and so on.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
Xref: sparky rec.photo:22764 ba.announce:305 alt.sex.movies:4310 alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d:10445
From: Jimmy.Tung@dartmouth.edu (Jimmy Tung)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Remote shutter releases
Date: 26 Dec 92 20:36:26 GMT
 <1992Dec22.164825.11598@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Dec22.164825.11598@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>
Jimmy.Tung@dartmouth.edu (Jimmy Tung) writes:

>  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've been exploring the post-Christmas world, and have found that I was
mistaken.

Canon sells the RC-1 for the Elan and 10s (list $20).  For the EOS-1,
and T-series, a two piece kit is needed (list $160).  The Canon
literature doesn't say what freq's these operate at, but they look like
IR remotes.  The RC-1 range is 16 ft. or so.

Merry New Year and all that stuff...
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman)
Subject: Re: HELP: history of Nikkormat FS (not FTn, FT, EL, etc)
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 08:05:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.045347.20226@hubcap.clemson.edu> ychen@hubcap.clemson.edu (Eric Chen) writes:
>Recently, I got a chance to collect two near mint condition Nikkormat FS
>(both made in 1974).  I have check over some literature but can not
>found anything about this model.  No one sell it in Shutterbug or
>Popular Photography.  Since I have two of them, I would like to sell
>one.  But I don't know the current price is.  

The FS was made from 1965 to 1971.  It is a Nikkormat FT without the 
exposure meter and mirror lock up.  Not popluar, and according to
the Nikon Systems Handbook they are worth about $65, which is $20
less than the "normal" Nikkormat FT.


-- 
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
                       al@qiclab.scn.rain.com
It's odd how as I get older, the days are longer, but the years are shorter!
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ychen@hubcap.clemson.edu (Eric Chen)
Subject: Re: slide dupe mount for micro-nikkor
Organization: Clemson University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 00:19:30 GMT


I have a off brand slide duplicator and extention bellow didicate for
Nikon bodies.  I used it for slide copying purpose.  You must put
the micro lens or good Nikon lens between the extention bellow and 
the slide duplicator in order to duplicate the slide with different
magnification.  The best light source is TTL Nikon flash attached with
SC-17 to the body.

Since I havn't doing any slide copying for a while, I am going to
sell them for $35 plus shipping.

Eric
Newsgroups: rec.photo,rec.scuba
From: jeffs@.SanDiego.NCR.COM ()
Subject: Re: Camera Rentals In Maui
Reply-To: jeffs@spike.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Jeff Schwartz)
Organization: San Diego Porting Center
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 00:25:56 GMT

There is a dive shop that rents Sea&Sea Motomarine IIs, unfortunately I don't
remember the name.  It's located about 2 blocks from Lahaina Divers though and
if you ask them where you can rent a camera, they'll send you over there.  Two
things to keep in mind is that they will insist on you not opening the camera
(so they have to load and unload it) and unless you provide your own film when
you go to pick up the camera, they will load it with some off-brand print film.

It seems like all the commercial dive charters in Maui want to go to Molokini
crater.  Its a great dive site but not the only one in Maui.  If you get a 
chance, Ed Robinson's sometimes goes to Kahoolawe.  I also recommend a night 
dive at Black Rock (behind the Kaanapali Hilton I believe).  This place is eel
city at night and we also saw a spanish dancer and a host of other interesting
critters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Schwartz
NCR - San Diego Porting Center		jeff.schwartz@sandiegoca.NCR.COM
16550 W. Bernardo Dr ms5990		 (619) 485-2052
San Diego, CA  92127			 NCR Voice Plus 440-2052
============================================================================
The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds
universes.  ......................................../|/|/ GO CHARGERS!

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mtfirst@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Mount-first Yat Fung Ng)
Subject: What is a standard method to test a len?
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 02:17:03 GMT

	Can anyone tell me whether there is any standard method to test
a len (zoom or otherwise)? There are reports in magazines about 
different lens. Does anybody knows how they did these tests? Or 
may be someone can direct me to the issue(s) of magazine(s) that 
describe(s) the procedure of the test that they are using.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: eclipse@netcom.com (Brian McCullough)
Subject: Re: IBM programs for manipulating photgraphs
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 00:01:12 GMT

davek@vax2.concordia.ca (DAVID KURZMAN) writes:
: Hi there,
: 
: I am looking for an IBM program which will allow me to manipulatethe images 
: of photos which I have scanned into a scanner.  Has anyone done this sort 
: of thing?  Can anybody reccomend a good program that will allow me to do 
: this? 
: 
: Sorry if this is the wring list for t6his kind of question.  please e-mail
: 
: David Kurzman
: davek@vax2.concordia.ca 

In addition to the suggestion elsewhere about Aldus PhotoStyler, there is also
a program available called Micrografx Picture Publisher.  I've been using
this for about 2 months and it seems as full-featured as anything out there.
It will run at acceptable speed on my 386-40 and savvies Photo CD through
your CD-ROM driver, if you have one that's either single-session or multi-
session Photo CD capable.  It's worth a look, if you have Windows, and is
much more capable than the packaging would suggest.

One other note:  when I did my comparison shopping on this and PhotoStyler,
I noticed that there was a higher-than-normal variation between retail and  
street price on both.  Some vigilance should pay off handsomely.

Ciao ...

-- 
---------------------------------
Brian C. McCullough   eclipse@netcom.netcom.com  Opinions of self only

"The early worm goes forth with zeal to give the hungry birds a meal.
His brother has no such intention, and lives to draw his old-age pension."
         -Montagu C. Butler
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: 80A 80B 80C Which filter?
Date: 31 Dec 92 08:41:24 GMT

In <344@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:

>pjs@gvgdsd.GVG.TEK.COM (Peter J. Stonard) writes:
>: I have a couple of questions about colour balance.
>: 
	[ Tale of mixed lighting woes snipped... ]

>: What if I want to combine a long exposure with artifical light,
>: using the blue filter, and add a flash for freezing motion or
>: lighting the subject? Is there a yellow gel that compliments the 
>: blue filter, that can be placed over the flash?

There are filters that allow the use of tungsten balanced film in
daylight (85B).  You could try to get one to cover your flash head.
Problem is that most flash heads aren't designed to take filters, so
you have play arount with tape, velcro, or whatever.

Cokin make an 85A filter.  Since it's square, it should be more
adaptable to your flash head.  However, some feel the Cokins aren't
totally accurate.  Might be neat to see of you can modify a Cokin
filter holder to go over your flash head without darkening the edges.
Opens up some weird and wonderful possibilities.

Similarly, there are filters to make your flash act like a fluorescent
light source.  I believe Calumet is a mail-order source for these.
However, I think the filters come in large sheets (for covering
windows) and may be more than you need.  (They can be cut down to size
though.)

If there isn't much ambient light falling on your subject from
artificial light sources, then hitting 'em with your flash on daylight
film may help shift the balance favourably.  Your artifical light
sources may look a little funny (greenish, under some kinds of street
lights), but your main subject won't be so badly off.  However, it
is still preferable to not mix one's light sources.

If you're in a small room, try shooting at your fastest X-sync speed to
reduce the amount of ambient light, and try to overpower the existing
lighting with the flash.

Fuji Reala is supposed to have a blue-green sensitive layer to handle
off-lighting conditions like fluorescent.  That is definitely worth a
try if Reala is fast enough for you (ISO 100).  There have also been
reports that Fuji HG 400 Professional (NHG) is pretty reasonable under
flourescent lighting (my experience agrees with this--friend's wedding
pictures in the computer lab).

Hope that helps.

ACS
-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|"The Nikon lens owners are more gratingly smug, while the     |
| - | --|__ | Canon lens owners are more verbally abusive." - Tony Arnerich|
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Re: NIKONOS-5: advice request
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 00:20:49 GMT

In article <631@tsw.UUCP> ray@tsw.UUCP (Ray Izumi) writes:

>The other big problem with the Nikonos is that it is a rangefinding camera.

No, none of the Nikonos cameras are rangefinders. You have to
guesstimate the focus. (Except on the Nikonos RS, but that is a
different beast altogether; an AF SLR).
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: axjes@acad2.alaska.edu
Subject: Re: NIKONOS-5: advice request
Organization: University of Alaska
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:52:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.104949.23889@cli.di.unipi.it>, ciofi@pimac2.iet.unipi.it (Carmine Ciofi) writes:
> Hi,
> I would like to buy an underwater camera and i was thinking
> of a NIKONOS - 5. Is there anyone out there who can give me
> any advice about it? In particular I would like to know whether
> it is such a good camera as Nikon says.
> 
>         Thank you,
> 
>              Carmine.

I have had a Nikonos V for 3 or 4 years.  The body is nearly indestructable
unless you fill it with saltwater.  If you are going to use it underwater,
you need to pay a good deal of attention to the o-rings.  There are several
user maintainable rings and several factory maintainable rings.  Nikon
recommends the factory maintainable rings be replaced about every year.
The cost used to be around $75, but it may have gone up.  I've never had
mine done, and it hasn't leaked, but I plan to have it serviced before I
take it diving again.  Lens selection is pretty limited, especially for
land use.  I have the 35mm lens and the 20mm lens.  Only the 35mm is 
suitable for land use.  The only auto mode is aperture preferred auto as
the lenses are manual only.  There's also an M90 setting  which is manual
shutter at 1/90 sec.  It allows the camera to function with a dead battery.
On the whole, I like it.  It's been very dependable.  Great for rafting
or kayaking where a camera might get dunked.  On the other hand, I've talked
to people who swear by housed cameras and think the Nikonos is a nuisance.

Jim Snyder
axjes@acad2.alaska.edu

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mazz@mars (Richard Mazzaferri)
Subject: Re: Canon EF28-70/f3.5-? II vs. EF28-105/f3.5-? USM
Organization: Uni of Newcastle, Australia
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 12:40:02 GMT

hsong@ardour.bellcore.com (G. Hugh Song) writes:

>It is pretty well-known that EF28-70mm/f3.5-4.5 II is an excellent 
>piece of glass.   I have also been told all the good things about the new
>EF28-105mm/f3.5-? USM.   Several questions for you:

>1. Is the front element of EF28-70mm/f3.5-4.5 II nonrotating?
>2. Just from a glance, it looks like that it can 
>   accommodate a filter with no problem.  Is there any problem with filters?
>3. Is it worth $260.00?

I have one - from memory (it's at home) the big annoyance with it is that
the filter mount/front element rotates and retracts.  Retraction is a big
problem if your filter has a diameter greater than 52mm.  For example, my
Cokin P filter holder, even though I have a 52mm mounting ring, is much
larger in size than this.  Because of the retraction, it is unusable (without
modification) between about 35mm and 50-something mm in the zoom range.
If you stick to one end or the other, you're OK, but this defeats the purpose
of a zoom.  While you can always put a couple of empty filters (punch out the
glass or something) on before your Cokin, this will usually result in
noticable vignetting at the wide angle end of the range.
 
    Mazz.
--
Richard Mazzaferri        Ph.D. student          Uni. of Newcastle 
  Ph (049) 216254   mazz@faceng.newcastle.edu.au     Australia.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: <None>
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:08:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.062322.8914@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
> In <PD.92Dec17105919@horus.sics.se> pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:
> 
>>In article <BzDpoo.Joq@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> twtan@essex.ecn.uoknor.edu (Tack Wee Tan) writes:
> 
>>>Over a long run, buying rechargable AAs instead of alkaline would
>>>make it even more cost effective.
> 
>>Yes, that definitely is an advantage with AAs. Why can't somebody make
>>a 2CR5-shaped rechargable?
> 
> Well, I guess the battery manufacturers figure that nicads don't have
> the right characteristics that users have come to expect from lithiums
> (fairly straight discharge curve, etc., etc.).  If a lithium 2CR5 only
> lasts 5 rolls for some users, a nicad version it might not make it
> through one roll!  (Actually, I think someone posted saying this is
> what happened when they tried it!)
> 
> Supposedly there is a battery technology that may be able to provide
> the equivalent of a rechargeable 2CR5--nickel metal-hydride.  Hope it
> happens soon!
> 

Well, ah as it happens I inquired recently about Gates 1100mAHr NiMH cells.
Not available. Would I like a 1AHr NiCd or NiMH instead? Why? I ask.
It seems than those wonderous IQ 5 people in DC don't want all that top secret
NiMH technology to fall in to nasty commie hands so they have put an export
control on the Gates cells. We import NiMH cells from China instead...

As to a rechargable 2CR5, it would be of very low capacity. Li cells are 3v,
2 gives 6v. We need 5 NiCds to match the voltage. A 2CR5 is rated at 1350mAHr,
we can just get 1000 out of a simular sized NiCd. So we are down about 25% of
coulombs, and we still have to find room for 3 more cells...

The discharge curves are about the same, flat to the near bitter end. They also
can share the nasty habit of going bang if shorted.

The *BIG* difference is shelf life. At the moment I need to change AA NiCds
about every 10-12 days, irrespective of use due to self discharge in the
30C+ days. Li's and NiMH cells are better in this regard.

BTW, after 16 months I am still using the original 2CR5 in the EOS-1, when I
remove the booster. Its down to 1 bar, but still going, and yes, I do have
a spare.

~Paul