HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alc@gdstech.GRUMMAN.COM (Al Chang)
Subject: Re: Ansel Adams Prints
Organization: Grumman Corporation
	<1993Jan27.181827.6056@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 22:07:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.181827.6056@odin.corp.sgi.com> bongers@redgto.asd.sgi.com (Hans L. Bongers) writes:


   In article <1k53fsINNaqd@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, sylve_ge@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Gerald E Sylvester) writes:
   |> 
   |> A few months ago, someone posted a message containing the phone
   |> number and address of the company (?) that sells "authentic"
   |> Ansel Adams prints.  Can someone re-post this address and phone 
   |> number and approximate price of 8x10's and 11x14's (or whatever
   |> the standard sizes are).  Thanks in advance.....


   There are TONs of places that sell Ansel's prints.

   The cheapest start at about $3000 (5x7).  Ansel used so many
   different types of cameras that there is really no "standard"
   size to expect.  Gnereally the price will depend of the age of
   the print (eariler print of given negative costs more) the 
   popularity of the image (sort of) the condition of the print
   and your savvy in talking the price down.

   Don't have phone numbers but here are a few places in
   Carmel (CA) that have Ansel inventory:

   Josephus Daniels Gallery
   Weston Gallery
   Photography West

   Both of my Ansels were purchased at the Weston (BTW
   Brett Weston died last Friday night).

   I own a 16x20 Moonrise (late print) ==  $17,5000

(I'll do almost anything for Moonrise.)

   I own a 6x9 (approx) of Tenya Creek from Portfoilo III (#179/200) == $4800

   Be prepared to spend big bucks.  If you are going into this as
   an investor you might want to look at other photographers.  There
   are many with greater potential for gains.

The cheapest  "authentic" photo re-prints are availiable in Yosemite 
National Park. These are photos taken in the park by him and he
authorized it to be sold at affordable prices ($75 ea.) These are
unlimited so it is not collectors items, but I still enjoy owning a
few of them.

Al
From: gsmlrn@gsm001.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)
Subject: Re: B&W Film question
Keywords: B&W film
Organization: Mendelson.com
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:01:45 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.040021.7843@walter.bellcore.com> ekim@nyquist.bellcore.com (Michael Mills 21340) writes:
>
>I need to buy some film for a photo class I will be taking.  Can someone
>tell me the difference between the following films:

>tri-X ( 400 )
For many years this was the standard high speed b&w film (except for some
asa 1200 film (was it 2745?)) It produces good negatives and is slightly
grainy. Many b&w photographers love the stuff.

>Plus-X ( 125 )

IMHO the best B&W film made. It has a very wide tonal range and good grain.
It's also very predicatble and forgiving.


>T-Max (400 & 100 )


For many years Kodak spent most of their R&D money on improving color film.
They did quite well and then applied the same technology to b&w film.
T-Max has fine grain, but IMHO a very short tonal range. It is also very
finicky when it comes to development. While some people can produce excelent
results with T-Max I am not one :-( 

My advice is to use plus-x. I would also recommend Ilford PAN-F (asa 50)
or ADOX KB-15 or EFKE KB14 (asa 25) if you can get them.

I also recommend getting a 100' roll of film and a good bulk loader
such as the watson or alden. You can get a package (film, loader,
casettes) mail order from Freestyle in California, (call 1-800-555-1212
for their number) for less than the cost of 10 36 exposure rolls of film.


-- 
Geoffrey S. Mendelson 
(215) 242-8712
gsm@mendelson.com     or uunet!gsm001!gsm
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ajackson@ernie.Princeton.EDU (Andrew William Jackson)
Subject: Re: Konica FT-1
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:40:25 GMT


for sale:


Konica FT-1 motor drive 35mm camera (black)

        - 1.7 frames/second
        - manual focus
        - auto exposure mode
        - very solid camera, case is metal - not plastic
        - removable back
        - manual film rewind


Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.8

Kalimar 28mm f2.8   (macro)

Soligor 45-150mm f3.5  (macro)

Konica X-24 dedicated auto flash

Remote shutter release w/latch for Bulb exp.



Look in the back of photo mags...  costs over $700 new.

will sell for $250/bo.


need the cash.


ajackson@ernie.princeton.edu
andrew jackson - physics department - princeton university
From: fr0c+@andrew.cmu.edu (Frank A. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Technidol LC vs Technidol Liquid - What's the Diff.?
Date: 26 Jan 93 08:33:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.4fNMDTK00WBK84_60k
Organization: Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentatn, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

> can anyone get me straightened out about the distinctions between
> 2415 (35mm tech pan) and 6415 (120 tech pan, I guess)
> and what is the difference between technidol LC and technidol liquid?
 
> I could try Kodak's 800 number, but I'm afraid I might end up going
> around in circles trying to get answers to such general questions from
> the big corporate bureaucracy.


Call!  Most of my calls to Kodak are for "general questions".  Every
Kodak tech. rep. I have talked to has been courteous and made an effort
to answer my questions, and if the one I was taking to could not answer
them they have always transfer me to one that could.



Frank Reynolds
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: B&W paper developer
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:07:05 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.230739.1949@spectrum.xerox.com> mcfarland.henr801c@xerox.com writes:
>
>In article <C1FFz8.10K@javelin.sim.es.com>, rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs) writes:
>|> In article <1993Jan23.112419.28000@spectrum.xerox.com> mcfarland.henr801c@xerox.com writes:
>|> >
>|> >Has (is) anyone using Fred's formula (Zone VI) paper developer or
>|> >Zonal paper developer ? Also, in the zone VI catalog they sell
>|> >Benzotriazole, a restrainer, could someone comment on the
>|> >effectiveness of this product ? (I hope this isn't going to be
>|> >an emotional issue :)
>|> 
>|> Benzotriazole is an anti-fogging agent, and is often useful to prevent fog
>|> in old paper.  Having not seen Fred's formula, I can't comment on its
>|> usefulness in this situation.
>|> 
>|> What I really wanted to say is that you should check around for prices on
>|> Benzotriazole.  Here are some:
>|> 
>|> Artcraft	$13.75/100 g		(518)-371-4683	(Current)
>|> Lauder		$ 6.75/1 oz		(916)-638-1225	(1988)
>|> Bryant		$16.00/100 g		(415)-526-3141	(1988)
>|> Tri-Ess		$ 6.70/2 oz		(818)-247-6910	(~1988)
>|> Pho. Formulary	$34.50/100 g		(800)-777-7158	(1990)
>|> Zone V		 ??			(802)-765-4508
>|> 
>Fred says: (well, that is, it states in the Zone VI catalog)
>
>    Zone VI (2% solution) $18.00 for two 1 quart bottles.
>            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    use 1/2 to 1 oz. per quart of developer.
>  
That's a lot to pay for water.  That amount of benzotriazole at Artcraft's
price would be $5.50.  The word in buying basic chemicals:  Shop around.

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
From: moreaux@litsun22.epfl.ch (Michel Moreaux)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Which 210mm 5.6 copal ?
Date: 27 Jan 93 11:48:03 GMT
Reply-To: moreaux@litsun.epfl.ch
Organization: Laboratoire d'informatique technique
In-reply-to: mcfarlan@aurigaxerox.com's message of 26 Jan 93 11:37:27 GMT


Doug McFarland writes :

| Sinar       Sinaron-s      $797     72   310
| Schneider   APO-Symmar     $792     72   305
| Rodenstock  Sironar-N      $625     72   301
| Nikkor      Symmetrical    $510     72   301

As far as I know, Sinar lenses ARE Rodenstock lenses selected by Sinar.
Therefore, their quality "should" be slightly better than that of Rodenstock
lenses because lenses are selected. In fact, I have heard that does not
justify the (huge) difference in price.

Personally, I opted for the 210mm Schneider APO-Symmar because I found a better
price (in Switzerland) for it than for the Rodenstock lenses.

_Michel Moreaux

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michel Moreaux,                           | "Ceux qui ne savent rien en savent
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne  |  toujours tout autant que ceux qui
Departement d'Informatique                |  n'en savent pas plus qu'eux"
Laboratoire d'Informatique Technique      |                  P. Dac.
EL-Ecublens                               |___________________________________
CH-1015 Lausanne                           
Phone # : (21) 693-46-72,   e-mail : moreaux@litsun.epfl.ch
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michel Moreaux,                           | "Ceux qui ne savent rien en savent
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne  |  toujours tout autant que ceux qui
Departement d'Informatique                |  n'en savent pas plus qu'eux"
Laboratoire d'Informatique Technique      |                  P. Dac.
EL-Ecublens                               |___________________________________
CH-1015 Lausanne                           
Phone # : (21) 693-46-72,   e-mail : moreaux@litsun.epfl.ch
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mic@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Marc Clarke)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:41:55 GMT
Subject: Re: Apartment Darkrooms
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Ft. Collins, CO
Newsgroups: rec.photo

Aluminum foil (the kind you wrap around food) folded together at seams
and taped over a window is completely light tight, costs only a few
cents, and can be recycled.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Plastic Canon
Date: 21 Jan 93 19:46:18 GMT

In <nicholson.11@main.mndly.umn.edu> nicholson@main.mndly.umn.edu (JOHN JAY NICHOLSON) writes:

>Why are most Canon cameras made of mostly plastic?  You pick up the Elan or 
>the new A2E, and they feel so cheap?  I understand that the EOS 1 is a very 
>well made camera, and is very durable, but all the others that I have seen 
>are almost pure plastic.  If you don't believe me, open the back of the A2E 
>and look.

The big reason is probably ease of manufacture.  For most people, the
plastic cameras are probably "durable enough".  Indeed, the weight
savings certainly makes them more bearable when travelling.  (A camera
left at home doesn't take very interesting pictures! :-)

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______________________|
From: Rick.Ellis@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: EPZ, EPP, RFP, VPS, CIA, IRS, FBI, KGB, etc
X-Sender: newtout 0.06 Jan  3 1993
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:41:26

On Jan 22 05:30, Thor Legvold of edmtl@alf.uib.no  wrote:

 TL> EPP   Kodak Ektachrome proffessional 64

It's 100 in my catalog.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rsojka@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (robert.e.sojka)
Subject: Canon EOS A2
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:40:40 GMT

I'm considering the purchase of a Canon EOS A2. Does anyone have any opinions
on this camera? What is a good price? What are the good points and
disadvantages? Batteries etc.. Any opionions would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.



Bob
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dxa8439@ultb.isc.rit.edu (D.X. Axelrad)
Subject: Radioactive Optics ????
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 22:33:55 GMT

Has anyone heard of the use of radioactive isotopes in the production of
lenses?  I'm especially interested if anyone knows of an instance of the
use of Thorium Oxide.
Has anyone encountered unusually high levels of radioactivity in a
certian type of camera ??
Can anyone tell me what the optical reasons may be for the use of
this isotope (or anyother for that matter) ???

I'm just curious,

Dan         ::)

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<>           Dan Axelrad           <> Rochester Institute of Technology <>
<> IN%"dxa8439@ritvax.isc.rit.edu" <>      Imaging and Photographic     <> 
<>  "The cat's already dead !!!    <>         Technology Program        <>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>  
   
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mike@neopath.wa.com (Mike Rosenlof)
Subject: small studio flash
Keywords: cheap request
Reply-To: mike@neopath.wa.com
Organization: NeoPath
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:24:25 GMT


I want to assemble a small studio flash package for doing portraits
and occasional still life work. I'm planning on using one reasonably
small studio flash with reflectors, diffusers, and my current portable
flash ( a sunpak 522(?) ) for fill, etc if desired. I'll use medium
format, and don't have any professional thoughts - I don't want to
mess up my hobby by turning it into a business! - so cost is always a
consideration.

My questions are:

anybody done such a thing? and how did it work out?

any thoughts on the sunpak monolights? white lightning? or others?
I've been thinking on the line of 100+ joule (watt-sec) flash with
some power variability and built in slave.

I've also seen the Novatron "fun kits" for more than I'd like to
spend, but maybe a 2 head system would be worth the extra $$.


thanks for any comments!
mike
-- 
mike rosenlof                   (206)455-5932
mike@neopath.wa.com     NeoPath, Bellevue Washington USA
From: frankenp@argon.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Paul Frankenstein  )
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Testing shutter speeds.
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:02:52 GMT
Organization: x=(x^2)+C

In article <1993Jan21.111516.5922@spider.co.uk> mikec@spider.co.uk (Mike Coren) writes:
* 
* This implies that leaf shutters will not pass a slit, i.e. they will be
* fully open for all shutter speeds.  This means that with a leaf shutter,
* you can have flash synch at all shutter speeds.  Is this true?
* 
* Mike

Yep. Of course, the only problem is that most leaf shutters only go up to
about 1/500 of a second.

paul


--
frankenp@gas.uug.arizona.edu
paulf@hacks.arizona.edu
"Bagels are great for backpacking."
	-- Mike Cottingham
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs)
Subject: Re: B&W paper developer
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:37:56 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.112419.28000@spectrum.xerox.com> mcfarland.henr801c@xerox.com writes:
>
>Has (is) anyone using Fred's formula (Zone VI) paper developer or
>Zonal paper developer ? Also, in the zone VI catalog they sell
>Benzotriazole, a restrainer, could someone comment on the
>effectiveness of this product ? (I hope this isn't going to be
>an emotional issue :)

Benzotriazole is an anti-fogging agent, and is often useful to prevent fog
in old paper.  Having not seen Fred's formula, I can't comment on its
usefulness in this situation.

What I really wanted to say is that you should check around for prices on
Benzotriazole.  Here are some:

Artcraft	$13.75/100 g		(518)-371-4683	(Current)
Lauder		$ 6.75/1 oz		(916)-638-1225	(1988)
Bryant		$16.00/100 g		(415)-526-3141	(1988)
Tri-Ess		$ 6.70/2 oz		(818)-247-6910	(~1988)
Pho. Formulary	$34.50/100 g		(800)-777-7158	(1990)
Zone V		 ??			(802)-765-4508

Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ben_wen@athena.mit.edu (Benson Wen)
Subject: Re: Canon EOS A2 or A2E?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:46:21 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.021717.28954@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:

   In <74311@cup.portal.com> HERMES1@cup.portal.com (Douglas Brian Opfer) writes:

   >I'm considering purchasing one of the Canon A2's and am interested in any
   >opinions regarding the eye controlled focus on the A2E.  Is this really a
   >worthwhile feature or something that would rarely be used?  Also, is this
   >the ONLY difference between these two cameras?  Any comments or opinions
   >would be helpful, especially from those who have already made this choice.

   The only difference between the A2 and A2E is the eye-controlled
   focusing.

Actually, the A2 has a built-in diopter correction eyepiece, while
the A2E doesn't.  I guess there's not enough room for both in the
prism housing. 

Also, due to patent wranglings, according to this month's Pop Photo,
the EOS-5 HAS the manual exposure offset in the viewfinder ON THE BAR
GRAPH!  The A2(E) has only plus/minus.  

I tried out the A2E at a couple of camera stores, and it seems to work
pretty well.  I really like the vertical grip.  I wish Canon would've
allowed the A2(E) to take AA's, oh well, I smell an EOS-2 around the
corner.... The only time I would use the eye controlled focus is for
shooting sports, maybe.

-Ben
--

|| Benson Wen
|| ben_wen@athena.mit.edu
|| queeph@hing.lcs.mit.edu
From: mcfarlan@aurigaxerox.com (Doug McFarland)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&W paper developer
Date: 25 Jan 93 23:07:39 GMT
Reply-To: mcfarland.henr801c@xerox.com
Organization: Xerox Corporation


In article <C1FFz8.10K@javelin.sim.es.com>, rspeirs@javelin.sim.es.com (Ron Speirs) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan23.112419.28000@spectrum.xerox.com> mcfarland.henr801c@xerox.com writes:
|> >
|> >Has (is) anyone using Fred's formula (Zone VI) paper developer or
|> >Zonal paper developer ? Also, in the zone VI catalog they sell
|> >Benzotriazole, a restrainer, could someone comment on the
|> >effectiveness of this product ? (I hope this isn't going to be
|> >an emotional issue :)
|> 
|> Benzotriazole is an anti-fogging agent, and is often useful to prevent fog
|> in old paper.  Having not seen Fred's formula, I can't comment on its
|> usefulness in this situation.
|> 
|> What I really wanted to say is that you should check around for prices on
|> Benzotriazole.  Here are some:
|> 
|> Artcraft	$13.75/100 g		(518)-371-4683	(Current)
|> Lauder		$ 6.75/1 oz		(916)-638-1225	(1988)
|> Bryant		$16.00/100 g		(415)-526-3141	(1988)
|> Tri-Ess		$ 6.70/2 oz		(818)-247-6910	(~1988)
|> Pho. Formulary	$34.50/100 g		(800)-777-7158	(1990)
|> Zone V		 ??			(802)-765-4508
|> 
|> Ron Speirs, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah


Fred says: (well, that is, it states in the Zone VI catalog)

    Zone VI (2% solution) $18.00 for two 1 quart bottles.

    use 1/2 to 1 oz. per quart of developer.


	Thanks for the info - doug


-- 
                       
     McFarland.henr801c@Xerox.com
  
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: raju@cs.UAlberta.CA (Raju Patil)
Subject: RED EYE ??
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 05:32:04 GMT

 
 Hi,

   Recently I had to take pictures of people (speakers) in a function,
   inside a dimly lit hall. I was using the SB-24 flash unit.
   The pictures were taken from about 13-18 meters from the 
   people at 135 to 200 mm. Red Eye effect was quite pronounced.

   I understand that red eye effect is more pronounced, the smaller
   the angle of the light from the flash falling on the eyes.
   Also the dim ambient light is a factor.
   But surely there must be a way to take such pictures with
   no red-eye ??

 Thanks
 Raju

   
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du)
Subject: Re: Teleconverters (was: When does price beat out the best choice..)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:49:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.175622@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> (robert.m.atkins) writes:
>The Nikons are "matched" in the sense that some are
>made specifically for lenses longer than a certain focal length, while
>others (of the same power) are for more general use (TC201 vs TC301,
>TC14A vs TC14B). 
>
	I haven't seen people mention Nikon TC-16A, and I'd recommend it
highly, especially for those feel that TC-14A/B is not "long" enough, and
that TC-201/301 is not good enough as one would wish it would be. A camera
that can operate TC-16A is needed though(N2020, N8008(s) and F4). I have
used TC-16A with 135/2 and 300/4.5EDIF on my N8008s. The results were
very satisfying. Center resolutions are as good as the comparable single
focal length lenses, while corner resolutions drop slightly. Although I
don't have a quantified measure, I can say that TC-16A beats, in term of 
image quality, TC-201 which I also have. I would not hesitate using TC-16A 
when there is a need for it. I don't mean to imply that TC-201 is not a
good quality converter, but I only use it when there is no other alternative.
The only drawback of TC-16A is that it reduces the closest focusing distance
of the prime lens. But I don't think it is a big problem because one can
set the prime lens to a closer focusing distance(instead of infinite), and 
the AF operation works fine in the reduced range.

---------------------------------
 Li Du | duli@prony.colorado.edu
---------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: nitram@tellabs.com (Marty Hewes)
Subject: Re: info needed on old 3-d glass stereo slide views
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 18:54:11 GMT

In article <93019.27089.L689577@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM>, L689577@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
> 
> does any body know when the stopped making the glass stereo tranparentcy
> view slides ?
> 
> the photographs are sandwiched in between 2 glass slides which have black
> and gold borders around the subject. judging by the picture content
> (mostly european) which has no evidence of any modern the could be turn
> of the century.
> 
> 
> i would appreciate any info. available.
> 
> 
> thanks mark
> 

If you're talking about slides of approximately 1 1/4 inch high and 4 inches
long, they aren't dead yet.  I made one last night from all currently
available supplies.  The Chicago Stereo Camera Club (among others) has 
competitions in this format.  The black and gold borders do not sound 
familiar, but there have been a number of suppliers of stereo masks.

If you post the outside dimensions of the slide, and of the windows in the 
mount (where the actual film chips are), we can get a little closer.

By the way, there are even commercial labs that still process and mount
Realist format stereo slides, although they usually use cardboard mounts
instead of glass.

Marty

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: d88micla@odalix.ida.liu.se (Michael Larsson)
Subject: Re: Tmax problem...
Organization: CIS Dept, Univ of Linkoping, Sweden
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:23:35 GMT

nkane@terapin.com (Nathan Kane) writes:

>That purple onthe film is from a dye that they put on it. I've never had a
>problem with it effecting the print before, just make sure its fixed long
>enough and most of it will come out. Also, useing some hypo-clear does a good
>job of getting the purple out.

Kodak uses a red dye layer on the T-max to increase sensibility, I believe.
However it requires extended fixing, at least double the usual time to
resolve this layer. Alternatively, use Kodaks special fix for this.

                        Michael Larsson, Linkoeping University, Sweden
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jlavi@cs.joensuu.fi (Jarkko Lavinen)
Subject: Re: Minolta Maxxum 5400i flash
Organization: University of Joensuu
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 08:15:04 GMT

finger@convex.com (Jay Finger) writes:

>I've got a new 7xi, and I need a flash for it.  Has anybody out there had
>any experiences with Minolta's 5400i flash?  Good, bad, etc?  In short, 
>is it worth a hoot?
Recently a swedish photo magazine had a test on various flashes. Among
those 5400i and Nikon SB-25 were in a class of their own. Many flashes
were good at something but these were good in just about everything.

I myself own 5200i. Couldn't live without it.

>jay
	Jarkko Lavinen