HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rune@cimsand.UUCP (Rune Riisnaes)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Who make good close-up lenses ?
Date: 14 Sep 92 09:19:58 GMT
Organization: Cimage A.S, Sandvika, Norway.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

txn@sirius.larc.nasa.gov (Troung Nguyen) writes:
: 
:   I am considering to buy some close-up lenses. Nikon makes good
:   2-element lenses for 52mm and 62mm thread diameters, but my 
:   Canon lenses are 58mm in diameter.  So  who else make 2-element 
:   close-up lenses?.  Are Tiffen's, B+W's and Hoya's close up 
:   filters any good?  I believe they are 1 element lenses though.
: 
:   Thanks for your responses.
: 

I am very pleased with my Nikon 5T and 6T two-element diopters.  I have 
tried simple one-element lenses, but would not recommend them.
Have you considered using a step-up ring from 58 to 62 mm ?
-- 
Rune Riisnaes    E-mail: rune@cimage.no, rune@cimage.com, rune@cimsand.uucp
                 Cimage A.S,  Skytterdalen 6,  N-1300 Sandvika,  Norway.
                 Phone: (47-2) 54 90 40   Fax: (47-2) 54 58 40
From: bc@apple.com (bill coderre)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Desperately Seeking Perfection XR1 developer
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:37:33 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA


Gazillions of years ago I used this developer for night work. It's
BLUE and very compensating. The results were mighty fine.

Anybody have any clues about the formula, or where I can order the
stuff?

thanks
bill coderre
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: yz3k@galen.med.virginia.edu
Subject: EOS stuff wanted
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:28:03 GMT

I'm a starving student looking for cheap EOS equipment. Please help. I'm  
looking for lens, flash and camers (hopefully a 10s), so if you have anything  
to sell or trade (I have some Nikon stuff), please e-mail me at  
yz3k@galen.med.virginia.edu. Have patience though, I don't get a chance to read  
my mail that often. Thanks.
--Yuan
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Request for info:  FLASHES FOR ELAN
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:08:59 GMT
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <lb9ooiINNfi0@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> zax@kenpo.Corp.Sun.COM writes:
>
>If you're really considering buying an external flash, purchase
>the Canon 430EZ, i paid $255.00 for it.  Canon's manual says, that
>if you use a different brand, it might not be *fully* compatible
>with Canon's camera electronics and could cause some camera problems,
>then therefore will void your camera warranty.

Every camera manufacturer says that.....

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: keivjam@elof.iit.edu (James Keivom)
Subject: NEED INFO ON NIKON ME.  PLEASE!!!!(grovel..grovel.grovel)
Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 05:33:40 GMT

would anyone know anything about the Nikon ME.  i know someone with
a Nikon E and its supposed to be good.  Would anyone know anything
about this model and is it similar to the Nikon E.  whats its week
points...forget the spelling mistakes...is it good for a first
camera.  someone is selling it for $115.  is that a good price.

thanks

jim
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble)
Date: 8 Sep 92 22:05:59 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow) writes:
: In article <274@metran.UUCP> jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
: >
: >Kodak recommends additional exposure AND FILTER CORRECTION for some
: >of their color films when exposed for less than 1/1000 sec......
: 
: I hope you meant "....more than 1/1000 sec...." and not LESS.

Actually, I meant *less* (1/2000 < 1/1000).  However, I was just checking
my information, and found out that when I posted the above, my imagination
was getting the better of me -- as it happens, Kodak specifies *no* correction,
to either exposure time or filtration, for most of their color films when
exposed for less than 1/1000 second.  Perhaps I had confused the color films
with T-max 100 and Tech Pan.

I apologize for the inconsistency!

Jay Ts
From: Gen.M.Kanai@dartmouth.edu (Gen M. Kanai)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikkor vs. Sigma
Date: 13 Sep 92 00:22:19 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <18sq6tINNdou@bigboote.WPI.EDU>
jayg@wpi.WPI.EDU (Jay Giurleo) writes:

>  As far as optical quality goes, how much of a difference is there between
> a Sigma lense and a Nikkor lense?  I realize that Nikkors are fantastic lenses,
> but my wallet is speaking for me right now!  Is it worth the extra dollars for
> a Nikkor?  Thanks very much.


Jay,
     Before I try to answer your question, I should tell you that I am
a Nikon owner and therefore might be somewhat biased.  
     The actual optical quality of Nikon lenses versus Sigma ones is a
question that has been flying around for a while now.  While you can
imagine there are people on both sides, I think that when this question
is looked at realstically, the answer is different for every person. 
Yes, a Nikon lens is optically more "correct" than a Sigma lens, but I
would bet that even the best of photographers would have a hard time
telling the difference between a perfectly focused shot with a Nikon
lens and the exact same Sigma.  Some might tell you differently, and
yes it depends upon what the light and subject is, but it is really
hard to tell unless we are talking about extreme magnification and/or
long, long lenses.  In either of those two cases, the Nikons stand out
significantly.  
      I think a lot of the debate, while it might center on the optics,
which we all know is the most important thing, also inclused things
like aesthetics, focus-ring movement, construction materials and
quality.  The Sigmas are not as durable as the Nikons are, especially
the manual focus Nikons.  
       All I own are Nikon manual focus, AIS lenses.  I do not own any
zooms.  I also print rather large prints (11x14 and 16x20).  I was able
to afford the Nikons, and I do not have a single complaint.  I am
thinking about buying a third-party zoom in the near future for a 3
month backpacking tour, but that lens will be strictly for fun photos
only.  
       Basically, I think everything depends upon the variables you
hold.  How much money, how much do you care about quality, aesthetics,
ease of use, and how much magnification you might enlarge your
negatives to.  Most professionals use the lenses that are made by their
camera companies.  This is also something to take into consideration.  

       Is it worth it?  I think so.  The manual focus Nikon AIS lenses
are now being phased out of production.  Only the fastest lenses are
left and those will be gone as soon as their stock of parts runs dry. 
I suggest you buy these lenses because they are all metal, and will
soon be difficult to find new, if at all.  If your budget doesnt allow
this, I suggest buying the Nikon AF lenses.  But be  picky, some are
better than others.

Gen.kanai@dartmouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: tssmith@netcom.com (Tim Smith)
Subject: Rental Darkrooms
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:23:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: ba

Can anyone tell me if there any darkrooms for rent in the Bay Area,
preferably near San Mateo.  Does this concept even exist anymore? I looked
in the yellow pages, and asked at one or two camera stores with no luck.

Thanks for any leads.

--Tim (tssmith@netcom.com)


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chang@ecf.toronto.edu (CHANG Rong Fawn Teresa)
Subject: Re: Morris Slaves and NiCads?
Organization: UofT, engineering 
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 02:15:11 GMT

In article <1992Sep13.002114.25203@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>I recently bought a Morris "Mini Wide" slave flash and some NiCd AAA's
>to power it.  However, when I tried NiCads (after charging them, of
>course), the flash wouldn't charge.  Indeed, one of the cells became
>too hot to handle and is probably damaged.  The flash seems to work
>fine with Alkaline batteries.

Were you buying used?  Seems to be obvious that your NiCads wouldn't
work.  You might just use alkaline batteries for a while.

>When I hooked the Morris up to the small power supply I have in my
>basement, the power supply gave a "short circuit" indication at the
>beginning of each flash recharge cycle, but otherwise worked fine.

Seems an "open circuit" to me.  Did you mean that there seemed to
be no electricity at some certain short period of time?
Were both systems compatible? (like 120V, 110V...etc.)  If your
basement has never been flooded before, I don't see water would
have any effects on this experiment.  Was your power supply overload?
(Like, computers, dehumidifier...etc.)

>Has anyone else experienced this, or do I just have a dud?  Any

Might be a little bit of valueless.  But not a big failure.  If you
insist on using recharging unit, probably you could find another
for $?0(?) or so.

>recommendations on something that would give me the same features (120
>degree coverage, optically triggered, small)?

Features of what (in detail??)?
From: tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Tony Arnerich)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Flash sync at 1/4000 s. (was Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble))
Date: 8 Sep 92 21:18:04 GMT
Organization: HP Scientific Instruments Division - Palo Alto, CA

markl@research.nj.nec.com (Mark Lee) writes:

>                                               To me, the only really
> useful new features of the modern AF cameras are:

> 1. TTL flash metering -- takes much of the guesswork out of getting good
> flash pictures in a hurry.  I realize this can't be done with an
> all-mechanical shutter.

Sure it can. The TTL flash function in a camera body is just a remote
sensor for the flash. When Vivitar brought out the model 283 so many
years (or is it decades?) ago, they introduced remote sensors. Well,
don't kill me if maybe they had this feature before the 283.

In any case, the only thing you need for TTL sensing is to put that
sensor inside the body, and connect it to the flash. Period. Why this
feature is associated with other electronic bells & whistles is just
a function of Marketing departments.

tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Subject: MF cameras and candid shots
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
Distribution: rec
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:19:05

Note:  I promise to get to the point eventually...

It looks like I'm going to be heading to Portugal this winter, in a
rare family trip with my stepfather.  This is going to be interesting,
because he and I are both avid photographers, but he's been winning a
lot of photo competitions as of late with his candids of Portugese
folks (he's gone there quite a bit).

I've always had better luck with scenics and macro shots, which has
been making me consider making the switch from 35mm to 6x6, possibly
the Rollie SL66E.  I've mostly considered this because the thought of
big chromes makes me drool, and I want the lensboard tilt, too.

Although we might make a good team, what with me documenting the 
things, and he documenting the people, the competitive urge in me
is probably going to push me over the edge and finally start pointing
my equipment at actual human beings.  My main mode of preparation will
be to start running around in good old New England and try to break down
my personal inhibitions about photographing strangers, but...

(I promised to get the point, so here it is...

Do those of you who take (uninvited) pictures of people on a regular
basis have any idea if a great big camera with a waist-level finder is
more or less intimidating than a small 35mm with a medium-sized zoom at
eye-level?  Peering into a box at waist level seems like it might be a
less aggressive-looking act.  Does it work out that way in terms of
reaction from the subject?

Tony
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mparikh@uceng.UC.EDU ( )
Subject: Fuji Camera FZ-2000 Information pls.
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Cincinnati
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:21:26 GMT

Hello!

I am just venturing out into the big world of photography. my current skill 
(not to speak of spending!) level limits me to the use of an automatic camera. 
(pls. refrain from snickering for a moment! :) ). I have heard about a Fuji 
camera FZ-2000, that would suit an ameteur like me. 

I would like to know from the enlightened subscribers of this newsgroups, what
they think about this camera. I would appreciate any details about the 
features (or lack thereof) and price to performance ratio, for this camera.

Thanks a bunch.

-M. Parikh
From: dbe2@dcs.exeter.ac.uk (David Bennett)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Rewinding Films: But not completely
Keywords: Rewinding, cartridge, diff kinds of photography
Date: 15 Sep 92 10:40:36 GMT
Organization: University of Exeter, UK.

In article <1992Jul15.224215.17883@news.uiowa.edu> mahatme@icaen.uiowa.edu (Chandrashehar Vasant Mahatme) writes:
>
>	Could anybody tell me how one can rewind a film without letting
>it go completely inside the cartridge. Specifically I've a Minolta X-700
>and I tried to rewind a partially exposed film so that it's end still 
>remains out. But unfortunately I couldn't stop exactly. There must be some
>technique for that which I don't know. This would be helpful if I wanted 
>to shoot nature pictures using say Ektar 25 then a Portrait using Fuji Realla 
>100. Since I'm no pro' I can't simply waste the expensive films for pictures 
>I don't want and since I'm not totally a amatuer I would like to use diff films 
>for nature photography and for other types.
>	Thanks for your responses.
>
>Shekhar Mahatme
>------- -------


Er... me too. But w/ a Canon EOS 100.  Impossible. I don't like the dictionary
defn.

Responses by E-Mail please... Thanks in advance.

Cheers

Dave

-- 
| JANET  : dbe2@uk.ac.ex.dcs       | "I say what it occurs to me to say when  |
| UUCP   : dbe2@ex-dcs.uucp        | I think I hear people say things. More I |
| Undergrad @ University of EXETER | cannot say." HHGTTG Radio Scripts.       |
| Computer Science Dept. EXETER,UK | by D N Adams                             |
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: s126@brems.ii.uib.no (Jarle Bareksten)
Subject: DX-kode ...???
Followup-To: poster 
Reply-To: s126@brems.ii.uib.no
Organization: University of Bergen, Norway
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 13:50:50 GMT


Hello!

I have to "fool" my camera - anyone out
there who can help me with readings 
on DX-koding?


    Thanks
      from
       jarle!

 email: s126@brems.ii.uib.no


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: markiewi@phage.cshl.org (Peter Markiewicz)
Subject: Re: Shuttlebug subscribstion... Mailing address needed
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:58:29 GMT

boh@fraser.sfu.ca (Changhao Boh) writes:

>Hi.  I am wondering if anyone here knows the mailing or FAX (Best !) address
>of Shutterbug magazine.

>I live in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canana.  A local fax number would be
>appreciated.

>Thanks in advance, and good health to all.

>Changhao.

Shutterbug
P.O. Box F
Titusville, Florida 32781
(407) 268-5010
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Subject: Re: Different Lenses in Different Formats
Reply-To: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 06:17:06 GMT


In article <1992Sep14.140506.15056@newstand.syr.edu>,
asadigh@rodan.acs.syr.edu (sadigh) writes:
|> Hello everyone!
|> 
|> I vaguely remember that there is a correspondence between the lens
focal length
|> and the format of the camera.  I would like to know how one goes from
one system
|> to the other.  To be more clear, suppose I have a 10mm lens on my
super 8 movie
|> camera.  The image produced by this lens is equivalent to the image of what
|> 35mmSLR format lens?  Is the correspondence linear?  How about other formats
|> like medium?  Thanks in advance.

You're in luck -- the conversion is linear with film size.  For
example, an 8x10 camera will use lenses twice as long as a 4x5, which
would uses lenses twice as long as a 2x2.5, if there were such a
thing.  Since the shapes of the frames are different, you have to
decide for yourself how you're going to match them up -- long sides,
short sides, diagonals, the part of the frame that fits an 8x10 print
best, or whatever you like.  Once you figure out the ratio, you can
just divide all your 35mm lens focal lengths by the ratio, and get the
length for the other format.

Getting too precise is rarely worthwhile.  Medium format comes in
several shapes.  Keep in mind that 6cm is really about 56mm.  I believe
most of the other numbers are as advertised.  Sheet films have a border
of a few millimeters; it begins to look big on 8x10 sheets.  Small
format, i.e. 35mm, is 24x36mm.  (I have no idea what the Super 8 frame
size is, which is why you haven't gotten any guesses about the
conversion factor from me!)

- donl mathis at Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
donl@sgi.com
From: eugene@briar.lle.rochester.edu (Eugene Kowaluk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Resolution test as function of distance
Date: 11 Sep 92 21:12:32 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics

robert.m.atkins writes:

> Many specialised copy lenses (e.g.
> Rodenstock) are specified to give optimum performance only at certain
> magnification ratios (which amounts to optimum imaging of objects over
> a limited distance range).


Most Rodenstock enlarging lenses do it at 20X.


eugene kowaluk
From: philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: 4x5 holders
Date: 15 Sep 92 23:28:54 GMT
Reply-To: philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: dp@world.std.com's message of 15 Sep 92 18:23:52 GMT


In article <BuMtrt.59x@world.std.com> dp@world.std.com (Jeff DelPapa) writes:

   The riteways are more expensive than others, but I *like* the
   darkslide safety catch - (one othe other Lg. fmt regulars on the echo
   doesn't) - but then again, I have pulled the wrong slide when trying
   to hurry

Ditto on the Riteways -- they are the best.  They also give you frame
numbering, although I'm too lazy to use it.

   I strongly recommend getting the polaroid holder in addition to
   conventional holders - you get proofing, image transfer (and other
   sorts of play - I have done my pinhole expirements on polaroid stock
   exclusively), and access to pre-loaded color transparency film (non
   instant) from kodak (not reccomended, I have had problems with film
   not exposing, and film slipping out), polaroid (contains Fuji
   rdp-100), and fuji itself (havent tried yet).

Ditto on Kodak Readyload being flakey and Polaroid/Fuji in a 545 being
winning.  However, Kodak introduced an "improved" Readyload holder
about one year ago so our info may be out of date.

Philip
From: alix@indetech.com (Alexandria North)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Looking for Photography Workshops
Date: 13 Sep 92 03:12:16 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Independence Technologies, Inc. Fremont, CA

Does anyone know of any good Bay Area workshops or seminars on 
photography? I'm not looking for photo basics; more like insights 
into studio photography, portraiture, nature photography, etc.
I'd prefer South Bay sources, but perhaps I can't be too picky.

BTW, I've already looked into community colleges (and am taking 
one course right now) but the pace is different then you find in 
workshops.

Alix
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Babies, babies, babies. Why did God make so many babies?
 But no, God didn't make them. Stupid people made them."
      -- Margaret Mitchell, Gone With The Wind
From: sog@craycos.com (Steve Gombosi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Needed: Info on 35mm B&W Enlargers
Date: 15 Sep 92 14:34:49 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <68160@hydra.gatech.EDU> gg10@prism.gatech.EDU (GALLOWAY) writes:
>I am starting a home darkroom for processing only 35mm B&W.  I am going to
>mail order the enlarger since it is the largest cost with the greatest
>potential savings.  The following is a list of inexpensive models that I have
>seen often:
>
>  * Besseler Cadet II w/ 50mm lens -- $105
>  * Besseler Printmaker 35 -- $140
>    + Needs 50mm lens kit (I think) -- $80
>  * Omega C700 -- $130
>    + Needs 50mm lens kit (I think) -- $55
>  * Saunders Dual 35 (lens?) -- $140
>
>Does anyone have any experience (good and bad) about these, or know of any
>other inexpensive models?
>

The problem with all of these is that they're rather flimsy. If you can
afford the extra bucks, I'd get the Omega C760 rather than the 700. It
has a *much* more rigid girder. Similarly, the Saunders 670 is a lot
more rigid than the 35. A poorly constructed enlarger is a *real* nightmare
to work with - they're very prone to vibration, which will make it
impossible to make sharp enlargements. I'd recommend going to a good
camera store and applying the famous Donl Mathis "slap test" to each of these
models.

You might also look for used enlargers.

Steve
Xref: sparky rec.photo:15792 rec.backcountry:6930
From: myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,rec.backcountry
Subject: Re: What tripod do you use when backpacking?
Date: 9 Sep 92 02:05:39 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada

In article <ptse.715999405@bcars65b> ptse@bcars65b.bnr.ca (Paul Tse) writes:
>I use a Manfrotto tripod which is kind of heavy and therefore
>often left at home.
I use a Manfrotto 055 out in the field.
I make up for it by using a very light camera, and very few accessories.  :-)

>Remember:  a tripod is useless if you leave it at home.
>...yeah, it's cliched, but true.

Not if you're a portrait specialist with an expensive studio.
Oh, at home! Yes, you're technically correct there. Gurus rarely work at home.
From: TSOS@uni-duesseldorf.de (Detlef Lannert)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Mirror Lockup
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 17:42:22 GMT
Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet, Duesseldorf
NNTP-Posting-Host: lannert.rz.uni-duesseldorf.de

In article <1992Sep9.213350.17976@hubcap.clemson.edu> klprice@eng.clemson.edu (kevin price) writes:

>Mirror lockup cuts down significantly on camera vibration 
>upon shutter release.  

Not to forget the noise reduction: When the mirror is locked up and
you press the release button, there is only the noise of the shutter
to be heard. If the film is advanced manually ( ;-) ), an SLR can be
used for candid shots where photographing is not, hmm, advisable.
With an accompanying, well synchronized dry cough you can take 
pictures where otherwise only a P&S (without motor) [or a TLR] could
be used.

Needless to say that the viewfinder is darkened while the mirror is up;
so this feature is only useful if the camera is mounted on a tripod or
otherwise in a steady position - or if you aim roughly and trust your
luck.
--
Detlef Lannert      DC3EK      E-Mail: tsos@rz.uni-duesseldorf.de
"No news is good news - not at all if the news system is broken."
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: winfia@vccsouth23.its.rpi.edu (Anthony Edward Winfield)
Subject: Kodak CD picture and LDs
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 19:24:06 GMT

	I just saw on QVC no less a Kodak cd picture disc player.  The thing
cost on QVC about $450.  The thing also played reagular CD.  They said that
to get you pictures put on CDs (or negatives for that matter) just take them
to a developer (I assume on that has some association with kodak) and they 
would have them put to CD.  What I want to know is, is this format of CD
picture compatible with current Laser Disc players that play multi-size and
multi format LDs and CDs?
	Thanks in advance.
                                      Tone