HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jromao@bragg.bio.purdue.edu
Subject: Re: Tokina ATX 90 f2.5 Macro
Reply-To: jromao@bragg.bio.purdue.edu
Organization: Purdue University, Dept. of Biological Sciences
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 01:01:23 GMT

	
	Buy it! It's my sharpest lens, and even in the portrait mode (not macro).
I also own a NikkNikkors (24/2.0 AIS, 35/1.4 AIS, 80-200/2.8 ED AF), a Tamron 400/4
LD IF, and a Sigma 1000/13.5 cat.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du)
Subject: Re: LOVE MY NEW SB-25
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 07:36:39 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.1134> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>All you Nikon followers:
>>	go out and get yourself the NEW SB-25..
>>	just got back the first row of picture ->
>>	and it is awsome!!!!
>
>Errr.  Can you be a bit more precise as to what you like about it?
>How are the pictures different from those from an SB-24?
>
	I'm not the person who posted original article. But I have been
playing with my SB-25 for two weeks now, and I'd say it is indeed a VERY
well designed flash. It is awsome compare to the flashes before SB-24,
and it is more useful than SB-24 even if you don't have the N90 camera.
	I have a N8008s, and haven't used SB-24 before. Besides the extra
features one can get from N90 + SB-25 combination, I think there are two
features on SB-25 that makes it a more useful flash. The first is variable
manual power control from 1/1 to 1/64(compare to 1/1 to 1/16 on SB-24). 
The 1/64 power is very useful for close-up applications. The second is
the built-in 20mm diffuser. The attach-on type diffuser is easy to lose.
The built-in white card reflector is nice, but one can easily attach a
white card on SB-24. One other feature, which I think is very useful but
not sure if the SB-24 has it, is the 1/3 stop manual flash control. One
can set the flash to fire at power between 1/1 to 1/64 in 1/3 stop interval.
This is useful for fine tuning flash exposure or for flash exposure 
bracketing, with ANY camera.
	I think Nikon engineers did a good homework, and may have
taken many input from various photographers. I feel the extra $50 is
well spent, and I'd value the gain of SB-25 to be greater than the
gain of a D-lens, whether one has a N90 or not.

---------------------------------
 Li Du | duli@prony.colorado.edu
---------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Which Pentax MF bodies have TTL flash metering?
From: fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov (Fred McKenzie)
Date: 12 Jan 93 10:21:34 EST
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: world
Organization: NASA/Kennedy Space Center, Florida

In article <1993Jan12.000357.1@cc.helsinki.fi>, mlindholm@cc.helsinki.fi
wrote:
> My wife owns a Pentax ME super a few lenses
> and a Metz 32CT7 flash.  She likes them very much, 
> but the camera does not have TTL flash metering.  
> Could you tell me which Pentax manual focus bodies 
> have this feature and what are they like otherwise?

Mikko-

I have the Pentax Super Program, which has TTL flash metering.  I have used
both the Pentax AF280T and Vivitar 550FD TTL flashes successfully.

I understand the Pentax LX has TTL flash capability.  It is considered to
be a "Pro" camera, and doesn't have automatic exposure except for the TTL
Flash.

The larger Pentax cameras that use 120 film, may also have the TTL
capability.

There are several newer Pentax bodies on the market.  I'm not familiar with
their flash capabilities.  If you look at the hot shoe, you may be able to
judge capability.  If there is only one contact, it has none.

If there is one large contact with one smaller contact, the camera probably
doesn't have TTL flash, but receives a signal indicating that the flash is
ready.  These cameras usually have a flash-ready indication in the
viewfinder.

If there is one large contact with two smaller contacts, the camera
probably has TTL capability, in addition to the flash-ready signal.

fred-mckenzie@ksc.nasa.gov
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 23:49:26 CST
From: Rich Chong <U41602@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: "Pro" film vs. Kodacolor - que pasa?

>From: robertson@pasadena-dc.bofa.com
>Subject: "Pro" film vs. Kodacolor - que pasa?
>Date: 5 Jan 93 17:50:14 PDT
>
>What do you get when you pay for "Professional" films?  What makes it worth
>the hassle of keeping them in the fridge?
>
>I usually shoot Kodacolor Gold or Fuji Reala in my old Bronica.  What
>frustrates me is the results I get when I try to photograph sunsets or
>twilight.  Seems like the film doesn't have the range of whatever they use in
>those Nikon ads - sky is real light and stuff below the horizon is too dark.
>
>Some, or maybe all, of my problem may be me, I know, but do the fridge films
>give better tonal range?  (I know refrigeration will enhance the shelf life of
>any film, but you know what I mean.)

Normal consumer film is formulated to age through its prime with acceptable
color balance, speed, and contrast, throughout its stated life,
stored and sealed at normal ambient "room temperature" conditions.
Pro films are formulated to be at its prime at the time of manufacture,
and held in that state under refrigeration (55F or lower) until use.
Pro film can take two weeks of room temp storage before 'expiring' past
prime.
There is no difference in tonal range between consumer and pro films.
Your tonal problems are due more to the lack of tonal range in paper
(reflective print) vs negative (or transparancy). You'll need special
handling or your own darkroom to print your problem stuff well.
It's amazing what you can do with a very light or dark negative and
still get an acceptable print. When you have both in one picture, that's
when it gets fun.

                 Rich Chong,  RC Tech Enterprises, Inc.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: NIKON FAQ?
Date: 10 Jan 93 13:57:43 GMT

In <1io6rqINNndh@titan.ucc.umass.edu> keene@titan.ucc.umass.edu (STEFAN L KEENE) writes:

>Could someone tell me where the Nikon FAQ is located and any
>other rec.photo FAQ.

The rec.photo FAQ ftp site is: moink.nmsu.edu

The Nikon FAQ is there, in addition to the rec.photo FAQ, and other goodies.

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______________________|
From: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: "Unmatched" filter coatings: new sales-droidism??
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:09:23 GMT
Reply-To: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Tim Conrow writes:

[deleted discussion of tale told to him by salesman about needing
 to match lens coatings between filters and lenses to avoid producing
 a color cast in the image]

>I see three possibilites:
 
>1) He got this from Tiffen sales literature explaining why this filter
>is not multi-coated and that this is A Good Thing.
 
>2) He got this from Nikon literature, explaining why one should never,
>ever, ever, ever buy anything but Nikon filters for Nikon lenses.
 
>3) I'm not so arrogant as to think I've necessarilly thought of
>everything. Maybe, just maybe, he's right.

Tim, I think you omitted several other possiblities:

4) He's a bald-faced liar.  (Related issue:  what does shaving have
   to do with lieing? :-)

5) He's a congenital idiot.

6) He thinks that *you're* a congenital idiot.  (See #4 above.)

7) Well, I've run out of possibilities myself but I'm sure that the
   kind net.readers will come up with more.  :-)  But I'm quite sure
   that possibility #3 is *not* the case.  At least not to any extent
   that one could notice.

In response to your dilemma about whether to categorize him as a sales-
droid, I think that to do so would be a malicious and entirely uncalled
for slur on people of that caste.

Barry
 

--


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp. | "It's much easier to go to exotic places and | 
| bjs@uts.ccc.amdahl.com      |  capture spectacular scenes than to take a   |
|                             |  spectacular picture of a really boring      |
|                             |  green pepper". - Anthony Tse                |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well. (I.e.  My statments are mine, not Amdahl's.)           |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: mikec@spider.co.uk (Mike Coren)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: OTF Metering Inaccuracies
Date: 5 Jan 93 11:49:01 GMT
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK.


My apologies if this is a repost.  My link to the internet seems to have
died briefly over the holidays, so I don't know if this ever got out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an aside to some recent discussions here about off-the-film (OTF) metering,
which I think grew out of the Canon vs. Nikon debate, there was a small blurb
about OTF metering in a supplement to the January '93 issue of "Photo Answers".
It said that the guy at Olympus who designed the OM-2 looked at the reflectiv-
ities of 55 different film emulsions to see how much error there would be in
the OTF metering system.  What he found was that most color films deviated by
less than 20% from the norm (1/5 stop), and B&W films by less than 30% from
the norm (less than 1/3 stop).  This was considered OK since most built-in
meters will only get you to within about 1/3 stop of the correct exposure
anyway.

He noted, however, that there were three films which would require additional
correction to the OTF metered reading:

	- Agfapan 25 document film
	- Orwo NP15
	- Kodak black & white infared film

I know this last one in particular is used by a lot of the people on rec.photo.
Unfortunately, the guy writing this article (Ron Spillman) didn't think anyone
might be interested in how much correction is needed for these films.  I guess
you're on your own!

Mike

-- 
Michael D. Coren, Electrical Engineer             mikec@spider.co.uk
Telecommunications Techniques Corporation, Germantown, Maryland, USA.
Temporarily at Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: djb85@thor.albany.edu (Donald J. Byrd)
Subject: Hard to find projector bulbs
Originator: djb85@thor.albany.edu
Organization: State University of New York at Albany
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 04:06:07 GMT

	I have an excellent old 6x6 slide projector, but the
markings are burned off the bulb, and the local photo stores do
not recognize it.  Does any one know of a solution to this
problem?

	Thanks in advance.

	Don Byrd
	State University of New York--Albany
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Questions about everything
Date: 7 Jan 93 16:57:53 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1993Jan7.051137.29249@cello.hpl.hp.com>
jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson) (that is I er me er I) write:
>In article <1993Jan5.114632.29209@spider.co.uk> mikec@spider.co.uk (Mike Coren) writes:
>
>>1)  Why do fast zoom lenses need rediculously wide filters when compared to
>>their slower counterparts?  For example, compare the specs on the Tokina
>>AT-X 28-70mm f/2.8 versus the SZ-X 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5.  Both have a maximum
>>field of view of 75 deg, 20 min at 28mm, but the AT-X (f/2.8) uses a 72mm
>>filter, while the SZ-X (f/3.5) uses a 52mm filter.  On the one hand, these
>>numbers seem way too small, since the 92mm long AT-X would need an opening
>>142mm in diameter to capture a 75 degree field, while the 65mm long SZ-X
>>would need an opening 100mm in diameter for the same 75 degree field.  On
>>the other hand, though, at the 70mm end, to give f/2.8, the AT-X only needs
>>a clear aperture of 25mm diameter, and the SZ-X at f/4.5 needs even less.
>>Is there a simple explaination for this, or is this one of the subtleties
>>of modern computer-aided optical design?
>
>I think the requrired diameter to avoid vignetting is the diameter of the
>aperture (focal_length / f_stop) plus 
>Sqrt[24^2+36^2]/focal_length*front_nodal_point_to_front_element_distance.
>I didn't follow your arithmetic, but since you don't know the last
>term, you can't get a hard number.

Oops it should have the aperture + film_diagonal/focal_length*
apparent_diaphragm_position_to_front_element_distance.

In many lenses, particularly wide angle lenses, the apparent position
of the diaphragm is in front of the nodal points.  This makes the
aperture appear larger from the rear than the front.  For example in
my Sigma 24 mm f/2.8, the diaphragm appears about twice as large when
seen from the rear as from the front.  A little algebra and the normal
lens equations shows that the diaphragm's apparent position from the
front must be 12mm in front of the front nodal point, and as seen from
the rear must be 24 mm in front of the rear nodal point.

I'm not a lens designer, so I don't know if this is a necessary
consequence of making a lens with enough rear clearance for the
mirror, or whether it is done delibrately to reduce the size of the
front element.  

  -- David Jacobson
From: dcl@romeo.caltech.edu (Darek Lis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: More on Lithium
Date: 5 Jan 1993 08:36 PDT
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: romeo.caltech.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1993Jan5.121244.20812@eua.ericsson.se>, Harald.Brandt@eua.ericsson.se (Harald Brandt) writes...
> 
>I plan to go for the modification, since I want to battery warnings to be 
>meaningful, i.e the last warning (blinking symbol) should mean "there is 
>no point in trying to squeeze out more of the battery since it will soon 
>not wind or charge flash",  
> 
I've been quite annoyed with the battery indicator on my Elan as well and 
I just wonder if one shouldn't ignore it altogether. What I mean is just 
keep shooting until the battery goes dead. The manual says that as long as 
the camera winds the film the exposure will be correct. Does it make any 
sense?

Darek Lis
From: dex@lprhp3.epfl.ch (Christian Decurnex)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: EOS objectives umounted - which position ?
Date: 6 Jan 93 20:26:09 GMT
Reply-To: dex@lprhp3.epfl.ch (Christian Decurnex)
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne


Hello,
I'm just worry about the safety of my EOS lenses when unmouted.
If there a risk to leave the objective in AF position. In case of 
movement of the manual focusing ring, how does it interfer with the
AF mechanism ?

Is it recommended to put the lenses in MF position when unmounted
for non-USM lenses, and both types of USM lenses ?

Regards,

-- 

Christian Decurnex

IGA DP						Phone: ++41 21/693 33 85
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne	FAX:   ++41 21/693 44 70
PH-Ecublens				
CH-1015 Lausanne
Switzerland					Email: dex@lprhp5.epfl.ch


"Nuclear Workers Make Better Lovers ...................... They're Hot !"
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: krd2b@Virginia.EDU ("Keith R. Donnelly")
Subject: Re: about 300mmF2.8 and 200mmF2.0
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:56:52 GMT

The 300 2.8 also has the distinct advantage of functioning as a
400 f4 with a 1.4x converter - and loses very little in the way
of sharpness at that focal length.  A 600 f 5.6 with a 2x
converter is nice, and fast enough to use too.  If only I had 2
grand to spend to get one...

-Keith				You who aspire to greatness,
krd2b@virginia.edu		learn how to laugh! - Nietzsche
From: diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: LOVE MY NEW SB-25
Date: 6 Jan 93 02:39:16 GMT
Reply-To: diamond@jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo

In article <1993Jan5.113425.29635@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>In <1993Jan5.154414.21944@iplmail.orl.mmc.com> artc@iplmail.orl.mmc.com (Art) writes:
>>All you Nikon followers:
>>	go out and get yourself the NEW SB-25..
>>	just got back the first row of picture ->
>>	and it is awsome!!!!
>How are the pictures different from those from an SB-24?

Faster fill flash, if you use it with an F-90.  (Grrrrrrr.)
Softer illumination, if you're not carrying a bounce card along with the SB-24.
Wider coverage,      "    "     "      "    "    "    "     "    "    "    "  .
--
Norman Diamond                diamond@jit.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
Pardon me?  Or do I have to commit a crime first?
From: mkuhn@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Martin W Kuhn)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Mercury 1/2 frame 35mm camera
Keywords: mercury
Date: 8 Jan 93 01:59:56 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA


Oops, one minor correction (before someone else finds it :-)

The Mercury II also has a different lens than the older model;
an f/2.7 Tricor instead of the old f/3.5 version.

             --Marty
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Anyone do their own C41 developing?
Date: 8 Jan 93 08:13:40 GMT
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

In article <PHR.92Dec31131158@napa.telebit.com>, phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:
>     A friend of mine tells me that there are little machines
>     photojournalists use to do developing of negatives on-the-spot
>     (something like the Polachrome machines, I think).  I have no idea if
>     it's colour or not.
> 
> This would be great---can you find out more about it?  The only
> automated way I know of to develop film short of a minilab is
> with a high end Jobo or similar.  I could see spending a few hundred
> $ for a mostly-automatic developing machine, but not kilobucks.

Some use the new Jobo ATL 1000 film processor (around $2000) for volume
processing. For simpler jobs, it is common to use a Jobo daylight tank
and small packs of C-41 chemistry (like the Tetenal 0,5 liter kit).
Tetenal has now also released C-41 chemistry in powder form to be diluted
to 1 liter of solution. I saw them at my dealer the other day. I think
they were called "Press Kit" or something like that and are intended
for photographers who need to bring their own chemistry but can't bring
concentrated solutions.

- Robert

-- 
--------------------- This mass of gibberish came from ---------------------
         ____
        |    |               Robert Claeson
        |    |               Data General AB
 _______|____|_              Box 28
|    |    _    |_____        S-164 93 KISTA
|_/\ |   / \   |     |       Sweden
| \/ |   \_/   |   . |
|    |    |    |_____|       robert@sys.sweden.dg.com
|____|_________|-
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: krd2b@Virginia.EDU ("Keith R. Donnelly")
Subject: Pentax Motor Drive 4 SALE
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:20:40 GMT

I have a Pentax Motor Drive A in mint condition for sale.  It
is approx. 2 yrs old and works perfectly.  I believe it can be
used on the MEII, Program Plus and Super Program - the Super
Program for sure (that's what I've used it with).  It cost $180
new, so I'll part with it for around $100.  It fires around 4
frames per second and has a vertical shutter release which is
really convinient in reducing arm fatigue.  It takes 8 AA
batteries, which last for 60-100 rolls of film or so.  I've
been very pleased with it, but am selling it for lens $ - (I've
still got one on my other body which I'm keeping).

You can contact me at (804) 979-0391 or at
krd2b@virginia.edu.

keith
From: wagner@mala.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: light meter problem - Nikon SLR
Date: 10 Jan 93 09:22:14 -0700
Organization: Malaspina College

wIn article <C0MIBx.Bxu@well.sf.ca.us>, rchao@well.sf.ca.us (Robert Chao) writes:
> In article <C0M4yJ.81D@well.sf.ca.us> rchao@well.sf.ca.us (Robert Chao) writes:
>[B>
>>I[B[B[B have a problem with a Nikon FM which I haven't used in a while. The thing
>>is that it keeps telling me there is too much light coming in. I was
>>aiming at an outdoor scene and turned the aperture and shutter speed to
>>all possible extremes and it still said there was too much light. The
>>ASA is 200. (This meter has a "+","-", and normal LED.)
>>
>>Is there anything that might cause this except for, of course, a malfunction
>>with the thing? I thought it might be the batteries but that didn't sound
>>right.
>>-- 
>>Robert Chao
>>Oakland, California
> 
> 
> I forgot to mention that when I use the depth-of-field preview switch,
> the light meter gives me a more reasonable estimate of whether there
> is too much or too little light.
> I am not sure if that is normal or not. Well thanks if you can help.
> -- 
> Robert Chao
> Oakland, California
Is it possible that when the lense was installed the small tab that grabs the 
mechanism telling the camer the lense setting was missed?

When installing the lense it contacts a spring loaded ring.  If the lense tab
and/or the ring don't come into contact the camera doesn't know the lense
setting.         

73, Tom

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: 49mm versus 52mm
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 04:33:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <PHR.92Dec31154741@napa.telebit.com> phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.161824.1@ducvax.auburn.edu> swanger@ducvax.auburn.edu writes:
>
>
>   Pentax and Nikon use different diameters (widths?) for their 50mm lenses.  
>   Pentax uses 49mm, Nikon uses 52mm.  Does the width affect picture quality?
>   Is one better than the other, or does neither make any difference?
>
>It shouldn't make any difference to the optical quality of the glass.
>However, using 49mm with wide angle lenses is more likely to cause
>vignetting (some Olympus lenses have this problem slightly; don't know
>about Pentax).  52mm gives the designer a little more room to use
>bigger elements etc.  
...
>However, Nikon more recently seems to have gone to 62mm for new AF
>lenses including 60/2.8, 85/1.8, etc.

Careful here.  The 60mm f/2.8 MicroNikkor does indeed use a 62mm
filter, but it has nothing to do with optics.  The front element is
only about 3/4 of an inch in diameter.  This lens has an extremely
clever built-in telescoping lens shade.  When focused at infinity the
front element is at the back of a deep well.  As you focus closer, 3
separate pieces all move a different rates, with the innermost one
moving out fastest, so that at 1:1 the front element is almost right
out at the front.  The 62mm filter is to accomodate this clever
mechanical stuff.

  -- David Jacobson


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: mlindholm@cc.helsinki.fi
Subject: Byu a Nikon FE 2, FA of F3?
Organization: University of Helsinki
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 17:23:46 GMT

I own a Nikon FM 2, and I am thinking of byuing
another body, with aperture priority automatic.

My question is: what are the differences between
Nikon FE 2, FA and F3 models?  Which one should I
purchase (second hand, that is)?

Many thanks to all who bother to answer.

Mikko Lindholm

Mikko.Lindholm@helsinki.fi
or: mlindholm@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: rec.photo