HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chen@eve.usc.edu (Chih-Tung Chen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Need advice on purchasing a Canon EOS camera
Date: 15 Sep 1992 14:21:32 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: eve.usc.edu
Keywords: Canon

Hi netters:

I'm sorry if this is a FAQ. I'm thinking purchasing a SLR camera.
I am not very serious on photographing, but I would like to have an
general purpose SLR camera which is more versatile than those
point-and-shoot cameras. One of my friends recommended the Cannon EOS
Rebel S II kit, which seems to be the most cost effective choice for
me. However, I would like to have more advice from all of you.
First of all, my budge is around $400(+/- $50).

1. Is this kit a good buy? (price is just around $400 for 35-80mm
lens)?
2. If yes, should I buy the one with 35-135mm lens or spend more money
on a good Ultra Sonic len such as (28mm-80mm) with the Rebel S II body?
3. Is there any other good choices from Nikon, Cannon or Minolta that
you will recommend?

Thanks in advance

Chen




Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: wave@media.mit.edu (Michael B. Johnson)
Subject: Re: Kodak CD picture and LDs
Keywords: Kodak Photo CD
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:51:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.184946.2037@arrocha.charlotte.nc.us> roberto@arrocha.charlotte.nc.us writes:

<bunch of stuff deleted...>

>>multi-session read/write. This feature allows you to add images to the  
>>Photo CD (up to 100 images). Just bring the CD to your processing lab and  
>>they will add the new images for you.
>>
>>Processing:
>>Input format:			35mm negatives or slides
>>Max. number of of images / CD:	100
>>Image processing cost:		$1.20ea (as advertised by Kodak)
>>				$1.79ea	(KODALUX)

An interesting thing to note here (Mike Axman correct me if I'm wrong,
please) is that this number (100) is not a firm one.  I was talking to
a guy locally who does Photo CD (i.e. works at a place commercially taking
your negs and puttting them on PhotoCD) and he said the amount of images
varies depending on the film you use (i.e. how much compression they
get).  Since I tend to shoot mainly Ektar 25 and Ektar 1000 (pushed 2 stops)
he said he thought I'd probably get on the order of 150 of my pushed 1000
negatives on a disk.  I've been procrastinating on going out there, so
I can't back that up first hand, but I thought it was interesting, and it
does make sense (assuming variable compression ratios for different 
emulsions).





-- 

-->  Michael B. Johnson
-->  MIT Media Lab      --  Computer Graphics & Animation Group
-->  (617) 253-0663     --  wave@media-lab.media.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: M18709@mwvm.mitre.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Tamrac 706 vs 606
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:11:01 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102

I have been thinking about buying a new camera bag.  I have
narrowed my choices down to the Tamrac 706 and 606.  They are
essential the same bag (both are approx 12x8x6, side pockets, tripod
straps, lens bridge, zipper + clip closure, padded carry strap, handle,
etc.) but with a few differences:
 
706:  Waist belt  (I like the waist belt alot, not just for carrying the
bag on my waist, but for keeping it from slipping when carried on
my shoulder)
 
606:  Larger rain-flap, large partitioned front pocket (bigger then the
706, great for storing filters, etc), large removable film pouch.
 
I would be interested in hearing from folks who have these bags.  I
am not worried about quality.  Tamrac has a good reputation.  I plan
on holding an N6006, 70-210, 35-70, 24, 50, strobe, film, and
associated accessories.  Any experiences would be helpful.  Other
suggestions would also be interesting.  Has anyone tried sewing belt
loops on the back of a bag?  Can that work?  Does anyone sell
dividers separately?  Tamrac's dividers strike me as being a bit
short.  A moderately long lens (i.e., 70-210) standing up might slip
over.
=====================================================================
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out, and
remove all doubt" --Abraham Lincoln (1862)
=======================================================================
Andrew R. Lacher      | Center for Advanced Aviation System Development
m18709@mwvm.mitre.org | The MITRE Corporation
(703) 883-7182        | McLean Virginia 22102
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: klprice@eng.clemson.edu (kevin price)
Subject: Minolta Maxuum 7xi and system for sale $795
Keywords: Minolta Maxuum 7xi
Reply-To: klprice@eng.clemson.edu
Organization: College of Engineering, Clemson Univ.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:39:44 GMT


Everything In MINT condition!!    Not one mark anywhere!!!

Includes:
	Minolta Maxuum 7xi
	AF 50mm Minolta f 1.7
	AF 75-300mm Sigma f 4.5-5.6  APO
	Long electronic cable release

Has given unparalleled results... Metering is perfect... Widest AF area available
Most accurate shutter to 1/8000... continuous predictive AF at 4 frames/sec
14 segment metering pattern... I am selling because I miss a manual camera...
Unbelievable buy!!!  all together lists at $1500...
Call (803) 653-4692 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: watters@darwin.genetics.washington.edu (Mike Watters)
Subject: FOR SALE: Olympus OM-1n w/ 28mm lens
Organization: University of Washington   
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:34:05 GMT

For Sale:

	Olympus OM-1n body.............. $140
	Olympus 28mm f3.5 lens.......... $ 50

The OM-1n body is fitted with shoe 4 (interchangable hotshoe) and features
mirror lockup, self timer, fully manual shutter (speeds from 1 to 1000 + B)
and TTL meter (center the needle for accurate exposure).

The body and lens are both in top shape with very few signs of wear on them.

Buyer pays any shipping costs.
Offers on both together favored (read that to mean: "I'm more willing to
bargain if they go as a set")

mike


--
Mike
watters@genetics.washington.edu
Dept of Genetics, Univ of Washington  Seattle
(d) 206-543-1934   (e) 206-361-1156
From: philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Kodak vs. Fuji Readyload
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:38:31 GMT
	<RIVIERES.92Sep14103530@texas.parc.xerox.com>
Reply-To: philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: rivieres@parc.xerox.com's message of 14 Sep 92 17:35:30 GMT


In article <RIVIERES.92Sep14103530@texas.parc.xerox.com> rivieres@parc.xerox.com (Jim des Rivieres) writes:
Path: ai-lab!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!stanford.edu!ames!bionet!parc!rivieres
   From: rivieres@parc.xerox.com (Jim des Rivieres)
   Newsgroups: rec.photo
   Date: 14 Sep 92 17:35:30 GMT
   References: <PHILG.92Sep12142659@zug.ai.mit.edu>
   Sender: news@parc.xerox.com
   Reply-To: desrivieres@parc.xerox.com
   Organization: Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA
   Lines: 16


   philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun) writes:

   > P.S.  I assume all of you have seen Fuji's ad for Readyload 4x5
   > Velvia... has anyone managed to find any?

   Yes. I bought some locally about a month ago.  I was a bit surprised to find
   that Fuji "Quickload" is quite different internally from Kodak Readiload
   (although Quickload works just fine in a Kodak Readiload holder).  Whereas a
   Kodak Readyload contain two sheets of film attached at the top to a full
   length opaque plastic backing, Quickload contains a single piece of film with
   plastic extension tabs attached at the top and bottom.  The Quickload is
   somewhat clumsier to extract the sheet of film from, especially the first time
   you try it (hint: the tabs twist off).

Quickload is different ... it works!  Using Quickload Fuji 50, which
has been available for years as Polachrome or something in a Polaroid
545 back has always been a 100% reliable experience for me.  Kodak
Readyload in the original holder always flaked out (you'd pull the
film out along with the sleeve, thus getting no exposure at all).
Kodak recalled the original holders and gave me a new one, but I still
trust the Fuji/Polaroid system more.

Philip Greenspun
MIT Department of EECS
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: What's "telephoto ratio"
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:25:15 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories


I was just looking at a Sigma ad and saw the following:

    APO 1000mm F8 ZEN
    World's first 1000mm autofocus lens.  Extremely
    compact, telephoto ratio of 0.58.

So what is "telephoto ratio"?

  -- David Jacobson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: epperly@osnome.che.wisc.edu (Tom Epperly)
Subject: Getting the flash off of my camera
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Chemical Engineering
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:12:30

I have a Nikon 5005 and a Nikon SB23 flash, and I am trying to figure
out an inexpensive way to get my flash off of my camera.  I would like
to minimize red-eye and to do vertical shots without the shadow to the
side.  I would also like to have the flexibility to put my flash on a
tripod far away.  I have been thinking about getting some kind of
Stroboframe and a SC-17 flash extension cord.  I would like to know if
anyone has any recommendations.

				Tom
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Epperly	University of Wisconsin-Madison		Chemical Engineering
(608) 262-8264	epperly@osnome.che.wisc.edu		Graduate Student
Member of the League for Programming Freedom(fighting software monopolies)
	For more info contact me or league@prep.ai.mit.edu
If you feel you must flame, please send email rather than posting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: TCDEV010@ysub.ysu.edu (Dennis Konik)
Subject: Close range non-macro focusing problem with Pentax IQZoom105
Organization: Youngstown State University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:55:22 GMT

I recently purchased a Pentax IQZoom 105-R point-and-shoot and have
encountered a focusing problem.
 
The problem occurred at a Christening party this weekend when I attempted to
take a picture of the cake.  In the normal mode the camera will focus up to
4.4 feet of the subject. If you're closer than 4.4 feet the shutter release
button locks up. If I stood back further I was at a bad angle for a good
picture (the cake was laying flat on a table). So I switched to macro mode
which focuses from 4.4 feet to 1.5 feet. But in the macro mode the zoom
extends all the way out and the field of view shrinks so I couldn't get the
entire cake in the picture.
 
Has anybody ever had this problem with the Pentax or any other autofocus
camera?  Is there a solution other than looking silly by standing on a
chair to get the picture?
 
Thanks.
 
Dennis Konik
Youngstown State University
Youngstown, Ohio
From: rsl@gasco.com (Robert Lucas x4363)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: fixed lens medium format / slide mount questions
Date: 4 Sep 92 19:50:26 GMT
Organization: NorthWest Natural Gas Company, Portland Oregon.
Originator: rsl@libra


I am wondering if anyone out there has had any experience with the Fuji line
of medium format cameras (6x7 and 6x9) that utilize a fixed lens and 
rangefinder focusing.  They seem to be affordable, but I am unsure of the 
quality; also, most of my photographic work involves shooting fine art
for exhibitions, gallery cards, etc., and I am concerned about possible 
parallax errors at the 5' to 15' camera to object range I typically use.

Additionally, I have found that artists are typically required to send 
glassless slides to competitions, and have been unable to find decent plastic
mounts.  The Pakon (sp?) mounts that I have tried typically lose slide 
registration easily (as when bumped or dropped by the mail service), and 
are a pain to load without scratching the film.  I would prefer to have mounts
similar to my trusty Wess glass ones that are sturdy and easy to load.  I 
understand that Wess DOES have a glassless mount (not available locally, alas)
but I have never seen any and am concerned that they are too thick to submit
to art juries (that typically use the high density carousel trays).  Has 
anyone used the Wess glassless mounts?  Are there others that are "better"?	

Thanks in advance for any help on these topics.....

Bob   (rsl@gasco.com)

Robert S. Lucas
Northwest Natural Gas Company
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Rewinding Films: But not completely
Date: 16 Sep 92 03:45:45 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <92259.091030FKK@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> FKK@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:
>To all those who have auto-rewind cameras that pull the fill all the way into
>the can.  There is an inexpensive device at photo shops that lets you pull
>the film leader back out of the can in about 30 sec.  It is two thin pieces
>of stainless steel that slide with respect to each other.  It takes 2 or
>3 practice tries and then becomes easily.  Then just put the film back in
>the camera and advance it to the last shot +2 and keep going.  I use one
>with my Nikon 8008 all the time - I don't leave home without it.

You can avoid wasting two frames with the following trick:  Note that
the 8008's sprocket has only 4 teeth, and since a full frame is 8
sprockets, you know that each frame must be two full turns.  Turn the
sprocket carefully with your finger and every other turn you will feel
a slight bit of resistance.  This is presumably the sprocket geared
down by 2:1, operating a switch.  Anyway, turn until you feel the
pressure,then back off one tooth.  Mark this tooth with something.  I
used white typewriter correction fluid.  

Now when loading your camera turn the sprocket gently until you feel
the resistance, then back off until the marked tooth is up.  Put in
the film and mark on the film opposite the marked tooth with a marking
pen.  

If you have to reload, proceed as above except put the mark on the
film opposite the marked tooth.  Advance to the first unused frame.

I've done this at least a dozen times and never had a single
overlapped frame.  But, of course, if the last frame or the next frame
will be really valuable, go one more frame.

  -- David Jacobson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jas@wdc.sps.mot.com (Jaswinder S. Jandu)
Subject: SB-24 Flash Questions...
Organization: Motorola Western MCU Design Center, Chandler Arizona
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:30:11 GMT

 Hi Folks,
    Does anyone know of an adapter bracket that will allow me to 
use a Nikon SB-24 flash with a non-hot shoe camera?
What I require is a bracket to hold the flash and allow it to be
mounted to the bottom of the camera and an adapter from the 
'hot-shoe' to either 'x' or 'fp' inputs on my camera.
If anyone knows of such adapters and could point me in the right
direction, it would be appericated.

Thanks
jas
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bosslet@gaas.enet.dec.com (Ron Bosslet)
Subject: Re: New Saunders 4x5 Enlarger Model ??
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 15:18:44 GMT


In article <1992Sep9.164142.1443@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, bosslet@gaas.enet.dec.com (Ron Bosslet) writes...
> 
>	I'm currently trying to decide on a 4x5 Enlarger and I've 
>	narrowed the choice down to the Beseler 45MX and the Saunders
>	LPL 4500II.  Right now, I'm leaning towards the Saunders, mainly
>	because it can be upgraded (from B&W diffusion head to Dichroic
>	color head) more economically than the Beseler.
			.
			.
			.
>	If anyone has any opinions re: my choice of Saunders vs.
>	Beseler, I'd like to hear from them also ( hope I don't
>	start a religious war here :-).
> 
>Thanks in advance,
>ron b.
> 

	Last week I asked the "net community" for some opinions on 4x5
	enlargers and some specifics about the Saunders models.  The
	general consensus seems to be that the Saunders LPL is much 
	more rigid than the Beseler model and would be the enlarger
	of choice between the two brands.

	I contacted Saunders in Rochester, NY and they sent me a spec
	sheet on their new model 4550XL 4x5 enlarger.  Basically, they
	used the baseboard, vertical column, and modules from the 4500-II
	(which remains in production).  What they have done is to center
	the lamphousing over the usable part of the baseboard by extending
	the carriage 2 1/2 inches (by inserting a metal "spacer" between
	the lamp housing and the original carriage).  They've also 
	increased the wattage of the lamp from 200 to 250 watts and installed
	a higher capacity muffin fan (reputed to also be quieter).  The
	bellows is also longer.

	I called Calumet today, they hadn't even heard of the new model
	yet and had no idea when they would get them or what the price
	would be.  There has been no price reduction on the current
	model - actually it has gone up, from $1257 to $1299 :-(.

	I'm a little concerned about the effect of the carriage extension
	on overall rigidity, and I want to order the enlarger in the next
	few weeks so I'll probably go with the current 4500-II with the
	Dichroic module.  Looks like one could upgrade to the new model
	by just swapping out the lamphousing/carriage assembly since all
	other parts are the same (all it would take is $$).

	Thanks to all who responded to my request.

ron b.
From: rune@cimsand.UUCP (Rune Riisnaes)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Getting the flash off of my camera
Date: 10 Sep 92 11:18:18 GMT
Organization: Cimage A.S, Sandvika, Norway.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

epperly@osnome.che.wisc.edu (Tom Epperly) writes:
: I have a Nikon 5005 and a Nikon SB23 flash, and I am trying to figure
: out an inexpensive way to get my flash off of my camera.  I would like
: to minimize red-eye and to do vertical shots without the shadow to the
: side.  I would also like to have the flexibility to put my flash on a
: tripod far away.  I have been thinking about getting some kind of
: Stroboframe and a SC-17 flash extension cord.  I would like to know if
: anyone has any recommendations.

Not an inexpensive one, no.  As a minimum, you would want the SC-17 cord 
at $50 or so, and handheld the flash or as you say, mount it on a tripod.  
Handhelding the flash is very awkward, so you'd want a flash bracket.  
Stroboframe, Lindahl, and Newton makes good flip brackets, with Newton 
in the $130 range, and the other two around $70 if memory serves me right.  
Then you may want to add a flash diffuser. 
Lumiquest has a line of diffusers at $20-$30.

It does add up, but at least to me, it was worth it.

-- 
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
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bisbalr@pell2l22.alleg.edu (Rodrigo Bisbal)
Subject: Canon or Nikon Camara Wanted
Organization: Allegheny College
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:48:53 GMT

Hi there !
Anyone interested in selling a Canon or Nikon 35mm camara in good shape  
please contact  < Bisbalr@alleg.edu > I'm willing to pay no more that $  
150.
         -Rod
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: steveh@pilot.dmg.ml.com (Steve Hannoford)
Subject: Re:  NIKON AF Wide Angle recommendation
Organization: Merrill Lynch Debt Markets Group
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 16:52:00 GMT

> Can any one give ne advise and/or recommendation on any of the following
> Nikon AF wide angle lenses:
>
>       16 mm, 20 mm, 24 mm
>
> I currently own a 28 mm and would like to purchase one of the above
>

  I recently requested info on Nikon F4S and lenses to replace stolen equip.

  I got many suggestions to buy the 20/f2.8, many of them touting its high
   optical quality and sharpness...  For what that's worth
-- 

+-------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| steveh@pilot.dmg.ml.com | My employer has no opinions and has  |
| Steveh Hannaford        |  nothing to do with anything I say.  |
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble)
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 19:28:12 GMT

In article <274@metran.UUCP>, jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
...

> Hey, if those new auto-everything, super-intelligent SLR's are so good,
> howcum they can't be programmed to expose properly, adjusting for a
> particular film's reciprocity characteristics? :-)
> 

They can... But Canon want $50K plus $500 for the micro-fiche service manual.
:-( Nikon simular I expect. A real pisser.

This would go near the top of my wish list. The latest Kodak leaflet lists
4 RF curves; TP, TMY, TMX, and everything else. Thats just for B&W, but I
expect colour would be pretty close to one or the other.

~Paul
From: rheinze@lrc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Advice on buying needed
Date: 8 Sep 92 08:28:58 EDT
Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC

I am considering buying a camera for my son.
I noticed that mail order was nearly $100 cheaper
than local photo stores.

Can anyone give me advice on buying?  Is there a problem
with mail order or is that the way to go?

E-mail replies would be appreciated as I don't regularly
read this newsfeed.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chang@ecf.toronto.edu (CHANG Rong Fawn Teresa)
Subject: tyro (Re: Can someone derive this term?)
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:10:14 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.035007.29214@ultb.isc.rit.edu> fjcppr@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In Popular Photography, they use the term "tyro" a lot. It appears to
>mean someone who is very inexperienced with photography, or someone
>who is gadget-oriented in a bad sort of way. Can someone explain
>the derivation and real meaning of this strange term?

You could look it up in UNIX dictionary.

Cross references:
  1. amateur               

ty.ro \'ti-(*)r-(.)o-\ n [ML, fr. L tiro young soldier, tyro] : a beginner
   in learning : NOVICE

You're right on this one.
From: bc@Apple.COM (bill coderre)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: B&W darkroom question or how to increase contrast?
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:13:06 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

bohus@math.lsa.umich.edu (Geza Bohus) writes:
|I have some very flat (if that's the word) negatives. Can I increase
|contrast more (when printing) by using two contrast filters together (as
|opposed to one)?

It works a little bit, but not very much. It also is hard to guess
what the exposure times will be.

Buying a different, more contrasty paper will help, as will making
fresh developer at full strength instead of diluted. Make sure you
develop for the full allotted time, as well.

What causes flat negs? underexposure, underdevelopment, or both. This
could be caused by stale developer, reading the instructions wrong, or
dead camera/flash batteries.

To tell a flat negative, look in the Kodak books about how to judge
negative density with a newspaper.

Your best bet would be to get someone to look at the negatives and
prints. It's usually pretty easy to find out what went wrong.

bill coderre
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: New Canon mentioned on CBS This Morning
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:47:36 GMT

In article <BuC5Mp.A16@cup.hp.com>, pdg@cup.hp.com (Paul Gootherts) writes:
> On CBS This Morning (Sep 9) I heard an annoyingly incomplete description
> of a new Canon body about to be announced.
> 
> They said it's able to focus on "what the photographer is looking at".
> They didn't say what that means.  They also said it is expected to sell
> for about $800 and that it would be introduced in Japan first (with no
> plans announced at this time for U.S. release).
> 
> Now for my question.  Does anyone know anything *substantive* about this
> camera?
>
Hardly substantive, but... See the post in made in the Elan thread.
Nice to have ones rumors backed up. :-)

~Paul