HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jimc@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Jim Cathey)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Distance info on EF lenses...
Date: 5 Sep 92 22:54:31 GMT
Organization: ISC - Bunker Ramo, Spokane, WA

In article <1992Sep6.044401.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
>There have been coments to the effect that the Nikon D series lenses are
>the first to provide distance info to the camera body. Not so. The EF Canon
>lenses have always done this to support the Depth-of-Field mode on EOS models.

I don't think they need distance to do this.  After all, the system focuses
with a stepper motor.  They only need to count the steps between near and
far focusing points in order to find the middle, and the aperture...

Hmm, maybe they _do_ need the distance.  Any takers?

>BTW, have Canon slashed the price of the RT in the rest of the world? It
>has been dropped from $1100 to $575 in West Aust. Wonder why :-).

Cut here, too.  It's about $100 (US) more than a 630.

-- 
+----------------+
! II      CCCCCC !  Jim Cathey
! II  SSSSCC     !  ISC-Bunker Ramo
! II      CC     !  TAF-C8;  Spokane, WA  99220
! IISSSS  CC     !  UUCP: uunet!isc-br!jimc (jimc@isc-br.isc-br.com)
! II      CCCCCC !  (509) 927-5757
+----------------+
			"PC's --- the junk bonds of the computer industry"
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hsong@ardour.bellcore.com (G. Hugh Song)
Subject: Tilt and Shift.  How useful are they?
Organization: Bellcore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 23:44:35 GMT

We know they use this feature for architectural works.  So,
Large-format camera owners!  Especially field camera owners!
How often do you use this feature for landscape works?   I think that
greater depth of focus can be achieved with these field cameras than
with usual medium format cameras with normal lenses.   At what focal 
lengths are they really useful?   Is there any difference in the way tilt 
and shift work between wide-angle lenses and telephoto lenses?  In terms
of tilt angles, so to speak.  The lens should be especially free from 
vignetting, shouldn't it?  Do usual telephoto lenses suffer from 
vignetting when used with tilts?

Thanks a lot.

	Hugh
From: dionj@netcom.com (Dion Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Info on Schneider Symmar Convertible (150/265) ?
Date: 6 Sep 92 16:51:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.#vpnnka.dionj
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

From article <1992Sep3.162035.7453@mercury.cair.du.edu>, by troby@diana.cair.du.edu (Thorn Roby):
> Has anyone used one of these? I'm told its coated, about 8 years old.
> Is it likely to be as sharp at the shorter focal length as a current
> lens like the Nikkor-W? How much worse at the longer length? Does the
> fact that the elements can be swapped mean they're likely to be slightly
> out of adjustment, or am I overestimating the need for perfect alignment?
> -- 
> Thorn Roby                              troby@diana.cair.du.edu

The Symmar is a modern derivative of the Goerz Dagor, although it's
not symmetrical.  THe Dagors were not considered very convertible,
either. At the long focal length (front element removed), the Symmar
is not very sharp, but this is common in a convertible lens.

As for comparison to the Nikkor-W, I dont know.  What I've always
found in view camera work is that matters of film flatness, correct
back alignment (with the film plane), focusing technique, etc. were
much greater factors than lens sharpness.  I would bet the two lenses
are pretty close.  When in doubt, STOP DOWN!  Try f64. :-)
-- 
Dion L. Johnson  --  dionj@netcom.com
The material above is my personal opinion, and has no official sanction
from The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: View camera shades and filter holders
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:15:29 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Distribution: rec
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

bjs@uts.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman) wrote:
> Denny Page writes:
>> Now that I have my camera, I am in the market for a shade/filter holder.

and now I have my view camera, me too.


> Well there's the Compendium style if you have hundreds of dollars
> to spend.  I don't.

What might do a similar shading job but home-made: find a ring clamp that
fits the lens and attach a small rectangular wooden frame to it.  Glue the
narrow end of the bellows from a trashed folding camera to this.  Fix a
similar frame to the wide end at the front.  To hold the thing in the right
extended-and-shifted position, link the front and back frames with four
lengths of stays-where-you-bend-it armoured cable like the stuff commonly
used for desklamps; something lighter than that would be better, but I
don't know where to look for it.  This should take a couple of hours' work
and cost at most a few pounds/dollars.  Stretch lycra from an old pair of
cycling shorts would probably work just as well as a bellows, you don't
need total opacity.  Any ideas for improvement?  Maybe some way of getting
a Cokin filter holder in at the lens end?

How do people usually fit polarizers to view cameras?

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: s0l3906@venus.tamu.edu (LIN, SHYH-HORNG)
Subject: another all mechnical camera
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 19:45:00 GMT



A few months ago some netters talked about all mechnical
cameras. Only two are mentioned : Pentex K-1000 and Nikon
FM2. I recently got a brochure of Yachica FX3 super 2000.
Looking at its spec. ,it seems to me it is also a all 
mechnical camera : mechnical shutter, mechnical timer. You 
can use it without batteries.( Of course, meter's h
gone)
From the specification, it has a shutter speed up to 1/2000
and a self timer and with a split-image cross-microprism
view finder, but its price is only $119( at Adomara ).
Compared to Pentex k-1000, it has higher shutter speed. K-1000
doesn't have a selftimer. And if you want a split-image view
finder, you have to pay $20-$30 more to get a SE model , which
costs about $135.
For a beginner who want a mechnical camera, it seems to me that
Yachica FX3 super 2000 is a better buy than Pente x. But, on the
other hand the Pentex body is probably more rugged.

Any comments are welcomed.

Jerry
From: patrice@cs.concordia.ca (SCATTOLIN patrice)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Professional Labs in Montreal
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:36:25 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

In article <Bu6IDE.DCE@ecf.toronto.edu> chang@ecf.toronto.edu (CHANG Rong Fawn Teresa) writes:
>In article <05SEP92.13714494.0051@vmxa.polymtl.ca> DH02 <DH02@polytec1.polymtl.ca> writes:
>>Would any kind reader from the city of Montreal (the one in Quebec)
>>be able to recommend me to a professional photo-lab where I could
>>get manually printed enlargements (8x10's etc.), preferably down-town
>>(centre-ville) or around.  I'm kind of new to this (great ?) city!
>>Merci beaucoup!  I would really appreciate any suggestions.
>>Have fun in the sun ( a welcome change from the cloudy and rainy week
>>that we've been having!).
>

The true pro lab of montreal, the one a lot of pros use is CORLAB 
located 175 PEEL. This is a huge place.  The one I use is PROCOLOR 464
McGill. It's cheaper but quality is high.  Both are walkable from downtown/
Old Montreal.


>I've been always wondering where to find such labs in Montreal.  Just for
>the safe reasons,I always had my photo-finishing done in Toronto after each

  The yellow pages is a good start. Call the ones with the biggest adds.
I am sure Toronto has good labs but can they reproduce the Montreal colours,
I think not.



-- 
Patrice Scattolin
					patrice@cs.concordia.ca
Concordia University			Montreal, Canada
"I am so far north that Santa lives two blocks from me"
From: accwai@math.uwaterloo.ca (Andy Wai)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Anyone own a Zone VI field camera?
Date: 15 Sep 92 11:51:54 GMT
Organization: Math Faculty Computing Facility, University of Waterloo

In article <1992Sep15.060319.21581@odin.corp.sgi.com> donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis) writes:
>|> I'm also coveting a Schneider Super Symmar lens with moby coverage.
>
>[...]  (This is the aforementioned lens with a flourite element,
>which (now, I don't want to scare you...) can absorb humidity and
>generally deteriorate if it ever happens to get wet.)

Well, they say the element is near the center and since fluorite
can't be cemented with anything else, it has to be the one just
in front of the shutter.  Now I don't want to scare you :-) but
if you have somehow managed to get water in there, your shutter
would be in pretty bad shape also.

Andy Wai
QUIT
lso.

Andy Wai
From: dtalmage@guvax.georgetown.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Using IR film w/autofocus SLR
Date: 8 Sep 92 09:05:23 -0400
Distribution: world
Organization: Georgetown University

(OK, I've missed the discussion about spider webs and infra-red film.)

I'm curious: how do I use infra-red film with an autofocus SLR?  How 
do I tell the camera to set the focus at the little red mark on the 
lens?  Some of the Minolta Maxxum series cameras take little 
personality cards.  Is there one for IR film?

This probably isn't of general interest, so please reply by e-mail and 
let me summarize to the net.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Talmage (dtalmage@guvax.georgetown.edu)
"Once more.  This is deixis.  This is your brain on deixis.  Any questions?"
From: liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: EXA Camera
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:47:41 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Sep14.141003.13129@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> sasha@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alexander.kostomaroff) writes:

> 
>Primo:	 "Ihagee" not "Thagee" - very reputable German manufacturer before
>         WWII.
>
>Secondo: Lens IS removable - Exakta bayonet mount (BTW, Meritar is a piece
>         of East German merde).
>
>Else:    EXA was concieved as a poor commie's Exakta. The shutter (1/30,


   All kine Exaktas except the first model were manufactured AFTER
WWII, in East Germany.  The East German camera industry was state of
the art until the 1960's.  I thought the Exakta itself was already a
poor commie's alternative to a real camera.
From: bc@apple.com (bill coderre)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Looking for wide-angle point-n-shoot camera
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:42:33 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA


I'd like to find a point-n-shoot that goes from normal focal length to
rather wide focal length (24mm, 18mm or thereabouts).

Yes, I don't mind barrel distortion. It does have to be a sharp lens,
tho.

Thanks for your bytes,
bill coderre
From: kudva@ecn.purdue.edu (Gautham K. Kudva)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Short range zoom for EOS
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:21:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

I'm sorry if this is an oft repeated question!!
I'd like to buy a short range zoom as the main lens for my EOS-630. 
There seem to be a bewildering array of choices. Canon alone has some 
four offerings -

EF 35-70/3.5-4.5
EF 35-80/4.0-5.6
EF 35-80/4.5-5.6 USM
EF 35-105/4.5-?

There are others too like the 28-80 USM and 35-105 USM, but
they're beyond my budget of ~$150. I've scanned through every
Pop. Photo issue from Nov. '90 and only the 35-105 seems to be
covered. Could someone with experience please provide feedback 
on the relative merits/demerits of these lenses (sp.?).  With so many
choices from Canon, I've decided to stay away from independents
like Sigma. I remember there was a discussion on a similar topic
a few days ago... unfortunately I didn't save those posts. I would 
appreciate it if the original poster of the question could send me the 
summary of responses he received.

Please post or send mail to kudva@ecn.purdue.edu. I'll summarize
if there's interest.

Thanks much in advance
Gautham Kudva
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: Cheap "Leica" (Re: another all mechnical camera)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 17:16:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.084037.5777@fy.chalmers.se>, f88mattb@fy.chalmers.se (Mattias Bryntesson) writes:
> In article <10SEP199214453382@venus.tamu.edu> s0l3906@venus.tamu.edu (LIN, SHYH-HORNG) writes:
> ...
> >For a beginner who want a mechnical camera, it seems to me that
> >Yachica FX3 super 2000 is a better buy than Pente x.
> ...
> 
> Another feature of Yashica is that you can use Leica lenses, making
> the bodies interesting for others than beginners. I don't think they
> come with such a lens, at least not for $119.   ;-(
> 
> Mattias

I don't think so. The latter Yashica cameras (including the FX3 series) have
a Yashica/Contax bayonet mount. You can get Zeiss T* lenses in this mount, but
I wasn't aware that these lenses are the same as Leica. Prices on the T* lenses
aren't all that bad, maybe $100-$200 for a 50mm, $300 for a 135/2.8 etc.
I have an FX3 (and had an FXD) and have always found Yashica cameras to be
well built, sturdy performers. The FX3 pre-fires it's mirror on the timer, so
you get a "sort of" mirror lockup. Don't know if this is true on the super 2000
version though. Note that EARLY (60's?) Yashica cameras had a screw mount if I'm
not mistaken.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Which camera for $200
Distribution: usa
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:25:36 GMT

In <371@evtprp0b.UUCP> mrt7455@evtprp0b (Michael R Tucker) writes:

>I am open to suggestion as to what brand and make of camera to buy.  I
>am looking for something that would be less that $200 for body and
>lense.  Automatic focussing is not important but SLR and
>interchangeable lenses is important.  I can go thru mail order or buy
>from a local dealer.  What do you suggest?

I've seen Nikon FG's with a 50mm lens around here on consignment for
$250 CDN.  So, for $200 U.S., you should be in business.  Since Nikon
looks committed to the F-mount, you can buy (or rent!) the latest and
greatest AF lenses and buy an N-90 later.

ACS

-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: FLD filters with Flash photography !!!
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 02:47:18 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <79619@ut-emx.uucp> pojee@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu () writes:
>
>	Hi network readers ,
>
>		If we shoot in presence of flourescent light with a 
>	flash set to 'through the lens' reading then the snaps turn
>	out to be green in the background. Can we use FLD filter
>	even while taking such flash pictures

Note is the the background that is green.  That is because it is too
far away to be illuminated by your flash.  If you uses the FLD filter
the foreground would be too magenta.

>		Do we have to go for 2 stop overexposure when doing
>	so? I am asking this because when seeing through the viewfinder
>	I find the scene to be very dark? Same happens with the 80A
>	filter. 
>

If you are using TTL metering and TTL flash, it all works out
automatically, except that your max distance is less than you
calculator dial tells you.

>		Does the presence of filter degrade the object we are
>	actually shooting at (even though it might bring out background
>	colours fine without greenish cast).

Well, for perfectionists every little piece of glass costs a little.
But for practical purposes, it won't hurt.

Here are some suggestions.

1.  Shoot entirely available light with the FLD filter, then you won't
have any mixed light.   or 

2.  Shoot flash at max sync speed without a filter to try to
overpower the fluorescent lights.  or

3.  Shoot with the FLD filter and try to get some kind of greenish gel
to go over the flash so your flash matches fluorescent light.  I don't
know what gel to get, or even if such a thing is available.  or

4.  Shoot Fuji Reala.  It is supposed to be quite tolerant to mixed
lighting.  (I've never tried it.)


  -- David Jacobson

PS  Its fluorescent, not flourescent.
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: High speed useful ? (was Re: Nikon N90 technobabble)
Date: 8 Sep 92 02:05:04 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <28773@sophia.inria.fr> luong@sophia.inria.fr writes:
>In article <PHR.92Sep4102515@soda.berkeley.edu>, phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:
>
>|> They should also add TTL flash metering and a 1/8000 shutter (the more
>|> recent FM2's already use the same shutter as the N8008) and call it
>|> the FM3.
>
>I don't understand the utility of high speed shutters. On my 8008, I think
>I have never shot beyond 1/1000s, and I cannot imagine any real situation 
>where 1/8000s would be useful. Using high speed means that you use also high
>sensibility film, and/or wide aperture, and this is known to reduce 

Actually, of late I've really wished there was something faster than 1/1000
available on my venerable OM-2.  I've been on a quest for really strange,
hyper-grainy prints, and even with 5 stops of ND (which makes focusing hell
even with my 50/1.4, and makes my longer lenses useless) Tmax P3200 at 25 or
50,000 ASA is really only useful starting in the late afternoon, with things
stopped way down.  Recording Film 2475 is better, but I hear that Kodak's
going to discontinue it soon, and the grain structure isn't as nice as that
of the fast Tmax.  Your mileage may, of course, vary.
-- 
Thor Lancelot Simon	 tls@panix.COM

"Better be careful there.  John might decide to start taking legal action
against people who refuse to buy stuff from him."  --Kevin McBride
From: rune@cimsand.UUCP (Rune Riisnaes)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Different Films and Pro rated speeds ?
Date: 14 Sep 92 09:52:10 GMT
Organization: Cimage A.S, Sandvika, Norway.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

drinkard@icelan.enet.dec.com (Rich Drinkard) writes:
: 
: Does a list exist anywhere of the different (common anyway) films and the ISO
: ratings the pro's use to shoot with them.
: 
: I would be interested in finding out.
: 

The rated speed, +- 1 stop :-)
Seriously, this probably depends on a number of things, like personal
preference, your subject, the development process at your lab, your printing 
process, etc.   

The films I use most are Velvia exposed at 40 ISO, and Reala at its rated 
speed of 100.  (and I'm not a pro :-)

An interesting question:  Most photographers I know, prefer to shoot Velvia
at a lower ISO than rated.  If this is a common trend, what are the criterias
Fuji (and Kodak for that matter) uses to determine a films rating.
Is it purely technical, like density, color saturation, and such ?

When Kodak changed the ratings of its Ektar film from 125 to 100, was
that caused by a change in the film itself, or as a result of the way it
was being used ?   
Does anyone know ?
-- 
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: bipin@iastate.edu (Bipin K Dalmia)
Subject: P/S camera advice needed (for mom and dad)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 19:08:26 GMT

i'd like to buy a simple camera for my parents. basically for family
pictures, nothing fancy. some camera that gives good sharp pictures and
is very easy to use. a 35-70 zoom might be helpful, not the superzooms.
they (my parents) will probably never use the multiple exposure/multiple
frames/exposure bracketing and any such advance features. but a strong
intelligent flash would be good. by intelligent i mean that the camera
can sense backlit subjects and fire an appropriate amount of fill-in
flash if required automatically and that sort of thing. 

not too bulky and should come in a nice soft case with an instruction
manual written for mere mortals. if you have any suggestions, i'd like
to hear them. please e-mail or post a follow-up. i'll summarize if there
are enough responses, for the benefit of others in a similar situation.

thank you....bip

-- 
bipin k. dalmia               the other night i was lying on my bed, looking
bipin@iastate.edu             up at the beautiful stars, and i said to myself, 
n2.bkd@isumvs.iastate.edu     'where the F*CK is my ROOF !!'
--
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Advice on a flash to Nikon FA?
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:51:41
Organization: CSUA/UCB
	<1992Sep9.184516.8019@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: jww@anchor.eng.hou.compaq.com's message of Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:45:16 GMT


    With the SB-16, you get matrix ballanced fill-flash (although its
    a bit too strong for my taste for ballanced fill, it generally does a 
    great job and no "futsing" with controls to do it.

Uh, I'm quite sure the FA doesn't support matrix balanced fill
flash with any flash unit.  Matrix balanced fill flash didn't
come until the 8008.  The FA had a precursor to matrix metering,
but it was not for flash exposure.

As for a cheap flash for the FA, I was satisfied with a Vivitar 3700
but eventually sold both and got an 8008/SB24 combination.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: txn@sirius.larc.nasa.gov (Troung Nguyen)
Subject: Who make good close-up lenses ?
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:50:04 GMT


  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.

  Truong Nguyen
  txn@sirius.larc.nasa.gov


 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chang@ecf.toronto.edu (CHANG Rong Fawn Teresa)
Subject: Re: Auto Focus button on Canon EOS cameras
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:49:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.085753.16580@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>>> use a separate button for initiating AF. This means that you can let
>>>> the camera set the focus automatically and then leave it at that
>>>> position for every following shot.
>>Hate to spoil your day, but you're wrong about the 100.
>Ah well.  The 630 does have it.

Be happy and enjoy your Canon EOS 630!

Does photography take a lot of our spare time?  It is a good experience
though.  Now, time back to school!