HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kroger@tinman.cognet.ucla.edu (James Kroger)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Internal wear in Nikons: a concern?
Date: 12 Apr 92 03:07:22 GMT
Reply-To: kroger@tinman.cognet.ucla.edu (James Kroger)
Organization: none

I'm looking to buy a used Nikon, probably an FE2. I've
found one in a shop. The salesman (who seems honest)
says it's an 8+, and that their expert has gone over the
camera and it's mechanically right. It has some paint
worn around the edges of the knobs on top, and has a 
couple scratches on  the back. 

This is quite an investment for me, and I want to get
something that will be right. Should I be concerned, 
as I would with a car, that the external wear indicates
that the internals have deteriorated somewhat due to
wear and tear, or is it the case that the internal 
mechanicals are either OK or not OK?

Should I spend an extra 75$ to get a 9+ or 10 from
Del's in Santa Barbara or wait until this shop gets
one in, or should I go for this one? (I don't care 
about apearance, only the state of the mechanicals.
A few extra bucks won't hurt *too* much.:-)

Thanks in advance for any informed opinions,
--Jim

(BTW, I recently asked for comparisons between the FE2
and FA, and was amazed at the response! Thanks! The 
great info made my choice possible and confident.)
From: roland@sics.se (Roland Karlsson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Whats the price of Widelux in Japan ?
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:32:05 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista


I am going to visit Tokyo at the beginning of June.  Do anyone know
any shops that are cheap on new and/or used cameras?  I am not looking
for regular 35 mm cameras.  I am mostly interested in panoramic
cameras.  Both the wide angle lens type and the rotating lens type.
One rotating panoramic camera is the Widelux camera.  Do anyone know
where I can find it (used or new) at a good price?  And at what price?


Thanks for any information,

--
Roland Karlsson             SICS, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Internet: roland@sics.se    Tel: +46 8 752 15 40          Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
Telex: 812 6154 7011 SICS   Ttx: 2401-812 6154 7011=SICS
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Verichrome Pan PROCESSING
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:29:22 GMT
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA

In article <1992Apr10.180419.4565@news.cs.brandeis.edu> ylevy@binah.cc.brandeis.edu writes:
}Hi,
}
}I recently bought an old brownie-type camera at a garage sale and it had
}a roll of exposed Verichrome Pan 120 film in it.
}
}Can anyone suggest processing for this film?  How old can it be?

You would develop someone else's film?  That's like climbing up on your
roof with a pair of binoculars so you can peek into your neighbor's
bedroom at night.  

Shame on you!   :-)

-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
From: swayzed@brandonu.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Europe -- Which lens to take?
Date: 15 Apr 92 23:09:23 GMT
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

I am planning a fall trip to Europe as well as Morocco, Israel, Egypt and
Turkey. I plan to be gone for about 4 months, and will be taking my Nikon FM.
I was wondering if anyone could advise me on the best lense(s) to take. I don't
have a flash and will be backpacking, therefore, I intend to travel as lightly
as possible. I have the following lenses:

Soligor 28-70mm f3.9-4.8 zoom.
Nikkor  50mm f1.8
Nikkor  70-210mm f4.0-5.6 AF zoom.

I was intending on taking the Soligor, however, I was also considering the 50mm
for lower light conditions. I have visited Europe before. The first time I took
a Canon T-70 with the 50mm lens and shot ISO 400 print film. The second time I
took a compact 35mm camera, again with ISO 400 film. I am now planning to use
slide film, so I will probably take 100 or 400, but not having a flash I may opt
for the 400. Incidently, my girlfriend wil be carrying the 35mm compact and it
has a flash.

I do not plan to take the 70-210 zoom, since I doubt I will get too much use
for it and it is also too heavy to carry around when backpacking. I also fear
it getting stolen.

Any recommendations regarding film, lenses, or travel photo tips would be
appreciated.

David

-- 
 
David Swayze        | SWAYZED@BrandonU.CA    | Reading furnishes the mind only
Brandon University  | Canada (pokey) Post:   | with materials of knowledge; it
Brandon, Manitoba   | 56 Wilnor Bay          | is thinking which makes what we
Canada              | Brandon, MB, R7B 3H1   | read ours.           John Locke
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fculpepp@norfolk.vak12ed.edu (Fred W. Culpepper)
Subject: Re: Help w/Push Processing
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 92 15:31:14 GMT

ramnarain@mcclb0.med.nyu.edu  writes:
> I would appreciate any help on push processing. I'm new to developing my
> film and prints and I know nothing about pushing
> 
> info: I'll be using Tri-X film to photomicrograph fluorescently stained 
> objects, as such the light level is extremely low therefore I want to push
> to 800 or more. The film was recomended by Kodak, and a co-worker who also
> used it for this application but forgot all the pertinent info.
>  
> 			What I need to know is Developer (HC-110, Dektol, Edwal,...?);
>    Dilution; Development times; Agitation; Fix; and whatever else
>    is important. 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you,
>           Satya Ramnarain


You might like to try a developer called Acufine.  It has been
around for years and has two advantages.  First the development
time is much shorter than many others, it increases the speed
of the film used, and it gives 35mm negatives which can easily
be enlarged to a 8 x 10 format without grain difficulties.

EXAMPLES:

Kodak T-Max 400:   E.I. - 800,   4.25 minutes @68 degrees.
Kodak Tri-X:	   E.I. -1000,   5.25 minutes @68 degrees.
Kodak 2475:	   E.I.  1600,   9.75 minutes @68 degrees.

I am not plugging this chemistry, I am only reporting my
success in using it over a period of 25 years.  I started using
it with Pan-X with a speed of 100 (when developed in Acufine),
and when that was discontinued began to use T-Max 100 at a speed
of 200.  The best part of using Acufine is the quality of the
negatives - slighty contrasty, but with good density for
enlarging.
 
To get up-to-date data contact:

	Acufine, Inc.
	5441 Kedzie
	Chicago, Ill
	60625

-- 
Fred W. Culpepper, ODU

fculpepp@norfolk.vak12ed.edu
From: gsgi_ss@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Greg Gibson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Recommendation wanted for Nikon 2000 Zoom lense > 135mm
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:32:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

Dad has a Nikon 2000.  His daughter (my sister) shows her horse
in English Dressage competitions.  Dad wants to photograph these
events.  He only has a 50mm lense for the thing though.  Well,
Dad needs a telephoto and is contemplating an autofocus camera.
Anyone shoot Equinary sports?  What is the best lense to use?
200mm or 300mm...

Anyone have a Nikon 2000?  Which zooms are good?  Which telephoto
is good?  

I appreciate the time it takes to reply!

-Greg Gibson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: meastman@adobe.com (Mark Eastman)
Subject: Need source for lens repair tools
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 17:35:29 GMT

I'm looking for a source for tools such as
optical spanner wrenches to take apart a 
lens to remove some rather large flakes
of black paint between some elements. Can anyone
recommend a source for lens repair instruments such as this.
The lens is a fairly old collapsable 50mm f1.9 Serenar, probably
not worth taking to a shop.

Thanks,

Mark Eastman
meastman@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Levi's ads, real or computer-genereated?
Date: 16 Apr 92 22:58:07 GMT
Reply-To: donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis)
Distribution: rec
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA


In article <k21701.703406826@kyyppari>, k21701@kyyppari.hkkk.fi (Teppo
Nieminen) writes:
|> (Maybe this should be in rec.diving, but there doesn't seem to be such
|> group,so...)

Maybe it should be in comp.graphics!

|> I guess most of you have seen these Levi's underwater posters ( a guy
|> riding rodeo on a shark, kissing a fish etc.) Does anybody know if
|> those photos are real or a result of some digital wizardry ?

I haven't seen the new posters, but I know Levi's ad agency or agencies
have done a lot of commercials on our Silicon Graphics Iris Graphics
Workstations, and they looked wonderful.

Also, those "morphs" you see, like Terminator 2, Michael Jackson's new
video, and several car commercials, where one object turns into another,
are done with our workstations.  Cute stuff.  Virtual photography.

- donl mathis at Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
donl@sgi.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dbm@vulcan.anu.edu.au (David R. Braddon-Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Diff between OM XA and XA-2?
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 16 Apr 92 00:51:19 GMT

In actual fact, the XA 2 has a slightly better lens than the XA; it's half
a stop slower at f3.5, but wide open and untila bout f 5.6 it exhibits less
flare and higher resolution than the f 2.8 on the XA
does at theae apertures; from there on they are
about hte same; both very good. Neither has any glass elements.

Nor is the XA2 fixed at f 3.5; the atuo exposure is programmed,
adjusting both the aperture and the shutter speed.

having said all that, I agree that the XA is more deaireable. The rangefinder
means that in practive you get sharper results at wider apertures
because accuracy of focus beats the slightly sharper wide
apertures of the XA2. And being abe to control depth field
is great, and very rare these days on a small camera.

-- 
David Braddon-Mitchell
Division of Philosophy and Law
Research School of Social Sciences
Australian National University
Xref: sparky rec.photo:6883 alt.cd-rom:1339
From: dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,alt.cd-rom
Subject: Re: Kodak Photo CD news
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:37:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: nsisrv.1992Apr8.213721.29922
Organization: NASA GSFC CDP VLBI

In article <1992Apr3.141814.5288@vax.oxford.ac.uk> mingos@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <int547e.702046282@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au>, int547e@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Ed "Duke" Cation) writes:
>> So when will we see atmospherically sealed containers to store your CD's in
>> which permeate a non corrosive atmosphere around the discs... or if the clear
>> platic (whatsit called?) is already sealing it, why arent they prepared in a
>> vacuum and the metal pretreated to zap the oxidants.
>> 
>> Ed
>
>
>Hopefully never.  The degradation of the aluminium coating in the discs 
>reported by company X was due to the printing inks on the disc gradually
>diffusing through the plastic to the aluminium, reacting with it and 
>decomposing the aluminium.  It's an overrated problem anyway.....
>
Not necessarily.  Telescope mirrors are vacuum coated with a thin layer of
aluminum which is typically overcoated with a thin layer of transparent 
material.  They call it silicon monoxide overcoating, but I think that after
a little exposure to air it probably becomes silicon dioxide overcoating.
The aluminum coating usually remains serviceable for 5 to 10 years.  Oxygen
diffuses through the coating and oxidises the aluminum.  Oxides of aluminum
are transparent.  

It seems likely that oxygen will also diffuse through the lacuer and
polycarbonate used in cd-roms.  *IF* the aluminum coating used in cd-roms
is much thicker than that used in telescope mirrors, then they should last
indefinately.  The coatings used in optics are kept as thin as possible due
to the small tolerences involved. Cd-roms presumeably have much larger
tolerances, permitting the use of thicker coatings.  It is not necessary,
however, to use a thick coating, to get 95% or better reflectance.  Whether
or not cd-roms are typically manufactured with such a margin of safety,
is a question that needs to be answered.
From: goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: air travel with tripod
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:35:58 GMT
Reply-To: goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg)
Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Annapolis, MD

In rec.photo, ehr@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Ernest H. Robl) writes:
>Although most of the photography that I do could be described as
>"journalistic" there are still lots of times when a tripod is useful.
>So, what do those of you who use a tripod do when you travel by air?
[elaboration deleted]

Facing a similar problem, my answer is a POCKET TRIPOD.  It's really
a 6" long handle, where the legs retract inside.  Camera mounts on a
ball/socket on top.  In use, it requires finding a level surface, like
a tabletop, car roof, covered trash can, etc.  It is a little more difficult
with long lenses, like my 300mm f4.  Then I use it machine-gun style
- pocket tripod mounted on lens, camera hand held or rested on another
surface.

Some users employ styrofoam-ball-filled beanbags (sold as Steadybags).

Ether solution will handle many of the tripod jobs, and easily fit into
your cases.
   /|/| /||)|/  /~_/\| |\|)[~|)/~_  |   Everyone's entitled to MY opinion.
  / | |/~||\|\  \_/\/|_|/|)[_|\\_/  |      goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil
========Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein=======
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Diff between OM XA and XA-2?
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:23:26 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <LSWAB.92Apr14082102@bmerh953.bnr.ca> lswab@bnr.ca (Lyndon Swab) writes:
>I've heard that the XA is a dandy little camera.  I have a chance to 
>buy an XA-2.  Can someone fill me in on the differences between them?

The XA is indeed quite the dandy little camera.  It has rangefinder
focusing, an f2.8 35 mm lens, adjustable aperture and aperture-priority
automatic exposure with the shutter speed displayed in the viewfinder.
It also has self-timer and a +1.5 stop exposure compensation switch.

The XA2 has a 3-position focusing switch (close-up, medium, infinity)
without rangefinder.  There's no way to adjust aperture; I think it's
fixed at f3.5.  Exposure is automatic, with a light that lights in the
viewfinder to indicate that the exposure will be long so you should put
it on a tripod.  I've heard rumors that the optics are inferior to the
XA (plastic vs. glass?), but it takes decent pictures.

I paid $180 for my original XA, and when it was stolen, paid $180 for
another one.  Recently, I paid $175 for a used one so now I own two (as
you can see, I really like the XA).  I bought a slightly broken XA2 for
$20, fixed it, and gave it to someone as a gift.  This weekend, I turned
down a chance to buy one for $10 at a garage sale because I wasn't sure
it worked and didn't feel like fixing another one.

They're both nice cameras, but the XA wins hands down; get one if you
can, but I don't think it's really worth $180 used.

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	That's one thing about going against the flow:  there's
	less traffic in that direction.
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Hasseblad/Bronica/Rollei, which should I get?
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:45:58 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <ktf2ghINN1nn@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:
>
>I really like Rollei's medium-format cameras.  They are, I believe, the
>most popular brand in europe...and they are essentially unsupported in
>the U.S.  A good SL66 or SL66E for $1K I'd snap up in an instant...

Well, here's your chance.  There's two of them at Bear Images.  Not
knowing how to judge the age or quality of a Rollei, I decided not to
take the chance.  I bought myself an SQ-A at the photo fair this
weekend.

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	That's one thing about going against the flow:  there's
	less traffic in that direction.
From: peterd@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Peter Davidoff)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 16:50:16 GMT
Subject: Re: Printing-out papers
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Greeley, CO
Newsgroups: rec.photo

Printing-Out-Papers
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There was an interesting article in _View Camera_ magazine
back in Jan/Feb 1990 on POP.  It was written by Doug Munson
who is the owner of Chicago Albumen Company:

  "...Until the 1880's, photographic printing was done
  almost exclusively on albumen paper.  While the
  paper was albumenized (coated with the salted egg
  white solution) in large factory productions and
  sold through the various jobbers and supply houses,
  each individual photographer or studio had to sensitize
  the paper on a daily basis for their own use.  Albumen
  paper was relatively insensitive to light and it required
  direct exposure, under a full-size negative, to sunlight
  or open sky.  The image emerged completely during the
  exposure, and the processing merely required the paper
   to be rinsed, toned in a weak solution of gold
  chloride, fixed in plain hypo, and subsequently washed..."
  
  "...The Eastman Company introduced its first POP, which
  was trade named "Solio", in 1892.  Ninety-five years
  later, in 1987, it finally withdrew its "Studio Proof"
  paper, the last remaining POP in existence, from production.
    But the history of POP did not end.  Within a year,
  the French firm of R. Guillemminot Bosepflug & Cie.
  had resurrected one of its vintage POP formulae
  and, in late 1988, my company, the Chicago Albumen
  Works in Housatonic, MA, arranged to import the
  Guilleminot POP for distribution in North America and
  elsewhere..."
  
  "...Why, after an entire century, is there still demand
  for this same product?....The printing characteristics
  of POP cannot be found in any other current printing
  paper.  It has an exceptionally long tonal scale, requiring
  negatives of correspondingly high density range..."

I called Doug Munson, owner of CAW, and he added:

  "Not are [the prints] only unlike any other, but they
  are good!  [an implied :) there!]"  The market for POP is
  split between studio photographers using the product for
  proofs and by fine-art photographers, and printers of
  historical negatives.  There are also a variety of special
  technical uses.  CAWs distributes throughout North America,
  and later this year they will expand to Europe (call the
  company if you're in Europe and interested finding sources,
  or e-mail me and I'll mail it to them.)

Some Sources
------------
 Chicacgo Albumem Works
 PO Box 379 Front Street
 Housatonic, MA 01236
 413/274.6905
    Stock Sizes
       100 sheets     8x10 $75+ship
       100 sheets     11x14 $150 +ship and h
       50 sheets 10x24 $225
    Non-Stock Sizes, minimum order 400sq ft (about 8 8x10 boxes).

 Light Impressions
 439 Monroe Ave
 PO Box 940
 Rochester, NY 14603-0940
 800/828.6216
    25 sheets of ChicAlbWrks 8x10 for $32.75

  The Photographers' Formulary
  800/777-7158
  PF offers a Salted (Plain) Printing-out-paper Kit,
  a "forerunner of Albumen" paper.  They also offer
  the Gold Chloride Toning Solution.

Remember, this is a contact-printing process.  Small or med
formatters will have to make inter-negs of 4x5 or larger (yo,
20x24, eh!) to use the process.

  Peter Davidoff
From: ron@SSD.HARRIS.COM (Ron Weidner)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Olympus Zuiko Lenses For Sale (NON-AF)
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:32:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harris Computer Systems Div.  Ft. Laud. FL


Olympus Zuiko 24mm f2.0, mint condition			$275
   [55mm accessories; includes box & pouch; hardly used]

Olympus Zuiko 85mm f2.0, mint condition			$150
   [49mm accessories; includes box/pouch/hood]


rweidner@misg.csd.harris.com
ron@flipper.csd.harris.com
From: pizza@athena.mit.edu (Antonio T Pizzigati)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: question
Keywords: tech pan film
Date: 14 Apr 92 05:30:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <rnewell.703205161@sol.UVic.CA> rnewell@sol.UVic.CA (GQ-guy) writes:
>What is the ASA rating of Kodak Technical Pan Film ?
>
>And what Black & White films are out there other than The T-max
>series for  120 Roll Film and 35mm.
>
>I use ton's of t-max  100ASA and 400ASA in my Rollei 3.5F Planar
>with very satisfying results and am wondering what other options
>there are.
>
>Colin


Tech Pan is rated at different ASA's for different applications.
Originally, it's a high contrast photomicrograph film, I believe.  For
pictoral applications, Kodak recommends an ASA of 25.  Damn sharp
film.  Used correctly, this film will easily push the limits of your
optics.  Have fun!

-Ben Wen ( using pizza's account)

ben_wen@athena.mit.edu
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:40:29 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr13.171544.981@talon.ucs.orst.edu>, monson@caviar.ECE.ORST.EDU (Tyrus Monson) writes:
....stuff deleted....
>  I will maintain that photos I take in on public lands are mine to
>  use. I don't need permission to take a picture of my neighbor's house
>  (from the public street, of course!) so why should I need permission
>  to take a picture of public land?

This is likely to turn into another discussion of what you can and can't
do with photos, but nevertheless.....

You can take a picture of anything you want from a public place (except
maybe some government classified sites), but you can't use the picture of
your neighbor's house for commercial purposes. I think the real question
here is not whether you can take pictures in National Parks (of course you
can - I have never had a problem, and always use a tripod), but what you
can then do with them? You can certainly use them to illustrate a travel
article, you can put them on your wall and you can probably send them in
to a photo contest. The question is can you sell them to an advertising
agency for use in the next Coke ad, or make them into postcards and sell
them to the public? I don't know the answer but my guess is that without
permission from someone (National park Service?), you can't.
From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Will there be a Maxxum 8xi??? Soon???
Keywords: Maxxum
Date: 17 Apr 92 16:03:46 GMT
Organization: I is a writur

gwf@sapphire.bellcore.com (George W. Fleming) writes:

>Does anyone know if and when Minolta will introduce a Maxxum 8xi???

Minolta isn't saying much of anything, being rather quiet prior to
introductions, but here's a few datapoints for you:

o when I was talking to the local Minolta rep a few weeks back, he made
  quiet noises about the 5xi (this was before I bought my 7xi). 

o Various folks I talk to on GEnie have talked to them about futures
  for pro-class gear and while Minolta won't commit to anything, they
  admit that they don't feel they can compete successfully with Nikon's 
  pro gear, so they are focussing more on the consumer and advanced 
  amateur stuff. 

How this relates to an 8xi I leave for you to interpret, but the people
waiting for a 9xi are probably going to wait for a long time (unless
Minolta's blowing smoke).


-- 
            Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, Enterprise Products Support
            chuq@apple.com | GEnie:CHUQ & MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ
               Book Reviewer, Amazing Stories =+= Member, SFWA
           Editor, OtherRealms =+= #include <standard/disclaimer.h>

And lo, though I travel through the valley of the archetypes, I shall fear
no evil, for I know that the author can't kill me off for at least another
150 pages, no matter how stupid or trite I become, or he ruins the book.
Newsgroups: rec.photo