HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton)
Subject: Re: Leica Lenses
Summary: 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:47:45 GMT

In article <71675@apple.Apple.COM>, kchen@Apple.COM (Kok Chen)  writes...
>bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton) writes:
> 
>>Can anyone recommend a Leica Rangefinder lens that is both a good portrait
>>lens and good at macro-focusing?
> 
>>I'm looking for something that will do double duty as both a potential portrait
>>lens and something for shooting macro-photography (not 1:1 but 1:2 or 1:4 would
>>be fine).
> 
> 
>One of the sharpest lens from Wetzlar, the old 50 mm f/2 
>Dual-Range Summicron should still be available in the used market.
>Make sure it comes with the close-up rangefinder adapter.

What does dual-range mean and how do I know if it's an "old" 50mm f.2
or a new one?  

What is (and what does) the close-up rangefinder adapter do and what does
it look like?


>Lovely lens, heavy enough when mounted on an M3 to do harm when
>swung at a mugger :-); although 50 mm is a little short for my
>tastes to take portraits with.
> 
> 
>Kok Chen, AA6TY				kchen@apple.com
>Apple Computer, Inc.

Thanks.

Brian
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Flashes and auto-everything
Date: 3 Sep 92 03:03:06 GMT

In <1992Sep1.173309.1@cc.curtin.edu.au> zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
>I was unsure if you where refering to the flash or the body or both  WRT
>'manual'. I assumed flash only, hence the body will use the flash exposure info.
>Or so I thought. I have just switched from a 420ez to a 430ez and am still
>sorting out its tricks. In manual, there is NO preflash, but the body still
>sets its idea of what the exposure should be.

Hmm.  When I am in Program mode and set the 430 to manual, the body just
fixates itself on 1/125, min aperture!  It doesn't want to deal with
combining program mode with manual flash!  (But, I have a 630.)

>           [...] The TTL and ATTL automagic stuff adds several layers of extra
>uncertainty to what happens between the measurement and what the user is told.
>Worse, it's not documented in detail, so you can know when the numbers will be
>massaged, or the flash change from fill-flash to direct-flash.

This is covered in the "Speedlite Reference Guide".  It took a couple of
passes through to let it sink in, but it's much less mysterious now.

>Why can't we have a GN mode for the flashes? The body can read the focus
>from the lens, and set the appature. No notice of light/dark subject etc,
>thats the users problem, BUT he does have a known starting point. 

Not all lenses provide focus information.  It's only the newer USM lenses
that send such information.  In addition, there would have to be a lot of
reworking of the software.  (Maybe with the next "pro" EOS body?)

>My favorite was the old Nikor GN lens, but I was lucky enough to have a sharpish
>one :-)

Never heard of it.  Do tell!

>~Paul

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: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Need film recommendation for baby's birth
Date: 30 Aug 92 21:53:23 GMT

In <1992Aug29.130445.12103@sys.sweden.dg.com> robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:

>In article <1992Aug28.145224.13100@deshaw>, siegela@deshaw.com (Andrew Siegel) writes:

>If ISO 100 is enough for you (probably not), I'd recommend Fujicolor
>Reala. It is the best film around for mixed-light situations.

At a photo store downtown, I saw Konica "Baby Film".  I thought it was a
joke, but there was an accompanying brochure.  It supposedly gives nice
skin tones and a softer look.  However, it's only ISO 100 and I've never
tried it.

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______________________|
From: chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Seeking advice on solarization.
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:35:36 GMT
Reply-To: chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC)
Organization: AT&T, Denver, CO

Here is a topic I've never seen discussed before. I have attempted this on a 
number of occasions with limited success. I would like to know what advice
is out there about producing dramatic solarized images.

Chuck Luciano
chuck@csn.org
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Ektachrome & Fujichrome
Date: 1 Sep 92 03:35:29 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton) writes:
: 
: As far as Fujichrome 1600D is concerned, I confess to having had it pushed
: to 6400 asa and it still holds up!  Well...it doesn't look great, but it'll
: pass.

I am very curious ... what are the grain and color accuracy like?  Are flesh
tones any good?

: BTW, can someone tell me what the best asa to shoot Velvia at would be?

Try EI 40.  That works very well for me.  From what I've read in a number of
publications, EI 40 is what is most commonly used by those who find 50 too
high.  However, some like to use EI 32, or even 25.  I think that a few of
them may have bad exposure meters, though ;-)

On a more serious note, I think that Fuji does have reason to rate the film
at ISO 50.  Velvia is very contrasty, even for a slide film, and if you
rate it lower, you risk losing a lot of highlight detail.  I think that
the idea with ISO 50 is to preserve as much of the highlights as possible.
Unfortunately, this makes for a dense slide.

Jay Ts
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: hamish@netcom.com (Just Another Deckchair on the Titanic)
Subject: Re: Camera World
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 20:24:53 GMT
Organization: Pandemonia PLC

In article <5439@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> mpc+@pitt.edu (Mike Contento) writes:
>>From: gduna@snafu.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (George Duna)
>>
>>Any one have any recommendations buying from Camera World of
>>Oregon.
>
> I just ordered a new camera (Canon SureShot Megazoom 76) from CWO
> last Tuesday and received it yesterday (a day earlier than promised!)

I have dealt with Camera World many times over the last two years, and
have nothing but praise for the service (and goods) I received. They
can cope with strange and mixed orders, they are pretty good about
delivery times, and they generally don't pull any crap on the phone.
Oh, and their prices are usually pretty competitive.

All in all, recommended.

	Hamish
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hamish Reid   +1 510 596-3917   hamish@netcom.com   hamish@sybase.com
From: eugene@briar.lle.rochester.edu (Eugene Kowaluk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Film resolution
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:46:03 GMT
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics

Gary Snow writes:

>                             lines/mm
>                            ----------

> Kodak Ektar 25 Pro            160


Kodak's publication E-135 lists it as 200 lines/mm (at 1000:1 contrast).



eugene kowaluk
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton)
Subject: Re: Fingerprints
Summary: 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:26:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.061619.21490@jyu.fi>, konkkola@jyu.fi             writes...
>Hi!
> 
>How do you clean fingerprint from slides?
> 
>Make
> 

Use Kodak's own Film Cleaner which costs a few dollars in the states.  Clean
your slides "very carefully" using either a q-tip or Kodak Lens Tissue using
a small amount of the cleaner on them.  Also, get yourself some compressed
air to spray away the dust on the slides after you're done cleaning them.
Remember, abrasion is your enemy!

Also, unless you'll be printing from them yourself I'd leave the cleaning
to the person at the photo lab who'll probably know just what to do.

Brian

> 
> 
>---
>Markku K|nkk|l{   Computing Centre of Jyv{skyl{ University   Jyv{skyl{, Finland
>Markku Knkkl   Computing Centre of Jyvskyl University   Jyvskyl, Finland
> 
>E-mail: konkkola@jyu.fi        phone: +358-41-603594        fax: +358-41-603611
>===============================================================================
>
From: wania@aurora ( development)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Sigma 400 mounting bracket
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:53:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

The darn mounting bracket on my Sigma 400 lens
has come apart. It seems that the screw
holes on the body of the lens are shot.
I was thinking of using the same holes but
re-treading the holes to 6/32 or 7/32".
I prefer to get the mounting off
and then re-thread the holes.
The problem is getting the mounting 'ring'
apart from the lens body. Has anyone done it?
How do I get the mounting ring off the lens body??
Any info will be really appreciated.
Thanks,
Xerxes
-- 
Xerxes Wania              | Usenet: wania@icpd.mitel.com 
MITEL Corporation         |         
360 Legget Drive, Kanata, | "Transatlantic call from Mr. Floyd 
Ontario, Canada K2K 1X3.  | to Mrs. Floyd are we reaching..."
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: markl@research.nj.nec.com (Mark Lee)
Subject: Re: Q: Minolta vs Nikon: Compatibility
Organization: NEC Research Institute
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 13:00:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.28947> tjlow@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg <Toong-Jye Low>
writes:
                <Questions about modifying pre-1978 Nikon
                 Lenses for use with modern Nikon cameras>

Every Nikon camera made after 1978 has a small tab that sticks out on
the upper right part of the lens mount.  A post-1978 lens (the A.I.
and A.I.S. lenses, including all AF lenses), have a ridge on the f-
stop collar that pushes this tab back a distance proportional to the
max. aperture, hence mechanically telling the camera the max. aperture.
Pre-1978 lenses do not have this ridge, and their f-stop rings stick
out far enough to squash the tab if you try to mount the lens on a post-
1978 body (exceptions are the old FM, the F3, and the F4, where the tab
can be folded back out of the way if desired).  This can result in an
expensive repair job.  The pre-1978 lenses can be modified by some
camera repair shops to the A.I. configuration by cutting back the f-stop
ring and adding the ridge.  Typical cost for this service is $40 - $70.
This allows the pre-1978 lens to function (in manual focus mode only, of
course) on all Nikon SLR bodies, including the original F.

The funny-looking "fork" on the manual focus lenses was used to couple
mechanically to a spring-loaded prong that stuck out of the finder
housing on the old Nikon and Nikkormat F-series (I can't really describe
it better, you have to see one operate to understand).  The fork pulled
the prong along as the f-stop ring was turned, telling the camera the
set aperture.  So to use a modern fork-less Nikon AF lens on a pre-1978
body, you have to get the fork installed in order to couple to those
old meters.  You can use the lens directly (no meter coupling) if you
are not going to use the built-in meter.

The FE2 and FM2 are both post-1978 cameras, and so require the A.I. or
later lenses.

--Mark



Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: joyce@meaddata.com
Subject: NEW YORK CITY SYLINE
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:32:01 GMT

Hello everyone! I wonder if anybody could tell me where I could get a
good view of the New York City skyline at sunrise and/or sundown. I
am hoping I could get a good picture of it. Please e-mail replies.
Thanks!
From: neilw@informix.com (Neil Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Why do photofinishers crop so much?
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:31:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <78205@ut-emx.uucp> psilsbee@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Peter Silsbee) writes:
>Hi,
>  it seems that all the places I get my color negatives
>printed chop off large portions of the picture during
>the printing process. I've taken them to three different
>local shops recently and they're all the same. Is there
>a reason for this? The aspect ratio is exactly the same,
>by the way, I'm shooting 35 mm. (24x36 mm. image size)
>and printing on 4x6 in., so that's no excuse. Is this 
>standard practice? If so, why? I'm not talking about
>a little margin-of-error, here, but fully 2.5-3 mm. of image
>gone... this is about 15% of the image area! I'm tired of
>heads, hats, tops of mountains, etc. missing and I'd rather not
>have to leave a zone of extraneous material all the way around.
>Any comments or recommendations (besides do it myself, I've 
>already concluded that this might solve several problems but
>it's not going to happen THIS year anyway...)?

Heh heh, reminds me of the last time I was picking up some
photos; the place I go is quite good for a 1-hr lab -
they spot out dust spots on the 4x6's, don't charge for
poorly exposed negs but give you the best print they can
anyway, etc.  

Anyway, while I was waiting, I observed someone ahead of me
flipping through their photos.  Heads were missing, arms were
cut off, "photographer's thumb" shadow was prominent, etc.
A truly oustanding example of terrible composition.  I didn't
find it amusing at the time - I just wanted to pat the poor
woman on the back and say "there, there, it's not so bad...." 

--Neil

-- 
Neil Williams: neilw@informix.com

Seen on my last trip on United: "If you are seated in an exit row 
and can not (sic) read this card... please notify a crew member."
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Variable output slave flash
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:04:09 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <1992Sep2.162409.26526@tc.fluke.COM> strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) writes:
    >Does anyone know of a slave flash unit with an adjustable
    >ouput. All the ones I've come across work at full output
    >only; you have to cover them partially to regulate their
    >light output. I'd like one that has a 3 stop range of
    >adjustment, and doesn't consume more power than necessary
    >when used at low output.

I really like the Sunpak 383. Goes 1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, & 1/16.

Nice flash. Survive drops really well too!


-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dougb@comm.mot.com (Doug Bank)
Subject: Re: Time to boycott Photo CD
Reply-To: dougb@ecs.comm.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 14:18:49 GMT

In article <la838pINN84h@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM>, fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:

|> Think of the opportunity: a patent says that something useful is
|> out there,

Actually, patents have absolutely nothing to do with usefulness.
It doesn't have to work to get a patent.

Face it, as a photographer interested in computer manipulations 
and quality scans, PhotoCD is going to be great.  I have tried to
find someone to scan my photos.  No luck.  It would probably cost
we $30 plus computer time at the least.  The PhotoCD will make
the process easy (well... easier) and much more affordable.  Unless
you can come up with as good a scanner and as large an infrastructure,
there is no way that anyone is going to kill off this service.  The 
concept of the PhotoCD being used by consumers may fall flat on it's 
face, but I'm interested.

Now for a question.  The consumer machines allow zooming and cropping
of the images.  You can also choose to skip some images or play them 
back in a different order.  How does the machine store this info.
You can't write to the CD, can you?  If it stores in inside the machine,
what happens when you take it to another player?  Anybody know?


-- 
Doug Bank                       Private Systems Division
dougb@ecs.comm.mot.com          Motorola Communications Sector
dougb@nwu.edu                   Schaumburg, Illinois
dougb@casbah.acns.nwu.edu       708-576-8207
From: chuq@gallant.apple.com (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Rechargable type of lithium batteries?
Date: 28 Aug 92 17:11:43 GMT
Organization: I is a writur

konkkola@jyu.fi (Markku Konkkola) writes:

>About 6 rolls in my EOS 10 with EF 2.8/300 - is it a long time??

No, but I'm averaging 45 rolls per battery on my Maxxum 7xi, so perhaps it
isn't the lithium battery in itself, but the power efficiency of the camera
and the quality/freshness of the batteries? 

-- 
Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, ESD Support & Training (DAL/AUX) =+= Member, SFWA
  chuq@apple.com | GEnie: MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ =+= Editor, OtherRealms
	A real SF writur with stories in ALTERNATE KENNEDYS and THE 
	  FURTHER ADVENTURES OF BATMAN, in better bookstores now!
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: cmc4a@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Costa M. Colbert)
Subject: Re: Advise on telephoto zoom lenses
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 14:58:22 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.034437.19973@gordian.com> johnk@gordian.com (John  
Kalucki) writes:
> In article <1992Aug27.213657.29192@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>,  
yz@broca.acc.virginia.edu  writes:
> >In article <BtnsL4.I5B@acsu.buffalo.edu> tklai@acsu.buffalo.edu  
(Tobysze K.  
> >> above lens?  Thanks in advance for any advise or comments!
> >Popular Photography did test on all of the lens you mentioned. 
> >The Sigma 75-300  
> >did considerably better than the Canon lens. I own a Sigma AF 75-300 DL 
> >for my 10S.
 > I'm pretty sure you are thinking of the review of the 75-300 APO
> a few months ago. It they gave it very good numbers and a good
> writeup.  I own the 75-300 APO and I'm very happy with it. Even at
> 300mm and wide open, 8x10's are pretty decent. I'd stick to less
> than 300mm and stopped half way for very critical work...probably
> good advice for any zoom lens.
Actually Pop. Photo did a test of the Sigma 75-300 and the 75-300APO a  
while ago. I think it was last year's april issue. The test was on the  
older non-APO verasion, which has been replaced by the DL version. But I  
think there actually another different lens recently introduced. I'll  
check to find out. But the non-APO version of the lens is also  
exceptional.
yz
From: Rick.Ellis@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Zone system with 35mm?
Date: 29 Aug 92 20:03:28 GMT
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Aug 21 1992

On <Aug 28 13:03> Brian Barton writes:

 BB> It works every time.  I think I have a written "blurb" on this somewhere,
 BB> but I haven't been able to find it recently.

No, it doesn't work every time.  It only works when you want to put your skin 
on zone VI.  While this is often true it certainly isn't always what is
wanted.

 BB> This works best when you're _not_ shooting in bright sunlight.  The best
 BB> time to use this is on overcast days.

Of course...it works best when you don't have a large range of values in the
image.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: Need a new camera - what to get?
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:13:52 GMT

In article <2049@deadmin.ucsd.edu>, napier@cs.ucsd.edu (Jim Napier) writes:
> 
> I have a Canon FTB with a 55mm FD lens that I bought in '76 and used for a
> number of years before putting it on the shelf. I tried using it recently
> and discovered that the lens no longer works (a repairman said the lubricants
> in the leaf shutter had dried up so that the mechanism no longer stops down
> properly). However, I'm torn on whether to get the FTB cleaned up and buy a
> newer multipurpose lens for it or replace it. I've been away from the camera

If my F1n had not burnt, I'd not have moved to the EOS. If you have a FD 55mm,
it's either the f1.2 or the f3.5 macro. ( I'm discounting the 55 f0.9 :- )  )
You will have a good case of 'sticker shock' if you get quotes for an equivalent
replacement. Thr FTb is a good solid unit. Have you made sure you have not
got the stop-down lever behind the actuator in the body? I am a little iffy
about the quote from the repair man because: 1 the FTb does not have a leaf
shutter, 2 the diaphragm shouln NOT be 'oiled', it has a surface coating on
the blades to do that. Also he should have given you a quote for a 'clean n'
prean' about 50-100 bucks, from other US posts.

The FD 35-105 zoom is a good all rounder. All the FD lens except the 200 f4
macro are still current I believe, though some may be a bit hard to track
down now.

~Paul

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: Inrared Photog + Spider Webs
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 18:38:20 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.174351.26951@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, rdb1@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (ronald.j.deblock..jr) writes:
> I believe that the flower patterns in spider webs show up at ultraviolet
> and not infrared.  This is from a documentary  I saw on PBS a few months
> ago.
> 
> Makes sense, if you think about it.  Bees and other insects can see
> ultraviolet.
> 
> The show also explained that spiders will change the patterns every
> few days.  The theory is that some bees get caught and manage to escape
> and somehow warn the other bees to stay away.  A new pattern fooled the
> bees into thinking it was a different "flower".  Amazing.
> 
> Now, where do I buy ultraviolet film?

Well, pretty much anywhere actually. Most film is sensitive in the near UV
region. The reason for UV filters is not only to protect lenses :-), but
also to block UV from reaching the film. Unfortunately, most lenses also
do a good job of UV blocking. Special Quartz lenses transmit UV very well,
but they are EXPENSIVE. The best bet with normal lenses would be to chose
one with the minimum number of elements, so as to minimize UV loss in the
glass. True Mirror lenses would also be good, but most "mirror" lenses also
have refractive correcting optics which absorb UV. Then again, you could
always try a "pinhole" camera - air absorbs very little UV until you get to
VERY short wavelengths (<190nm).

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================


Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: davids@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (David Petrie Stoutamire)
Subject: Canon FTb shutter problem - advise?
Organization: International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, CA, U.S.A.
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 06:16:06 GMT

I have an old Canon FTb dug out of the garage.  It seems to be working
fine with the exception of an intermittent problem that occurs with fast
shutter speeds, where part of the right field is unexposed.  The exact
position of the unexposed portion varies from shot to shot where this
occurs, occurs only with >=250 shutter speed, and has a fairly uniform
fade from the regularly exposed part of the shot to the unexposed part.

The shutter moves from right to left (looking from back of camera).
This means that the first shutter piece - the one opening the film to
exposure - must be slow; is this correct?  This would seem to be the
sort of thing I would try to fix by applying lubrication.  I would
like to hear from anyone with advise on how to perform this (apparently)
simple operation.  I don't know anything about the internals of the
camera and didn't want to proceed without some acknowledgement that
I am in the right ball park.

Thanks for any advise -


    Dave