HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: Re: Fuji Slide Film or Pushing Kodachrome
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 12:46:24 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

In article <1992Aug27.162906.2610@pony.Ingres.COM>, bbarton@Ingres.COM (Brian Barton) writes:

> Here's my "two cents" on the matter.  Shoot Ektachrome 100 _Plus_ and you'll
> cry for days at how good it looks.  It's just an incredibly good film.  You've
> never seen such beautiful color in your life.
> 
> Also, I'm very fond of both Fujichrome 50 Professional and Fujichrome 100 
> Professional.
> 
> I shoot assignments all the time on these slide films with excellent results.

I second that. Ektachrome 100 Plus is my long-term favourite film, although
I've mostly been using Fujichrome 50 and 100 Prof. for the last few years
since I've found them to be more flexible and easier to push with predictable
results than Ektachrome 100 Plus. I also read a test somewhere recently
that concluded that Fujichrome 50 and 100 has significantly better long-term
stability than Ektachrome. I also use Fujichrome Velvia (at EI 32 or 40)
when I want extra color (NOT for images of people).

Another advantage of the Fujichrome films is that there's Fujichrome 400
that mixes well with images shot on Fujichrome 50 or 100. The contrast is
slightly higher and the color saturation slightly lower.

Ektachrome 100 Plus sort of stands by itself. There is no finer-grained,
lower speed film to combine it with, nor a higher-speed one. Ektachrome
400X doesn't count. It is better than the old Ektachrome 400, but that
doesn't mean it is good. Only that it is less bad.

-- 
------------------------------ END OF MESSAGE ------------------------------
Robert Claeson                Internet: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com
Data General AB                         robert@sys.dg.se
Box 28                             CEO: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com:dg-smtp
S-164 93 KISTA                     Tel: +46 (0)8-92 55 00
Sweden                             Fax: +46 (0)8-751 36 22
From: kbb0@harvey.gte.com (Kevin Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Leica Lenses
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:42:15 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.000048.13153@pony.Ingres.COM>, 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 currently have a Minolta 28mm for my M4P and although it's extremely
> sharp, you can't focus very closely.
> 
> 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).

Most late model lenses for Leica M bodies restrict minimum focus
distance to roughly 3 feet. The reasons for this have to do with the
fundamental method of viewing/focussing: the view/rangefinder.  At
significantly closer distances the angle of view is different and
parallax from the finder makes accurate framing difficult. Also, the
accuracy of the rangefinder is questionable as well. These areas are
where an SLR really shines. There are two possible solutions: 1) 50mm
dual range Summicron which has a close focus distance of something
around 19 inches or 2) get a Visoflex and either the 65mm Elmar or an
early 90mm with detachable optical assembly. The Visoflex essentially
turns the M into an SLR.
 
> Could someone compare the close-focusing distances and/or quality of the
> 21 f 3.4, 50 f.2 summicron/wetzlar and 90mm f2?
 
Re: close focus - see above. 50mm Summicrons maintain their contrast
performance into the close focus range. Sharpness is also maintained
well even at large apertures. Later model 90mm Summicrons are a little
soft at large apertures but clean up well when stopped down to
f/5.6-8.0. I find the slight softness is actually an asset in portraiture.
The 21s usually suffer slightly more distortion at the edges when
focussed close but the effect is usually slight.

For further reading I recommend Gunther Osterloh's book "Leica M:
Advanced School of Photography" and Dennis Laney's book "Choosing and
Using Leica Lenses".

Regards, Kevin
From: eugene@briar.lle.rochester.edu (Eugene Kowaluk)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Infrared Photog + Spider Webs-UV-not-IR
Date: 2 Sep 92 15:50:06 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics


Paul Gleichauf writes:

> The problem is where you buy UV transmitting lenses.

They can be bought locally or through the mail.



> They exist as a rare subspieces of "glass" at prices guaranteed to astound.

Nikon's UV 105 can be bought for under $2,500.



> Then there are the problems of how to get rid of the unwanted optical wavelengths.


Band-pass filters can be used, such as the 18A that transmits mostly in the
300-400nm range.


eugene kowaluk
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: dougb@comm.mot.com (Doug Bank)
Subject: Re: The quality of Nikon "E" lenses?
Reply-To: dougb@ecs.comm.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Land Mobile Products Sector
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:28:19 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.144844.9800@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, duane@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (duane.galensky) writes:

|> the 75-150 zoom is supposed to be a top-notch lens...much
|> by accident i'm told.  they command a good price on the
|> used market.

Well, I've got one, and while it is a nice lens, the mechanics leave
something to be desired.  It is a one-touch zoom, and the zoom
control is very loose.  It tends to slide if I point the lens
up or down.

-- 
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                    
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: Need film recommendation for baby's birth
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:32:18 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.144719.12998@deshaw>, siegela@deshaw.com (Andrew Siegel) writes:
> My wife will be giving birth to our first child in November, and of
> course I will be there taking pictures (and perhaps assisting my wife
> as well :-).
> 
> I'm trying to decide what kind of film to use to record this occasion.
> I'll want prints, so it's going to be print film.  The lighting in the
> room will be bright fluorescent ambient light and (probably) halogen
> examination lights.  I'm pretty sure that there are no tungsten lights
> in the room.  I won't be using flash.
> 

Fugi NHG 400 Profesional. Not HG 400. Is the best in 'horror' mixed lighting
I have found. The 400 won't hurt either...

Best wishes to you both
~Paul
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikon N90 technobabble
Date: 4 Sep 92 10:25:15
Organization: CSUA/UCB
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: markl@research.nj.nec.com's message of Fri, 4 Sep 92 14:26:54 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.142654.28132@research.nj.nec.com> markl@research.nj.nec.com (Mark Lee) writes:

   To me, the only really useful new features of the modern AF cameras are:

   1. TTL flash metering -- takes much of the guesswork out of getting good
   flash pictures in a hurry.  I realize this can't be done with an
   all-mechanical shutter.

Incorrect.  You can't do matrix-balanced fill flash with a mechanical
shutter, but conventional TTL flash metering controls only the length
of the flash pulse, not the shutter speed.  I think lack of TTL flash
metering is the FM2's greatest shortcoming.  There *are* some mechanical
SLR's which have it, including the OM3 and one of the Leica R series,
I believe.

   2. Built-in spot meter -- great for emphasizing certain portions of the
   photo, and in low ambient light situations.  Why can't Nikon add this to
   the FM2n, and come out with an "FM2ns"?

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.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: bu890@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal)
Subject: Re: Suggest a pair of binoculars?
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 11:37:47 GMT


Depending on what you want to spend, I can heartliy recommend
Carton Adlerblick 7 x 50 binoculars..they are simply excellent
and easily comparable to Zeiss at half the price...razor sharp
and excellent contrast..great for daylighht and also for
astronomical viewing at night.

brian
From: savoia@sw.stratus.com (Rick Savoia)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Photograping Whales [8008s autofocus problem]
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:43:33 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <PHILG.92Sep1181633@zug.ai.mit.edu>, philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Sep1.172313.23153@adobe.com> usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS) writes:
> 
>    | Nikon autofocus is basically decorative.
> 
> 		   -Philip Greenspun
> 
>    This comment is just MADE for flames! Big, orange ones!
> 
> Hold a Minolta 7xi in your hands for two minutes and pan it around a
> camera shop or other cluttered space.  Then tell me that our Nikons
> have autofocus.  What they really have is manual focus whereby you put
> the sensor on top of what you want sharp, push the shutter release
> halfway, then recompose. 
	
	Minolta had the same type of focussing for years before
	it came out with the 7xi.  People seem to forget this for
	some reason.

> Philip Greenspun
> MIT
> 
> P.S.  The Nikon press release actually shows how poor their
> understanding of systems engineering is (if the fact that the old
> SB-24 won't work fully with the new 6006 wasn't enough evidence).  It
> is only now that they figured out that the camera would eventually
> want to know what distance the lens was focussed at.  Nikon saved
> adding a $0.50 pin to all the lenses they sold these last few years,
> but people like us will have to toss $10,000 of lenses if we want to
> take advantage of their latest technology.  If we all designed
> software with this degree of shortsightedness...  we'd be really rich!
> (MS DOS, MacOS, etc.)

	I'm not sure what you mean by this.  According to an article
	I read here yesterday, you should be able to use any Nikon
	lens with the new N90, just with a loss of some features,
	which is much better, I must say, than replacing all of the
	Minolta lenses you used to own with new ones for the xi 
	series.  I'd rather lose some of my features and still be 
	able to use some great lenses, than have to replace my
	lenses all together.

Rick
========================================================
Rick Savoia                     |	This
savoia@watts.sqa.stratus.com    |	Space
rsavoia@beirut.sqa.stratus.com  |	For
Rick_Savoia@vos.stratus.com     |	Rent
========================================================
From: holland@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Rich Holland)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Need film recommendation for baby's birth
Date: 31 Aug 1992 01:39:41 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

jchen@flash.bellcore.com (Jason Chen) writes:

>The Fiji films were developed in a local drug store. Overall, they came
>out fine, except that the skin tone is somewhat greenish. That may be due
>to processing.

...or the subject matter.  :-)

-- 
Rich Holland              | INTERNET: holland@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
100 Jardine Terr, Apt A7  | BITNET  : holland@ksuvm
Manhattan, KS  66502-3357 | UUCP    : ...!rutgers!matt.ksu.ksu.edu!holland
"Jesus saves...but Gretzky gets the rebound!  He shoots!  He scores!!"
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Nodal point on lens.
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 04:15:39 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <1992Aug27.195109.27731@news.columbia.edu> fag2@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Farul A Ghazali) writes:
>
>How do I find the nodal point on a lens?


There are two nodal points.  The rear nodal point is one focal length
in front of the film place when the lens is foused at infinity.

The front nodal point (probably the one you mean by *the* nodal point)
can often be determined in a similar way.  Let light from a distant
object pass through the lens from back to front.  (Ie take the lens
off the camera and aim the rear of the lens at the subject.)  Find the
point where the image is formed and measure back one focal length.

This is not always possible, since on some lenses the image is
actually behind the front element.  In that case you can use a macro
lens to find the point of focus.

Another fancier scheme that doesn't depend on knowing the focal length
is the "nodal slide".  Arrange the lens on a pivoting mini-table.
(It pivots about a vertical axis.  You are looking down in this diagram.)

                       ---------------------- mirror




                                lens on table 





                        white
                       ------------ --------------- 
                                      slit

                                  lamp

Now light will pass through the slit, through the lens, reflect off the
mirror, and come back onto the white back side of the slit.  When you
rotate the lens the image will move.  Adjust the distance from the
pivot of the table to the slit and the position of the lens over the
pivot until the image of the slit is share and does not move when the
lens is rotated a little.  The distance from the pivot to the slit is
the focal length and the pivot is over the slide-side nodal point.

  -- David Jacobson
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: What writes on Pakon slide mounts?
Date: 4 Sep 92 00:24:49
Organization: CSUA/UCB
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: ken@cs.Princeton.EDU's message of 4 Sep 92 05:19:30 GMT

I've never looked at a Pakon slide mount but a Pilot SC-UF or
Sanford fine-point Sharpie marker will write on pretty much anything.
These are like magic markers, but with fine points for writing (not
suitable for multipage diaries etc. though).  You can identify them
by taking off the cap and sniffing.  They smell like magic markers,
which is to say like industrial cleaning solvent.  They are available
at stationary stores, etc.

These markers are widely used by photographers.  With the SC-UF, at
least, you can write on the back of a just-exposed color print
and then run it through an EP-2 processing machine without smearing
the ink or contaminating the chemistry (this works for the black
marker, not colored ones).  I haven't tried it with an RA4 process
or with other makes of pens, but results should be similar.
From: Mike.Turner@f28.n116.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: A Word of Warning
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Aug 21 1992
Date: 30 Aug 92  19:04:00

This is just "A word of warning" for anyone that is thinking of
ordering any equipment by mail.

I called Cambridge Camera on July 20 and ordered a Sigma 28-80 f/4 lens
and was suprised to see the ol UPS man pull up on July 24. When I
openend the box, to my suprise I found a Sakar 28-200 f/4. When I took
it out of box there was some kind of (for lack of a better word) "gunk"
on the barrel that made it very hard to focus. Being an "easy" person,
I thought that I would keep the lens if it did well.

Over the weekend I shot some with it, and found out that it was not
even close to being sharp. So Monday July 27 I called Cambridge and
told them what the problem was. They said to pack it up and send it
back with a letter stating what was wrong with it... So I did.

I sent a letter stating that I wanted to exchange the lens for a Canon
brand 35-105 f/3.5 Macro.

On 7/30 a person called and confirmed that they had received the lens,
and apologized for the mixup. He stated that the 35-105 had been
discontinued and they didn't have any in stock. So I changed my order
to another Canon lens they had advertised. He said the next day.

On 8/12 I called to see where the lens was, and was transfered to 5
different people. Then I was told that no one knew if it had been
shipped, and to call back tomorrow.

On 8/17 I called and talked to the first man, and he said that they
didn't have the lens in stock. Being fed up I told him to send my money
back. He said "You can't wait a few more days?" I who is considering ordering 
anything from Cambridge NOT TO. I
don't know if I was just the exception or if they are rip off artist.
Anyway, thanks for listining.

Mike  
 
---
 * Origin: Music City Photographer's BBS Ds/Hst615-356-8016 (1:116/28)

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jacobson@cello.hpl.hp.com (David Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Suggest a pair of binoculars?
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 03:31:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories

In article <BtnE42.ACL@mail.boi.hp.com> wally@boi.hp.com (Wally Overton) writes:
>I am using a pair of Jason Auto-focus binoculars which I like a lot.
>At first I thought they were a gimmic, but they are of high quality and
>work.  It seems traditional binos expect the eye to focus at infinity, then
>you adjust the optics for the specific range.  The Jasons use the focusing
>capability of the eye to do the job, and you can't tell, but it's sharp
>for what you are looking at.  I think the eye makes a better optical "servo"
>then a finger adjust, and am really sold.  The model I have is the bright
>yellow floatable with a soft padded case.  Try some.
>
>The do have one down side in that they won't allow focusing below about
>35 feet.

Sorry to disappoint you, but there is such thing as an eye servod AF
binocular.  The Jason binoculars are just fixed focus binoculars.  It
is easy to solve a few equations and show that for fixed focus
binoculars, where an object at infinity is imaged at infinity, just
divides the distance by M^2, where M is the magnification.  Your
comment about 35 feet is pefectly consistent with this.  If I recall
correctly the Jasons are 7 power.  35ft/49 = 8.6 inches, which is
probably just about as close as your eyes can focus.  People in their
mid 40s who can only focus down to about 3 feet without glasses will
be limited to 147 feet---not useful!

  -- David Jacobson
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: raju@cs.UAlberta.CA (Raju Patil)
Subject: Anybody selling SB-22, SB-23, SB-24 flash units???
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:26:39 GMT

 Hi,
    If anybody wants to sell any of the following flash units --
  SB-24, SB-23, SB-22, please contact me.
 Thanks
 Raju
From: philm@groucho.ocpt.ccur.com (news admin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Old camera Blitz I
Keywords: Blitz I
Date: 3 Sep 92 11:01:15 GMT
Organization: CONCURRENT,Nat'l Repair Depot,Oceanport NJ


	Looking for help on this camera the only other identifcation
	is the word Superflex.  It is a twin lens reflex made of metal
	and covered in leather.  It has a 70mm lenses at 4.5
	it is marked made in Germany Soviet Occupied.  Very similar in
	design to the Yashica Mat 124G,
	it takes 120 film only though.
From: ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Tripod mounting and long lenses
Date: 28 Aug 1992 15:07:34 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: almaak.usc.edu
Summary: Any catches?  Opinions on tripod+teleconverter?
Keywords: Nikon 6006, Sigma lenses, tripod, teleconverter

I'm planning to get a Sigma 70-210 APO and a Sigma 400 APO (both AF)
for my Nikon 6006.

Obviously, the body will have to be routinely tripod-mounted to
avoid shake.  My question is: are the lenses light enough to not
give trouble to the mount?

What if a 1.7x or so teleconverter is present?

Do you have opinions on a good teleconverter (what make, and what
power) and on a tripod?

Thanks,

        -ans.


-- 
Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@usc.edu
From: kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com (Ken J. McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Good Bye???
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:23:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Tredyffrin

I'm moving on to another position within Unisys and don't know whether I'll
have email or news access anymore.  Anyway if you don't hear from me, somebody
might want to take over the Nikon FAQ (I'll post that next).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken McFadden        kjm@cnmss.tredydev.unisys.com
Unisys Corporation  kjm@cnmsa.tredydev.unisys.com
P.O. Box 203        work: (215) 648-3742
Paoli, PA 19301     home: (215) 675-0382
From: Chuckie.Baby@f31.n343.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: RE: Cambridge Camera
Date: 29 Aug 92 16:18:14 GMT
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Aug 21 1992

IS 47th Street a bad place to buy gears?

--- Tabby 2.2
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: gold@imp.sim.es.com (Bruce Gold)
Subject: Re: Problem with screen slides
Keywords: depth of field focus
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:11:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.043729.6067@cerberus.bhpese.oz.au>, (David Masters) writes:

|> slides of computer screens

|> Problem: Focus changes from top to bottom of the screen.

|> the FAQ suggested < 1/30, a tripod, bracket the shots, and a long lens.
|> 
|> Well, I interpreted a long lens as say 85mm. I have a 28-85 Nikon
|> AF that I used on the day. Some of the shots have different focus
|> from top to bottom. I couldn't see this when I was setting up for
|> each shot. They are in focus in the centre.
|> 
|> Question: What do I do to increase the depth of field here?

I believe the advice should have been >1/30 of a second not <1/30 of a second. 
Ideally, the exposure should be some integral multiple of the frame refresh
interval.  If your exposure is enough longer than that, then the difference in
exposure for different parts of the CRT screen shouldn't matter.  1 second or more
would be good for that.

This applies to tripod mount for your camera and for non-moving images.

Given the longer shutter opening, the corresponding small apeture opening
will make your depth of field problem will go away.
-- 
				Bruce Gold
				   Utah
Newsgroups: rec.photo