HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmb5b@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (John M. Bozeman)
Subject: Re: Cambridge - watch out!
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 05:53:19 GMT

In article <1992Apr17.023258.16589@mdd.comm.mot.com> clay@mdd.comm.mot.com (Richard Clay) writes:
>It may depend on what you order.
>
>My photo instructor recomended one of their telephoto lenses (a 
>Cambron lense, ie. made for Cambridge).  I ordered it with no 
>hassles or problems, and have been very satisfied with it.
>
>Rich Clay

Similar result with me...  they advertised a 135 mm f/4.5 enlarging
lens on "close out" for $39 or so.  I ordered w/ a credit card and 
got it two weeks later... no problem. And I had even (probably foolishly)
told them they could make a reasonable substitute for "only $10 more."
So I guess I had good luck.

         John
From: pbk@mtuxo.ATT.COM (54524-P.KIDD(MT5502)0000)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Sigma 400 5.6 APO thoughts
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:26:03 GMT
Distribution: rec.photo
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


		
	I have read the current news concerning the SIGMA 400 5.6 APO lens and
seem to be confused. One person who just purchased a Nikon F4 states that this
lens only autofocuses 10-15% of the time in bright daylight. I checked a Nikon
brochure and found the spec stating a maximum aperture of 5.6 is required for
electronic focus assistance.

	However, Nikon makes several lenses with variable maximum aperture
(zooms) some of which have maximum aperture of 5.6. They do not seem to put a
restriction on them. How can Sigma market a lense as autofocus that only 
autofocuses 10-15% of the time. As mentioned they also make a 1000 f8 
(also a 500 f7.2) which they claim to be autofocus.

	I am not stating that the person who claimed it did not work is wrong.
I personally have not tried this lense but would like to as Nikon does not
have an autofocus above 300 ( except for the new 600 f4, lots of money). Is
it possible this person has a defective camera or lense or is Sigma actually
trying to market a lense as autofocus that only "works" 10-15% of the time.

		pete
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: accwai@watmath.waterloo.edu (Andy Wai)
Subject: Re: 4 x 5 camera help	
Organization: Math Faculty Computing Facility, University of Waterloo
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 15:37:03 GMT

In article <1992Apr3.235851.12421@col.hp.com> sparks@col.hp.com (John Sparks) writes:
>
>[...]  An Arca Swiss
>F-line camera might also work well, but they cost more than the Sinar
>and I have never seen one in person.

Arca Swiss accessories are expensive as hell and the services from the
distributor is unsatisfactory IMHO (in Canada, at least.  I don't think
they even have a distributor in the U.S.).  If you need something the
distributor doesn't have, you have to special order it from Switzerland.
Be prepared to wait a month or two (or three).  It's really too bad,
since the Arca Swiss F is a great camera.  The F-line goes from 6x9cm
to 8x10.  The 8x10 weights 8.5 lbs which is lighter than most field
cameras of that size.  The small ones weights about the same as a Linhof
Technikardan of the same size.  The different sizes share most of the
parts except for the format frames and the bellows.  Since support
structures are designed to handle 8x10, the 6x9 and 4x5 configurations
are solid like a rock.  And they don't have rail or bellows limitations
either.  After all, they are full fledged view cameras.

Andy Wai
Xref: sparky rec.photo:6827 ne.forsale:1602
From: shock@buengf.bu.edu (Shakir Abbas)
Newsgroups: rec.photo,ne.forsale,bu.forsale
Subject: FOR SALE -- Canon Camera Equipment
Keywords: CAMERA EQUIPMENT FOR SALE
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:52:57 GMT
Reply-To: shock@buengf.bu.edu (Shakir Abbas)
Followup-To: rec.photo
Distribution: rec.photo,ne.forsale,bu.forsale
Organization: College of Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


=============== Camera Equipment FOR SALE =================

Canon Camera EOS620
Canon Lens 80-200
Canon Lens 35-105
Canon 15mm Lens
Canon Speedlite flash 430EZ

-----> The whole system for $1000 or best offer.
This a deal and half, if not two deals! (need the money quick!)

May sell the 15mm lens seperately.

===============================================================================
Shakir Abbas					E-mail:  shock@buengf.bu.edu
Boston University					 shock@bu-pub.bu.edu
College of Engineering		
===============================================================================
-- 
===============================================================================
Shakir Abbas					E-mail:  shock@buengf.bu.edu
Boston University					 shock@bu-pub.bu.edu
College of Engineering
From: madson@unix.SRI.COM (Carl Madson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: immaturity on rec.photo
Date: 6 Apr 92 20:03:34 GMT
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, California

In article <1992Apr6.183337.27458@noao.edu> lytle@noao.edu (Dyer Lytle  CCS) writes:

>Gentlemen,
>
>I have not been following the thread about copyright so, unfortunately,
>the following is taken out of context.
>
>The following rhetoric compares favorably with the sort of flame wars
>that occur in groups like "talk.abortion" or, perhaps "alt.flame".
>I don't think it really accomplishes anything but it does make the
>rec.photo less pleasant to read.
>
>If the people involved in this (and you know who you are) have something
>something constructive to say about PHOTOGRAPHY or have a question about
>PHOTOGRAPHY we would be very glad to read and respond.  Otherwise,
>please take this discussion to another group or correspond by e-mail.


I HAVE been following the thread, since much of the topic is important to 
serious imaging professionals and users, but my vote's still with Dyer on
keeping the crap out of rec.photo. It's a potentially useful thread, but
personal flames don't belong here.


		--Carl Madson, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA
From: smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu.wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Recommendations needed on a low cost point & shoot camera
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:08:52 GMT


	I am looking for an inexpensive (about $100-00) point and shoot
camera.  Are there any better ones to choose from. I need at least the auto
focus capability.

	All comments and suggestions are highly appreciated.

	Thanks in advance

--
Shailesh Potnis.			|The good that you do today will
Research Associate.			|be forgotten tomorrow.
Concurrent Engineering Research		|DO GOOD ANYWAY.
Center, West Virginia University.	|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sleo@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Suwandi Leo)
Subject: Used Nikon F4s FOR SALE
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 09:18:04 EDT

I am selling my Nikon F4s.  It is about 8 months old.
Used very little (reason for selling).  The F4s is really
not what I need, it is too much for me.  I am looking to
buy an 8008s instead.
Price: $1200 or best offer
       (The figure $1200 is based on some ads from Shutterbug)
Condition: Almost new (less than 15 rolls shot)
           Boxes and all manuals and proof of purhase available
	   I will also include one focusing screen in addition to the one
	   already supplied with the F4s.

Contact: sleo@mailbox.syr.edu

Suwandi Leo
60 Presidential Plaza #1409
Syracuse, NY 13202
(315)475-6973

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: fculpepp@norfolk.vak12ed.edu (Fred W. Culpepper)
Subject: National Camera Co.
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 23:09:00 GMT

Does anyone out there know if National Camera Co. is still in
business and if so their address?

I purchased several camera tools from them some 15 to 20 years
ago and need to replace one of the lens ring clamps in the set
I purchased.  

Thanks for any information you can supply.

-- 
Fred W. Culpepper, ODU

fculpepp@norfolk.vak12ed.edu
From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Help with star trail time exposures
Date: 7 Apr 92 01:03:10 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

Let's see... I'd use a medium-speed film (like ISO 100 or so) because if you're
going to expose a long time, light will build up and you'll have a blue sky
rather than a black one.

Also, for sharpness and to avoid excessive light build-up, work at f/4 or
f/5.6 rather than wide open.

If your camera is aimed at stars near the celestial equator, then the
length of the trail on the print is going to be

     E F tan(T/4)

where T is the exposure time in minutes, T/4 is in degrees, F is the
lens focal length in millimeters, E is the enlargement magnification
(e.g., 8 for a 10x8 print from a 35-mm negative), and the result is in
the same unit as F (i.e., millimeters).

If you're _not_ aimed near the celestial equator, then the trails will
be curved and their length (measured along the curve) will be the above
times cos D, where D is the declination of the stars you're aimed at.

You can also get nice UN-trailed pictures by exposing for 20 seconds 
at f/2 on ISO 400 color slide film.

Best regards

Michael Covington
Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur (Cambridge 1991)
-- 
==========================================================================
Michael A. Covington, Ph.D. |  mcovingt@uga.cc.uga.edu  |  ham radio N4TMI
Artificial Intelligence Programs | U of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602  U.S.A.
==========================================================================
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Thursday, 9 Apr 1992 10:10:48 CDT
From: Ted (Theo) Stresen-Reuter <U42075@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: database for images???

Hello newsgroup,

I have a quick question for you.  Does anyone know of a database
for cataloging a library of photographic images?
Could someone lead me to a stock photo agency that uses this system?
Any help is much appreciated.  Theo.
     Theodore Stresen-Reuter
     u42075@uicvm.cc.uic.edu
     The definition of a nice guy is someone who
     lets people take advantage of him.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sparks@col.hp.com (John Sparks)
Subject: Re: Printing-out papers
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:11:46 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

In article <1992Apr10.160828.11708@polari.com> uunet!polari!bullis writes:
>gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) writes:
>
>>shoppa@erin.caltech.edu (TIM SHOPPA) asks:
>>>1.  Why do all my photo books tell me I don't want to use printing-out papers?
>>>
>>To answer your questions in one fell swoop: They are a moot because Kodak
>>discontinued P.O.P last year. The amount of sales did not justify even
>>manufacturing it and keeping it in a freezer. :-(
>
>Linda Conner prints on POP, and I asked her where she got her paper.  Unfor-
>tunately, I can't remember the answer, but there is a manufacturer.  Perhaps
>it is the Chicago reference mentioned in another posting.  Her prints are 
>very rich and warm; it is certainly worth following the trail and finding 
>the source if this interests you.

I ran across the reference again the other day.  The paper is made by
the French firm R.  Guilleminot Boespflug & Cie.  who resurrected one of
its old formulas and is imported to the U.S.  by Chicago Albumen Works,
Box 379, Front Street, Housatonic, Massachusetts 01236, (413) 274-6901.
In an ad from November 1989, they listed 100 sheet box of 8x10 paper
as $79.50.  The paper is a single weight (or thinner) fiber paper.  It
is processed by toning in a gold chloride or potassium chloroplatinite
toner, fixed in plain hypo then washed.  The resulting image is rather
warm, but can vary depending on the toner and amount of toning.   The
light source used to expose the paper must contain strong UV light.

John Sparks
From: subra@kaki.uucp (S Subramaniam)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Choosing a tele zoom
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:56:29 GMT
Organization: TANDEM Computers, Inc (CS2)

I have received couple of reply mails for my posting. I noticed that
netters are facing problems in replying to me as my reply address is
ambiguous. Please send your email to

uunet!devnull.mpd.tandem.com!subra@uunet.uu.net

Sorry for the mistake happened. Thanks for all those who are responding 
to my posting. I think some of the your mails might have bounced 
because of incorrect address.

Thanks again,
Subra

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jchen@ftrooper.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Jason Chen)
Subject: Re: adorama and slide film
Reply-To: jchen@ctt.bellcore.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 13:40:06 GMT

Not only slide films. I ordered a dozen Fuji print films from Adorama
in January, all HG-400 films expire in June (92).  I suspect that they may 
have ways to get soon-to-expire films at a deep discount.

-- 

C. Jason Chen                 
**************E-Mail: jchen@ctt.bellcore.com
**************V-Mail: (908)699-6993
**************P-Mail: 444 Hoes Lane, 1E229, Piscataway, NJ
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Canon EOS-2, digital EOS-1, rumours...
Keywords: Canon EOS digital
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:17:24 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <robert.703305476@labtam>, robert@labtam.labtam.oz.au (Robert Groom) writes:
> There has been some talk of an EOS-1 replacement recently in rec.photo but
> this is the first mention I have seen of it outside the newsgroup.
> Has anyone out there got any more information? 

I heard (2nd hand, via someone who had talked to a Canon rep) that there
might be a new EOS in late 92. Something between the current 10s and EOS1 -
maybe sort of like an EOS version of the T90? It is just a rumor and I have
never heard it confirmed by any other source, so take it for what it's worth.


===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: daved@hplsla.hp.com (Dave Dintenfass)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:57:00 GMT
Subject: Re: 4 x 5 camera help
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

One lens that is often overlooked these days is the classic
203mm f/7.7 Kodak Ektar (older versions weren't called Ektars
but simply "Kodak Anastigmats" as I recall).  This is an 8-inch
lens designed for use on a 5 x 7 view camera.   But it makes
a nice slightly-longer-than-normal focal-length lens on a 4 x 5
camera.  I have one and have used it for years.  

This lens is listed in the older Kodak darkroom handbooks (in the
lens section) and many of the lens-design textbooks.  It was very
popular a few decades ago, and for good reason.   

Advantages:

o  A small, lightweight lens; ideal for field use and mounting on
   the smallest of lensboards. 

o  A sharp lens at both infinity and at close distances, due to 
   its four element, symmetrical air-spaced design; also makes
   a great copy lens.

o  A great bargain; these sell on the used market between $125 and 
   $250 (don't pay more; these lenses often go begging), usually
   in Kodak Supermatic shutters. 

Disadvantages:

o  Very flare-prone, due to the eight air/glass surfaces (the lens
   does not have cemented elements); most of these lenses are coated
   but don't count on that to do much -- you need to shade the lens
   carefully.  If take care to do this, you will find the lens
   performance outstanding -- that is, if the glass is clean and
   clear.

o  Somewhat low-contrast lens, due to unavoidable flare (see above);
   if you are used to modern, high-contrast lenses, you may need to
   adjust your developing to yield a negative with equal contrast.

o  Most f/7.7 Ektars are in Kodak Supermatic shutters, which need regular
   attention; the Supermatic is not well sealed and can get dirty
   quite easily (though if you are handy, you can clean it yourself
   without much trouble :-).  Also, many Supermatic shutters lack
   flash synch, though Kodak did offer a Supermatic shutter with flash
   synch (done by converting the self-timer mechanism).  But you
   rarely need flash synch for field use.

o  An f/7.7 lens is a bit slow, but who shoots wide-open with 
   view-camera lenses anyway?  However, it can make focusing in dim light
   a bit harder.

Hope this helps...

Dave Dintenfass
From: beth@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Beth Crespo)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 23:08:18 GMT
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for you!)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.photo

Mark Evans posted: 
>Only clear cut case is where the photo has the copyright symbol followed
>by the copyright holders name on the original publication.
>If not it may have no copyright protection at all, in quite a few parts
>of the world.

I do not believe the original publication needs to display the copyright
symbol (c in a circle) - only the original transparency as sent to the
publication. Most photographs used in commercial work will not display
the photographers name or the copyright symbol - but the photographs
are still copyrighted.  My understanding (based on reading ASMP Guide
to Selling Stock - not the exact title) is that the _act_of_creation_ is 
what gives the copyright, the symbol only helps ensure protection of a 
copyright should a dispute arise. Also, the copyright laws are international.
The only sure way to know a work is *not* copyrighted is to ask the
publisher of any printed material - including advertisements.

I wouldn't scan in any picture I had not created myself unless I had 
gotten written permission from the photographer for reproduction. Of 
course, no professional photographer in his right mind would grant 
unlimited use with international distribution without charging a 
hefty fee  - about $5000. per image as a starting point.

Copyright violation is a costly crime. The ASMP has a staff of lawyers
who help photographers protect their copyrights; I would not assume
that posting to the net is immune from prosecution.

My Opinion,
Beth Crespo, Mommy to Kara Michelle Kieffer since July 13, 1988
             Mommy to ??? ?????? Kieffer beginning May ??, 1992
These opinions are mine, Hewlett-Packard may or may not agree with them.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du)
Subject: Re: Some arcane questions
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 15:44:57 GMT

In article <213328> phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul H. Rubin) writes:
>I am pretty sure the 28/2.8E is different than the AF.  The AF
>is quite a bit bigger and heavier, more like the 28/2.8AI
>(I've owned all three at different times).  The 28/2.8E is
>an under-respected lens, by the way.  I wish I hadn't sold the
>one I used to have.  It was pretty good optically and very
>light and compact, excellent for travelling.
	Nikon 28/2.8AF is definitely not the same as 28/2.8AI(-s).
	The manual lens had a 8-element 8-group design which
	incorporated Nikon close-range-correction system for better
	close range image quality. The 28/2.8AF has a 5-5 design
	that is similar to(if not the same as) the 28/2.8E, and
	doesn't have the CRC. I must agree that 28/2.8E is indeed
	an excellent lens.

---------------------------------
 Li Du | duli@prony.colorado.edu
---------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: michelle@play.esd.sgi.com (Michelle Boyd)
Subject: photog. in Nat'l/State Parks etc.
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 18:29:40 GMT


I read something recently which made me wonder
about selling photos I have taken in National /
State Parks, Recreation areas, Beaches, and
Wildlife refuges/preserves.  I assumed that
since I was a US citizen, these areas belonged
to me as long as I wasn't doing anything to destroy
them.  Do I need special permission or releases
to sell photos taken in these areas?

michelle
From: bjs@uts.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: How to clean multi-coated filters?
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:29:35 GMT
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

John Ongtooguk writes:

[ regarding cleaning Hoya multi-coated filters ]

>If there are oily finger marks or
> such I'll use some Kodak lens cleaner, although there may be better 
> cleaning solutions, and follow up with exhaling/cleaning. For really
> dirty filters I'll start with some alcohol, then use the cleaner, then
> exhale/clean. I also don't use a chamois as I don't want to clean a
> fragile surface with an item that I've used before....the thought of
> rubbing a grain of sand around and around on the lens ....   
>
> I have noticed that the Nikon coatings are kind of fragile, more so
> than the ones on some of my other optical surfaces. The Hoya coatings
> are funny in that if it appears that I created a cleaning mark I can
> get it to disappear if I use some alcohol followed by the Kodak cleaning
> solution, it's as if the solution 'hydrates' the coating, or ? In any
> case use care, and regard my reply as much of a question as a good 
> technique.

Interesting.  When I got my first Hoya HMC filters I found that using Kodak
lens cleaner resulted in horrendous smears on the surfaces of the filters.
In a local photo store I located some lens cleaner made by Hoya and marked as 
expressly intended for their HMC filters.  This removed the smears, although
it took a lot of time.  I've since found that, if the filters are not already
smeared, this stuff works very nicely.  I've also had good luck using 
ROR and OFR.  Interesting how we all have different experiences.

Barry


-- 


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp.       | "Any fool can face a crisis - it's     | 
| bjs@ruts.ccc.amdahl.com           |  this day-to-day living that wears you |
|                                   |  out." - Anton Chekhov                 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well.                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Recommendation wanted for Nikon 2000 Zoom lense > 135mm
From: krschimm@wsuhub.uc.twsu.edu
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:59:46 CST
Distribution: usa
Organization: Wichita State University, Wichita, Ks

In article <1992Apr13.213258.13341@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, gsgi_ss@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Greg Gibson) writes:
> 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
get the nikkor 80-200

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: kmheal@audiolab.UWaterloo.ca (Michael Heal)
Subject: Re: Cameras with lockup, etc.
Organization: Audio Research Group, University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 22:48:50 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.201518.12141@linus.mitre.org> chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux) writes:
>I have been getting into Astrophotography lately and have been using a
>Pentax K1000 for same. I have thought about replacing this camera and getting
>something that:
>1) I can use for Astrophotography.
>2) I can use for Auto Everything.

Hmmm...  Only the most expensive cameras now days will do both.
By Astrophotography I assume that you mean attaching a camera
body to a telescope.  If that is the case, then why not just get
a Olympus OM-1 body for that purpose, and get a second camera
(with lenses) to fill the other needs?  Judgeing by "Sky and
Telescope" it seems that most people use an OM-1 for this purpose
because it is all mechanical (battery for light meter only) and
has real mirror lockup!  Quite a rarity.  From other articles
here it looks as though you should be able to pick one up for
less than 150 $US (used but in excellent shape).  This camera
was in production from 1971 to about 1985 so there are tons of
them out there and is tough and reliable.
                               Michael.