HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: anton@tss.com (Jeff Anton)
Subject: Print tongs - avoiding damaged surfaces
Reply-To: anton@tss.com
Organization: Teknekron Software Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:55:29 GMT

I've been having problems with marks on prints done on Ilford .5K
matt surfaces due to print tongs.  I don't have problems with RC
or other surfaces.  Anyone who uses .5K paper have a favorite
method or brand other than bare hands.
					Jeff Anton
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson)
Subject: Re: SPORTS ILLUSTRATED SWIMSUIT ISSUE: What Camera/lens?
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 11:33:41 GMT
Organization: Data General AB, Akalla, Sweden

In article <n2pmqs=.hchong@netcom.com>, hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong) writes:
> From article <1992Jul28.173734.23834@sactoh0.sac.ca.us>, by mfolivo@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark Newton-John):

> > You see, the world doesn't always belong to Nikon.

> Oh yeah?  I got one for you.  Canon cameras are made of plastic (so I was
> told). 

Older Nikon's are made of metal. So are the older Canon's.
Newer Nikon's are made of plastic with parts in metal. So are
newer Canon's. Both brand's current high-end cameras are made of
some fiber polycarbonate(?) that's extremely hard and feels like
metal.

-- 
Robert Claeson            Internet: robert@sys.sweden.dg.com
Data General AB                     robert@sys.dg.se
Box 28                    Tel: +46 (0)8-92 55 00
S-164 93 KISTA, Sweden    Fax: +46 (0)8-751 36 22
From: jstewart@Software.Mitel.COM (John Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Lens extenders for IS1
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:27:09 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <1992Jul20.143800.14117@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> philt@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (philip.tomaskovic) writes:
>I was at the camera shop the other day and while looking at the IS1
>they told me I could buy their set of lens converters (normally
>used on camcorder zoom lens) and use those instead of the Olympus
>200mm extender for the IS1. They sold a set of the 28mm (.65x) and
>200mm (1.5x) for $79, while the Olypus converters retail for $89
>each.

I saw an enlargement of a fish-eye one once. I was not impressed, as the
edges were not at all sharp, and not at all well colour corrected. (term ?
at the edges the colours separated)


Hey, why not try them out and see?

Now a question for you, how are the olympus ones attached? I have a
camera with a 49mm filter ring that I would like to try something
like this on...

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I wish to god these calculations had | John Stewart - Mitel Corp, Kanata Can.
been executed by steam" - C Babbage.  | jstewart@software.mitel.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: ptse@bwdls49.bnr.ca (Paul Tse)
Subject: Re: Yashica T4
Keywords: Olympus-- no contest
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:39:40 GMT

Does anyone have any experience with Yashica's quality?
I still want the T4, but since no dealer's carry it 
locally, I'll have to get it elsewhere.  Getting it
elsewhere means a pain in the butt if anything goes
wrong with the thing...  So, how good are Yashicas?
 
Thanks for any input.
From: jimc@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Jim Cathey)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Canon EF300/f4 USM. Hard to find - anyone know of stock?
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:26:06 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: ISC - Bunker Ramo, Spokane, WA

In article <1992Jul17.181208.29357@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins) writes:
>I'm looking for a Canon EF300/4 USM, but so far I haven't found one in
>stock anywhere. I've tried the usual NYC reputable discount stores, CWO
>and Vienna Camera. CWO said several MONTHS, B&H said try again in a few
>weeks, etc. Does anyone know anywhere where this lens is in stock at a
>reasonable (<$900 if you can call that reasonable) price. If anyone has

A local camera store had one sitting on their shelf for a couple of
months (at nearly list price, of course).  An out-of-town professional
photographer walked in (he was there for a large footrace) while I
happened to be there, spotted it, and said "Wrap it up!"  He'd been
looking for one for weeks in Calif., and was surprised to find one.  Of
course, he wasn't too happy about the price... 

Apparently demand is outstriping supply.

-- 
+----------------+
! II      CCCCCC !  Jim Cathey
! II  SSSSCC     !  ISC-Bunker Ramo
! II      CC     !  TAF-C8;  Spokane, WA  99220
! IISSSS  CC     !  UUCP: uunet!isc-br!jimc (jimc@isc-br.isc-br.com)
! II      CCCCCC !  (509) 927-5757
+----------------+
			"PC's --- the junk bonds of the computer industry"
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: International Photographer)
Date: 27 Jul 92 11:49:34
Organization: CSUA/UCB
	<1992Jul27.023123.4690@athena.cs.uga.edu>
	<1992Jul27.055206.3316@PacBell.COM>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM's message of Mon, 27 Jul 1992 05:52:06 GMT

}}The key word is *primary* source of income.  I work full time for
}}Pacific Bell and I occassionaly shoot weddings, retirements and
}}other events.  I recently sold my first photograph as opposed to
}}selling my services and I consider myself an advanced amateur, NOT a
}}pro.  My income from my photographic services do not comprise a
}}majority of my income.
}
}No, it isn't.  If that were the criterion, professional writers would
}be almost nonexistent (except for journalists).  About 1/3 of my
}income is from writing and I'm _definitely_ a professional writer
}(just ask the IRS!).
}
}The criterion used by various governmental agencies is that an activity
}is a business if it makes money or has a reasonable expectation and intent
}of doing so.
}

The topic under discussion is not what a professional photographer is
in the eyes of the IRS or other government agencies, but what a
professional is in the eyes of organizations who specifically deal
with professional photographers and for one reason or another want to
distinguish pros from wannabees.  Some such organizations are police
departments (they don't want to give out passes to randoms to get
behind police lines at riots), other media managers (want to limit
access to press area for politicians' speeches etc.), pro support
departments of camera makers (e.g. Nikon Professional Services, which
sometimes lends out equipment like super teles to members covering
news events), and maybe some trade groups who try to act as a kind of
union (though I think anyone can join ASMP).
From: tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: a question about Velvia
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:33:49 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Labratory, Washington, DC

In article <1992Jul23.095747.16915@fy.chalmers.se= f88mattb@fy.chalmers.se (Mattias Bryntesson) writes:
=In article <3097@ra.nrl.navy.mil> tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:
=
=>never go back to Kodakchrome.  Everything look so pale, even with
=>a polarizer on, there was hardly any color in the K25.  I'll stick
=>with Fujichrome for scenics and Ektachrome for anything with skin.
=
=I got some Kodachrome slides back yesterday and they had very rich,
=saturated colors. Do you expose correctly? I think stopping down 2/3
=or so would make your colors come. Kodachrome requires much more
=careful exposure than the E6 alternatives, but when treated right
=it gives you wonderful pictures (it has also excellent achival properties).
=I like Velvia too, and sure hopes it comes in bulk.
=
=Mattias

	I was bracketing from -1 to +1 at one stop step metering off a
gray card.

-Anthony
From: tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Tony Arnerich)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikkor 180mm f2.8
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:52:52 GMT
Organization: HP Scientific Instruments Division - Palo Alto, CA

duli@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Li Du) writes:

> In article <1992Jul24.23372@makesys.com> john@makesys.com (John Turman) writes:
> >I am considering the purchase of a 180mm f2.8 Nikkor [ ...... ]
> >My current standby for portraits is a Nikkor 135mm f2.0 AIS. I'm
> >thinking that the 180 may just give me a little more dramatic
> >separation of subject to background than the 135 does.
	> Does a 180/2.8 lens produce more seperation of subject from
	> background than does a 135/2.0 lens? A rough computation shows
	> that, when used wide open, the two lenses have about the same 
	> DOF at same magnification. 

Wide open, the entrance pupils for the 135/2 and the 180/2.8 are
67.5mm and 64.3mm. Therefore, at the same subject distance, the
135/2 has less depth of field when both lenses are used wide open.

Move 25% closer (to achieve the same subject magnification) and the
135's depth of field decreases even more. For the *stated* purpose,
the 180/2.8 is a waste of money. Also, consider the flatter (less
"natural" looking) perspective that such a long lens will provide.

At a given f/# and magnification, the expectation is that all lenses
have essentially the same depth of field. 

tonya@hpldsla.sid.hp.com
From: smith@panther.adelphi.edu (Jim Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Your Opinion of EOS-1?
Summary: What's your opinion of
Keywords: EOS-1, evaluation
Date: 22 Jul 92 17:55:33 GMT
Organization: Adelphi University Swirbul Library

I'm sort of new to the net and have been away from photography for awhile.  
My s.o. is an mfa/photo student and has mentioned that the Canon EOS-1 is 
the camera professional photojournalists prefer. Always _trying_ to be the 
good mate, (and aware that her birthday is in late August) I offered to 
solicit comments from r.p folks who've had experience with this camera. 

My email address is: smith1.franklin@panther.adelphi.edu.

Thanks, and remember:  "Don't take any wooden kodachrome."*
Jim.

*--Harold Bolton, Lifetouch National School Studios
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Books on EOS Cameras
From: bishopg@lincoln.ac.nz
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:21:20 +1200

Hi,
I have an EOS10 camera and was wondering what books (other than the
manual which I have,  but find lacking) are available for EOS cameras,
or specifically the EOS10.

Here in New Zealand I have been unable to find any books specifically
on these cameras.  I'm interested in both technical type books and
books on the cameras and their use.  I would also like to hear what
you thought of the book and if possible a breif summary since I will
unable to view the book before asking someone to import it.  Perhaps
I could also trouble you for unique identification of the book so that
the shop can't get the wrong one.  And finally the price of it.

Many thanks in advance
Greg

=======================================================================
Greg Bishop-Hurley                          Phone 64 3 3252 811 x8710
Research Officer                              Fax 64 3 3253 839
Farm Management Dept.                      E-Mail BISHOPG@LINCOLN.AC.NZ
Lincoln University
New Zealand
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Olympus 3000 vs Pentax IQ-105, Opinions?
Supersedes: <92210.173656KCHAN@ESOC.BITNET>
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Wednesday, 29 Jul 1992 01:48:57 CET
From: <KCHAN@ESOC.BITNET>

I am trying to choose between the Olympus SuperZoom 3000 and the Pentax
Zoom IQ-105 point & shoots? Any opinions and/or experiences with either
or both cameras or even recommendation/s for some other p&s in the same
feature category would be greatly appreciated.


Khee Chan
PROFS: esoc(kchan)   BITNET/EARN: kchan@esoc   SPAN: jplsp::kchan
INTERNET: kchan@jplsp.jpl.nasa.gov             COMPUSERVE: 73750,1402

I speak for no-one, and no-one speaks for me, sometimes not even myself!
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: wedman@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (WEDMAN DOUGLAS EDWARD)
Subject: Re: Images anyone?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 14:25:46 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.221908.933@msus1.msus.edu> stafford@msus1.msus.edu writes:
>
>	Would anyone here be interested in exchanging images?
>	All I see is hardware fetish material.
>
>	We could set up a GIF FTP site and become involved in
>	esthetics other than those of the engineering paradigm.
>
>	?
> jjs

	Interesting idea.  Anyone in the Denver/Boulder area
	have the hardware to transfer 35mm slide images to 
	GIF, JPG or other formats??
 -Doug Wedman
  wedman@ucsu.colorado.edu

Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: faust@bagels.enet.dec.com (Stephen R Faust)
Subject: Re: Long lenses
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 24 JUL 92 10:44:00 EDT


>: > AK> Don't bother with 300mm unless you're prepared to bring a tripod too,
>: > AK> and use it.  My tests at shorter focal lengths lead me to believe that
>: > AK> anyone who claims to be able to hand-hold a 300mm lens, even at 1/500,
>: > AK> is either lying or has low quality standards.  At some point I will
>: > AK> try it myself and then I'll know for sure.
>: >

A slightly blurry shot is better than no shot at all. I have seen some pulitzer
prize winning shots that were a little blurry due to the conditions they were
shot under. Go ahead and shoot, but if you are looking for maximum quality and
tack sharp, use a tripod. If you just want to capture a pulitzer prize winner,
use it hand held if thats the only choice you have!

> 
>I missed the original - just in case its not been mentioned...
> 
>As general rule: never hand-hold a shot at a speed SLOWER than the 
>focal length of the lens. ie. 300mm @ 1/500 etc.
>Of course, its only a general rule. - some people will get acceptable
>results other won't.
>Personally, I've used 400mm @ 1/500 and got away with it, but then I
>learnt to shoot .303 rifles in the semi-prone position as teenager in
>the Army Cadets!!!!
>-  Please no FLAMES from the anti-gun lobby (I only shot at paper targets)

I've shot my 300mm 2.8 as slow as 1/125 with acceptable results (ie, no larger
than 5x7 or 8x10). At 1/250 the results are even better (decent 8x10's). At
1/500 on a tripod, the results are excellent. I'm very picky of the quality of
my work, but I feel you can get acceptable results at 1/125 if you brace your
self properly, and dont want big enlargements. It also depends on the subject.
If you are shooting something where you know you will want all the fine detail,
a hand held shot wont work. If its more in line with photojournalism where the
priority is to capture the moment, you would be surprized what people will 
accept if the photo captures a rare moment or very newsworthy event. For example
look at the old shots of Jackie O in the buff. Looks like it was shot with a 
2000mm hand held at 1/30th, grainy, blurry, etc, but sold worldwide and made
the photographer a bundle. I bet he would have been plenty mad if he didnt shoot
it because he forgot his tripod at home!

Photography is all relative...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen R Faust                                         faust@bagels.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corp.                            faust@bagels.enet.dec.com
Networks and Communications                                   (508) 486-7433
Littleton, MA
============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: wedman@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (WEDMAN DOUGLAS EDWARD)
Subject: Re: Anti-Freeze for cleaning lenses ???
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 20:12:33 GMT

 (discussion about solvents for lens cleaning omitted)

>Just curious....  Why would iso-proponol (IPA) be better than ethanol?  (apart
>from the additional C-molecule etc).

Methanol is widely used in the spectroscopy arena for cleaning spectrophoto-
meter cells which are generaly made of glass or quartz (or plastics.)  Ethanol
is used when a slightly less polar solvent is needed.  Isopropanol (Rubbing
alcohol) is also used and is even less polar.  It will therefore remove more
organic types (oils and greases) than methanol or ethanol. Be carefull that
whatever you use will not remove the polymer coatings applied to your lenses
to reduce reflection.  Most alcohols should be safe.  I would suggest iso-
propanol because it is available widely in a more pure state than either 
methanol or ethanol.

-Doug Wedman
 wedman@ucsu.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi)
Subject: Re: Nikon 6006 vs Cannon Elan; Questions on the Elan
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:38:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.143050.21069@westford.ccur.com>, will@kansas.westford.ccur.com (Will A.) writes:
...
> Eventually, I ended up with the Elan and the Cannon 75-300 lens.
> Now, the questions.
> 
>   1) The lens has quite a bit of slippage.  If I point the camera
> at the ground, the lens 'walks' quite a bit.  It also makes it
> very difficult to carry the camera in the lens down position.  Is
> this common of the Cannon lenses?  Or did I just get a bad lens.
> Does the same thing happen with the Nikon lenses?
> 

the lens elements are quite loose to keep the power required for AF down. This
will be a general change across the board for all AF lenses compared with manual
lenses. The tolerences are also looser to reduce cost. The 75-300 is not the
best lens ever made... :-) The 70-210USM does the same trick, but not as bad.

>   2) I could live/hate the above problem, but I've also noted
> that sometimes the dial just behind the shutter release button on
> the top of the camera, doesn't respond to being turned.
> Frequently, I try to 'shift' the camera's exposure and end up
> fighting with that stupid dial.  I thought I was doing something
> wrong, but even in CF mode, sometimes the dial just doesn't seem
> to respond.  Is this a real problem with the Elan?  Have other
> people had this problem?
> 

The controls are 'asleep' till you press the shutter release to the first
pressure.

> I've started thinking about returning the Elan and going with the
> Nikon instead.
> 
> I would appreciate any info, answers, horror stories, love
> stories or anything else people could tell me about these
> cameras!!  THANKS.
> 

I would prefer the 10 over the 100, but I have a 1... The 100 is VERY quiet for
a motor SLR. The $$$ determines what you get. A 6006 will be of comparable
quality. I would dump the lens though.

It will prob take you about 6 monthes to start to get used to the camera. You
have to re-orrient the way you think, and what you stay on top of. I sometimes
think that A-everything doesn't solve problems, it just swaps them for a new
set.

~Paul
From: ria@dash.udev.cdc.com (Richard Askew)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Long lenses
Date: 27 Jul 92 10:11:17 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au (Paul Repacholi) writes:
: In article <1992Jul25.154705.15326@PacBell.COM>, jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
: ...
: >                                   Some people are just able to
: > shoot at slower speeds, you just have to know your limitations
: > (no flame intended here).  SIDE NOTE:  I am very aware of my
: > breathing and heart rate and I mentally try to moderate my
: > breathing and attempt to relax to slow my heart rate and as
: > I am about to shoot at 1/15 (hand held), I relax, take a slow 
: > deep breath, hold it and I slowly press the shutter release. I
: > often use the self-timer to release the shutter.
: > 
: > The point being made is not everyone can shoot at slow
: > speeds and there are people who can shoot at slow speeds.

- Another useful experiment: next time you take a shot, check how quickly
  you press the release. 
- Its amazing how many people 'stab' the release rather than squeeze it!
If I am handholding a 'long-lens', I sometimes use a flexible release.

: 
: It is rare that there isn't SOMETHING you can brace against though...

- I've known people to mount a camera on an old rifle stock 
- but its probably worth adding a large label "THIS IS ONLY CAMERA" !!

--
Richard Askew
Information Management Centre
Control Data Systems Inc
London (UK)
Internet: ria@cdl.cdc.com
FAX (+44) 81 848 3134
From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Polymax paper
Date: 27 Jul 92 02:52:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

Anyone using Kodak Polymax paper yet?  Comments?

-- 
==========================================================================
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.
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: phg+@CS.CMU.EDU (Paul Gleichauf)
Subject: Re: Any Nikon 8008 regrets (get the F4?)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 14:21:29 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Distribution: usa

SOME criteria for choosing between a Nikon F4s and an 8008s.  (Note I would
not recommend buying a new 8008 without the s enhancements and improvements).

F4s						8008s

Heavy professional use.				Serious amatuer/ semi-pro use.
Hazardous environments				Lighter weight.
  (better seals, Aluminium carcass 
   construction)				Economics, especially if you plan
Interchangable finders.				  on investing in multiple bodies.
Intend to use very expensive 			Easier to hold and shoot, 
   long motor-in lenses.			  especially with small hands.
Higher motor drive framing rates.
Special purpose accessories like
   250 exposure film backs.

Almost every serious photographer can safely shoose the 8008s and not need to
work out in the gym to use it and its accesories.  That said I use the F4s.  
	I am off to the gym...

							Paul
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: stb@dasher.uucp (25157-becker)
Subject: Re: AF/AE vs. Manual aka All That Jazz
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 13:50:42 GMT
Summary: My experience
Keywords: opinions

I have a Nikon 8008, several Nikon AF lens and an SB24 flash unit.  I think
for fast action pictures AF is great BUT I also find several major! 
disadvantages to the equipment:

(A) Additional weight - the 8008 with 4 AA batteries is heavy compared to
 some of the older manual cameras.  In addition, you need to carry backup
 batteries (another 4) plus 4 AA cells for the SB24 (plus backup
 batteries).  That is 12 to 16 AA batteries! 

(B) Matrix metering is great for color print film - in most cases the 
 camera is programmed to provide additional exposure when in doubt.  This
 works fine  for the print film, but I find it can tend to over-expose slide
 film.  I really do not think that overall (I shot mostly slide film) the
 exposure is any better than before!  It is also less predictable since the 
 camera "thinks" differently for each situation.   

(C) Most of the lens manufactors have gone to variable aperature lens versus
 fixed aperature.  Because this, if you shot strobe or want to use an
 external meter, it is hard to figure out what aperature you are really
 shoting at ( I believe that my 8008 reports the aperature in whole
 F stops in the viewfinder).  In addition, the new lens are slower than
 the older lens!

(D) There is also a tendency for many of the current lens makers to "label"
 their lens as "professional" and "consummer".  The professional line usually
 has a major cost premium.  I guess I sort of resent paying $400 for 
 a lens and then be told that the lens is not "professional", etc.  The 
 alternative is major $$$$.
Newsgroups: rec.photo