yian nyc

Wow, thanks for all your quick responses.

Update. I just received an email from him saying:

"I just sent you the payment instead of money request. Please use "Refund Payment" link

on PayPal payment page and then I'll send you a request."

QUESTION: has anyone been on the SELLING end of paypal? Is this the usual sequence of

events? Is it easy to confuse the "payment" instead of "money request" buttons?

I find this highly unusually. Since this is almost my first trade on ebay (first and only other

one a few years ago), I think what I'll do is email him for a contact number and call him to

get his story, before reporting to ebay, etc.

Sorry to post this OT question here, but I just have to ask you guys: Have you ever heard

of this? Is it a scam or honest mistake?

I found an Olympus S-20 small auto flash on ebay, with a Buy it Now price of $79 (Brand

new). The seller has 2000+ positive ratings and 4 negs. However, he has sold the same

unit before using the same pictures. At his last sale, he had 26 units for sale. Here he has

2. (Red flag #1)

I use the Best Offer feature and offer him $50, through the ebay system. He emails me his

counter offer of $70, and we finally settle on $60. Good so far.

Then he asks for my paypal number so he can send me an invoice. I'm not sure why he

needs *my* paypal ID. Correct me people if I'm wrong here. (Red Flag #2)

I ask him if this is to be an off-ebay sale. He says yes. I don't know much about ebay or

paypal, but this is redflagged all over ebay. (Red flag #3)

I tell him that I am not comfortable with that, can we do it within the system please. his

curt reply is that it's either direct sale at $60 or Buy it now on ebay (at $79).

After thinking about this for a night, I figure that since I'm new at this, at the worst, $60 is

a cheap lesson, so I email him to go ahead with the direct sale.

This morning, I find an email from him saying that $60 had been deposited in MY account.

What's going on? (Actually not that surprised, as I was already wary). In the same email

was a paypal screen asking for my password to log in. (Immediate Red Flag). So I trash the

email and log in to paypal directly. And it's true, the $60 is there.

What to do?

I haven't emailed him yet. I would like to know if anyone has heard of this before? I

haven't inputed credit card number into paypal, so quite safe there. I haven't lost my

password to identity theft (pretty sure). What's his game? How can anyone who has done

2000 trades on ebay confuse selling and buying???

Reply from Stephan Gandy from my question posed to him.

"buy the all metal 28."

thanks guys so far.

To clarify, the camera is the nikon 8400 which goes from 24mm to 85mm (in 35mm

terms). I know that if I press the "tele" button three times quickly, it is roughly 28mm, and

matches the plastic 28mm VF I played with in the store. Then I just keep it there.

<a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtacc.htm">Camera Quest</a> has a page full

of descriptions, but doesn't really compare the two. I will email Mr. Gandy and repost his

response here.

Anyone else played with these things?

Does anyone have experience with these 28mm Voigtlander viewfinders? The metal

version (newer 2003ish) versus the plastic (older 2001-ish versus the mini (which has both

28 and 35mm lines)?

Basically I just bought a digital camera and cannot stand the EVF (electronic viewfinder).

My local shop has the plastic 28mm in stock, which I like. However, some research has

turned up the metal version, which is newer and supposed to be brighter (?), and the mini

-- which looks better as it is more discreet.

Question: Has anyone used these and can you comment on which is better? I am leaning

towards (1) the mini for its small size, and (2) the metal, for its brightness. Is the view

from the mini much smaller/dimmer than the metal version?

Thanks.

(P.S. I only want to shoot 28mm, so no worries about lack of focal range. I have also

bought a 50mm Kontur viewfinder for the rare occasions I will go above 28mm)

Alex Majoli (Magnum) uses two Oly digicams. (He fills the buffer of one, then shoots the

other.) Georgui Pinkassov (Magnum) also has started using digicams. Jerome Delay (AP)

uses an Oly with a wide angle attachment permanently attached.

If it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for me.

I made my decision to go when I was at Perpignan for the festival in early

Sept, at the end of my internship. As you can imagine, equipment choice has

been the last thing on my mind for the few weeks following this decision.

I do know however that most Magnum shooters are still sticking to their

Leicas. One notable exception that I know about is Thomas Dworzak, who

uses a 1Ds.

I'm meeting a few of them next week. Will definitely ask them then.

Guy -- yes, exactly. People exclusively. Why Fuji NPH please?

RT -- Portra 400 UC. Good. (it sounds like a "portrait" film). Any specific

reasons please?

Sorry, I obviously know not of what I speak. But now I have two suggestions

to focus my research on. Thanks.

Ironically, after my long schpeel(how do you spell this?) on digital, I still need

some help with film. I'm bringing an Olympus Stylus Epic and a brick of

400ASA Color Negative (for absolute emergency use).

I've posted a question regarding this on the following link, but it is kind of

dead. Maybe since you guys are so forthcoming with advice, you wouldn't

mind helping out? Thanks. Yian

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009all

Thanks once again for all the helpful replies. Jean-Marc and Mani -- for the

adapters. Guy, do you what is the origin of the term "golden hammer"?

Trevor, thanks for the well wishes.

WIth regards to film, thanks for all your well-intentioned advice. But I think

Mark (Tomalty) said it best when he said to me "you've also indicated that

you've never shot film so it might not be the best time to learn the subtleties of

transparency film exposure. "

I don't mean to condescend, but have you guys ever gotten that wonderful

feeling of deciding to commit to something, whereupon there's no turning

back and no more indecisiveness? Regarding photography, I have made a

few of these solid commitments to myself:

(1) to shoot only primes. Some good photographers drummed this one into

me early on.

(2) to shoot only wides (28mm) for reportage. I allow myself a 50mm for posed

portraits.

(3) to shoot only digital. (My first camera was a digital, and I've never looked

back = one less thing to learn = more time to focus on priorities)

(4) recently -- to have the courage to shoot colour. (And even more recently,

to go to the Sudan.)

There's no more waffling. The camera just gets out of my way, and lets me do

my thing. I'll deal with digital's drawbacks, just as I'm sure I would have to

deal with film's. Maybe I made a wrong choice, and if I did, no big deal. This

trip is my first, not my last. I'll come back to this thread and tell you that you

were right. (But I'm confident that won't be the case)(smile).

For the record, I've used a 1V (with 35mm lens, for a week on a fishing boat),

Leica (with 15mm, two afternoons), Hasselblad 500/c (80mm, one morning in

a fishing village); done some 4x5 work reluctantly, and I own two Seagull

TLRs. None of them have ever done it for me. Nothing. No mojo. No zen.

I will grudgingly admit to spending quite a few hours this past weekend

drooling over the Rolleiflex 4.0 FW online. (more smiles)

Wish me luck!! And BTW, I still haven't decided on my backup yet. (Please, no

more advice on my primary system = 1Ds).

Thanks for the helpful replies, guys.

Leslie (Cheung) -- Love your advice about smallest and most reliable. In the

mechanical film world, there are simple solutions, starting with Leica and

working your way down price. Add a requirement for autofocus, we're now

talking (for your stated goals of smallest and most reliable) 1V or F100 type

cameras. Add a digital requirement (or preference), what's small and

reliable?

Gary (Woodard) -- Thanks.

Andrew (Robertson) -- Going to stay away from the complication of solar

power for now. Maybe next time. Thanks for the reminder on Eclipse.

Ishik -- Forgot about purificaion. Thanks.

Mani, El Fang, and Gurpreet -- No offense taken, and the NGO doesn't pay for

my equipment. I don't work for AFP. I'm not that good of a photographer, but

every aspiring war photographer has to start somewhere, right? Sorry about

the Armmegedon exageration, I just meant when there's no electricity. That's

pretty Armeggedon to me. I've decided on digital. Will transmit from NGO or

press locations, hand off CDs if needed, etc

I use my (shhh) seagull just like an SLR or RF.

Left hand holds the camera and focuses. (thumb and forefinger for focus; palm and other

three fingers to support)

Right hand alternates between winding and shooting. (While shooting, part of R hand

helps stabalise the camera too)

(Hi, here comes the postscript first. It?s a long post, written mainly to clear my head.

Wouldn?t mind your thoughts though. Yian)

I am running myself in circles thinking of a backup camera for my upcoming reportage trip

to the Sudan. This will be my first big trip, the first part of which will be with an NGO aid

organisation. I'm not sure, but am forecasting a few months.

I'm pretty sure of my shooting style. For all (100%) of my PJ shots, I use a 28/1.8. For my

posed portraits, I use 50/1.4. I have one body (which I've broken the shutter before, not

sure how. Am very disappointed with Canon?s 200,000 cycle claim, but am somewhat

grateful for the wake-up call to get a backup camera), and a shitty backup (my first

camera, the canon G2. Which I had to use when my aforementioned shutter broke. With a

client. With embarrassment.)

In decreasing order of price:

OPTION #1: 1Ds Mark I. USD 8,000. Used is cheaper. +500 for lenses.

The simplest solution (in theory) is an exact duplicate, since I like my current system. Find

a minty 1Ds, 28/1.8 and 50/1.4.

OPTION #2. 1Ds Mark II. USD 8,000 approx. (Available late this year?)

Then I started the mental masturbation (excuse my language). Wait for the new 1Ds2,

make that my new prime camera, and use my current 1Ds as the new backup body. I'm

pretty sure I don't need the extra resolution though (is that the main benefit of Mk2 over

Mk1?) and that this is pure technology-chasing. I'm planning on a November departure, so

this might just not even be an issue. For options #1 and #2, there is the added option of

juggling of lenses. I'm thinking of the slower/lighter 28/2.8 and 50/1.8 to keep weight

down.

OPTION #3. 1D Mark II. USD 4,000 + 500 for lenses.

Now for the more practical matters. Money. As in let's try not to spend so much of it here.

(Splurge $4,000 more on hiring a good driver and translator, which will translate to better

pics, and more probably keep my ass out of trouble.). The next step down (for me; no

offence intended to anyone) is the 1D2. Half the price, and more than capable. I do,

unfortunately, really like the FF sensor, especially for selective focus portraits. Since I don?t

plan on using the backup anyway, it?s not so important (right?). This also has the added

advantage of 8FPS, which might be nice. (I know, go rent one and see if I like it.) I also

need to start thinking of new lenses. Sigma 20/1.8 or Canon 20/2.8 = 26mm. And a 35 =

45mm.

OPTION #4. 1D Mark I. USD 2,000 used +500 for same lenses as above.

This downgrading starts a slippery slope. By my former argument of not wanting to need

the camera unless something breaks in my primary body, then there should be nothing

wrong with a used 1D. 4 good megapixels is ?enough?, isn?t it? For emergency situations.

A ?beater? camera means I won?t mind leaving it in a not-absolutely-trustworthy place.

OPTION #5. 20D. USD 1,500

More mentalbation (excuse my new coining of phrases). How far down can we go for the

?backup? body. 20D. Advantage smaller size, and lighter weight (means I?ll less likely leave

it in the base camp). Disadvantage #1 loss of weather sealing. Disadvantage #2 cannot

share batteries (I plan on buying 5 sets) and cannot use charger as backup. Lenses 20/1.8

= 32mm (not as wide as I would like, but not too big an issue). 35 = 56mm

OPTION #6. 300D. USD 800

Well, then the 300D sensor isn?t so far off, is it? How bad is this camera in terms of usage.

It?s the sensor that matters, right? It?s even lighter. I can bring three for the weight of the 1

series cameras. (or about 10 or them for the price of the 1Ds) Lack of weather sealing is

offset by quantity. Advantage, I can carry one all the time in a backpack, leave one with the

driver and 3 in base camp. Where does this argument end?

OPTION #7. Pro 1. sub 1,000.

Offers silent shooting. Offers 200mm. (But I hate teles. And I hate zooms. And yes, those

are two separate issues). Shitty quality and handling, but I could take a 20D and Pro 1 as

double backup for less than the price and weight of a 1 series camera. And these two

share batteries and chargers. Going back to my prior experience of having to use my G2

when my 1Ds shutter broke, I wouldn?t want to use the Pro 1 as main camera, but what are

the chances of a 1Ds AND a 20D breaking down by themselves? And I?m not talking

mugged or lost or stolen or I-fell-into-a-river, because then the extra 3rd backup body is

a winner whatever quality it might be.

Sorry about the lengthy post. Here is a summary of my priorities.

1. I need a backup (at least one; but how many?)

2. Keep weight down. (camera, but also spare batteries and chargers)

3. Electricity dependency

Option #1 and #2 are true backups. They duplicate (or exceed) my current setup. Do I

need a true backup? A true backup means it stays sealed until my primary breaks. One less

thing to worry about (bonus point).

Options #3 through #7 are not true backups. They do not duplicate my primary picture-

making capability (quality of fullframe sensor and weather sealing are most important to

me). But they offer good consolations and capabilities (that I?ve never been able to justify

having a second body). This also means I can/will use the camera for other purposes

(another kind of bonus point).

-- price reduction by at least 50% to 90% (all of them)

-- higher FPS (1D, 1D2, 20D). Might be nice to have, since I?ve never had a second body

before.

-- Decreased size and weight (20D, 300D)

-- Extreme price and weight reduction, leading to possibility of multiple backups (20D,

300D especially)

After writing and re-reading, I?m leaning towards the 1D mk II. Tough body. Good sensor

size. New feature 8FPS to offer. Half price of 1Ds mark I or II. (ie. can upgrade to 1Ds mark

III when that come out). Shares batteries. No silent capability (not so important, I don?t

think). It?s not small like the 20D, but since I?m going to stand out anyway, the big size I

can deal with. And I have another final backup (see below)

Post Script on FILM

P.S. I know a few photographers who have been to the Sudan, from whom I have been

getting great beta (information). But, they shot film. On Leicas. I have no experience with

film, nor do I like it. (My first camera was the Canon G2, as mentioned). No experience on

Leicas for that matter.

P.P.S. I?m planning a third backup, which I call my Armageddon Camera, for when all else

fails. An Olympus Stylus Epic, a brick of colour negative film (no idea which yet), and a

backup battery.

Hi

I'm going to africa for a long (6 month) trip, and am taking two digital bodies with me, one

entirely for backup. On top of this, I want to bring a film camera for triple backup and

emergency situations where I can't get access to electricity. Planning on buying the

Olympus Stylus Epic and 20 rolls of film.

I have no experience with film whatsoever.

1. I'm thinking that CN is the best, since I will have a simple camera and not too much

exposure control.

2. I'm thinking 400 speed

3. I'm thinking stick to one brand, one film, one speed -- so as to minimise any choices in

the field.

4. Something available easily if I need replenishment. (in African capitals, and at B&H)

Any recommendations, or can someone please tell me the differences between Fuji Press

400, Portra 400, Agfa and Kodak?

Thanks, yian

Hi

Looking for a ?cute? digital camera as a present for my little sister. Something small that

she will carry around and feel like using. Doesn?t need too many functions, but has to be

?hip? and ?cool?. Preferably even without an optical zoom. Let?s say 5-ish mega pixels so

she?s not too far behind technologically speaking.

Preferably in pink, or mauve (whatever color that may be).

I have no idea what?s out there in this category. Any of you guys (or the two girls reading

this forum) have a clue?

Still searching for the perfect bag (sigh..)

Anyone know of a bag that fits the following criteria

1. Canvas

2. Backpack

3. Small -- roughly the size of the Domke F803

Thanks, Yian

Alistair, I'm shooting with a fullframe sensor.

However, could a 1.4x extender be used on the 45mm to give a 63mm field of

view? does it physically fit?

Jeff -- Roughly what kind of tremendous post-processing are we talking

about? contrast and levels sort of thing (or their wet equivqlents), spotting, or

some kind of blurring and sharpening thing?

Thanks for the reference to Mark Tucker. I actually came across his site after

reading some of his comments on rob galbraith. i sent him a brief email but

received no reply so far.

That is almost exactly the look I'm looking for, technically speaking. It still

doesn't have the same feel as looking at Timothy Greenfield Sanders 20x24

portrait of Rahel Leigh Cook (even on the web), but maybe that's bias on my

part.

Mark Tomalty, how did you come about this camera/lens info about Mark

Tucker? Is it public information on a forum that I can look up?

Mark Tucker -- if you're reading this, I love the effect of the Nashville series. I

have been trying to do the same with my 85/1.8. Is this what you use or do

you go further, ie. with the 85/1.2 or 90TS-E?

The Berlin/Prague series is my favourite, and is what prompted me to rent the

45TS-E. Is this what you use or did you also use the 24TS-E and/or 90TS-E?

To my relatively unsophisticated eye, it all looks "normal-ish" perspective to

me.

WT, I agree that the Atlanta series is too artsy for me, personally speaking.

What sort of effect is that? PS filter or in camera? BTW, Mark (Tucker), do you

have an opinion about in camera vs PS blurring and other effects?

Thanks for all the help guys. And sorry about all the equipment questions.

Mark (Tomalty) you are right about vision being more important than

equipment. However, nobody can help me with that but myself.

My current plan: I like the one lens concept, I only use a 28mm for reportage.

However, my portraiture is not as well developed and thus I'm spending time

searching for my "style". I believe that eventually, I will want to settle on one

lens, the 45TS-E. That's the focal length Avedon used, Greenfield-Sanders

with the 20x24 polaroid, and many other LF portraitists. And they had tilts.

(Well, they certainly don't use a 24 or 90mm equivalent, right?)

I am returning the rental this week. Will rent the 50/1.4 for a day, and maybe

the 85/1.2 next week for a day. I can't find any 50/1.0 or 90TS-E rentals in

Paris. Might end up with two lenses, the 45TS-E mentioned above, and the

50/1.4 for non-tilted selective focus.

Sorry

Thanks for your great answers. I had actually already ordered the lens baby as I knew I

liked the 45TSE the day I started using it, but also knew that I could not (yet) justify the

cost of that lens. Will rent the 50/1.4 and then decide to either buy it as my primary

background-"destroying" lens and keep the lensbaby for fun, or skip the 1,4 and go

straight for the TSE.

Yes, I agree the v/f is pretty dismal on 35mm.

FYI, I am not interested enough in huge blowups for that to be a factor.

Ivan and Marco

This is exactly what I was looking for, some one to put in words the "LF experience". I do

suppose you are both right with regards to the tripod (which I almost never use), slowing

down, looking more, getting more 'respect' from the subject. I will hang on to my 35

setup for a while more, whilst trying to incorporate these important parts into my creative

process. Thanks.

FYI-- to answer one of the other questions: the intended uses are for 8x10 and max

13x19 inkjet prints. For an exhibition, maybe a lambda print. So absolute resolution is

not a primary decision maker for me in terms of moving up formats. This "tonality" thing

might be though.

(same question posted on "LF forum" a little while ago, but their opinions

seem to tend towards LF, which I'm not surprised. Was looking for other

opinions. Please excuse cross-post)

Hi

First a bit of background. I have been doing mainly reportage and have

recently started doing portraiture. I love the work of Avedon, Greenfield-

Sanders, Arnold Newman, Sally Mann; and Paolo Roversi's 8x10 polaroids.

I am not quite ready to move up formats yet, and I rented a 45mm Tilt-Shift

lens for my Canon this past week and love the selective-focus look. I will be

returning it on Wednesday and will rent a 50mm/1.4 to try and shoot with even

less DOF (although without tilts).

Here is the question: Is it possible to emulate the LF "look" with either of these

two lenses on 35mm format(full frame)? What are we missing in 35mm?

Thanks, Yian

Thanks for the input guys. I've been giving manual focus a try this past week,

especially since I rented a 45 TSE (MF only). Am still not hitting the focus spot

on, even with the angle finder which has a 2.5x magnifier. More practice I

guess....

Thanks for the feedback on my pic. You guys are spot on.

Ivan,

Thanks for the link to greg miller. I actually saw this just yesterday, but it

meant nothing to me then. Looking at it after your cue, it has a whole new

meaning.

With regards to the "look" and resolution, what about images on the web?

where resolution obviously does not come into play. Can you put into words

why the photos still have a different "look"?

With regards to the physical presence of the camera, I suppose taking this

dog and pony show analogy further, it's also the assistants and lights that

contribute to the presence of the photographer. At the extreme, you have the

20x24 polaroid camera used at that recent film festival (sundance?) by

greenfield-sanders to shoot celebrities.

Joe, thanks for you quick reply.

I don't actually know what I mean by the LF "look". I just know the pictures

look different (in a good way). Yes, I've identified the selective focus issue,

but this is the first time I've heard about smoothness and tonality issues. Can

you elaborate more please?

With regards to focal length, I like the 50. I also heard that Avedon used the

360mm for most of his American West series. I think this transpates roughly to

50? When you say long, are you talking SI Swimsuit Issue 300/2.8 long? I like

being much closer to my subjects and will sacrifice a little distortion for that.

Up to this week, I've been using an 85/1.8 for portraits, but am finding it a little

too tight (head and upper torso only).

Question: for the 50mm at 1.4 (35mm) what aperture does this translate to in

8x10 with a normal lens (300-400mm-ish) in terms of DOF (for the same

subject magnification)?