charles_mason

<p>hugoz_2000@yahoo.com<br>

Hugo Zhang. He is a stand up guy!<br>

Charles</p>

<p>the spots are there at all fstops, but sharpness of sensor dust images is related to depth of field, thus the spots look sharper as you stop down...it is almost surely dust on the sensor. don't pay someone $100 or more to clean this, as it is easy to do yourself. invest that money in Visible Dust's arctic butterfly tool and one of their lighted magnifiers and you can clean your own sensor whenever needed. i've cleaned mine dozens of times, and many others, without problem. the sensors have a cover similar to a filter on a lens, and doesn't scratch easily. if you are brave, you can get some of their sensor cleaning fluid and sterile q-tips for getting off the occasional smudge of oil that appears on sensors, and that the brush will not remove.</p>

<p>I once had one of these. It banded badly when I scanned. It was scuzzy, so was outdated when new Macs got rid of that interface years ago. Too bad. Now I use $600 Epson v750, and it is a lot less hassle and quality is fine...wish I still had the holders, I'd give em to you.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Easy to find the Visual Symphony book through abebooks.com...</p>

 

<p>I am still using 10 year old or more type 55 and 665. sometimes a pack is dry, but often not... it would be a real crap shoot to buy this off eBay though...</p>

<p>I probably have it, but would have to look. Would be later in the summer when I am back in my office where I teach. If you don't find it by then, feel free to write me at cwmason@alaska.edu and I'll look. I could scan and email to you then.</p>

<p>note: the two photos above are at 1600...</p>

<p>Detail from above</p><div></div>

<p>I've spent a couple days with it now, and am undecided. It still might go back to B&H. My quick take--unlike many here, I think the Image Quality and high ISO quality are the camera's strong points. The files are lovely. And I like certain things, like the real aperture dial and real shutter speed dial, which can either or both be set to A. But operationally, at least for those of us used to "normal" cameras (I use the Canon SLR system, and my current PS is the Lumix GF1 with the 40mm and a Voightlander finder--an excellent, snappy street camera), it is a nightmare.</p>

<p>As many have noted, the menu system, etc., just doesn't make sense. Trying to get the LCD on require synching two different buttons, and I still haven't got it down. The fact that it locks up while writing files is IRRITATING, especially since the cameras I just mentioned have this down. The viewfinder is nice, but the LCDs are DARK. You can't really see the back LCD in sunlight, and turning up the brightness all the way does little, and this also blows out the highlights on the viewed image!</p>

<p>God I had high hopes for this camera. It is a beautful device, no doubt. I love the retro looks and feel. But again you wonder if they had Photographers actually use it. Twenty minutes with this thing and I could have provided a list that would make it 10x more photo friendly. For instance, the +/- dial is extremely easy to knock. It doesn't click in hard, and is in a bad spot. ISO needed a button, and not the FCN button. And we need only ONE button to make the back LCD work. And clean up those menus!</p>

<p>Some of this might be addressable in firmware. But much isn't. Today I will decide whether or not to send it back. The image quality, though , definitely the attaction, over my Lumix. Oh, and I forgot to mention it is somewhat slow to use, especially if you don't prefocus. Quite a bit of noticeable lag. More than the Lumix.</p>

<p>So it is kind of an also ran. I don't know what the current wait list is, so if I do decide to send it back, but one of you would like it instead, I'd sell it for my cost. This isn't an ad, just offering a service, IF I decide to pass.</p>

<p>Frustrating, though. I wish Canon or Nikon would do this and get it right. And hey, just give me real Rangefinder focus, that would be fine!</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>only matters on jpegs- NOT the DNG files!!! also matters in reselling lenses...</p>

<p>Hey you aren't the Andrew Kleinfeld in Fairbanks, Alaska are you?</p>

<p>I keep trying to place a Classified Ad on Photo.net for a Tri-Elmar I am selling, but get an error of "Bad Gateway." I wrote Josh a couple days ago about it, but I know he must get a million emails. Anyone out there have any experience with this? Thanks.</p>

<p>I teach photography. In my beginning class, I always put the question "How do you spell that A-word that means your lens opening?" I tell them it is on the quiz ahead of time. Still I get a lot of inventive spellings for Aperture. So Ian it isn't APATURE, or APTURE, but APERTURE. Usually I get aper-A-ture, as a lot of people pronounce it that way for some reason. Sort of like Nuclear is often pronounced Nucular. Anyway, enjoy!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>"That's why it gives ample opportunity for the boastfull to boast about how good they are handholding their camera.<br />So if you want proof, see if you can find people boasting about how good they are handholding their camera. Both the "how good they are" and the "their camera" bit.<br />Should not be difficult. ;-)"<br>

Huh? I have no idea what this means. But generally looking through the post about the "Enormous" difference in handholding, I think this de Bakker man is baiting everyone... ;-)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks to all. I'll try the cleaning sheets. I haven't used Exhibition Fiber, as I like GFS's warmth. The scratches do move around, so unlikely debris. The curl issue seems the best bet. The scratches are there as they come out of the printer. I'd have students who got them and the next person wouldn't, and now same for me. Hard to figure out, though I was hoping for an Epiphany here! Cheers...</p>

<p>I have three Epson 3800s at my disposal, and have had a fourth (one of the three was replace). Two printers are in a university printing lab. My students and I have been getting scratches the in the direction of travel in the surface of GFS. These come and go, but run most of the length of the print. They move around as to location. I have set the paper thickness and widest platen gap (hardware and software). I've backloaded, and front loaded. I've tried everything I can think of. They will go away for awhile, then be back. I am in the run of them now, and can't get a scratch free print I need for a show. This is so infuriating. Epson is no help, for as soon as you mention Ilford paper they clam up and say this isn't their problem.</p>

<p>Does anyone else have experience with this? Have you found out how to solve it, other than changing papers? And I have checked to make sure the paper isn't "pre" scratched. It isn't. </p>

<p>Many thanks to you if you can help me solve this problem. This paper and printer, otherwise are so gorgeous for BW. I hate to quit trying.</p>

<p>Charles</p>

<p>Easy, Chamonix. Contact Hugo Zhang and get yourself one. Most bang for the buck I've seen in a wonderfully designed and sturdy but lightweight 4x5!</p>

<p>Hi Dwain,<br>

What focusing issues did the 45n-1 have if you might know?<br>

Thanks,<br>

Charles Mason<br>

Fairbanks</p>

<p>best answer is the black tshirt. forget all that white/black thing just take an old black tshirt and put it over your head, but neck first. then pull the "body" around the ground glass when you are viewing. nothing simpler or better out there, and won't blow away...another way to use it is to put the neck over a 4x5 back, and leave attached to the camera. then just pull the body around yourself when you need it...</p>

<p>I also have the Seiko/46mm and recommend it completely... Great Lens, amazing coverage...</p>

<p>So you can cycle view mode in PS with the "F" key. One step in that cycle is the image against black. Always been that way. Somehow my black step is gone. It was here, but now it goes against Gray, but not black anymore. Anyone have any insight on how to get black back? Thank!</p>

<p>well sigma says they never have heard of it. suggest i swap it out with Amazon. pain!</p>

<p>last</p><div></div>

<p>one more</p><div></div>

<p>spectator</p><div></div>