john5

The Canon rep stated that at a demo he saw another rep completely

dunk an EOS 1D {basicly a 1V} along with the new 70-200 in a bucket

of water and then proceeded to take pictures. Our rep also sugested

not to try this with our own equipment. He did say {but did not

guarantee} that it would hold up to rain. I was persistant and asked

Downpour? "Yes, but not guaranteed." Side ways rain? "Yes, but not

guaranteed. So they say it weather resistant but are carefull not to

give limits. Weather resistand has many differest definitions in the

camera world. My best advice is to check the warranty and see if it

covers water damage. Also make sure your equipment has insurance that

covers water damage and not just loss or theft.

No problems at all. The 54 is an incredible flash. Also if you

upgrade to a camera with ETTL you do not have to buy a new flash.

This really isn't an answer to your question but I always remove the

batteries out of any unit {body,flash,ect.} as soon as I'm done using

it. In fact it becomes second nature to just pop them in and out

before and after. Never had to worry drain or even cold weather. Hope

this helps even though its's not the answer you were looking for.

With the EOS 1n will the cross sensor work with lenses that are slower than f2.8 or does it change into a horizontal sensor only? For example a 700-200 f2.8 with a 1.4 teleconverter or one of the macro lenses.

I had the same problem years ago with a 620 and have heard from tec

reps that this is a common problem throughout the Elan line. Way back

then I switched to Nikon and now I'm back to using Canon. Sounds like

you were very lucky that your pictures were not effected Iwasn't so

lucky and ruined a job. No offence by I hope your camera was just an

exception and that Canon actually fixed the problem. IMHO if you are

running that many rolls of film you might want to upgrade to the EOS 3

Easy there. I know that the 50mm is opticaly better on its own I,m

saying the focus bothers me as well as switching from my main lens to

a 50mm then also adding an extender if neccessary. Then there is the

issue of carring extra stuff arond. I'm not trying to be lazy and I,m

not tring to save money. It would be nice to keep an extender in my

pocket or leave it in the car in case I needed it. I just wouldn't

feel comfortable constantly leaving any lens in the car through

Chicago weather.

I'm interested in an EF 25 ex tube I mostly work with my 28-70 f2.8. I would spring for a 50mm macro but they are so loud and seem so crappy plus they need an accessory lens to get 1:1. I think that a 100mm might be to long and I usually a very big lens switcher. I've played around with the 28-70/EF25 combo and it seems to get me where I want to be but I was wondering if any body knew of any drawbacks.

Thanks in advance!

Has anyone had experience with Kodak's HIE infrared film and any of these cameras? When Canon announces their next full frame high megapix camea in about 6 months the first one is mine. In the mean time I need a camera to shoot with and later as a back up/odd film camera. Being a recent Nikon convert {F5} I'm worried about the IR frame counter. I would perfer the 1V will probaly get the 3 but at the moment the Elan 7 is my budget. Any sugestions and experince to share.

Thanks in advance

In Chicago some not alot but quite a few photographers shoot with

8X10 transparency. Most of the time when it is requested by the

customer. However since Montgomery Wards closed the Chicago market

has quieted tremendously. Then the national recession hit.

Try Calumet 1 800 CALUMET

You should have a 35mm or 35mm to medium format scanner and a flatbed

scanner with a transparency adapter. The flatbeds work great for 120-

4X5 but do a horible job. This may sound expensive but I have a

Canoscan 2710 {$500.00} and an Acer 1200UT flat bed {$150.00} both do

an incredible job.

Calumet Photographic 415-643-9275

I work at a camera store and one of the digital employees has been

working with Canon's 35mm neg scanner with the same program. He says

it does a very good job, not quite as well as the Nikon {Though the

Nikon doesn't make a flat bed} but does what it is supposed to do. He

was kind of extreem with his test. He used a 25 year old kodachrome

slide that looked as if his dog ate it {honestly}. It was not

printable at the lab but the program got it to a point where he could

do minor touch ups and make an excellent print. Now that was an

extreem case but if you use your darkroom experience and dust off the

transparency, use gloves to handle it, keep your work area clean, and

keep the glass on the scanner clean you will be a lot better off than

most of us. Dust always pops up from somewhere and the Canon is more

than capable of handling it. You will have a lot less if any touch

ups to do.

I purchased an Acer 1200UT for about $150.00. It has a built in 5X7

transparency adapter. With 120 film it picks up the dots that make up

the film description and frame #s. {ex. FUJI NPS160} Yes, those are

made up with dots. It doesn't have the greatest DMAX range {what do

you expect for $150} but does an excellent job and I wouldn't have

regreted the purchase at 2-3 times the price.

Taxes {income and sales} are lost money. There is no use in crying or

complaining about it because it is the government we chose. If you do

not like the policies do something to change them rather than typing

out your aggravation. In your cushy computer chair. On an impartial

keyboard. Burried under your security blanket. Bythe way this is a

photograpic fourm not a political one.

BACK TO THE REAL SUBJECT. I would like to quote an earlier post "I

pack out what I pack in...and leave no trace of my being there" well

some people do not always follow this philosophy. I know that as hard

as I might try I have lost a few items one is a Nikon 35mm F2 if you

have found it please send it back. IMHO it is worth helping to pay a

living wage to people to keep up the parks or forests or whatever.

Keep in mind that most of us pay incredible amounts of money to ruin

the environment with film and paper developing chemicals. I haven't

heard any of the photographers even mention this little photographic

secret. Bitch all you want but photographers are the biggest

hypocrites and should be charged if not double what the public viewer

is charged to clean up their well hidden trash.

My 2 cents {1.4 pence in England} Calumet filters are made by Lee and

they have several locations in England. www.calumetphoto.com

I forgot that "punch" you see actually what your eye/brain is

interpreting due to contrast. Contrast being trying to compress a

whole bunch of info into a small F stop range and losing whatever

doesn't fit.

Hope this helps.

Try shooting a white piece of paper in daylight with a neutral trans.

film like EPN. Or use your favorite film so you get the effect you

are used to. Process then compare the filter and transparency on a

light table if the are close you are in bussiness. When I say close

keep in mind each film deals with color differently if it is close it

would be the same color addition that you are used to. Next scan it

in with a film scanner. If your system is color calibrated you now

have a solid color image that you can load in as a mask or with your

eye dropper tool get the RGB numbers.

I have just started to venture out into the neg scanning. I have

always been dead set on using transparency film because I was told

that it was the best option. You do not have to correct for the

orange mask, you have a exact reference to go by, photoshop might not

do a good job at reversing the color, you lose to much in the

conversion, ect. Then I started working on some old color negs that I

had laying around. I found out how much info was missing from the

traditional C prints that I had labored over. And found out how much

more info there could be with a little work and digital output

{neg/transparency printer, lamda prints, even lowly ink jet

printers}. To the dedicated transparency shooters who follow or made

up these rules either you are sheep {like I was } or your full of BS.

Figuer out the math color negs have what 7 stops of usable info and

B+W film has about 10 stops. Transparency film has 4-5 stops if you

are lucky. With photoshop you can adjust the levels and curves to get

all of the stops into a printable range about 4-5 stops depending on

the printer or media. It is always better to get as much info as

posible and with the freedom you get from the editing controls in

photoshop {just like traditional processes} get the best image you

possibly can.

Check the date it might be new old stock OTOH it might be grey market

film. Since the B+W readyloads are not available as a U.S. {if you

are writing from the U.S.} product I would assume that they are

selling grey market. Ask! Grey market can be like playing russian

roulet. You know there is a bullet somewhere in there and eventually

you will end up with a bad experience.

Sounds like your labs are running the film through faster and rasing

the temp. to compensate to save time and not replenishing their

chemicals on time to cut costs. I have even been to Kodak Q labs {the

best of the best suposedly} that do this. Just keep testing labs to

find the best one. Here is a sugestion expose 5-10 sheets of film at

the same exposure of the same seen and send one each to 5-10 labs.

You will be suprised at the difference.

With digital you can pick your printing range {lets say 5 stops}

place them where ever you like {tword the highlights or shadows} and

manipulate the rest with the levels control. It isn't always what the

color gamut's limits are. Its more of adjusting so that your eye can

percieve your original intent. Your print might not match your

transparency exactly but when view as a whole after your adjustments

the eyes/mind can be tricked into seeing what you want.

To answer your question I think it is the fuji pictrography.

My name is John and you can reach me at 1-800-CALUMET ex 3351. I can

go over the differences with you without being a salesman. There are

major differences between the two and the one you choose should be

based on what type of printing that you do and where you want to go

with it. I'll be in 7-30 and 7-31 but then wont be back until 8-12

then I'm here every day.

You are probably talking about the 1280. Yes it is an awesome

printer. One major drawback though you have to use epson inks because

of a little computer chip in the cartrige. A printer you might want

to check out is the discontinued 1200 availabl refurbished through

epson with a one year warranty. They do accept third party inks.

Currently I have two of these one for color and one for quadtone

black and white with blended pigment/dye inks that last 75 years and

an old 8X10 epson Photo 700 with regular epson inks for text or non

archival prints. All the printers that I mentioned rival the prints

of any of the new printers.

Look at major brands Canon, Nikon, and find one that you like not one

that people tell you is the best. You have to be comfortable with the

controls, where they are, and what the camera functions will do for

you. Most importantly you must be comfortable using the camera and

happy with your decision, don,t be pressured to jump at the first or

second camera. Play with as many as possible.