john_baxter

Has anyone heard the rumour about the digital EOS 2 - its gonna be better than all the others until the EOS 1½ comes out which is gonna be better still.

 

Whilst I can accept that digital is brilliant technology and all that does it mean that until now (or the next EOS comes out) we haven't been able to take pictures that were any good. 35mm film is good enough, a D60 is good enough, another 2 million pixels means nothing more than another 1000 out of our bank accounts.

The chief beneficiaries of all this mad rush to ever more pixels is the shareholders in Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc.

I think the sooner we get to the stage whereby we say enough is enough the better otherwise photography will cease to be an enjoyable hobby/profession and just be a financial burden.

 

There I feel much better now...

Does anyone know of any devices (similar to those available for the

Nikon D1 series) that help to protect the display on the back of the

D60? Perhaps I'm paranoid (I know a certain Photo.net user thinks I

am) but it does seem vulnerable to knocks.

Very sorry Marcus & Carl...perhaps there's nothing new under the sun.

Is there any truth in various reports doing the rounds that certain

of the newer Canon lenses are optimised for digital SLRs with their

smaller than 35mm sensors? Specifically I have seen reports that the

24-70L f2.8 and the forthcoming 17-40L f4.0 have poorer edge

definition than earlier lenses if they are used on film SLRs but are

excellent on the D60s and so on. I know Nikon have a new range of

digital only lenses, are Canon doing the same but less openly? The

24-70 in particular is tempting but I intend staying with film for

the foreseeable future.

PBE2 on EOS 3 - any quieter than the standard EOS 3?

Does the REV. ROSS ever buy any of the cameras and lenses he keeps posing questions about or is it just for fun?

Whilst all this is very impressive for the Canon can we now all assume that MF (and by definition anything smaller) is no longer good enough? How many of us really need anything "better"? I think we have got to a point in photography where technology is driving demand rather than the other way round. I do not deny the benefits of technological advances but I can honestly say I have never needed a print bigger than that available from MF. If I could afford (and more importantltly justify) £7000 on a camera it wouldn't miraculously make me want ever more massive prints. In the real world how many people study images pixel by pixel on a computer screen? Stick a traditional 12" x 16" in a frame and enjoy it and treat yourself to a new car with the £7000 you've just saved.

I am intending to purchase a Mamiya TLR. My local dealer has both

the C330F and C330S bodies available, the C330S only slightly dearer

and the condition about the same. In terms of features there doesn't

seem to be much difference but the C330F body seems slightly

stronger somehow. What are peoples thoughts on which model to buy?

...my typing's getting worse...I meant "their eyes"

Thanks again Bill, I don't know where the Speedlight users of the world would be without you :) What I meant about the blink of an eye was in practise would there be any chance of the subject blinking from the pre-flash thereby having there eyes closed on the actual exposure. I know normally it isn't a problem but I was wondering if the extra time needed for two pre-flashes could make a difference.

Thanks Bill, I wasn't aware of the sequential firing. I imagine all this takes place in less time than it takes someone to blink.

..that should say "relating" not "realting"...:)

With the STE2 transmitter with a 550EX and 420EX I understand it is

possible to set the lighting balance ratios, 1:1, 1:2 etc. I have a

couple of questions realting to such a set-up.

Firstly if I set a 1:1 ratio does the 550EX reduce it's power to

match that of the 420EX in effect reducing the maximum power to the

equivalent of 2 420's?

Secondly if I were to fire the flashes through a softbox or bounce

them from an umbrella do the ratio settings still work? For example

if I wanted the 550ex through a softbox to have twice the power of

the 420ex bounced from a silver reflector could I still

automatically set a 2:1 ratio. I know that in E-TTL mode that a pre-

flash is fired but where is the sensor that detects the result? If

it is in the camera (an EOS 3 say) then how does it know what

proportion of the light is from which gun? If the sensor is in the

flash then wouldn't the softbox or the fact that one flash might be

pointing away from the subject (into the brolly) cause a faulty

reading?

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

Just a quickie, what's the maximum synch speed for a Pentax 6x7 MU

camera?

Thanks for the replies. I tend to distrust mini labs, I've has too many scratched/dirty negs in the past. Finding a pro C41 lab is sensible of course but since I print the negs myself I wanted to keep control of the whole process. To be honest the Tech Pan seems a little too "non standard" (for want of a better term) and is too slow. I was considering Ilford Delta 100 but so far there seems to be no votes for it. I suppose I'll have to experiment.

Until recently I have used XP2 @ EI250 for studio portaits mainly

because of its smooth gradation in skin tones. My regular C41

processor has now quit (I do my own printing) and since I don't want

the hassle of C41 processing in-house I intend to move over to a

conventional film. Any suggestions for a good XP2 substitute with a

similar "look and feel"?

I've not used the 24mm but I have the 20mm f1.8 and 28mm f1.8 and they are both pretty good - the main problem being the large front elements and the cost of filters. At f1.8 both are a little soft at the edges but very few lenses wouldn't be at f1.8. If you need such a wide aperture then I think they are as good as you'll get since from what I've read even the Canon f1.8s aren't fantastic wide open and cost far more. The build quality is pretty good - at least as good as the non L series Canon's and better than many "cheaper" lenses. If you can get a good deal then I think it would be OK but watch out for flare since the petal type lens hoods aren't that fantastic, but at least they are supplied as standard as is a case. There is a lot of Sigma bashing on PhotoNet but I think the newer lenses are fine for most purposes.

Guess what...I can't afford one.

I've seen an accessory called a "Flare-Buster" for sale in the UK. It slots into the hot-shoe or clips to a tripod and has a lens shade attached to a flexi-arm so that the shade can be positioned as required. It looks a bit silly but sounds quite a good idea and its cheaper than a Canon lens hood. Try www.7dayshop.com for details. I have to admit I havn't bought one though!

I've never used the 24mm but I've handled the 20mm f1.8 and 28mm f1.8 and seen the results which are actually very good. THe build quality is fairly high and despite reports there didn't seem to be any compaibity problems with EOS cameras. One potential problem is flare from the large front element but you do gain the F1.8. Like everyone else I'd love to have all Canon 'L' series lenses but in the real world I think most people would be hard pressed to see and major differences in quality. One of the best lenses I own is a non-Canon (The Tamron 90mm Macro) so I'd give the Sigma a close look.

I believe this model is sold in the UK under the Centon brand - model MR40. I have the Centon in the EOS fitting and to be honest it isn't very good. Build quality is poor and it is somewhat underpowered. For macro closeups with flash I would want to use slow film and small apertures and with this model it isn't possible. However it is very cheap and works OK with faster films or "flat" subjects such as copying work. To be honest I would advise 1 or 2 ordinary flash guns on a bracket.

I'm gonna load some film in my EOS 3 and not worry about it :)

Not wanting to appear a Luddite but what's the point - there is no way on Earth I would be able to justify £7000 on a camera no matter how good. I think that other than those with a desperate need for immediate pictures then film is fine - it has been for years and just because something is new doesn't make everything that has gone before pointless.

Can anyone clarify if the 1v and 3 share the same evaluative

metering system. I tend to get different readings (the 1v giving

less exposure) but only in evaluative mode. And as a second point

are the program modes supposed to be the same? Again there seems to

be a difference - the Eos 3 favouring faster shutter speeds.

Film backs are only available for certain 645 Mamiyas and the 645E isn't one of them - this model only takes the inserts. Basically a film back enables the film to be changed mid-roll by removing the entire back. This feature is on the 645 Super and upwards. With the 645E kit you have all you need, extra inserts are useful in that you can pre-load them so film loading is quicker.