steve_allans

There are no import duties whatsoever. The other products are

slightly ,ten percent ,more expensive. The word discriminatory is

more appropriate, however. In the digital market Canon has

huge market share and is pushing it's weight around. This

shows monopolistic practices. Note to Australians: OUCH.

Yes, Excuse the use of the word apartheid discriminatory is the

appropriate word. BUT, there is little price difference in the other

Canon line maybe ten percent. But 50 percent for the 300 D.

There are NO import duties whatsoever on these cameras. And

buying from B&H will provide the same price. This is out and out

price gouging and Australia seems even more squeezed. To

claim the Canadian market is that much different is ridiculous.

80 percent of the pop. is 100 miles from US.

I first read about the 50 percent extra list price for Canada and

Europe on the website Steve's Digicams. And checking the

Canon website found it to be true after currency exchange the

300D is 50 percent higher in price in Canada and Europe!!!!!

Why?!?! Will Nikon and Pentax follow with this price gouging?

Does anyone know why this is the pricing?

What would be the way to start such a boycott or is it a matter of

the Canon digital monopoly(almost) pushing it's weight around

and there is nothing we can do?

Having seen some adapters to use manual focus lens on EOS

cameras on the auction site I am interested in trying this. Yet I

read on a thread that it is not recommended by Canon. Is this not

recommended as ,in they will lose sales if we didn't buy EOS

lens or the electronic circuits will fry if used with a non EOS

compatible lens? Does anyone with experience either way read

this forum?

Thanks everyone for the answers,

...so in 645 format roughly a 75-80mm f 2.8 will be equivalent

to 50mm at f 1.4 and a 120mm f 3.5 = 80 f 1.8? I will

compensate for the slower shutter speeds with a tripod or faster

film. Thanks again everyone. Are the fuji 645 rangefinders only

in the wider angles?

Excuse my lack of knowledge as I am new to med format and

have searched the archives for information about equivalent lens

in terms of focal length and DoF . My fave lens in 35mm are 50

mm f1.4 (nice bokeh) and 80 mm 1.8 both in manual focus.

What might be the 645 and 6X7 equivalents and do the

rangefinders (Fuji and Mamiya) have a diff equation. Is there a

website with this type of info. Do the Fuji 645's come in a short

tele model? Thanks for any responses.

Does anyone know of any split rangefinder style focusing screens

available for SRT 101 and can you use a X-700 screen? And can other

brand focus screens be used

ie canon screens?

Thanks for any responses in advance.

For Kelly and others re: converters where have you seen

converters

the ones I have seen are pentax screwmount to eos and leica to

eos pentax screwmount to pentax k-mount and canon fd to eos.

But has anyone seen a minolta manual focus mount to eos

adapter?

These adapters go between your lens and body and make it

slightly farther from the film plane is this a performance issue?

Lastly, can rangefider lens be used on an slr (w/ converter).

Thanks in advance for answers.

Recently inherited a Minolta Srt 201(?) and wondered if

someone could tell me what this CLC metering is about and

what a CDS cell is. Any info is appreciated and thanks in

advance,

There were people who said that the curve ball was an optical

illusion,till someone filmed it using upright sticks to prove that

indeed the rotational energy of a curveball did indeed make the

curveball, curve. Now, since the film grain is continuous tone

and the extra increments of scanning ie 5400 ppi would indeed

make a difference. That is without question. even if you were to

do a million ppi scan (whoa big hardrive needed) there would

still

be more info (many pixels scanning a grain)now the only point

might be would anyone be able to tell the difference in the

diminishing rate of returns. which brings us to the main point for

most of us. Can we get a better scan from 5400 dpi $900

scanner than a med format scanner at $900? And as for the bet

statement by Scott , when the 5400 comes out someone will do

a test. But in the meantime , I'll bet there are more places to

process 35mm film and i bet that the

AF will beat the pants off med format.and the lens will cost less

and that i can change 20 rolls of film will in action faster than in

your 6X7 and i bet that a 35mm outfit with a few lenses weighs

less than your 6X7. Yes, I have med gear and yes i like the

bigger negs, BUT, that wasn't what this thread was about.

Final point try scanning ave transparency at 4000 ppi and res

down to 1000 and compare to a 1000ppi scan from same

scanner.More color info in res down version. More pixel to get

info from(4 times more).

Well Carl , the bigger files surely do provide more info and more

resolution. As for film grain there are many grain reduction

programs available. At the very least alot more color info that the

digital cameras sorely lack. ie blown out highlights and

OBNOXIOUS REDS. Bigger files soooo. Your next computer

will be faster,bigger,than your current one. Not trying to pick on

you , but these limits people put on things makes me laugh.

No one will ever break Bob Beamon's record, man cannot go to

the moon! Go to the link provided above www.clarkvision.com

8000 is better than 6000 which is better than 4000. Grade one

math.So simple. another website (can,t remember which) had

645 negs cut down and placed into 35mm slide mounts and it

gave much more info. Presumably because of the extra

thickness. this opens up more resolution to be had. Enough for

I'm going to throw out my Kodak Brownie.You can have it if you

like.