roland_larson

Haha, if only we can have security photos that you can really recognise somebody :-D That was actually an on-going installation under the theme "quake", and it's the Bay Area ...

I guess we're expecting something more bizzare from an artists' harbor in SF; sorry to disappoint you guys, but you will have different ideas if you were there : the place is lively, esp during open studio sessions in weekends. Not much I can do to the very flat lighting, but I can do better with the desaturation. I'll be back :)

Last summer I came to visit an artist who runs a shared ceramic studio in San

Francisco, near Cow Palace. It's in a postwar industrial building turned an artists'

harbor, where you also find a piano rebuilding guru, a dancing school, painters and

also sculptors.

I was framing and metering aimlessly at some kind of an installation art at the

flourescent lit windowless hallway. Then I heard footsteps, and here she came. I

quickly took a few steps back, trying to include the walking her; she noticed me and

was wondering what I was taking, then I pressed the button.

I wouldn't have taken this photo if she didn't come into my view; the picture would

have been very static if her left foot wasn't blurred by a 1/8 sec shutter; had the lens

been 2 stops brighter then I might have cranked up the speed and froze her motion;

of luck, all the right things happened. Somehow I also find her attention to the piece

of art (if you agree it is ...) kind of curious.

I wish I had brought with my own FG and loaded with Tri-X, because this borrowed

Bessa-T was already half way thru a roll of Portra VC 400; the green cast of the lab

print almost made me believe it is a signature of a fully-opened CV 28mm f/3.5, but

soon I realised it was from the flourescent lighting; can't live with the wierd color, so

the negative scan was desaturated by PhotoShop, and contrast adjusted; no

sharpening.

And if you ask, I didn't request her to walk for my photo. This was not staged.<div></div>

<i>When people paid top dollars for a camera, most of us expected that it is well spent and worth every penny.</i>

<p>

How much are you going to pay ? Given the R&D spendings on this field, I would say you are getting more than you paid for today.

<p>

<i>Do I have to buy all the lenses for testing it? Yes...but give me a break and NO thanks.</i>

<p>

Poor guy, I begin to think that someone is forcing you to buy into DSLR :) Anyway, Nikon Thailand is hiring camera and lens testers to cope with their increasing production; you may not get the cameras for free, but you get paid for testing.

<i>Some years ago the viewfinder was a big issue. Are we at the stage where we rely so much on viewfinders lacking in detail, auto focus(usable) only lenses & no DOF scales to make an image? Maybe we reached the stage where we make a "good" image by the quantity of exposures & not the quality of exposures!</i>

<p>

I will keep myself alert with your kind reminds but I cannot readily agree. Neither do I see proliferated shootings can overcome a bad viewfinder. I remember when the viewfinders <i>were</i> a big issue, we did overcome their inadequacies and learn to live with it to produce usable images. I also know that there are always motordrives and a generous film consumption for certain occasions, calling for as many images as possible within a finite time. Going digital should not equate to multiplying the quantity of exposures, though it does make it easier if we choose to; put it in the right hands, it will free us from a long term burden from film budgets when quantity is called upon as a safety margin, not to overcome quality.

<p>

It's good to ask for more and better features, this makes improvements; it's equally important for a learning user to adapt to an available and usable tool, that is self-improvment. Don't complain it's tiring to walk after we've got used to driving. Walk off-road to get far, and pave paths for followers.

<i>IMO, I wouldn't be a be irritated by the N70's finder- if I were manual focusing,

then I would surely care- but this not the case.</i>

<p>

Good point. This brings up the most valid point so far. The D70 is built as an AF

camera and is meant to be used an AF camera, that the brightness of the viewfinder is

no longer as important as with its MF counterpart.

<p>

If I were manual focusing with the D70, I would care more about the focusing screen,

which poses a bigger problem than the whatever prism/mirror thingy. This

<i>fixed</i> screen 1, provides no focus aid such as split image or microprism

collar; and 2, gives a more than "generous" offer of an enormous depth of field. Both

are done to optimise for comfortable viewing when the camera takes care of the

focusing. Those who are trashing the D70's viewfinder may consider such a focusing

screen a drawback, but I'm amazed to see that they never mentioned it. That makes

me wonder.

<p>

Having said all that, there is always a very usable electronic rangefinder to aid manual

focusing if you choose to be adventurous. So afterall, the whatever prism/mirror

viewfinder is a non-issue. Chuck, are you satisfied ? Or are you still considering used

Leica better value for money ?

<i>FYI, the problem were reported under the use of Nikon D70 + new Nikon 18-

70mm DX which supposed to be designed for Nikon DSLR.</i>

<p>

I cannot start to answer. Anyway, I once owned an Olympic Sonnar 180/2.8 by

Practika for Pentagon 6X6, adapted to Nikon for stopdown metering. I would say it

gave more chromatic abberation than any lens you can have today, even from the

cropped field of view for 135, but I did manage to sell fashion show documentary

from it before I can afford a Nikkor 300/2.8

<p>

It seems that we are getting more obsessed with small findings and disregard the

great potential of this little neat gadget. To me, the random findings of color fringes

sound like someone is trying to see how big a barrel they can get from a brick wall

shot.

Some may remember I've joined trashing the Kodak DCS Pro 14n in another thread

<i>because</i> I consider Kodak has done it wrong by starting with a wrong

platform, rendering it unproductive. Now that the D70 is another beast : when Nikon

has done almost everything right for it, I see no point complaining recursively over a

less-than-perfect viewfinder. I'm fascinated that a whatever prism or the lack of, from

a neat, modern, hyper-tech, usable and affordable Nikon DSLR has fuelled so much

discussions.

<p>

The D70 has come to town and I've played with one for a few moments with a 50/1.8.

From what I've seen, I would say that had we not been overexposed to these

premature prism/mirror discusions in the internet before its debut, I doubt there

won't be many of us who can tell or even care about what the D70 finder is made of.

It may not be the biggest brightest highest eyepoint Nikon viewfinder but I have to

add that if I am wearing glasses of -3.5D correction and can live with it comfortably,

so can you.

<p>

Well, am I buying the D70 ? Yes and no. I want one with a decent AF zoom, not

necessarily a Nikkor, to set myself free from 25 years of hand focusing. Or I may just

bump into whatever DSLR by love-at-first-sight and learn to live with it. Also I can

liquidate the budget into a 100+ rolls of good print film plus D&P, go on scanning

those I would love to bring to PhotoShop, which can also keep me very happy and

busy for probably a year. Or I may buy myself a box of pastel and start drawing ...

<i>some say that the quality of the photos is not much different from Canon G5! This is dissapointing (if it is true).</i>

<p>

I haven't made nor seen any comparisons and so I cannot start to answer. However, it is interesting to note that some say that a self-contained d-cam eliminates the problem of dust on the sensor, while some insist that a larger sensor in a DSLR (some may even prefer a full frame ...) gives lower noise and potentially greater dynamic range. When checking out the prices, I've played with an LC-1 for a few moments and personally do not like its electronic viewfinder, but I think I can shoot with it comfortably by viewing from the main LCD. Given the price tag of the LC-1 / D2, I can also go for a Nikon D70 at HKD 8K <i>only</i>, save the change to finance a decent AF zoom, even not necessarily a Nikkor, to set myself free from 25 years of hand focusing. Or just bump into whatever gear by love at first sight and learn to live with it. Or I can liquidate the budget into a 100+ rolls of good print film plus D&P, which can also keep me very happy for probably a year, and scan those I would love to bring to PhotoShop. Or buy myself a box of pastel and start drawing again ...

<p>

... sorry I do not mean to offer a cold splash; what I want to say is, if you are comfortable with the budget and love the gadget, stop worrying and get it -- the most important thing is to use it, to use it fully and happily because very soon people will tell you your beloved tool is obsolete (yikes !) and make you believe your equipment needs an upgrade; by then you can proudly tell them "been there, done that", with a great portfolio that turn them red ...

<p>

... and it's a lovely Saturday afternoon here in HK. I'm logging out and go for a bit of a hiking with my wife, and her Minilux. Enjoy your weekend :)

<i>I was at Man Shing today. No Digilux 2 yet but the Panasonic version was sold

out.</i>

<p>

... emmm, yeah you're right, the LC-1 is in Wing Shing only. Well, seems that we do

need a bit of luck to get either :)

<p>

And for no apparent reasons, all fonts in this thread had become italic (?)

<i>Thank you. Are there any differences between the two apart from the brand and

colour?</i>

<p>

The price, it must be :) The Digilux 2 is at a premium of HKD 4,000 (ie approx USD

500) over the LC-1 in here (!)

<p>

The D2 is tagged at HKD 13,500 (approx USD 1,730) but are still selling like hot

cakes -- 3 hours ago salesman Hong of Man Shing told me they received no

replenishment today yet, so, depends on its availability, and a bit of your luck, you

may or may not get one when you come here 2 weeks later.

<p>

On the other hand, the LC-1 is available at both Man Shing and Wing Shing, is tagged

at HKD 9,500 (approx USD 1,200). Literally being the same camera as the D2, the LC-

1 bundle comes with a filter and a cable, and with an extra 128MB card, so personally

I think the LC-1 is a steal.

<p>

address:

<p>

Wing Shing : Sai Yeung Choi St South (main road Argyle St), Mong Kok, Kowloon

MTR- Mong Kok Stn, exit E2 for Bank Center, then turn left

<p>

Man Shing : Tung Choi St (next St to Sai Yeung Choi St South, on the other side of the

Argyle St) MTR-Mong Kok Stn, exit D2, walk one block east, and turn left.

<p>

Official imports are priced more or less the same across the city, so it's also a good

idea to try shops along Stanley St, Central District, HK. MTR-Central Stn, exit D2, then

walk a bit uphill, head for SOHO and access from Lan Kwai Fong.

<p>

By the way, to avoid surprises, please estimate price after tax when you bring them

home. Hope this helps :)

What points are you going to make Chuck ?

<p>

It's a bit of a deja vu about my teenage-self in the mid-late 70's -- I was using a Pentax Spotmatic but very much dreaming for a Canon AE-1 MK II, which could be an AE-1 <i>plus</i> aperture priority; and I was proud to hate the fully-featured A-1 <i>because</i> I thought programmed auto is not for a potentially talented <i>Pro</i> like me; then came the AE-1 Program, and I started jumping around showing my frustration <i>because</i> Canon spoiled my dream AE-1 MK-II by including the amateurish programmed auto instead of a more <i>Pro</i> aperture priority. I even felt <i>betrayed</i>. Then I waited and waited and waited and eventually settled on a Nikon FM when it came out <i>because</i> people told me Nikon bodies are better built in metal while <i>expensive cameras</i> like the Canon AE-1 are cheap plastic, and <i>real Pros</i> don't need auto. Haa, then I went on getting a used F2, feeling very <i>Pro</i> ! However, I later corrupted for auto, sold my Leica M3 (bought used in England) to finance an F3, and further corrupted for programmed auto and got an FG, and be happy ever after with Nikon, and the rest is history.

<p>

OK, enough bed-side tales. Are you telling us the same ? Then go for Leica and be happy too :)

<i>Hi, I am going to be in Hong Kong over the next 2 weeks and am just wondering if the Digilux 2 is available there yet?<i/>

<p>

As of yesterday (Mar 04) evening, not yet, but I saw the Panasonic LC-1 in Mongkok, Kowloon HK, last Saturday, though not quite sure if it is from the reputable shops like Man Shing or Wing Shing.

<p>

Now it's lunch time Mar 05; much can happen in half a day in here and I may as well check it out after work and be back with you :)

There is a difference between street photograhy and journalism. Personally I can

accept staged street photography, voluntary or paid, but cannot accept the same for

journalism.

<a href="http://www.camerasbrookwood.com/price_list_kaa.html">Cameras

Brookwood</a> seems to have the DX-code stickers in store, but without much

instruction. If you want to explore a bit by yourself, some guru out there has already

listed the <a href="http://www.nelsontan.com/articles/dxcode.html"> DX-code

pattern.</a>

<p>

Square 1 is the leftmost check on the top row <i>when film leader points upwards

and code pattern facing you</i>; there you count from left to right to name Square 1

to 6, and repeat for the next row to name Square 7 to Square 12.

<p>

You may want to start with spare cannisters to see what you can do to the paint, and

how well your camera's DX contacts detect the new pattern.

And you may want to try the DX stickers for the film cannisters, cheating your N75 to

believe your loaded Tri-X is an 800 fillm; then you push as you used to be. There you

keep the +/- 2EV exposure compensation handy.

And you may want to try the DX stickers for the film cannisters, cheating your N75 to

believe your loaded Tri-X is an 800 fillm; then you push as you used to be. There you

keep the +/- 2EV exposure compensation handy.

Dave

Thanks for your input.

I doubt that there was an M mount variant for this original pancake Color Skopar

35mm f/2.5; beside this coming pancake II, the only VC lens in M mount is the

Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH.

Anyway, a correction in here that the old pancake does focus down to 0.9m instead of

1m as in my previous post.

In fact Cosina have announced it a few weeks ago. The original "P" (pancake) version

only focus to 1m while this coming new one in M mount can do down to 0.7m, the

same as the "C" (classics) version.

... emm, should this discontinued VC pancake an LTM lens ?

<p>

Anyway, Cosina just announced <a href="http://www.cosina.co.jp/35p2/

index.html">a new version with a Leica look</a> in M mount.

<p>

A little convenience in translation can be found in <a href="http://

babelfish.altavista.com/">here</a> :)

I brought up a previous thread on <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-

fetch-msg?msg_id=007V26">some Micro Nikkor 55mm lenses</a> to a coworker. It

happens that we do have a few of them in our workplace, and yesterday he sent me a

quick shot of one with an extenal spring that brings the stopdown lever under

tension, hence no play with the lever, regardless of the aperture setting.

<p>

WP Cheng (the original poster), if you're still around, I would like to say your initial

worry is very valid. There is at least one version of those 55mm Micro Nikkors that is

without play for the stopdown lever. That said, as you've found yours is operating

fine, then you're simply having a "modernised" version. Happy shooting :)<div></div>

And it must be one of these Roberts radios here and there in my favorite "Yes,

Minister".

I don't remember whether my M3 with a Summaron 35mm f/3.5 has an exact 35mm

frame; the goggled viewfinder gave me a somewhat barrel-distorted view a tad wider

than that from a 35mm, so I saw more than I got. I'm not 100% sure but it seemed to

me that the 50mm frame was there too, but reduced in size, hanging in the middle of

the view ... anyway the Summaron was the only lens I have for my M3, and so I wasn't

confused over frames. They were sold long ago to finance my swtich to Nikon, and I

would rather I have kept them.

Pleasure :)

This is on assumption that the lens stops correctly on the "infinity" mark upon

focusing to

true infinity when mounted on your camera. As the distance from the film plane to

the lens mount is robust, start with a simple prime lens (eg a standard lens, which

should have less chance to be misaligned) and your combo should agree that the

moon is at infinity.

If not, then go on checking whether the viewfinder shows an overshoot or

undershoot, and what you're doing is to calibrate the focusing accuracy for the

viewfinder not for the camera.