Didier Lamy

Thank you everybody, Of course there is this MIR site, I should have remembered it. Something I don't understand is why this angle is dependant on the camera body? ( a F3 for me)

<p>Hi, with plans to travel soon inside a particularly scenic spot of the Dolomiti mountains in Italy, I am trying in advance to locate on a 1/25000 map where I could bring my hardware and (hopefully) get some fine photos of a spectacular summit ("Civetta") at sunset. To choose good spots, I need first to know the angle of view of my lenses. I cannot find this spec for two of them: the 35mm 2.0 Nikkor AI-S and the 135mm 2.8 AI-S. Can anybody help me to find them? Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>This link might help you select the right magnification: http://www.studio-plus.fr/images/NOUVELLESIMAGES/leica%20m6%20viseur%20cadres.jpg<br> My M6 is a 0.85, my default lens is a 50mm, and I am wearing thick glasses. It is ok, but nothing like my beloved F3HP...</p>

<p>And Xtol? Even vulture vomit has been mentioned, so what is wrong with it?</p>

Once more, quality is my main concern, so would you say that it's worth the risk for me to look for a Super Coolscan and that it will produce top quality results with B/W negatives?" IMHO yes...All my B&W prints have been scanned with a 5000ED. Sorry to quote my work, but have a look at the "fort de gaudin" photo in my Single photo section. However the maintenance factor is an impossible problem to solve on the long term, but, as it has already been said, on the long term we are all dead..

<p>"So this is a perfectly acceptable image for a Nature photography website or contest?" No, I would say that this photo is not suitable for a "human-free" photo website/ contest.<br> Good night everybody (I am at GMT+1), thank you for your comments</p>

<p>"The idea that man-made objects are not part of nature comes from a religious background where man put itself in a higher position" . Ilkka, actually in a *lower* position, see for example William's post below.<br /> "Do you really think telephone poles are a part of nature here". William, I dont see any poles on your photo. However, assuming that there were a few, I would probably be annoyed. Not because I would see precursors of atomic bombs, but because I am formatted by the quasi-universal ~bucolic culture. However, I would not mind an old windmill. Of course not a modern wind turbine, at least not yet, maybe in 2-3 centuries.<br> "what photographiy subject would you<strong> NOT</strong> classify as nature" Bob, none, this is my point</p><div></div>

<p>Rob, Colin, I am not contesting the rules of the forum, just trying to have fun by raising a broader point from an innocent detail (the Nature Forum): why the anti-human mentality of our time?<br> Fred, yes irrationality is definetly natural, provided there is humans at the source. "Why are you ostracizing the non-rational?" Good question, I have to think about..</p>

<p>ok, I was a bit provocative, and I understand the topic in photography: "everything except Man". Myself I tend to shoot "natural" landscapes. Still, I don't see any rational for this kind of explicit ostracism. What would you say of an art exhibition inside a termite mound with a sign saying: "no termitian topics, just pure "nature""?<br> "That man is part of nature biologically doesn't make manmade things like technology natural." Why? An electrical power pole is made of "natural" raw materials, put together by natural (i.e. non supernatural) processes, implemented by homo sapiens made of "natural" C,N,O, etc.<br> In other words, we may be exceptionnal, that does not make us non-natural. Thus a photo of a car factory is a photo of "nature".</p>

<p>Seen in the "Monday in Nature" thread, of the Nature Forum:<br> "nature photography should not include hand of man elements. Please refrain from images with obvious buildings or large man made structures like roads, fences, walls. Try to minimize man made features and keep the focus on nature"<br> So Man is not part of Nature? what is the fundamental difference between an electrical power pole, and say a termite mound? For me, there is none, they are both "natural".</p>

<p>And the Zeiss 50/1.4 ZF2? I am not a photo-perfectionist, but by experience I am quite satisfied with the combination with a F3. And Just playing with it is a real pleasure.</p>

<p>then you cannot get the same amount of information as in 16 bits b&w</p>

<p>I usually use Nikonscan 4.03 with a 5000ED, 16 bits grayscale, and most of the time with TMY-2. I will have a look at this setting, although I don't see why it could change something.</p>

<p>"I scan my b&w negs as positive on a Nikon LS-9000, then invert in Photoshop (they turn out better scanned as positive)"<br> Any idea why? Can anbody confirm this?</p>

<p>Ask in the UK:<br> <a href="wlmailhtml:{A40FE3E1-410A-46F2-84FD-DB539D1A8DD6}mid://00000008/!x-usc:http://www.fixationuk.com/Fixation/FAQ.html">http://www.fixationuk.com/Fixation/FAQ.html</a><br> <a href="wlmailhtml:{A40FE3E1-410A-46F2-84FD-DB539D1A8DD6}mid://00000008/!x-usc:mailto:technicians@fixationuk.com">technicians@fixationuk.com</a></p> <p>Unit C, 250 Kennington Lane, London SE11 5RD<br> Tel; 020 7582 3294, Fax; 020 7582 9050</p>

<p>Steve, I wish I am the cup with my camera...</p>

<p>M6 TTL still "modern"?</p><div></div>

<p>Lovely pink marble at Trianon Palace. Many thanks to my HP finder and its focusing screen with a crosshair, and to my monopod, who allowed me to get the the frame about right</p><div></div>

<p>I just got my scanner back from servicing at Nikon Gmbh Service Tiefenbroicher Weg 25 40472 Düsseldorf Germany. Nice people, fast, and an upgrade of the firmware as a bonus. <br />Fixation Uk was also ok to take care of it, and Nikon Munchen too</p>

<p>Gasoline...I saw once an old land rover drowned under a tropical rain ressucitate when a local filled his mouth with gasoline and spat everything on the (then very basic) electric system ..</p>

<p>Thanks Malcom, I have emailed them.</p>

<p>"Why do you think that the no longer present problem can be fixed"? Good question... And it is still there, hidden, ready to come back much bigger, like a toothache.</p>

<p>> Les, I mean the "SA-21 adapter", and my software is NikonScan 4.03w<br /> > Glenn, Charles, thank you for the link, but I would not dare to to play myself with this machine. Last year a local repair shop (Nikon agreed) accepted only to do a cleaning of the mirror, nothing more. When not in use, I keep this scanner constantly under a tailor-made box.<br /> Well, this morning, the dark line had not come back, even after a scanning session about twice as long as yesterday's (2x scans and time of operation; by the way the room temperature was about 25°C, like yesterday). I dont know what to think except that it will show up again. So I am back at scanning the European map for a decent Nikon repair shop.</p>

<p>"Did they return after that". I have not yet tried that, I will know tomorrow with a large batch of scans to do. I dont see how the holder could make that artefact, in that case I would expect a black line, whereas the line above is just dark, with some détails in it.</p>

<p>They do are "very irresponsible", at leat in France. I have already looked in Germany for a simple routine servicing with negative results. If an European on this forum knows a Nikon shop that takes care of this kind of electronics, I will grant him my perpetual gratitude.</p>