w._h.1

Indeed, adorama just added the information a few days ago. I've been looking forward to this lens since it was first announced, but the price puts me off a little. I'm hoping that's the msrp and once it's actually available the price will change. But I doubt that.

If you get one you will be surprised by the light weight given its big size. Though if it were an slr it would be a lot bigger so it's all relative. Just for kicks, <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00C55t&photo_id=3335702&photo_sel_index=0">here's a photo taken with my Fuji</a>

Actually using a canon dslr with manual focus lenses can be a great experience. It sounds like you've never tried it and you're dismissing it unjustly. Especially with a 1ds or other full frame dslr like the 14n or slr/c, some select few manual focus wide angle primes are far superior in regard to corner to corner sharpness compared to canon's "top notch" wide zooms. And the question in the main topic is about a pancake lens, which the 50 1.4 is not, and canon really doesn't have one. The sigma 30mm 1.4 will be an offering that canon has no match for, assuming it will be smaller than the 28 1.8 and better quality than the 35 f2. (Don't mention the 35mm f1.4L, it wins hands down but ain't no pancake) Anyway, try using a full frame or even 1.6x dslr with a bright manual focus lens, it's not as bad as you think, aperture priority works and if the viewfinder is decent, focusing manually is no harder than it was with old olympus or nikon or even canon mf cameras. AF isn't always necessary.

<center><img src="http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif/om-sif/lensgroup/images/40mmf2.jpg" width=20%></center>

If manual focus is a consideration, the Zuiko 40mm f2 pancake would look pretty awesome on a 20d.

I'm waiting for the new sigma 30mm f1.4 - hopefully it will be coming out here in a few days, it's been long enough now! I thought about the 35 f2 for a fast normal prime on a 1.6x body, but it's a pretty old lens and the sigma will have higher end features like ring usm style and ftm focusing, distance scale window etc. I expect it to perform for a 10d or 20d pretty much how canon's 50 1.4 performs on a full frame body. A wise move for sigma to make this lens, now hopefully it lives up to its potential and the price is at a considerable point, and I predict they'll sell tons of them. Where can I get one? Their new 10-20mm also, please (hopefully affordable compared to canon's 10-22 though).

No need to worry, this feature was added with the 2n, and didn't exist in the first om-2. I actually prefer the original for some things, mainly its unlimited long exposure time when using the incredible otf evaluative auto metering. I believe they limited it to 30 seconds with the 2n. Great cameras.

Patricia - That revision is perfect. Thanks a lot for the input, it's greatly appreciated.

I forgot to mention that I would not mind at all if you run the photo through PS yourself and post a revised version that you think will print better. Thanks a lot!

I've been selling prints of some of my photos lately, and some have

been much tougher to properly print than others so I'm hoping to get a

little help from those with more digital darkroom experience than I

have. The example below is one of the most popular photos of mine, but

I haven't been satisfied with the prints I can make of it yet.

Scanning is done on a 4000dpi nikon 8000 and PP is with ps-cs. The

only adjustments I've made are curves, and an attempt to tame the

contrast with the levels control slider. The problem I have is that

while there appears to be enough brightness in the dark areas (such as

the dog's face) while on screen, when printed the contrast is too

much, and the sun beams are the only thing that look as I'd like them

to, with everything else too dark. Your first suggestion will probably

be to calibrate my monitor which I have not properly done. The reason

I don't think this is the problem is that with more even contrast

photos I have no problems getting prints looking like the screen image

(and slide). I'm wondering if trying to print on a lightjet or maybe a

high end inkjet would work better than the current LED based Noritsu

printer I'm sending out my files to be printed on. Any suggestions

will be helpful, but I can't afford to spend several hundred dollars

on a calibration device. Currently I use adobe gamma and it has worked

well for most photos, but not this one! Thanks for any help.

<br>- WH

<br><br>

<a

href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3040551&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/3040551&size=lg</a>

I'm just curious, what are the sensor dimensions on this camera?

They're basically a scam:

<p>

<a href="http://resellerratings.com/seller1988.html">http://resellerratings.com/seller1988.html</a>

Assuming it uses the same battery as the 2mp model, it's a 7.2V NiCD stick style battery like those used in the Kodak slr/c and other bodies. I looked on ebay and saw that there are a few new ones for sale, though they're quite expensive.

Whoops, 6 years.

10 years? As far as I know it was introduced at the end of 1998, making it just over 5 years old.

I think the Kodak version of this camera is more common in the US. The one I'm looking at was purchased in Japan, but I'm not sure if they were only sold there or in the US as well. Certainly the canon marked version is more rare than the kodak, though they are the same camera. The kodak model number is dcs 560. You can read a little bit about the d6000 at this link, under the EOS section:

<br><br>

<a href="http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/digital/f_index.html">http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/digital/f_index.html</a>

I'd like to hear from people that have used the now very outdated eos

d6000. I'm particularly curious how the 1.3X ccd compares to the newer

1.6X cmos sensors with the same resolution, when used at a low ISO.

Given the more preferable 1.3X crop (I generally favor wide angle over

telephoto, and hate to lose viewfinder quality coming from MF and

35mm) and 1 series body features, if the image quality is on par with

the other 6mp options, I may give the d6000 a chance. I also like the

fact that the IR filter is removable which is a trait of the other

kodak sensor-equipped bodies. A local photographer has his for sale

currently but I don't want to bother him with an appointment to check

it out unless I'm seriously considering it, hence my search for input.

The price is quite low, comparable to a used d60 with grip. Since

there's not a lot of information out there about this model, I'd

appreciate any and all knowledge you might possess. Thanks a lot!

I think I may be mistaken about the field of view with the 1.6X sensor. With the 15mm lense's 180 degree view, I believe with the cropping effect you still retain about the same angle of view as a 14mm lens on a full frame camera. It may be a good choice since you can correct the fisheye effect with software if needed. I could still have the concept wrong though, so some clarification from someone who uses the lens on a 1.6X body would be helpful.

Are you talking about the 15mm f2.8? With your camera it will have the field of view of a 24mm lens, not very wide really. If you really want a wide lens look at the ef-s 10-22mm which is only a little more expensive than the 15mm. The 17-40 is a good replacement for your ef-s 18-55mm, but if you haven't noticed a problem with the quality of that lens, there's no need to replace it.

You could try contacting the photographer to see if he'll sell you a print. He seems to be a pretty well known press photographer in S. Korea.

<br><br>

Kim, Jae Hwan

<br>jh.kim@afp.com

<br>(019)290-7353

The Minolta 5400 scanner comes with scanning software, so you dont <i>need</i> to buy anything at first. If you find that software to be too limiting, however, VueScan is worth the investment. I can't say how good minolta's software is because I use Nikon scanners, but for me Vuescan was a very worthy upgrade from the NikonScan software.

There is an adapter on eBay that allows Pentax M42 lenses to be mounted on OM bodies, but I believe infinity focus is lost.

FWIW, all of my OM bodies (1 2 & 4) have slightly different feels when advanceing the winding lever, some rougher than others, but all of them work properly. A CLA from camtech for the om-4 is around $140 last I checked.

I did find one obvious example of manipulation on Steve Bloom's site. It's not stated that this example is a manipulation, and I don't feel that it needs to be. Photography is art and the photographer controls the final image whether everyone likes it or not. The situation would be different if he was adding a full moon over the horizon, with a bald eagle soaring, with a wolf in the foreground etc, and he claimed to have witnessed that scene. This example is a lighthouse scene taken at sunset, and apparently manipulated with a color shift to look like a night time shot lit my moonlight. It's obvious by looking at the cloud formations that the two are the same photo, worked into different final images.

<br><br>

<a href="http://www.stevebloom.com/images/products_b/001706-SB1.jpg">http://www.stevebloom.com/images/products_b/001706-SB1.jpg</a>

<br>

<a href="http://www.stevebloom.com/images/products_b/001707-SB1.jpg">http://www.stevebloom.com/images/products_b/001707-SB1.jpg</a>

<center>

<img

src="http://www.firstlightphotographs.com/glacier020wallpaper.jpg"

width=80%>

</center>