moore_photography

..,.,.,,<div></div>

It looks like a no-go on the step-ring then. I thought about having one machined, but have just decided to go with buying another set of filters (at least 39mm filters are cheap, light, and small) as I just ordered the replacement rectangular hood for the 21mm from Gandy.

I'm looking for a step ring so that I can buy just one set of 43mm

filters. The 40 and 75mm Voigtlander lenses both take 43mm filters,

but the Voigtlander 21mm f/4 takes a 39mm filter. Is there a step ring

from 39->43mm? I tried looking at B&H and keh.com, but I could not

find any.

night<div></div>

Mike, I don't know how you can make such an expert observation. Nowhere do they tell us what camera was used to take the picture of the person holding the print--it could have been taken with a cellphone camera for all we can tell and the aberrations may therefore be inherent to the 2nd generation copy of the print and not to the actual print itself.

The people arguing against J Wind are complete idiots. Those are my thoughts. There is no way in hell ANY dslr can stand up with LF digital.

the shot of the priest walking in down the aisle is fantastic--let me know if you want to do a print exchange ;)

Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta B...

 

I'd marry it if I could.

Glenn, I've got some extra spools so I'll take it if it's still available.

 

Jeremy

www.satinsnowglass.com

 

He will make you a Rolleicord screen for $7.95. This is hand ground glass and is fantastic! I have one in my 5x7 camera and am waiting on the Rolleicord screen to arrive. The only caveat is that there is a 4 week backlog.

Lex,

 

You can use 120 in the Hawkeye, you just have to have a 620 take-up spool. It's what I use in mine!<div></div>

kjj<div></div>

As I'm in Texas, I'll be wearing my tshirt and shooting 5x7 :)

 

There are a couple of areas I'm hoping to get out to over the next couple of weeks with my camera.

scanned from print<div></div>

<div></div>

The newest scanner would be the most superior (the Epson 4780 or 4870 or something like that), but I routinely scan 6x6 negs on my Epson 2450 and it works just fine. I've made prints up to 15x15" and they looked great--I've never tried larger because I have no need to. $199 at the Epson.com clearance store with free shipping.

Why not the Canon 200mm f/2.8. Cheap and light and on the 10D will be a 320mm f/2.8 lens. Don't assume that you need a zoom; back before digital I shot baseball with a 300mm f/2.8 lens on monopod with film and got fantastic results that were published.

Here's one of my shots from a D70 in black and white<div></div>

John,

The Zenitar works great on my D70, you just lack metering. It's a very sharp little lens. If you're interested in buying one, I purchased a Sigma 15mm fisheye because I needed to be able to use aperture priority as I shoot concerts (the lighting changes too fast for me) and I have one to sell. It's been mounted on the camera about 5 times and I like it (MUCH smaller than any other fisheye lens I've seen), but I just need the auto-metering for fast-paced work.

 

email if you're interested, I have references here on photo.net, on apug.org, and on ebay.

Got my Bessa R when I was 19 and the M3 when I was 20.

I'm also a fan of Convert to B&W pro 2.0.<div></div>

I able to work it out. I just created the first half to spec, inverted it, flipped it both horizontally and vertically and I was finished. My step tablet now reads perfectly on the info palette.

I am trying to create a step tablet in photoshop like described at

 

http://www.bradhinkel.com/Correction%20Curves%20for%20Digital%

20Negatives.htm

 

to use in setting down some personal correction curves for printing

digital negatives. My problem is that using PhotoshopCS I will go to

the CMYK part of the color pallette enter in for example 0,0,0,34 for

the 34% grey box and fill it. The problem is that when I place the

mouse over the now filled box the info gives the K value as 29%. This

is just one example, but every box is wrong after 0%. Should I just

put in my K value in the color picker and ignore what the info pallete

says or should I adjust what I place into the color picker so that the

info pallete info comes out correct.

 

My monitor is calibrated, but I would think that this would have

nothing to do with it as whatever color shows up on my screen is

superfluous as photoshop should still be filling with a certain K%. I

don't understand why this is changing from the time I choose the color

to when I fill it. I am using Edit>Fill>Foreground Color.

 

The image is greyscale and I am working in Gamma 2.2 as that is my

normal colorspace for editing.

If you're looking for an M3 I have a user condition in excellent mechanical condition for sale. I'm planning on sticking on ebay pretty soon, but I'll sell it here for $500.

What's the problem with converting them to tiffs or jpegs before taking them to be printed?