justin_lee

I think it would be great if photo.net could forward the e-mails from prospective buyers to sellers in the classified system internally without exposing any e-mail addresses.

 

I mentioned this five months ago, but it would be really great if the classified ad HISTORY no longer displayed the e-mail addresses of the users. I can see the argument for having a valid e-mail address displayed for a current classified ad, but isn't that reasoning moot for one that has already expired?

 

Honestly, 90% of my total spam comes to my photo.net specific e-mail address.

I actually haven't received too many generated e-mail addresses hitting my domain. The most common ones though, are info@ and webmaster@

 

Tracking down spammers was so much easier in the 90's. Some of them actually used their own ISP/e-mail address to send out the spam back then! sigh.

I'm quite sure that the harvesting is caused by your classified-ad history accessible from your user page. Click on my user name, then select one of my old classified ads. It shows the e-mail address at the bottom.

Yet somehow I missed this <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009rWV">thread</a> posted only days and two lines below mine. Sigh. I... feel... so... dumb. But I think I came up with the answer.

This question was brought up in this <a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0059vx">thread</a>,

but I couldn't find anything after that.<p>

 

My question/suggestion relates to the manner photo.net handles e-mail

addresses in the classified. This recently caused me some concern as I

changed the e-mail address to something unique solely for my photo.net

account a few days ago and just got some spam sent to it. Obviously, I

this caused me to do some digging as to why a brand new e-mail address

could be exploited so quickly.<p>

 

I'd posted a couple ads a month and a half ago that expired before I

changed my e-mail address, so my first hunch was to look there. When

viewing a user's profile, it desplays their history of classified ads.

When viewing that history, it amends the end of the ad with:<p>

 

<em>Originally posted Date by <strong>e-mail address</strong> (user

name)</em><p>

 

To me, this defeats the purpose of forcing someone to request a user's

e-mail address from the server (thereby causing an e-mail notice to go

to the user who's e-mail address was just requsted) when you can just

follow the links through their history. Additionally, the e-mail

address is dynamic/taken from the database, so no matter how many

times I change my e-mail address and no matter how old the ads are, it

will always show the most current one. <p>

 

I would think that this is a great exploit for any e-mail harvesters,

because the more involved your are with the forums and classifieds on

this site, the greater the chances are of having your e-mail harvested.<p>

 

Cheers,<p>

 

Justin Lee

I'm sure it'll clear most mirrors. *whistles innocently*

Kelly,

 

I'm surprised there's that much 110 film lying around, although I honestly have never looked for some. A few years ago I heard that Kodak and Fuji had discontinued their 110 production. Rather, when I was still working at a camera store a few years ago, we weren't able to get in anymore from Kodak or Fuji.

 

Regardless, I'm more comfortable using 135, 120 or sheet film.

 

As for the lens, the zoom is internal and the focussing rotates the front elements. The flange sticks out about 3/8ths of an inch. There is back focus adjustment, but it can recess only 3/16ths-ish of an inch within the flange. It came from a JVC KY-210. I can't tell the distance from the sensor as there's some glass immediately after the mount on the camera.

 

Justin

Many thanks for all of your suggestions.<p>

 

I really don't care too much about full coverage off the image circle. Maybe instead of using my TLR and "thinking square" I can "think circle". :)<p>

 

I'm also uncertain about using 110 film. Sure, the cameras might be cheap, but no one really makes or stocks the film anymore.<p>

 

The video camera this lens fits weighs about 20 lbs, and requires a "portable VCR" unit that probably weighs another 10 lbs. I think I'll stick to my MiniDV camera.<p>

 

If I were to stick to 35mm, I could probably find something old and worthless to salvage a mount, buy a roll of duct tape, maybe some crazy glue, a mig welder... :)<p>

 

I couldn't find the Canon/Leica thread, but I did find this <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004GjD">one</a>.<p>

 

Thanks a bunch,

 

Justin Lee

I'm curious if anyone here has any experience converting video lenses

to work on a 35mm SLR.

 

I pulled an old Fujinon video lens (HZ-E12) from a professional JVC

video camera and it's interested me enough to try and find a way to

mate it with my FM.

 

It's a 9mm-108mm/1.7-2.0 lens with a built in 2x Teleconverter, macro

focussing, back focus adjustment and a minimum focusing distance of

.95 metres. It appears to be multicoated as well.

 

I'm doubtful the image circle will be large enough, but it appears as

though there should be enough clearance for the mirror.

 

Any idea where I should start?

 

I also had the idea of building a wooden box and putting the lens at

one end and a Graflok back at the other! Now that would be pretty fun.

 

Cheers,

 

Justin Lee

You can always ask whoever's in charge to turn on more lights (if the have more coloured lights, spot lights, etc). A few times a DJ has accommodated my request and turned on a few extra lights (or increased their intensity) for a song or two.

 

Generally, it's not a lot of extra light... but every bit helps.

Your best bet is to try and find USED AI/AIS lenses. You will not be able to use any of the newer "G" type lenses on your FM3A because they lack a manual aperture ring. The AF-S lenses are overkill for you. some of Nikon's best new glass are AF-S lenses and they have a nice focusing throw for an auto focus lens.

 

As for your lenses, when you say you simply want the best There are many nice things said about the 28/2.8 AIS, 28/2 AIS, or the 28/1.4 AF-D.

 

There are a variety of 50mm lenses, unless you want the matching 45 lens with the FM3A. All of the AI, or AIS 50's will be excellent. Many reports show that the 50/1.8 is sharper than the 1.4 at larger apertures. There are many different variations of the 50/1.8 AIS lens though.

 

I would highly recommend the 105/2.5 AIS lens over a 135, although the 105/2 DC, or 135/2 DC lenses should be something to look at if you're interested in using that length primarily for portraits. The 85/1.4 AF-D is reportedly fantastic.

Luminous Landscape has a nice comparison between the 17-40 and the 16-35.

 

<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml">http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml</a>

John,

 

I would conclude that the D2H looks like a capable camera. Overall image noise at higher ISO's seems a bit smoother than its predecessor, but slightly more than the 1D. Colour saturation seems higher on the 1D, but there's a note in the article about a some problems with the Nikon software. This 'First Look' really only covers specific concerns regarding image quality though.

 

The D2H should prove to be a capable tool for the many Nikon users out there at a decent price.

 

When the reviews come out from Phil Askey, Bjørn Rørslett, Rob Galbraith, Luminous Landscapes, etc, etc, etc, they should paint a fuller picture of the D2H.

 

Cheers,

 

Justin Lee

The 'review' is actually a First Look at a 'production-level' D2H. I believe the images are there for you to draw your own conclusions.

I believe they use fiber optics running through the screen to make it brighter, hence the need for power.

This will sound horrible, but I've noticed that a little to drink often softens the nerves a little <sic>. The subject's relaxation is attributed to the fact that they're not as aware of the camera or photographer anymore. It's not exactly the most professional method, but fully acceptable for good humoured friends.

 

I do recommend, however that you limit the heavy drinking (for both parties) until AFTER the session ;)

 

Another thing I often do to break the tention, is to ask them to Jump. Taking after Philippe Halsman's Jumpology, I find the jump photo a really good way to get things going.

 

I don't believe in too much technique persay as I find portraiture a matter of relationship and communication. Sit, talk with them a while. Use a less conspicuous lens. Pre-frame/focus, etc and use a cable release to trip the shutter while talking and establishing eye contact with them.

 

Just some thoughs.

Just echoing everyone else's sentiments. They have a good reputation and I've been nothing but pleased. I've gotten Omega and Beseler parts from them in the past.

 

Cheers,

 

Justin Lee

Since I made the switch after all my Nikon gear got stolen, there are many things that I miss and like after having used my D60 since last summer.

 

I find the DOF preview button on Canon to be useless. If using a longer lens, you have to move your hand off of the lens to use it, whereas it's just an extention of a figer of your right hand for Nikon. The Canon is so much quieter, though, than the electronic button on the F100, et al.

 

Ergonomically, I personally like the thick(er) coating of rubber on the Nikon bodies over the Canon, along the control placement. The on switch and backlight button right by the shutter release was my personal favourite.

 

I can sing nothing but praises for the Canon 70-200/2.8 IS, I'm enjoying it much more than the 80-200 AFS. I just wish that there 16-35 performed as well as their 70-200. It's no slouch either mind you, the 70-200 just makes it look so soft in comparison.

 

The wireless TTL on their 550ex's is quite nice, although I could just as easily buy a pair of cheap strobes for the price of one 550. I do find their E-TTL annoying whenever I try to recompose an image after focussing. As mentioned earlier, you will have to lock focus then pre-meter with the flash before you recompose your image.

 

Other than that, I found the range and price of lenses available from Canon to be much more attractive. All my friends also have Canon systems, so it makes it much easier to borrow a 550, or EOS-1v when I need to :)