tom_thumbnail

When using Liquify Bloat, under tool options, what does Brush Density, Pressure, and Rate do?

"Try using a tripod (the CZJ lens is heavy and hard to hand-hold steadily)"

 

I was thinking about getting one of these to use with a Canon EOS but I want it mainly for handheld use. Would that consideration make this lens not a good choice?

Quote: Andrew Hall

I believe the M39 to M42 adapter is very rare. Why not get the "real thing" instead: http://www.praktica-users.com/lens/mlenses/czjson2.8_180.html

 

==============

 

While the M39/42 adapter might not be rare, I can't seem to find any CZ Sonnar 180/2.8s in a M42 mount. I can find quite a few of them in Pentagon 6 medium format mounts, but M42 mount would be nicer.

David M wrote: Don't expect your experiences to match any one elses as the performance of any lens varies greatly from sample to sample. This has been proven in innumerable lens tests.

 

---------------------

 

Would anyone happen to be able to provide a pointer to any of those tests?

How would the 180 work out being handheld on a 1.6 crop body (Canon EOS with adapter?) Is this 180 what they call the "Zebra?"

I think the faster the lens, the more prone to vignetting it is. I think that's why HN-6, the hood recommended for the 50/1.2, is wider at the front than the HN-5 which is recommended for the 50/1.4. The HN-6 is a little deeper though also.

Hi, I just got one on Fleabay also. It looks the same as yours. Mine is not SMC or Super Multi Coated.

 

I'd like to get a tripod ring also. Did you find one?

I'd go with choice #5:

a. Sigma 10-20: Landscape/architecture, whatever--and you like it. b. 50/1.4 Museums and all non-flash indoors. 50/1.8 OK if you prefer to sacrifice a few opportunities to save weight.

c. 50-150 Telephoto has got to be useful somewhere, including small DOF shots.

d. 35/2 optional--to fill gap between 20 and 50.

It sounds like calibration is just as important as the monitor. I'll look into getting that. In the meantime, I found a cheap used CRT on craigslist that will hold me over and keep me up for now. I even saw a large EIZO CRT, model FZ-something (couldn't make it out from the picture, I inquired), for sale for $50, but I think it may be a couple hour drive away. Does anyone think that's worth going out of my way to get?

I could probably get by OK with the Samsung 215 .270 dot pitch. That falls in between the .250 I have now on my Dell 2001 and the .282 of the usual 22"ers.

 

After studying this a little more I see most of the 22" use a TN 6 bit panel and that is why they have such attractive prices. I have come to see it would behove me to move up a step.

 

I see the gretagmacbeth eye-one software costs $249. Is it very important to use that or could the money be just as well or better spent towards a better monitor?

 

Doesn't Samsung have some kind of calibrating software that comes with it? Or is that not adequate?

The Lacie 526 at over $2000 is not really what I had in mind. I could probably stretch my budget to the $600 vicinity if I saw a compelling advantage in a monitor in that price range, but that's about all I can justify. The NEC 2690 at $1600 is out of my league too.

The 21" Samsung 215TW has a dot pitch of .270. It is really easier for me to read text with the .282 22"ers.

 

I also see this display sells for $490 whereas most of the 22"s I say at NewEgg cost from $230 to $340. Why does the Samsung cost more? I see it has speakers. I don't really need them. I see it has television video imputs S, component and composite. I didn't really think I needed them, but I suppose it could be useful for watching TV sometime maybe.

I have a 19" CRT that's about to bite the dust and needs replacing. I see

there is a whole new breed of 22" widescreen LCD's out there and NewEgg has a

bunch of them. I think I'll like this size because the resolution is only

1600 x 1050 with a dot pitch around .282". My old eyes don't like higher

resolution screens like my 20.1" Dell 2001 LCD at 1600x1200 and .25 dot pitch

because the letters are too small.

 

Can anyone comment on which of these 22" LCDs would be particularly good for

Digital Darkroom use?

 

http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=20&name=LCD-Monitors

 

(I wasn't able to provide a working link specifically to the 22" monitors.

From the linked page, on the menu on the left, click on "+More" under "Screen

Size" and select 22".)

How would the 35 f/1.4 *Non*- AI Lens fare in this comparison? Has anyone ever had one of them?

Would all the lenses mentioned above work on a digital Canon EOS APC (1.6 crop) sensor?

What is the rebate Bob mentioned above? I plan on buying this lens.

In NYC,

 

Who are your favorite photography instructors?

 

What are the best seminars you've attended?

 

The best college classes in photography you've taken?

Is Olden still open?