zaptrax

The odometer on my 1Ds just clicked over and restarted. Seems odd to

me but it just started recounting from zero. The file numbers are

something like: 94AVxxxx. When it got to 94AV9999 it started over

again at 94AV0000. I was hoping the camera would increment up the

94AV part to something like 95AVxxxx or 94AWxxxx but I guess that is

just too logical for Canon. Is there some way to do this or am I

just stuck with duplicate numbers?

I'm about to buy a used Dynalite lighting system (one or two packs

and three or four heads). I've decided on the newer "M" series but

don't really understand the difference between the varioius models

(i.e, M1000, M1000e, M1000x, M1000xr, etc.). Visting the Dynalite

website I can find info on the current models but there isn't any

information on discontinued models.

 

Anyone have any suggestions about where I can get info/specs on older

Dynalite models?

Thanks

Canon has never been known to make great software and Remote Capture

apprears to be no exception. One especially frustrating thing is how

when you choose to have the files written to both the card in the

camera and your tethered PC, the files to the CF card have different

file names than those written to the camera. I tried to find out how

to get these numbers to be consistent but neither the help screens

nor the hard-copy of the software manual offer any useful advice.

 

Has anyone figured out how to solve this problem?

If I can get the Lacie for $700 +$425 for the calibration sensor I'm in for $1125. The Sony Artisan is $1700. Is there anything that the Sony Artisan has to justify the extra $575?

Looks like it's time for a new monitor to replace my 21" Sony 500PS.

I am considering the Lacie 22" Electron Blue 4 ($725), the 21" Sony

Artisan ($1700) and the Viewsonic 22" P225fb ($625).

 

The Sony comes with a calibration sensor but it is more than twice

the price of the Lacie and Viewsonic. I will mainly use the monitor

for Photoshop work on DSLR images for stock. Any opinions?

 

Thanks

Even shooting a flat target didn't produce better results. This test was done with a 24-70mm L f/2.8 lens wide open at 70mm.<div></div>

As I said in the orginal post, this was a crop from the full test chart (see new image posted of the full frame.) Yes, I used the center focus point. Yes, I let the camera "do its thing". A few of the suggestions seem a bit silly. This is a camera used to photograph people, animals, landscapes not a copy stand camera. If the only valid test is shooting a newspaper (which I did and the camera's AF failed), then it has a worthless autofocus system. I did the same test with my EOS-3 and 17 out of 18 test shots were perfectly focused on the target.

 

So, I guess it's back to Canon.<div></div>

Canon has now had my EOS 10D body in their shop three times and the

camera still cannot accurately focus on the test target. As you can

see from the image below (a corp form the orginal), the camera back-

focuses.

 

Any suggestions about what I should do now to get Canon to fix it or

replace it?

 

Test done with the updated AF target, camera locked down on tripod,

center focus point, one shot, JPEG large. The image posted is from

an 85mm f/1.8 lens. I aslo tested the camera and had similar results

with 17-40mm L f/4.0, 24-70mm L f/2.8, 70-200mm L f/4.0. 50mm f/1.4,

50mm f/2.5 Macro, and 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS.)<div></div>

This is the dawning of the age of digital. The ludites may be crying but the reality is hard to deny. Digital SLRs produce better images in most situations than a 645 camera. The work flow of digital is superior and the variable costs are lower. On one 3 week job I was able to pay for the $2500 cost of a new digital camera with what I saved on film and processing.

 

So, what did I do? I sold all my medium format gear on eBay last October. I think a lot of other photographers are doing the same thing. And, there are fewer buyers as more and more people see the advantages of digital.

 

It is inevitable that medium format prices will continue to drop.

Don't know if anyone ever answered your question. I just bought a Canon Elura 20MC and love it. I paid $1000 after rebate.

The Polaroid back for the Kowa Super 66 takes the same Polaroid film as every other medium format camera.

Los Angeles, Clear, Sunny, 12 noon, July 13, 2001

 

Sekonic L-608 @ ISO 100 - Incident Reading = 1/125 sec @ f/16.5

 

Los Angeles is not that different!

 

I should point out that I have not been able to find the medium format setting on my meter. (That's a joke.)

 

I shoot Velvia @ ISO 40 (I prefer my chrome dark so I've not tried shooting it at ISO 25)and got some nice pictures of Scotland including this one of Edinburgh (changed to grayscale in Photoshop) - http://www.photo.net/photo/256883 and this one outside of Oban - http://www.photo.net/photo/257683

Has anyone tried to replace the focusing screen in the Kowa Super 66

(or earlier models)? My Kowa has the Clear Spot II focusing screen.

 

I'm thinking of getting a brighter screen like one from Bill Maxwell

but wanted to know what others have experieced in terms of increased

brightness, ease of focusing, ease of installation, and cost.

I am unable to mount the 85mm Kowa lens onto the Kowa Super 66 body.

The two pins on the back of the lens will not turn all the way to the

position aligned with the red dots where they need to be in order to

mount on the camera body. The two pins turn freely unil they are

just short of the red dots and then they stop. The shutter blades

are closed--so I'm guessing that in order to get the lens on the

camera the shutter will have to be fired/released.

 

Anyone know how to fix this problem?

Shift lenses, Fuji GX680 III, or the other solution might be to take the picture with your regular lens, scan the film, and change perspective in PhotoShop. I've used this technique and it works quite well.

As my mother once said: If you don't know, look it up in a book. So, let me clear something up on this old thread because people still read these forums. Below is a direct quote from Ansel Adams found in Chapter 4 - The Zone System in his book "The Negative"

 

"...we define a one-stop exposure change as a change of one zone on the exposure scale, and the resulting gray in the print is considered one value higher or lower on the print scale."

 

So, ONE STOP EQUALS ONE ZONE!!!

My 2 cents worth on this old thread.

 

Using a pola back on an RZ67 II the test prints seem like a decent way to check general lighting, depth of field, composition, etc. But, it seems to me, that the polaroid is a poor way to check sharpness (or color). They lack the detail needed to do this (B&W seem sharper than the color). I just reviewed my test prints and the matching transparencies. The transparencies are sharp, very sharp. I can see every strand of the model's hair and every eyelash. When I look at the polaroid test prints, well, they aren't fuzzy but if I got back transparencies that looked as soft as the test prints I'd be pretty pissed.

 

Perhaps it's problems with the back I'm using. That said, I'd say looking through the viewfinder is a thousand times better for judging sharpness/focus.

 

I guess I'd like to know if any of the defenders of the sharpness of Polaroid test prints actually use them to check sharpness.

My guess is that it is a Chiness Seagul or Lubitel. You could go that route, or you could try to a single lens reflex for the same money. You could go to eBay and buy a Kiev 60 or a Pentacon 6 TL. They may not have the quality of the Japanese cameras but they aren't too bad and allow you many options for expansion--lots of lenses, finders, extension tubes, bellows, etc. If you're new to eBay be sure to check the feedback of the seller. Some have sold hundereds of items and have never had a complaint. Good luck, Zap Trax