For the camera buffs.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:20:51 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:30:14 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:01:57 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Konica - Minolta quitting camera business.
http://www.theregister.com/2006/01/1...ts_camera_biz/

interesting. with olympus getting out of the low end digital business
- point and shoot - and concentrating on the high end - dslr -, nikon
stops producing film cameras and canon thinking likewise, its going to
be an interesting year in the camera area.

PC Magazine recently had a review of the Olympus Evolt E-500, in case
you're interested.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1897608,00.asp

just another nikon geek bashing olympus.

My complaint with Olympus is the warranty coverage. Bad Switch, 1 month out
of warrantee I sent in. Flaky switch. They would repair for $10 less than
a new camera and give a warranty of 3 months vs. 1 year on a new one.

For the camera buffs.
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
The National Geo photog I occasionally hire uses Nikons with polaroid
backs for setups, and 35 mm and 2-1/4 for money shots. Two of the three
Black Star photogs I hire use kodachrome almost exclusively. There are
reasons why the best shots are still taken with kodachrome or fujichrome
for magazine use.

There's a blast from the past. I know nothing about photography but back
as a teenager I bought a halfway decent camera to try to learn. I
remember trying kodachrome film for slides and was immediately impressed
with the rich, almost artificial colors.

Eisboch


The problem with digital "photos" is that it is hard for a graphics artist
to see precisely what the picture really has, because the monitors
available today won't resolve them. That's not the case with a 'chrome and
a loupe.

Friend that does photography for most of the Silicon Valley annual reports.
Has not used film is at least 3 years. But almost all his digital cameras
all use at least 100+ mbyte per shot. All the commercial stuff cameras
connect to a PC.

For the camera buffs.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:59:25 -0600, "Dan J.S." wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:01:57 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Konica - Minolta quitting camera business.
http://www.theregister.com/2006/01/1...ts_camera_biz/

interesting. with olympus getting out of the low end digital business
- point and shoot - and concentrating on the high end - dslr -, nikon
stops producing film cameras and canon thinking likewise, its going to
be an interesting year in the camera area.

Who uses film cameras any more?

i do.

In the 1980's I was a supplier to the Konica film processing centers. Was
interesting to see how much film they processed a day. Those small kiosk's
in parking lots where you dropped off your film were picked up and sent to
the "factory". Huge piles of bags of film, processed each day and night. I
guess with the immense decrease in film usage, time to exit. Kodak almost
went toes up, because they misjudged the digital market, and have recovered
extremely well. Overall, tere has to be a decrease in photo paper usage per
person. You now only print the pictures you like, not the 36 on the roll
and hope some are what you wanted. Wife reviews the pics on the digital and
will retake what whe does not like, and erase the bad ones.

For the camera buffs.
 

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:32:19 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
snip
i dont know this for a fact, but one of my best friends is a rather
high end photographer who does fashion and hes plugged into the whole
digital thing with nikon. hes told me a couple of times that nikon is
working on something that will make film cameras totally and
completely, and finally, obsolete.

Even on a shooting mission in the middle of Greenland or the forests
of Belize?

/Martin

For the camera buffs.
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..

The National Geo photog I occasionally hire uses Nikons with polaroid
backs for setups, and 35 mm and 2-1/4 for money shots. Two of the three
Black Star photogs I hire use kodachrome almost exclusively. There are
reasons why the best shots are still taken with kodachrome or fujichrome
for magazine use.


There's a blast from the past. I know nothing about photography but back
as a teenager I bought a halfway decent camera to try to learn. I
remember trying kodachrome film for slides and was immediately impressed
with the rich, almost artificial colors.

Eisboch
Yeah. For crisp daylight outdoor shots...ASA 25 was the way to go.
For all else it was ASA 64.

Now that I am thinking about it, it wasn't "Kodachrome" that I was so
impressed with. I think Kodachrome was pretty much the standard film, in
different ASAs, wasn't it?
The film I was thinking about was "Ektachrome". It seemed to be much more
vibrant, colorwise. I still have boxes of slides that I took, back when I
was trying this stuff. One still cracks me up - I was laying prone on the
ground taking a close up shot of a couple of geese when one of them lowered
it's head and charged me. I couldn't get out of the way fast enough and all
you see in the slide is a giant beak about to devour the camera.

Eisboch

For the camera buffs.
 

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:32:19 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:35:09 GMT, Fred Dehl
wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in
m:

There are
reasons why the best shots are still taken with kodachrome or fujichrome
for magazine use.

Kodachrome and Fujichrome are very different beasts. Fuji films use the
E-6 process (E for Ektachrome). Kodachrome uses K-14. Here's a brief
description of K-14:

The key to the Kodachrome's archival stability is that the color dyes
(unlike Ektachrome and other E-6 Process films) are not placed in the film
emulsion during manufacturing. Kodachrome is basically a black-and-white
film with three light sensitive layers, each of which is "filtered" to
record magenta, cyan, or yellow "light". During film processing, the
correct color dyes are introduced into the respective layers to produce
the full-color positive image. This is a much more complicated operation
(the original K-11 Process required 28 different steps) than processing
color films in which color dyes are already within each of the emulsion
layers. But, the Kodachrome approach provides far greater color stability.

E-6 can be processed in a half-hour, but K-14 slides are said to have a
life expectancy of 200 years. Plus, nothing - let me repeat: NOTHING -
compares to a KM (Kodachrome 25) image.

its only a matter of time before km gets the boot like other films.
with some of the new light sensors and newer/faster memory cards, plus
the onboard memory improvements it won't be long before film is
totally and irrevocably fini.

i dont know this for a fact, but one of my best friends is a rather
high end photographer who does fashion and hes plugged into the whole
digital thing with nikon. hes told me a couple of times that nikon is
working on something that will make film cameras totally and
completely, and finally, obsolete.

Pssst. It's a secret. Tell no one. Nikon's already done it.









It's called the D200. With this beautiful lens:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70200vr.htm

And the 28-70mm of course.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

For the camera buffs.
 

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:09:03 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:32:19 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:35:09 GMT, Fred Dehl
wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in
:

There are
reasons why the best shots are still taken with kodachrome or fujichrome
for magazine use.
Kodachrome and Fujichrome are very different beasts. Fuji films use the
E-6 process (E for Ektachrome). Kodachrome uses K-14. Here's a brief
description of K-14:

The key to the Kodachrome's archival stability is that the color dyes
(unlike Ektachrome and other E-6 Process films) are not placed in the film
emulsion during manufacturing. Kodachrome is basically a black-and-white
film with three light sensitive layers, each of which is "filtered" to
record magenta, cyan, or yellow "light". During film processing, the
correct color dyes are introduced into the respective layers to produce
the full-color positive image. This is a much more complicated operation
(the original K-11 Process required 28 different steps) than processing
color films in which color dyes are already within each of the emulsion
layers. But, the Kodachrome approach provides far greater color stability.

E-6 can be processed in a half-hour, but K-14 slides are said to have a
life expectancy of 200 years. Plus, nothing - let me repeat: NOTHING -
compares to a KM (Kodachrome 25) image.
its only a matter of time before km gets the boot like other films.
with some of the new light sensors and newer/faster memory cards, plus
the onboard memory improvements it won't be long before film is
totally and irrevocably fini.

i dont know this for a fact, but one of my best friends is a rather
high end photographer who does fashion and hes plugged into the whole
digital thing with nikon. hes told me a couple of times that nikon is
working on something that will make film cameras totally and
completely, and finally, obsolete.

Pssst. It's a secret. Tell no one. Nikon's already done it.









It's called the D200. With this beautiful lens:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70200vr.htm

And the 28-70mm of course.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******


Except for the fact that it has the same damned sensor-lens problem as
the D70.

What problem are you having, Harry?
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

For the camera buffs.
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
om...


The National Geo photog I occasionally hire uses Nikons with polaroid
backs for setups, and 35 mm and 2-1/4 for money shots. Two of the three
Black Star photogs I hire use kodachrome almost exclusively. There are
reasons why the best shots are still taken with kodachrome or fujichrome
for magazine use.


There's a blast from the past. I know nothing about photography but back
as a teenager I bought a halfway decent camera to try to learn. I
remember trying kodachrome film for slides and was immediately impressed
with the rich, almost artificial colors.

Eisboch

Yeah. For crisp daylight outdoor shots...ASA 25 was the way to go.
For all else it was ASA 64.


Now that I am thinking about it, it wasn't "Kodachrome" that I was so
impressed with. I think Kodachrome was pretty much the standard film, in
different ASAs, wasn't it?
The film I was thinking about was "Ektachrome". It seemed to be much more
vibrant, colorwise. I still have boxes of slides that I took, back when I
was trying this stuff. One still cracks me up - I was laying prone on the
ground taking a close up shot of a couple of geese when one of them lowered
it's head and charged me. I couldn't get out of the way fast enough and all
you see in the slide is a giant beak about to devour the camera.

Eisboch


I believe Ektachrome was the one you could develop at home...or at least
in local processing labs.
Kodachrome had to be sent to a central plant in Toronto.

For the camera buffs.
 

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:29:16 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:09:03 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:32:19 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:35:09 GMT, Fred Dehl
wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in
:

There are
reasons why the best shots are still taken with kodachrome or fujichrome
for magazine use.
Kodachrome and Fujichrome are very different beasts. Fuji films use the
E-6 process (E for Ektachrome). Kodachrome uses K-14. Here's a brief
description of K-14:

The key to the Kodachrome's archival stability is that the color dyes
(unlike Ektachrome and other E-6 Process films) are not placed in the film
emulsion during manufacturing. Kodachrome is basically a black-and-white
film with three light sensitive layers, each of which is "filtered" to
record magenta, cyan, or yellow "light". During film processing, the
correct color dyes are introduced into the respective layers to produce
the full-color positive image. This is a much more complicated operation
(the original K-11 Process required 28 different steps) than processing
color films in which color dyes are already within each of the emulsion
layers. But, the Kodachrome approach provides far greater color stability.

E-6 can be processed in a half-hour, but K-14 slides are said to have a
life expectancy of 200 years. Plus, nothing - let me repeat: NOTHING -
compares to a KM (Kodachrome 25) image.
its only a matter of time before km gets the boot like other films.
with some of the new light sensors and newer/faster memory cards, plus
the onboard memory improvements it won't be long before film is
totally and irrevocably fini.

i dont know this for a fact, but one of my best friends is a rather
high end photographer who does fashion and hes plugged into the whole
digital thing with nikon. hes told me a couple of times that nikon is
working on something that will make film cameras totally and
completely, and finally, obsolete.
Pssst. It's a secret. Tell no one. Nikon's already done it.









It's called the D200. With this beautiful lens:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70200vr.htm

And the 28-70mm of course.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

Except for the fact that it has the same damned sensor-lens problem as
the D70.

What problem are you having, Harry?
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******


It doesn't have a full-frame CMOS sensor. If it did, I would have bought
one last week.

You really need that, huh? Personally, I don't consider it a problem.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

For the camera buffs.
 

Now that I am thinking about it, it wasn't "Kodachrome" that I was so
impressed with. I think Kodachrome was pretty much the standard film, in
different ASAs, wasn't it?
The film I was thinking about was "Ektachrome". It seemed to be much more
vibrant, colorwise. I still have boxes of slides that I took, back when I
was trying this stuff. One still cracks me up - I was laying prone on the
ground taking a close up shot of a couple of geese when one of them
lowered it's head and charged me. I couldn't get out of the way fast
enough and all you see in the slide is a giant beak about to devour the
camera.


Kodachrome = prints (negatives)
Ektachrome = transparencies (slides)

Kodachrome favored the reds and yellows and Ektachrome favored the greens
and blues.