From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28915 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 08:13:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 08:13:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 00:13:00 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09957 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:12:59 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1a3.ca3b8df (3980) for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 03:11:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b@aol.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 03:11:07 EST Subject: [OM] Lens Cleaning To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Hudson wrote: >What about trichloroethylene used in very small amounts in well ventilated surroundings? Be sure not to breathe it, or trichoroethane, either. It can put you DOWN, unconscious. And don't get it on your skin -- potential liver and nervous system damage. No proven carcinogenic affects, but that isn't necessarily a clean bill of health. As for lens cleaning, I'd opt for something a lot less potentially dangerous, like lens cleaning fluid, Windex (expensive water, ammonia, and pretty blue dye), isopropyl alcohol, or just plain water. Trichloroethylene/trichloroethane is a great cleaning/degreasing chemical, otherwise. Just... scary. As for acetone, I used to wash my hands with it almost daily in the boatyard. Most folks working in fiberglass use it by the gallon for cleaning up resin, tools, hands. (finger)Nail techs all over the world use it by the gallon, daily, too. Fingernail polish is nothing more than acetone with a perfume added. One of my favorite chemicals for cleaning, but I don't think I'd opt for it as a lens cleaner, either. Heck, I've even washed my hands in gasoline, too... and there ARE carcinogens in gasoline (benzine, for one). Used to love the smell of it. My dad used gas as a cheap shotgun cleaner. He also thought DDT, malathion, guthion, etc. were the greatest chemicals ever invented (and mixed all kinds of pesticides together with abandon). | :O I've used carbon tet and naptha without protection, too, before I learned better. Orchard spray planes (old Boeing Stearman bi wings) used to fly right over the house on approach to the local airstrip, dripping pesticides on my little upturned sunburned face. I used gallons of model airplane "Dope" as a kid. I should be dead by now, for these, any many other reasons (like beer & motorcycles -- at the same time -- youth, ya know). So anymore, I try to minimize any and all chemical exposures. RE: lens cleaning, I'm like some (hopefully most) others on the list. I clean optics (lenses, spotting scopes, binoculars, etc.) as little as is absolutely necessary, and then as gently as possible. Gentle cleaning agent, gentle motions. An old cotton t-shirt works great for me. Emphasis on old. Bill, Dove bars are O.K., unless you're high cholestrol, like me, darn it. Rich (who goes for a liver function test in a couple weeks for Lipitor cholestrol control -- how will they know if any liver impairment is the result of Lipitor or 35 - 40 years of other chemical exposures?) --part1_1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Hudson wrote:

>What about trichloroethylene used in very small amounts in well ventilated
surroundings?

Be sure not to breathe it, or trichoroethane, either.  It can put you DOWN, unconscious.  And don't get it on your skin -- potential liver and nervous system damage.  No proven carcinogenic affects, but that isn't necessarily a clean bill of health.  As for lens cleaning, I'd opt for something a lot less potentially dangerous, like lens cleaning fluid, Windex (expensive water, ammonia, and pretty blue dye), isopropyl alcohol, or just plain water.  Trichloroethylene/trichloroethane is a great cleaning/degreasing chemical, otherwise.  Just... scary.

As for acetone, I used to wash my hands with it almost daily in the boatyard.  Most folks working in fiberglass use it by the gallon for cleaning up resin, tools, hands.   (finger)Nail techs all over the world use it by the gallon, daily, too.  Fingernail polish is nothing more than acetone with a perfume added.  One of my favorite chemicals for cleaning, but I don't think I'd opt for it as a lens cleaner, either.

Heck, I've even washed my hands in gasoline, too... and there ARE carcinogens in gasoline (benzine, for one).  Used to love the smell of it.  My dad used gas as a cheap shotgun cleaner.  He also thought DDT, malathion, guthion, etc. were the greatest chemicals ever invented (and mixed all kinds of pesticides together with abandon). | :O

I've used carbon tet and naptha without protection, too, before I learned better.  Orchard spray planes (old Boeing Stearman bi wings) used to fly right over the house on approach to the local airstrip, dripping pesticides on my little upturned sunburned face.  I used gallons of model airplane "Dope" as a kid.  I should be dead by now, for these, any many other reasons (like beer & motorcycles -- at the same time -- youth, ya know).  So anymore, I try to minimize any and all chemical exposures.

RE: lens cleaning, I'm like some (hopefully most) others on the list.  I clean optics (lenses, spotting scopes, binoculars, etc.) as little as is absolutely necessary, and then as gently as possible.  Gentle cleaning agent, gentle motions.  An old cotton t-shirt works great for me.  Emphasis on old.

Bill, Dove bars are O.K., unless you're high cholestrol, like me, darn it.

Rich (who goes for a liver function test in a couple weeks for Lipitor cholestrol control  -- how will they know if any liver impairment is the result of Lipitor or 35 - 40 years of other chemical exposures?)
 --part1_1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29165 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 08:14:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 08:14:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 00:14:01 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09961 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:14:00 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1c2.25060f3 (3980) for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 03:12:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 03:12:08 EST Subject: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit William wrote: snip >Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent. Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild detergent, works best for any given project. Saliva, however, contains bacteria. I sure wouldn't be using saliva on ANY optics. Fogging a lens with the breath is another matter. That's just water vapor. Saliva on contact lenses? NOOO!!! Ask your optician. NOT GOOD! Sterile saline solution ONLY! Susan, help us out here! Saliva doesn't belong in cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as well as anything, until you can get to soap & water and/or proper medical attention... geez... maybe we should hold a first aid course here! Never "spit" on a wound. You guys are scarin' me now. Rich --part1_1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit William wrote:

snip
>Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent.

Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild detergent, works best for any given project.  Saliva, however, contains bacteria.  I sure wouldn't be using saliva on ANY optics.  Fogging a lens with the breath is another matter.  That's just water vapor.

Saliva on contact lenses?  NOOO!!!  Ask your optician.  NOT GOOD!  Sterile saline solution ONLY!  Susan, help us out here!  Saliva doesn't belong in cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as well as anything, until you can get to soap & water and/or proper medical attention... geez... maybe we should hold a first aid course here!  Never "spit" on a wound.

You guys are scarin' me now.

Rich
 --part1_1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29443 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 08:15:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 08:15:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 00:15:28 2002 -0800 Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.122]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09967 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:15:27 -0800 Received: from pool0083.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.210.83] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IPGA-00065r-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 00:15:26 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DE96E2D.3070506@earthlink.net> References: <3DE4937E.4040701@bristol.ac.uk> <3DE56781.C544721E@optonline.net> <008901c297f1$f384e2c0$5ce27ad1@hppav> <3DE852D2.AFE8B0F4@optonline.net> <3DE96E2D.3070506@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:15:21 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] off topic .. need advice on Netscape 6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Just my $.02 USD - > >I downloaded Mozilla about two months ago, after reading a post >on-list about it. I love it. It transferred all my Netscape files >automatically, I can read newsgroups, and the email is seamless. >What's even better is that encrypted sites like my bank's webpage >work with Mozilla, and it doesn't crash like Netscape does. I'm >running it on MAC OS 9.0.2 and love it - I plan to put it on my >Windoze box as well. >- Andrea I had the exact opposite experience. I have never run a version of Mozilla up to the current one that did not bring down my whole computer as it crashed. Netscape 7 is working fine so far. 3 days and not a crash. I just wish it was more compatible with URL Manager Pro and as configurable as iCab which, though it had problems with some page layouts, could zap the pop up ads. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29716 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 08:17:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 08:17:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 00:17:17 2002 -0800 Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.122]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09978 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:17:17 -0800 Received: from pool0083.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.210.83] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IPHv-00077B-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 00:17:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:17:11 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] off topic .. need advice on Netscape 6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Mozilla really is a nice option. I'm currently running Netscape 7 on >my Mac, which uses a lot of Mozilla code. I've had nothing but good >experiences with it so far, though I'm running it under OS-X and not >an earlier Mac OS. > >-Rob I am running OS9.1 and 7 is working great unlike the new version of Mozilla which I just dumped because of its instability. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30141 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 08:42:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 08:42:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 00:42:00 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10011 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:41:59 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.49] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id ABC0343009A; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 02:43:44 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 00:40:11 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/1/2002 12:12:08 AM, Doggre@aol.com wrote: > should hold a first aid course here! Never "spit" on a wound. > > You guys are scarin' me now. > > Rich gee, rich, you should hang out with the fellas that think urine (your own, so it's antiseptic; so they claim, i havent tried it nor wish to) can be used to neutralize venom/stings in the field, since most acidic substances do, if absolutely nothing else is availble personally, i dont go out hiking w/o a good first aid kit, but some ppl out there are wacko with home brew "remedies" ;) /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30653 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 09:21:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 09:21:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 01:21:02 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10028 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 01:21:01 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.195]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021201092008.TPKL11260.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 04:20:08 -0500 Message-ID: <006b01c2991a$dc467680$c32a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Lens Cleaning Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 04:20:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Of the ingredients mentioned, I think the most toxic one is the abandon. Just my theory. Ducking, Lama From: Doggre@aol.com My dad used gas as a cheap shotgun cleaner. He also thought DDT, malathion, guthion, etc. were the greatest chemicals ever invented (and mixed all kinds of pesticides together with abandon). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30934 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 09:27:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 09:27:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 01:27:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10036 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 01:27:15 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.195]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021201092622.TQJW11260.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 04:26:22 -0500 Message-ID: <00b201c2991b$bb16de40$c32a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 04:26:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Gees, in a pinch, I always spit on a wound unless I have some mop water, or blood samples or fecal material handy..... ----- Original Message ----- Rich wrote: Saliva on contact lenses? NOOO!!! Ask your optician. NOT GOOD! Sterile saline solution ONLY! Susan, help us out here! Saliva doesn't belong in cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as well as anything, until you can get to soap & water and/or proper medical attention... geez... maybe we should hold a first aid course here! Never "spit" on a wound. You guys are scarin' me now. Rich < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32072 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 11:06:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 11:06:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 03:06:40 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.hccnet.nl (smtp.hccnet.nl [62.251.0.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10086 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 03:06:38 -0800 Received: from fsc.ujwf24.nl by smtp.hccnet.nl via fia50-1.dsl.hccnet.nl [62.251.1.50] with SMTP id MAA23830 (8.8.8/1.13); Sun, 1 Dec 2002 12:02:46 +0100 (MET) From: Frank van Lindert To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS: some small OM goodies Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 12:02:46 +0100 Message-ID: <90qjuu4h77l2t234a65ptf0fl9b7lc6ar8@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have a few of the smaller OM items for sale: 1. T-20 connector $ 42=20 2. Auto-connector 3 $ 19 3. Auto-connector 4 $ 22 4. Shoe 4 $ 22 5. Multiconnector $ 40 6. Manual Adapter 1 (OM10) $ 30 7. Eyecup 1 $ 17 All items are in excellent or better condition. The shoe4 has the usual hairline cracks... Shipping extra ($7 insured priority mail). Payment by wire transfer or in cash; PayPal welcome when buyer pays 4% extra towards PayPal and currency conversion charges. When interested please reply OFF LINE to Frank.van@Lindert.com =46rank van Lindert Utrecht NL=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32636 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 11:55:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 11:55:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 03:55:32 2002 -0800 Received: from colossus.systems.pipex.net (colossus.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10107 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 03:55:31 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-241-160.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.241.160]) by colossus.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id BEE67160008C3 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:55:23 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] [OT] Dove Bars ? Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:55:23 -0000 Message-ID: <000a01c29930$87e4e480$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bill, Dove bars are O.K., unless you're high cholestrol, like me, darn it. OK, now I'm getting confused !! On this side of the pond, a Dove Bar is a bar of SOAP !! Is it some kind of chocolate bar (candy bar ?) in the States ? Otherwise, what are you doing eating soap ....... Jon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6081 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 12:57:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 12:57:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 04:57:47 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts6.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA10131 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 04:57:45 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.135.50]) by simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021201125327.HLLT3900.simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 07:53:27 -0500 Message-ID: <003001c29938$ac3ea480$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <1a3.ca3b8df.2b1b1e1b@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Lens Cleaning/getting OT Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 08:53:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Most folks working in fiberglass use it by the gallon for cleaning up resin, > tools, hands. I built two cedar strip canoes, which had to be fiberglassed. That was all the fiberglass work I need for one lifetime. > Heck, I've even washed my hands in gasoline, too... and there ARE carcinogens > in gasoline (benzine, for one). Used to love the smell of it Foolishly did that in the past too, but always hated the smell if it. >He also thought DDT, malathion, guthion, > etc. were the greatest chemicals ever invented (and mixed all kinds of > pesticides together with abandon). | :O > > I've used carbon tet and naptha without protection, too, before I learned > better. Orchard spray planes (old Boeing Stearman bi wings) used to fly > right over the house on approach to the local airstrip, dripping pesticides > on my little upturned sunburned face I have done foolish things like flagging for the spray planes that used to spray our potato fields, and the pilot used to complain that my CB antennae on the house was too tall, wanted me to shorten it so he wouldn't have to raise so much going over my house. I have washed my hands in weed spray after cleaning the plugged spray nozzles on the ground sprayer. I always used a tractor that had no cab for the ground sprayer, and the wind would sometimes blow the stuff right over you. So did my father, who's been battling cancer for the last 14 years. Now I'd prefer organic potatoes, if I could find them. > Bill, Dove bars are O.K., unless you're high cholestrol, like me, darn it. Eat those, and you'll be blowing bubbles. :-) > > Rich (who goes for a liver function test in a couple weeks for Lipitor > cholestrol control -- how will they know if any liver impairment is the > result of Lipitor or 35 - 40 years of other chemical exposures?) I'm on Lipitor too, hate taking it, but its better than the one the doctor had me on a year ago, which really fouled up some muscle functions in my eyes. OM content: I have some pictures from way back of those spray planes, Ag Cat I think, in the potato fields. They are banned from spraying that way now, thankfully. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7736 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 16:23:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 16:23:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 08:23:35 2002 -0800 Received: from www-ma1.iocus.com (www-ma1.iocus.com [208.254.43.4]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10261 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 08:23:34 -0800 Received: (from www@localhost) by www-ma1.iocus.com (8.11.6/8.11.0) id gB1GNa001890; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:23:36 -0500 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:23:36 -0500 Message-Id: <200212011623.gB1GNa001890@www-ma1.iocus.com> X-Mailer: Iocus iMail X-Originating-IP: 24.54.37.31 From: mms@cameraleather.com To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="qQTo7RvZa44plq/liwO=SO3jvJK-mFnBomRe+)2wKs6JqH2fo2x)65ifXTKwalHI.40lf:" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --qQTo7RvZa44plq/liwO=SO3jvJK-mFnBomRe+)2wKs6JqH2fo2x)65ifXTKwalHI.40lf: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Printed on my quart can of "Zimmerman" brand Acetone: "Warning: Vapor harmful. May affect the brain or nervous system. This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer." Morgan .. --qQTo7RvZa44plq/liwO=SO3jvJK-mFnBomRe+)2wKs6JqH2fo2x)65ifXTKwalHI.40lf:-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8154 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 16:47:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 16:47:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 08:47:58 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10281 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 08:47:57 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh78.interisland.net [12.17.134.78]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB1GihJ10649 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 08:44:43 -0800 Message-ID: <3DEA3D44.199AB6C2@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 08:48:04 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: RE: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id IAA10281 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Acetone is a very strong carcinogen, I'd advise switching, Clint. > > Umm, no. Acetone (and other ketones) are made by the body. Some disea= ses > are diagnosed by finding the smell of acetone on the breath..... > Acetone still requires care. Using as a cleaner involves far higher concentrations than the body may produce. Skin contact and breathing of the vapors should be avoided. Also it should not be used with other cleaning products. It can combine to form hydrogen floride or ammonia for example. For info on the hazards of chemicals: http://msds.pdc.cornell.edu/msdssrch.asp Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8585 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 17:13:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 17:13:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 09:13:33 2002 -0800 Received: from out002.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA10295 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 09:13:32 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.178]) by out002.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021201170916.NEIW9109.out002.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:09:16 -0600 Message-ID: <002301c2995c$64a151d0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <000a01c29930$87e4e480$0800a8c0@reac.local> Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] Dove Bars ? Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 12:09:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out002.verizon.net from [141.157.96.178] at Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:09:16 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We also have Dove soap, but Dove Bars are a frozen confection. Heavy ice cream with a thick coating of crunchy chocolate on a wooden stick. Cholesterol laden, at least there is fiber in the stick... Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: [OM] [OT] Dove Bars ? > > > Bill, Dove bars are O.K., unless you're high cholestrol, like me, darn it. > > > > OK, now I'm getting confused !! On this side of the pond, a Dove Bar is a > bar of SOAP !! Is it some kind of chocolate bar (candy bar ?) in the States > ? > > Otherwise, what are you doing eating soap ....... > > Jon > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8954 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 17:26:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 17:26:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 09:26:06 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA10315 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 09:26:05 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([198.164.98.28]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021201172146.QUFJ2935.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 12:21:46 -0500 Message-ID: <000c01c2995e$296ed4a0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <3DE8F266.C4025E45@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Pacific Image PrimeFilm Film Scanner-opinions Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:21:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >I'm happy enough with an old HP PhotoSmart SCSI model. > >mike >Wayne, The old model PhotoSmart looks just like the S20 except it is >SCSI, a plus in my book. Maybe there are other differences but the specs >look the same. Basically 2400dpi. It was easy to set and has worked >flawlessly. Here are a couple links. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2075713084 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2075550829 >The second one looks like a pretty good deal. The Skuzzy card that >comes >with is ISA but if you have an older computer that's no problem or you >can buy a cheap PCI card and still have a cheap scanner. >Here are some raw slide scans. Minimal tweaking before the scan. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/CordilleraBlanca/ >mike Thanks Mike. Your scans look fine to me, much better than anything I could achieve from the flatbeds with 35mm adapter I tried. I also found this site where he reviews the S20, and compares it with HP's previous version which you have. http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/s20.html He did think there were some improvements, but as you said, was a little slower with USB than with the skuzy card. He also gives scans that compares it to a couple of the Nikon scanners, and some very interesting comments on this on his site. Most sellers of used units won't ship to Canada, and I see some selling new S20's on epay that want as much as $79 to ship to Canada. So I'll probably go for a new one from B&H, if I can't find a retailer on this side of the border. B&H has it at the same as the BIN's on the auction site, and I suspect at better shipping prices, and a lot more piece of mind. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9564 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 18:16:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 18:16:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 10:16:45 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10338 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 10:16:44 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021201180416.EJMO4292.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:04:16 -0500 Message-ID: <000801c29964$27ff0940$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <3DEA3D44.199AB6C2@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:04:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:04:15 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Sunday, 01 December, 2002 12:48 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > >Acetone is a very strong carcinogen, I'd advise switching, Clint. > > Umm, no. Acetone (and other ketones) are made by the body. Some diseases > are diagnosed by finding the smell of acetone on the breath..... > Acetone still requires care. Using as a cleaner involves far higher concentrations than the body may produce. Skin contact and breathing of the vapors should be avoided. Also it should not be used with other cleaning products. It can combine to form hydrogen floride or ammonia for example. And for heaven's sake do not spill the contents if there are any open flames or furnace pilot lights at or below the level at which the spill occurs. Acetone vapour is heavier than air and will form an invisible stream downhill. When it reaches the flame the vapour will ignite and race back to the source of the spill creating more fire. jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9814 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 18:17:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 18:17:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 10:17:08 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10342 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 10:17:07 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh78.interisland.net [12.17.134.78]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB1IDvJ13781 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 10:13:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3DEA522D.A31DA33E@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 10:17:17 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] World's first photo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA10342 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "One summer day in 1826, Joseph Nic=E9phore Ni=E9pce placed a metal plate inside a black box in a sunny window at Le Gras, his country estate in the south of France. After 8 hours, Ni=E9pce found that with his primitive camera, he=92d achieved a goal that he=92d been striving after = for years: He=92d produced a permanent image recorded onto a photosensitive medium. It was the first successful example of =93fixing permanently the image from Nature,=94 Ni=E9pce told members of the Royal Society when he traveled to England in 1827. However, when Ni=E9pce presented his invention, he wouldn=92t fully divulge his process, and the society faile= d to confirm his discovery. Today, it=92s known that Ni=E9pce coated his plate with an asphalt called bitumen of Judea, which hardened under long exposure to the sun=92s rays. He then washed the unhardened material from the plate with a mixture of oil of lavender and white petroleum, leaving the faint image of his courtyard in relief....." The photo: http://sciencenews.org/20021123/a2691_1943.jpg Quoted from article in Nov. 23 Science News: http://sciencenews.org/20021123/bob10.asp The photo will be on display in Austin, TX at the U of Texas Ransom Center beginning in March. Interesting article, check it out. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10300 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 18:53:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 18:53:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 10:53:31 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10358 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 10:53:30 -0800 Received: from modem-1397.rhino.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.137.101.117] helo=BrownFamily) by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18IZDa-0004Lw-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 18:53:27 +0000 Message-ID: <01ba01c2996a$e57e06a0$619b4c51@BrownFamily> From: "DGB" To: References: <3DEA522D.A31DA33E@interisland.net> Subject: [OM] More OM for sale Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:53:09 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01B5_01C2996A.E40C7540" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01B5_01C2996A.E40C7540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear list - as promised I have now put a further selection of equipment = up on ebay in aid of my house buying fund: Olympus Zuiko 24mm/f2.8 and hood - item number 1942606862 Olympus Zuiko 28mm/f2 - item number 1942607325 Olympus Zuiko 50mm/f1.2 - item number 1942610838 Olympus Zuiko 85mm/f2 - item number 1942611308 Olympus Auto Bellows - item number 1942637280 Olympus Slide Copier - item number 1942640718 Olympus Handy Copy Stand - item number 1942636394 Olympus Double Cable Release - item number 1942641496 Olympus Winder 2 - item number 1942617140 Olympus T20 Flash - item number 1942611736 Olympus M AC Control Box - item number 1942617554 Olympus 10M Relay Cord - item number 1942617896 My ebay user id is keswick@rmplc.co.uk. A full listing of what I will be selling can be seen at = http://www.keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk/olympussale.htm. Best wishes to you all, David Brown BTW I am in the UK but very happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and = sold many times throughout Europe, the US and Japan. My ebay rating is = +136 with no negatives or neutrals and I can accept PayPal. ------=_NextPart_000_01B5_01C2996A.E40C7540 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear list - as promised I have now = put a=20 further selection of equipment up on ebay in aid of my house buying=20 fund:
 

Olympus Zuiko 24mm/f2.8 and hood - item number = 1942606862
Olympus=20 Zuiko 28mm/f2 - item number 1942607325
Olympus Zuiko 50mm/f1.2 - item = number=20 1942610838
Olympus Zuiko 85mm/f2 - item number 1942611308
Olympus = Auto=20 Bellows - item number 1942637280
Olympus Slide Copier  - item = number=20 1942640718
Olympus Handy Copy Stand  - item number  =20 1942636394
Olympus Double Cable Release - item number = 1942641496
Olympus=20 Winder 2  - item number 1942617140
Olympus T20 Flash - item = number=20 1942611736
Olympus M AC Control Box - item number = 1942617554
Olympus 10M=20 Relay Cord - item number 1942617896

 

My ebay user id is keswick@rmplc.co.uk.
 
A full listing of = what I=20 will be selling can be seen at http:/= /www.keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk/olympussale.htm.
 
Best wishes to = you all,=20 David Brown
 
BTW I am in the = UK but very=20 happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and sold many = times throughout=20 Europe, the US and Japan. My ebay rating is +136 with no = negatives or=20 neutrals and I can accept=20 PayPal.
------=_NextPart_000_01B5_01C2996A.E40C7540-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10577 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 18:57:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 18:57:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 10:56:59 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10362 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 10:56:57 -0800 Received: from du209.206.onewest.net ([65.19.206.209] helo=James.srv.net) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18IZGu-0008KY-00 for ; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 11:56:53 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 12:01:04 -0700 Message-ID: <001001c2996c$0016b100$d1ce1341@srv.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Urine is a natural astringent. Cleopatra supposedly bathed in urine for a skin-care treatment. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca] On Behalf Of siddiq Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 1:40 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! 12/1/2002 12:12:08 AM, Doggre@aol.com wrote: > should hold a first aid course here! Never "spit" on a wound. > > You guys are scarin' me now. > > Rich gee, rich, you should hang out with the fellas that think urine (your own, so it's antiseptic; so they claim, i havent tried it nor wish to) can be used to neutralize venom/stings in the field, since most acidic substances do, if absolutely nothing else is availble personally, i dont go out hiking w/o a good first aid kit, but some ppl out there are wacko with home brew "remedies" ;) /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10953 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 19:13:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 19:13:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 11:13:46 2002 -0800 Received: from protactinium (protactinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10379 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:13:43 -0800 Received: from host213-122-58-5.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.58.5] helo=personalmyself) by protactinium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18IZUD-0003ss-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 19:10:37 +0000 Message-ID: <002e01c2996d$5be05a30$053a7ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: References: <200212011623.gB1GNa001890@www-ma1.iocus.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:10:47 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 4:23 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > > > Printed on my quart can of "Zimmerman" brand Acetone: > > "Warning: Vapor harmful. May affect the brain or nervous system. This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer." > > Morgan > > > > .. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11290 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 19:25:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 19:25:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 11:25:07 2002 -0800 Received: from lutetium (lutetium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.116]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10391 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:25:04 -0800 Received: from host213-122-58-5.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.58.5] helo=personalmyself) by lutetium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18IZf0-0007PP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 19:21:47 +0000 Message-ID: <003801c2996e$eb20c1c0$053a7ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: References: <200212011623.gB1GNa001890@www-ma1.iocus.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:21:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Morgan, From what I have seen the State of California has covered itself by finding that most things CAN cause cancer :-) My can of "Goof off" states Vapor harmful, harmful or fatal if swallowed....repeated and prolonged occupational overexposure to solvents associated with permanent brain and nervous system damage. It seems that All solvents need to be treated with great care......When silversmithing many years ago it was the norm to to remove pitch and acid resist from jobs in progress using benzine and bare hands. I would not do that now. Regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 4:23 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > Printed on my quart can of "Zimmerman" brand Acetone: > "Warning: Vapor harmful. May affect the brain or nervous system. This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer." > Morgan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11582 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 19:32:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 19:32:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 11:32:44 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10395 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:32:41 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with ESMTP id <2002120119313200100qoh6be>; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:31:32 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:31:28 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comment at bottom. At 5:30 AM +0000 12/1/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 10:04:01 -0400 >From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> >Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > >- ----- Original Message ----- >From: "Joe Gwinn" >To: >Sent: Saturday, 30 November, 2002 11:23 AM >Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > > > > At 4:58 AM +0000 11/30/02, olympus-digest wrote: > > >Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 18:28:01 -0500 > > >From: "John Hermanson" > > >Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning > > > > > >Acetone is a very strong carcinogen, I'd advise switching, Clint. > > > > Umm, no. Acetone (and other ketones) are made by the body. Some diseases >are diagnosed by finding the smell of acetone on the breath. > > > > Also, the solvent of nail polish and the chief ingredient of nail polish >remover, used daily by hundreds of millions of women, is acetone. There >haven't been too many reports of women dying of cancer of the fingers. > > > > The carcinogenic solvents are largely chorinated hydrocarbons, like the >now-banned carbon tetrachloride. Some dry cleaning solvents were also >banned. Liver cancer is the typical issue with chorinated solvents, just as >it is with alcoholism. > > > > Joe Gwinn > >What about trichlorethylene used in very small amounts in well ventilated >surroundings? Trichloroethylene (TCE) has in the last few years been reclassified as a class 2 carcinogen, which means that various exposure-reducing precautions must be taken when it is used. TCE has not been banned from industrial use, but at least in the US it may no longer be sold to the general public. The major exposure-causing use is in the vapor degreasing of metals, a process using many gallons of solvent in an open-top boiler-condenser rig. There are millions of such rigs, but liver cancer isn't all that common, even among workers exposed daily. Despite all the hysteria now surrounding the subject None of the common solvents, even those now known to be carcinogens, are dangerous enough to be a problem for incidental users. Something else will kill us first. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11924 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 19:46:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 19:46:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 11:45:59 2002 -0800 Received: from vs.bgnett.no (vs.bgnett.no [194.54.96.159]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10403 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:45:53 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3) id gB1JcHX02513 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:38:17 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) Received: from svein (oppringt-214.ppp.uib.no [129.177.138.214]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3av) with SMTP id gB1JcF902506 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:38:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) From: =?windows-1252?Q?Svein=20Skj=F8tskift?= To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 20:45:13 +0100 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Organization: ess Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) and body fluids MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 X-Virus-Scanned: by vs.bgnett.no Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca dear list: Acetone is NOT a human carcinogen, but it can have a lot of other harmful effects on the body. And it dissolves rubber products! http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/krubin/MSDS/ACETONE.html The human body produces a lot of nasty fluids, among others acetone and hydrochloric acid (in your stomach). Acetone is contained in the breath of a person with "ketoacidosis" a sign in poorly controlled diabetes. Saliva does not necessarily contain bacteria, nor does urine (it depends on your hygiene and state of health). Saliva contains an enzyme that disintegrates starch, so it can serve as a solvent for difficult spots. I wouldn't hesitate to use it on glass like a filter surface, but agree with Rich and his optician that you should avoid using it on contact lenses. I treat my zuiko glass as contact lenses! Urine contains urea (carbamide) that is a component in many skin care products (softens the skin). But bathing in it??? Too high a price for eternal beauty, if you ask me.... svein >> >Acetone is a very strong carcinogen, I'd advise switching, Clint. >> >> Umm, no. Acetone (and other ketones) are made by the body. Some diseases >> are diagnosed by finding the smell of acetone on the breath..... >> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12689 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 21:02:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 21:02:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 13:02:55 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10437 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:02:54 -0800 Received: from pool0903.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.137.138] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IbEQ-0000Rj-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 13:02:26 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:02:21 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Trichloroethylene (TCE) has in the last few years been reclassified >as a class 2 carcinogen, which means that various exposure-reducing >precautions must be taken when it is used. TCE has not been banned >from industrial use, but at least in the US it may no longer be sold >to the general public. The major exposure-causing use is in the >vapor degreasing of metals, a process using many gallons of solvent >in an open-top boiler-condenser rig. There are millions of such >rigs, but liver cancer isn't all that common, even among workers >exposed daily. Despite all the hysteria now surrounding the subject > >None of the common solvents, even those now known to be carcinogens, >are dangerous enough to be a problem for incidental users. >Something else will kill us first. > >Joe Gwinn How do you know this? Are you a health professional? I have known as many people to die from liver cancer as any other kind. Of course there are many known causes of liver cancer such as alcoholism and hepatitis infections. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13005 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 21:14:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 21:14:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 13:14:51 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10441 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:14:49 -0800 Received: from pool0903.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.137.138] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IbQN-0004lx-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 13:14:47 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DEA522D.A31DA33E@interisland.net> References: <3DEA522D.A31DA33E@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:14:43 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] World's first photo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >"One summer day in 1826, Joseph Nic=E9phore Ni=E9pce placed a metal plate >inside a black box in a sunny window at Le Gras, his country estate in >the south of France. After 8 hours, Ni=E9pce found that with his >primitive camera, he=92d achieved a goal that he=92d been striving after fo= r >years: He=92d produced a permanent image recorded onto a photosensitive >medium. It was the first successful example of =93fixing permanently the >image from Nature,=94 Ni=E9pce told members of the Royal Society when he >traveled to England in 1827. However, when Ni=E9pce presented his >invention, he wouldn=92t fully divulge his process, and the society failed >to confirm his discovery. >Today, it=92s known that Ni=E9pce coated his plate with an asphalt called >bitumen of Judea, which hardened under long exposure to the sun=92s rays. >He then washed the unhardened material from the plate with a mixture of >oil of lavender and white petroleum, leaving the faint image of his >courtyard in relief....." > >The photo: http://sciencenews.org/20021123/a2691_1943.jpg > >Quoted from article in Nov. 23 Science News: > >http://sciencenews.org/20021123/bob10.asp > >The photo will be on display in Austin, TX at the U of Texas Ransom >Center beginning in March. > >Interesting article, check it out. > >Mike > That is an interesting site. Thanks for sharing it. I liked the article about the digital print vending machines. =46rom the explanation of the bitumen process I expected a negative, but it appears to be a positive, unless bitumen of Judea is white. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13512 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 21:46:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 21:46:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 13:46:35 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10466 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:46:34 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021201214540.USZJ21822.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:45:40 -0500 Message-ID: <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Oly List" Subject: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:45:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I shot a test roll with a new-to-me Argus C-3. The old girl's shutter hangs up but it sure is fun. I got the original instruction manual, leather case, and perfect flash bar for $15. Anyway, I loaded up some Fuji 1600 and smuggled it into a concert. The shutter kept hanging opend so I've exercised it without film since I got the roll back and it's very consistent now. Almost all of the frames were ruined by the shutter hanging up at 1/50 and below but I did get one frame worth sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/jlamadoo/vwp?.dir=/My+Photos&.dnm=At+Birdys+India napolis+2002.jpg&.src=ph&.view=t&.hires=t You'll undoubtedly have to reconstruct the link. Can anyone tell me if it is camera motion or the crude (unsharp) optics that caused the soft-focus effect? It works because Margo isn't as young as she used to be and the flowers gave me "permission" to go soft. Anyway, the C-3 is a novelty at this point but I'll try another roll on the tripod and continue to exercise the shutter to limber it up. No oil on the diaphram blades. Fun. Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13762 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 21:47:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 21:47:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 13:47:21 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10470 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:47:19 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021201214627.UTAQ21822.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:46:27 -0500 Message-ID: <000f01c29983$1eee62a0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Oly List" Subject: [OM] Share my joy: Series1 90 macro on order! Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:46:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I can't wait for my Series1 90mm f/2.5 macro with 1:1 tube to come in! I went to a camera show yesterday and picked up two hard cases for Canon lenses for $3.50 each, thinking one of them will be a close fit for the (large) Series1. Also found a 59mm-->55mm step down ring for the Series1 so I can use my existing filters. I found a Zuiko 85mm shade and used it's size to guage a 55mm shade for the Series1. Sweet! One thing: I couldn't find a 55mm screw-on cap anywhere in the whole show. Do I have to pay $10 for a new one? Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14075 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 21:59:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 21:59:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 13:59:31 2002 -0800 Received: from siaar2ab.compuserve.com (siaar2ab.compuserve.com [149.174.40.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10478 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:59:29 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaar2ab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.15) id QAA12314 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:53:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:51:23 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212011651_MC3-1-1D32-568C@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John Duggan writes: > = >Morgan, From what I have seen the State of California has covered itself= by finding that most things CAN cause cancer :-) = <<>> California is our domestic equivalent of France. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14571 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 22:33:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 22:33:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 14:33:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10495 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:33:02 -0800 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 17:32:32 -0500 Message-Id: <200212011732.AA2057895968@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "James N. McBride" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 12:01:04 -0700 >Urine is a natural astringent. Cleopatra supposedly bathed in >urine for a skin-care treatment. > Medics once were taught (may still be) that urine can be used to clean debris from a wound in the field if no antiseptic or clean water is available. Generally, it's pretty much sterile. And I'm beginning to regret that I used as an example of something that shouldn't be done cleaning a lens with spit and a shirttail wipe, which seems to have started this bodily fluids stream. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14827 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 22:34:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 22:34:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 14:34:04 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10499 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:34:02 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.52] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 30097642 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:33:13 -0500 Message-ID: <3DEA8E31.16E863B2@suite224.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:33:21 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! References: <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jim, This is the camera I learned to enjoy photography on back in the early 1970's. The Cintar lenses are known to be very sharp for their day-maybe even unflatteringly so at times. They are cheap enough that if yours does not prove to be a consistent performer, just pick up another, they are cheap. I have 4 or 5 kicking around in different variations that I keep on saying I want to use to try and recapture my early youth. Maybe it will be this next summmer. I remember taking it down to the beach(Lake Erie), one sunnybright frozen Christmas day, and shooting a few of the best picture, and the very best I have ever taken in my whole life. I used the guide provided with Kodak film(100ASA?), and shot a whole row wondering if my Dad would be willing to pay for development. Did you get any bulbs for the flash? I like your shot. The composition is great. I hope Margo does not get to see your comment "young as she used to be". Men have been severely injured for less.:-) The soft focus that is shown here is not really a characteristic of the lens in my experience. I'd have to scan them, but I remember quite a few very sharp pictures taken with mine. I think it is caused by your bad shutter, but it is still a damn nice picture. John Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > > I shot a test roll with a new-to-me Argus C-3. The old girl's shutter hangs > up but it sure is fun. I got the original instruction manual, leather case, > and perfect flash bar for $15. > > Anyway, I loaded up some Fuji 1600 and smuggled it into a concert. The > shutter kept hanging opend so I've exercised it without film since I got the > roll back and it's very consistent now. Almost all of the frames were > ruined by the shutter hanging up at 1/50 and below but I did get one frame > worth sharing. > http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/jlamadoo/vwp?.dir=/My+Photos&.dnm=At+Birdys+India napolis+2002.jpg&.src=ph&.view=t&.hires=t > > You'll undoubtedly have to reconstruct the link. Can anyone tell me if it > is camera motion or the crude (unsharp) optics that caused the soft-focus > effect? It works because Margo isn't as young as she used to be and the > flowers gave me "permission" to go soft. > > Anyway, the C-3 is a novelty at this point but I'll try another roll on the > tripod and continue to exercise the shutter to limber it up. No oil on the > diaphram blades. Fun. > > Lama > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15107 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 22:38:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 22:38:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 14:38:29 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10503 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:38:20 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120122370600100qpdcie>; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:37:06 +0000 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:33:33 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: [OM] Concert photography From: "R. Jackson" To: OM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just got email from the Dead office saying it would be OK for me to shoot some film at The Other Ones show at the Kaiser in Oakland next Thursday. I haven't shot film at a concert in ages. Back in the late 70's I used to shoot Kodak Ektachrome 400 for concerts, but there's a lot of film that's come out since then. I was thinking of using Portra or Supra 800. Has anyone got any suggestions? -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15575 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 23:00:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 23:00:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 15:00:39 2002 -0800 Received: from marstons.services.quay.plus.net (marstons.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA10516 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 15:00:36 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 5036 invoked by uid 10001); 1 Dec 2002 22:59:03 -0000 Received: from dyn196-55.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.55.196) by marstons.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 22:59:03 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photography Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:58:39 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:33:33 -0800, "R. Jackson" wrote: >I just got email from the Dead office saying it would be OK for me to=20 >shoot some film at The Other Ones show at the Kaiser in Oakland next=20 >Thursday. I haven't shot film at a concert in ages. Back in the late=20 >70's I used to shoot Kodak Ektachrome 400 for concerts, but there's a=20 >lot of film that's come out since then. I was thinking of using Portra=20 >or Supra 800. Has anyone got any suggestions? > >-Rob It's a while since I shot stage photography and that was generally on a small theatrical stage where light levels were around a stop lower than they would be at a professional concert. I got round to using medium format (645) too. I always shot colour negative (400ASA then) and printed my own. I used no colour balance filter on the camera and did all the compensation in the printing. I found it was better to meter a 400ASA film at 320ASA so that the blue sensitive layer was fully exposed in the shadows. If it isn't, you get horrible crossed curves and it's impossible to print. I suggest you rate the 800 colour neg materials at no more than 640 ASA for the same reason. Regards John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16003 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 23:23:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 23:23:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 15:23:59 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10537 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 15:23:56 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021201232009.ERSQ1598.priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:20:09 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021201161923.01f215b8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:20:08 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! In-Reply-To: <200212011732.AA2057895968@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 05:32 PM 12/1/2002 -0500, Walt Wayman wrote: [snip] >And I'm beginning to regret that I used as an example of >something that shouldn't be done cleaning a lens with spit and a >shirttail wipe, which seems to have started this bodily fluids >stream. ... er, so to speak. 8^> Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16587 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 00:08:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 00:08:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 16:08:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10590 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:07:07 -0800 Received: from pool0171.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.176.171] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Ie5C-0007Wz-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:05:07 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212011651_MC3-1-1D32-568C@compuserve.com> References: <200212011651_MC3-1-1D32-568C@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:05:01 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >John Duggan writes: >> >>Morgan, From what I have seen the State of California has covered itself >by >finding that most things CAN cause cancer :-) > ><<>> > >California is our domestic equivalent of France. > >Walt > At least we don't have an inordinate interest in bodily excretions. :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16879 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 00:13:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 00:13:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 16:13:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10602 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:13:31 -0800 Received: from pool0171.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.176.171] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IeDH-0000r1-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:13:27 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000f01c29983$1eee62a0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> References: <000f01c29983$1eee62a0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:13:22 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Digital and Wide Angles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, if you want to see a photo that seems to put the lie to the can't use wide angle lenses on a digital camera take a look at the example of the shot with a 14mm lens on a Canon EOS 1Ds in this review: http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index.html I think that spin was just because of the lack of availability of large high quality sensors at the time. Certainly it seems to be easier to make a large sensor and use existing lens designs than to design a new super wide for a sensor half the size of a postage stamp. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17492 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 01:04:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 01:04:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 17:04:29 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10635 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 17:03:41 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.120.213]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021202005906.NZUU1630.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:59:06 -0600 Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 19:56:20 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [151.198.120.213] at Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:59:06 -0600 Message-Id: <20021202005906.NZUU1630.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu>, on 12/01/02 at 04:45 PM, "Jim L'Hommedieu" said: ...[but] I >did get one frame worth sharing. >http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/jlamadoo/vwp?.dir=/My+Photos&.dnm=At+Birdys+India >napolis+2002.jpg&.src=ph&.view=t&.hires=t I had to truncate the url after the .jpg. >... Can anyone tell me if >it is camera motion or the crude (unsharp) optics that caused the >soft-focus effect? I should imagine it would be a bit of both. And did you check for deposits on the lens surfaces? As Richard Knoppow has pointed out, these are easily removed from older lenses. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17822 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 01:15:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 01:15:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 17:15:10 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.comcast.net (smtp.comcast.net [24.153.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10640 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 17:15:06 -0800 Received: from George Sears (pcp452738pcs.abrcrn01.ga.comcast.net [68.51.172.228]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.5 (built Sep 23 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6G00BZBWN0M1@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 20:11:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 20:11:45 -0500 From: George Sears Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! In-reply-to: <200212011732.AA2057895968@mynra.com> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3DEA6D01.35.256A98E@localhost> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 1 Dec 2002 at 17:32, Walt Wayman wrote: > > >Urine is a natural astringent. Cleopatra supposedly bathed in > >urine for a skin-care treatment. > > > Medics once were taught (may still be) that urine can be used to clean > debris from a wound in the field if no antiseptic or clean water is > available. Generally, it's pretty much sterile. > > And I'm beginning to regret that I used as an example of > something that shouldn't be done cleaning a lens with spit and a > shirttail wipe, which seems to have started this bodily fluids stream. > > Walt > Yeah Walt. Sure hope someone hasn't spat on, or for that matter even worse, pissed on their Zuikos. d:-( GeoW < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18193 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 01:30:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 01:30:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 17:30:38 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10655 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 17:30:35 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021202011802.FXFH4992.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:18:02 -0500 Message-ID: <00c801c299a0$9d62a520$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <200212011651_MC3-1-1D32-568C@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 21:17:42 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:18:02 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" To: Sent: Sunday, 01 December, 2002 08:05 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > >John Duggan writes: > >> > >>Morgan, From what I have seen the State of California has covered itself > >by > >finding that most things CAN cause cancer :-) > > > ><<>> > > > >California is our domestic equivalent of France. Wine production maybe :-)) jh > > > >Walt > > > > At least we don't have an inordinate interest in bodily excretions. :-) > -- > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19074 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 03:08:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 03:08:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 19:08:10 2002 -0800 Received: from pop015.verizon.net (pop015pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10713 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:08:07 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.178]) by pop015.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021202030347.MIST28019.pop015.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 21:03:47 -0600 Message-ID: <002701c299af$7301cea0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:03:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop015.verizon.net from [141.157.96.178] at Sun, 1 Dec 2002 21:03:46 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jim, Very nice photo, and part of a nice series as well. I believe the softness may be attributed to the same problem one of my 2 C-3's had. Although the focus control turned the lens mount, the lens barrel did not extend or collapse to provide focus shifting. If turning the focus wheel doesn't cause your lens to extend and collapse, you have the same problem. The problem was that the screw thread holding the lens in the body had loosened, therefore no longer holding the lens tight. The whole lens turned instead of the part of the barrel that should. I loosened the center gear cover a little, used a very small screwdriver to press against the brass part of the mount that was exposed below the lens barrel and worked it until I could extend the lens focus barrel far enough to remove the center gear cover and gear. Then I unscrewed the lens from the body. I worked the focus a number of times and it loosened up a bit. I cleaned the rear element and mounted the lens on the body firmly. Setting the focus wheel to 3 and the lens focus so the most clockwise part of the gear was near the 4, I replaced the center gear at the last available notch and replaced the cover. Your email brought back my own memories and caused me to pull out the 2 I have aquired. I too am anxious to try out this camera. I learned on a borrowed model in the early 70's. That first roll was like magic. Seemed like all I needed was the camera and the film box instructions. I'm sure that the results seemed so much better that what I was used to because I was used to the fixed shutter speed and aperture of the brownie... Sharp pictures and excellent color exposure. I was hooked. The model I will use was given to me in a custom wooden case with flash attachment, press bulbs, adapter for AG-1 bulbs and a few of them as well. A custom leather ready-case and other interesting stuff. The other one focuses, but the rangefinder has some problems and the shutter fires at one speed only. I guess the mechanism that causes the lag is shot. Interesting lens markings. The apertures are rated 3.5, 4.5, 6.3, 9, 12.7, 18. But the diaphram travel is more to both extremes. By the way, sneaking this thing anywhere is like sneaking a brick around. I think the XA would be more appropriate... :-) -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Oly List" Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 4:45 PM Subject: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! > I shot a test roll with a new-to-me Argus C-3. The old girl's shutter hangs > up but it sure is fun. I got the original instruction manual, leather case, > and perfect flash bar for $15. > > Anyway, I loaded up some Fuji 1600 and smuggled it into a concert. The > shutter kept hanging opend so I've exercised it without film since I got the > roll back and it's very consistent now. Almost all of the frames were > ruined by the shutter hanging up at 1/50 and below but I did get one frame > worth sharing. > http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/jlamadoo/vwp?.dir=/My+Photos&.dnm=At+Birdys+India > napolis+2002.jpg&.src=ph&.view=t&.hires=t > > You'll undoubtedly have to reconstruct the link. Can anyone tell me if it > is camera motion or the crude (unsharp) optics that caused the soft-focus > effect? It works because Margo isn't as young as she used to be and the > flowers gave me "permission" to go soft. > > Anyway, the C-3 is a novelty at this point but I'll try another roll on the > tripod and continue to exercise the shutter to limber it up. No oil on the > diaphram blades. Fun. > > Lama > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19510 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 03:36:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 03:36:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 19:36:12 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10728 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:36:08 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.100] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 30113744 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:35:21 -0500 Message-ID: <3DEAD501.FF4075E7@suite224.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:35:29 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! References: <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> <002701c299af$7301cea0$0200a8c0@ctx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, I had forgotten about my experience with this. This also reminds me of talk about Russian cameras with helicoids, and helicoid grease hardening up, and my experience is that the C-3, and C-44's have the same problem, I have thrown more than a couple in the trash due to sticky/hard focusing. And the loose screw are another problem. I have fixed a few too,because it is not a hard fix, but do not make a habit of it. John Mickey Trageser wrote: Although the > focus control turned the lens mount, the lens barrel did not extend or > collapse to provide focus shifting. If turning the focus wheel doesn't cause > your lens to extend and collapse, you have the same problem. > > The problem was that the screw thread holding the lens in the body had > loosened, therefore no longer holding the lens tight. The whole lens turned > instead of the part of the barrel that should. I loosened the center gear > cover a little, used a very small screwdriver to press against the brass > part of the mount that was exposed below the lens barrel and worked it until > I could extend the lens focus barrel far enough to remove the center gear > cover and gear. Then I unscrewed the lens from the body. I worked the focus > a number of times and it loosened up a bit. I cleaned the rear element and > mounted the lens on the body firmly. Setting the focus wheel to 3 and the > lens focus so the most clockwise part of the gear was near the 4, I replaced > the center gear at the last available notch and replaced the cover. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20219 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 03:45:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 03:45:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 19:44:58 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10746 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:44:24 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.10] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A54E128053C; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:36:46 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021201223027.034f7850@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:40:42 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! In-Reply-To: <000701c29983$037ec3c0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Lama, The Cintar lens on the C-3 is simple, but a good one and I rate it definitely above average and quite surprising for a camera that inexpensive in its era. I have a huge archive of my father's Kodachromes shot from the early 1950's into the early 1980's that are a testament to its sharpness and resolution. I would guess your sticky shutter is the culprit, or perhaps camera shake, or maybe a lens that someone has abused or reassembled improperly. It should be anything but soft. The C-3 is the Ford Model A of cameras. Everything you need for a 35mm camera, nothing more and nothing less. The Argus cameras were born out of a radio company in Chicago. Demand for radios was seasonal and the owner of the company needed something to keep his bakelite production line for radio cases busy during the months with lower demand for radios. He hit upon the idea of making camera bodies, and thus the bakelite bodied Argus was born. If Oskar Barnack and his Leica A get credit for being the first successfully marketed still camera to use Edison size film, the Argus deserves credit for solidifying the format's survival. Millions of them were sold. You are using a piece of history and many, like me, have archives of slides bulging with family photographs from holidays and vacations shot with an Argus C-3. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20642 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:05:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:05:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:05:39 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10759 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:05:31 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120204041600100qulvpe>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 04:04:17 +0000 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:02:44 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sounds like good advice. I'll give it a shot. Thank you. -Rob On Sunday, December 1, 2002, at 02:58 PM, john@coedana.plus.com wrote: > I always shot colour negative (400ASA then) and printed my own. I > used no colour balance filter on the camera and did all the > compensation in the printing. I found it was better to meter a 400ASA > film at 320ASA so that the blue sensitive layer was fully exposed in > the shadows. If it isn't, you get horrible crossed curves and it's > impossible to print. I suggest you rate the 800 colour neg materials > at no more than 640 ASA for the same reason. > > Regards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20961 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:18:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:18:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:18:38 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10767 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:18:35 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gB24AlZ28399 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:10:47 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:17:04 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37DC@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: [OM] (OT) Concert photography Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:17:02 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > On Sunday, December 1, 2002, at 02:58 PM, > john@coedana.plus.com wrote: > I always shot colour negative (400ASA then) and printed my own. I > used no colour balance filter on the camera and did all the > compensation in the printing. I found it was better to > meter a 400ASA film at 320ASA so that the blue sensitive layer was > fully exposed in the shadows. If it isn't, you get horrible crossed > curves and it's impossible to print. I suggest you rate the 800 > colour neg materials at no more than 640 ASA for the same reason. Sorry for asking a generic photography question, but, what do you mean when you say "crossed curves"? Also, is this a good general practice for such negative films, regardless of light conditions (for instance, shooting daylight sports with 400 to get a fast shutter speed on a slow and better-shut-down lens)? Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21329 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:30:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:30:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:30:54 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10780 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:30:43 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120204292700200soc52e>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 04:29:27 +0000 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:27:54 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] (OT) Concert photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37DC@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> Message-Id: <6D167066-05AE-11D7-AF54-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm not an expert on darkroom technique by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm pretty sure it means that the contrast in the various layers of the film emulsion aren't analogous to each other. In this case he's saying that the blue layer may not be exposed properly unless you slightly overexpose and that trying to make a print where the contrast of one layer doesn't match the others will produce unwelcome artifacts. Or I could be completely off-base, like with that whole, "Aren't you on mainland China?" thread a few days ago. ;-) -Rob On Sunday, December 1, 2002, at 08:17 PM, Marc Lawrence wrote: > Sorry for asking a generic photography question, but, what do > you mean when you say "crossed curves"? Also, is this a good > general practice for such negative films, regardless of light > conditions (for instance, shooting daylight sports with 400 to get > a fast shutter speed on a slow and better-shut-down lens)? > > Cheers > Marc > Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21584 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:31:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:31:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:31:35 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts10.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10787 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:31:33 -0800 Received: from [209.226.122.131] by tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021202042745.PTAZ12038.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@[209.226.122.131]> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:27:45 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: b1qgsf00@pop1.sympatico.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> References: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:28:01 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Robert T McFetridge Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1173319213==_ma============" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --============_-1173319213==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" I regret making light of the spit debate. I agree that spit is not antiseptic. >William wrote: > >snip >>Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent. > >Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild detergent, >works best for any given project. Saliva, however, contains >bacteria. I sure wouldn't be using saliva on ANY optics. Fogging a >lens with the breath is another matter. That's just water vapor. > >Saliva on contact lenses? NOOO!!! Ask your optician. NOT GOOD! >Sterile saline solution ONLY! Susan, help us out here! Saliva >doesn't belong in cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as >well as anything, until you can get to soap & water and/or proper >medical attention... geez... maybe we should hold a first aid course >here! Never "spit" on a wound. > >You guys are scarin' me now. > >Rich -- Robert T McFetridge 5489 Edgewater Dr Ottawa, ON, K4M 1B4 Canada Ph: 613 692 4896 --============_-1173319213==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor!
I regret making light of the spit debate. I agree that spit is not antiseptic.

William wrote:

snip
>Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent.

Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild detergent, works best for any given project.  Saliva, however, contains bacteria.  I sure wouldn't be using saliva on ANY optics.  Fogging a lens with the breath is another matter.  That's just water vapor.

Saliva on contact lenses?  NOOO!!!  Ask your optician.  NOT GOOD!  Sterile saline solution ONLY!  Susan, help us out here!  Saliva doesn't belong in cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as well as anything, until you can get to soap & water and/or proper medical attention... geez... maybe we should hold a first aid course here!  Never "spit" on a wound.

You guys are scarin' me now.

Rich

--============_-1173319213==_ma============-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21876 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:38:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:38:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:38:23 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10795 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:38:19 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-85-161.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.85.161]) by pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB24bk6X410002 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:37:46 -0500 Message-ID: <000801c299bb$ecf66520$a1554241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021202033617.19562.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Concert photos Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:33:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "I was thinking of using Portra or Supra 800. Has anyone got any suggestions?" You're started in the right direction. I highly recommend print film for this situation, as it is far more forgiving in difficult situations. (but see opposite recommendation below) I have used the Fuji 1600 film for night street shooting, when every half stop counts. This is, of course, the theory that a grainy photo is better than none at all. I would de-rate it to about 1200 for finer grain, as it gets really grainy when it gets thin. However, this degree of effort may not be necessary. Many stage shows are well-lit, as a super fast film isn't necessary. I would, however, recommend something like the portra, as the contrast will be high enough without making it more so with a film like supra. Another possibility is tungsten film. There may be enough for kodak's 320 film, or you might use a 1600 film with filter, if I could remember the factor for an 80A or B. There used to be a 640 ScotchChrome, but I don't know if it still exists. Stage lighting is usually 3200K (although heavily modified), so you would be right on the money. Just meter carefully and bracket, bracket , bracket. Remember, if you use your camera's center weighted meter, that there is a lot of black that will upset the metering, and if you use a spot meter, compensate for the highlights. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22188 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:46:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:46:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:46:28 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts23.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.185]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10799 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:46:26 -0800 Received: from [209.226.122.131] by tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021202044236.LWFE1511.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@[209.226.122.131]> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:42:36 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: b1qgsf00@pop1.sympatico.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <001001c2996c$0016b100$d1ce1341@srv.net> References: <001001c2996c$0016b100$d1ce1341@srv.net> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:42:55 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Robert T McFetridge Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As bacteria laden as spit can be from a healthy mouth, urine from a healthy person is quite antiseptic. This said I do not recommend using it to bathe in or as an astringent. I do believe there are some folk who are into this sort of thing though... even take pictures of it >Urine is a natural astringent. Cleopatra supposedly bathed in urine for a >skin-care treatment. > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca] >On Behalf Of siddiq >Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 1:40 AM >To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! > >12/1/2002 12:12:08 AM, Doggre@aol.com wrote: > > >> should hold a first aid course here! Never "spit" on a wound. >> >> You guys are scarin' me now. >> >> Rich > > >gee, rich, you should hang out with the fellas that think urine (your own, >so it's antiseptic; so they claim, i havent tried it nor wish to) can be >used to neutralize venom/stings in the >field, since most acidic substances do, if absolutely nothing else is >availble > >personally, i dont go out hiking w/o a good first aid kit, but some ppl out >there are wacko with home brew "remedies" ;) > >/S >-- >"We apologise for the inconvenience." > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -- Robert T McFetridge 5489 Edgewater Dr Ottawa, ON, K4M 1B4 Canada Ph: 613 692 4896 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22444 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 04:49:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 04:49:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 20:49:50 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts17.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10803 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:49:47 -0800 Received: from [209.226.122.131] by tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021202044600.GTIE4451.tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net@[209.226.122.131]> for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:46:00 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: b1qgsf00@pop1.sympatico.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DEA6D01.35.256A98E@localhost> References: <3DEA6D01.35.256A98E@localhost> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:46:17 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Robert T McFetridge Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Makes good stop bath too >On 1 Dec 2002 at 17:32, Walt Wayman wrote: > >> >> >Urine is a natural astringent. Cleopatra supposedly bathed in >> >urine for a skin-care treatment. >> > >> Medics once were taught (may still be) that urine can be used to clean >> debris from a wound in the field if no antiseptic or clean water is >> available. Generally, it's pretty much sterile. >> >> And I'm beginning to regret that I used as an example of >> something that shouldn't be done cleaning a lens with spit and a >> shirttail wipe, which seems to have started this bodily fluids stream. >> >> Walt >> > >Yeah Walt. Sure hope someone hasn't spat on, or for that matter even worse, >pissed on their Zuikos. d:-( > >GeoW > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -- Robert T McFetridge 5489 Edgewater Dr Ottawa, ON, K4M 1B4 Canada Ph: 613 692 4896 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23260 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 06:05:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 06:05:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 22:05:53 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10872 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:05:47 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.10] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A7042C5C014E; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 01:00:36 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202005953.034d6820@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 01:04:30 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photography In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Rob, See the Concert Photography Tutorial on Photo.Net: http://www.photo.net/concerts/mirarchi/concer_i He devotes an entire section of it to film; color negative, color transparency, and B&W. -- John At 17:33 12/1/02, Rob Jackson wrote: >I just got email from the Dead office saying it would be OK for me to >shoot some film at The Other Ones show at the Kaiser in Oakland next >Thursday. I haven't shot film at a concert in ages. Back in the late 70's >I used to shoot Kodak Ektachrome 400 for concerts, but there's a lot of >film that's come out since then. I was thinking of using Portra or Supra >800. Has anyone got any suggestions? > >-Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23515 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 06:09:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 06:09:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 22:09:30 2002 -0800 Received: from cedar.petroglyph.crestline.ca.us ([209.185.214.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10876 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:09:28 -0800 Received: by CEDAR with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:08:32 -0800 Message-ID: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F193B@CEDAR> From: Scott Gomez To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:08:31 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We Californians will make you a deal. We'll accept the "honor" if the rest of y'all will quit coming here and staying... Visit all ya like, just remember to go home :-) --- Scott Gomez -----Original Message----- From: Walt Wayman [mailto:hiwayman@compuserve.com] Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) <<>> California is our domestic equivalent of France. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23870 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 06:24:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 06:24:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 22:24:32 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10889 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:24:30 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120206232200200sokk0e>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 06:23:22 +0000 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:21:49 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F193B@CEDAR> Message-Id: <5766910E-05BE-11D7-AB66-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And take a couple of your ex-neighbors back with you when you go. ;-) -Rob On Sunday, December 1, 2002, at 10:08 PM, Scott Gomez wrote: > We Californians will make you a deal. We'll accept the "honor" if the > rest > of y'all will quit coming here and staying... Visit all ya like, just > remember to go home :-) > > --- > Scott Gomez < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24120 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 06:24:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 06:24:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 22:24:50 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10892 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:24:48 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120206234000100s8t9ie>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 06:23:40 +0000 Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:22:08 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202005953.034d6820@mail.spitfire.net> Message-Id: <62318776-05BE-11D7-AB66-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks a lot. Some great stuff there. -Rob On Sunday, December 1, 2002, at 10:04 PM, John A. Lind wrote: > Rob, > See the Concert Photography Tutorial on Photo.Net: > http://www.photo.net/concerts/mirarchi/concer_i > > He devotes an entire section of it to film; color negative, color > transparency, and B&W. > > -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24584 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 06:53:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 06:53:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 22:53:24 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA10909 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:53:22 -0800 Received: (cpmta 16949 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 22:52:20 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 22:52:20 -0800 X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 06:52:20 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: Robert T McFetridge , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 01:52:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Message-ID: <3DEABCC8.19053.AA1A35@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <001001c2996c$0016b100$d1ce1341@srv.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've read that doctors used to let dogs lick soldier's heads after operations to help them cure... tOM ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25136 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 07:35:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 07:35:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 23:35:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10925 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:35:36 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021202073443.BEJD8524.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:34:43 -0500 Message-ID: <00f401c299d5$4e3b7b40$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021201223027.034f7850@mail.spitfire.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:34:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi John, I found an essay of yours posted at http://www.cameraquest.com/argc3let.htm about the Argus C-3. Now I know that it's probably camera shake so I'll investigate further. Do you know of a disassembly document? I'd like to thoroughly clean all of the rangefinder surfaces. I think it might be a really cool concert camera cause it's easily hidden, and even if discovered, won't incite concern from bouncers. It looks like a fossil and "everyone" knows you need a huge SLR to get "professional" results, right? :) Unlike lots of point-and-shoots, it has a 50mm lens. Thanks for your essay and post. Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25448 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 07:45:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 07:45:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 01 23:45:20 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10933 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:45:18 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021202074425.BETY8524.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:44:25 -0500 Message-ID: <010501c299d6$a9201ba0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <20021202005906.NZUU1630.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Argus C-3, new to me! Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:44:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, I cleaned the _front surface of the taking lens but have not wedged open the leaf shutter. Natually, I cleaned the front and rear surfaces of the rangefinder lenses too but I want to dissassemble the rangfinder for cleaning if it won't throw off the linkage. Has anyone done that on a C-3? From: And did you check for > deposits on the lens surfaces? As Richard Knoppow has pointed out, these > are easily removed from older lenses. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25860 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 08:08:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 08:08:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 00:08:32 2002 -0800 Received: from web80104.mail.yahoo.com (web80104.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.169.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA10938 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:08:30 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202080817.71618.qmail@web80104.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [63.206.91.31] by web80104.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:08:17 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:08:17 -0800 (PST) From: Dr Timothy Hughes Subject: [OM] Digital and Wide Angles To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: wincros@earthlink.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-235490813-1038816497=:70248" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-235490813-1038816497=:70248 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Winsor wrote: >> Well, if you want to see a photo that seems to put the lie to the can't use wide angle lenses on a digital camera take a look at the example of the shot with a 14mm lens on a Canon EOS 1Ds in this review: http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index.html << Yes... But the website does actually show lateral chromatic aberation as a result of the sensor and wide lenses, although as might be expected it is both lens and scene related as they describe: >>(http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_fullframe.html) Overall, regardless of which wide angle lens you use with the 1Ds, you need to be prepared to contend with the aberration issue. At least for now, unless a new superhero L series lens is secretly being designed. It's not to say that this can't be fixed in software. It can. But, this type of channel editing compromises image quality, and calculations are difficult to manage especially since there is no universal solution and you'll need to recalculate channel shifting for each individual lens. << The most interesting abberation example is the somewhat hidden link entitled "Here is a crop" (from the same page): >>However, the same aberrations still pop up even with the best wide angle lenses Canon produces, including the 24mm f/1.4L. It performed a tad bit better than the 14mm since the lateral chromatic aberrations were only apparent in high contrast images. Here is a crop from a full size image taken at high noon with the 24mm f/1.4L.<< Given the 1Ds has a smaller pixel than the 1D it is very likely it has worse lateral abberations than the older 1D which has an overall smaller chip but bigger pixels! Regards, Tim Hughes TimHughes@ieee.org --0-235490813-1038816497=:70248 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Winsor wrote:

>>

Well, if you want to see a photo that seems to put the lie to the can't use wide angle lenses on a digital camera take a look at the example of the shot with a 14mm lens on a Canon EOS 1Ds in this review:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index.html

<<

Yes... But the website does actually show lateral chromatic aberation as a result of the sensor and wide lenses, although as might be expected it is both lens and scene related as they describe:  

>>(http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_fullframe.html)

Overall, regardless of which wide angle lens you use with the 1Ds, you need to be prepared to contend with the aberration issue. At least for now, unless a new superhero L series lens is secretly being designed. It's not to say that this can't be fixed in software. It can. But, this type of channel editing compromises image quality, and calculations are difficult to manage especially since there is no universal solution and you'll need to recalculate channel shifting for each individual lens.   <<

The most interesting abberation example is the somewhat hidden link entitled "Here is a crop" (from the same page):

>>However, the same aberrations still pop up even with the best wide angle lenses Canon produces, including the 24mm f/1.4L. It performed a tad bit better than the 14mm since the lateral chromatic aberrations were only apparent in high contrast images. Here is a crop from a full size image taken at high noon with the 24mm f/1.4L.<<

Given the 1Ds has a smaller pixel than the 1D it is very likely it has worse lateral abberations than the older 1D which has an overall smaller chip but bigger pixels!

Regards,

Tim Hughes

TimHughes@ieee.org
 

--0-235490813-1038816497=:70248-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26454 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 08:59:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 08:59:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 00:59:49 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10947 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:59:48 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120208583900100ekt32e>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:58:40 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEB20B8.6050403@attbi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:58:32 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) References: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F193B@CEDAR> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Maybe the problem is that our waitpersons (Californianism) are too polite and most of us actually try to understand and be nice to those whose pronunciation of our language is less than perfect. Of course, the fact that I was comfortably driving around with the top down on Dec. 1st. may be another part of the problem. Sure are a lot more people around here than when I was a kid - and they have a tendency to get in the way. Moose Scott Gomez wrote: >We Californians will make you a deal. We'll accept the "honor" if the rest >of y'all will quit coming here and staying... Visit all ya like, just >remember to go home :-) > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26735 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 09:02:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 09:02:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 01:02:05 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10951 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 01:02:04 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120209005600200sp3ire>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:00:56 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEB2144.7010800@attbi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 01:00:52 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) References: <200212011651_MC3-1-1D32-568C@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What about all those high colonics?? Moose Winsor Crosby wrote: >> John Duggan writes: >> >> California is our domestic equivalent of France. >> >> Walt >> > > At least we don't have an inordinate interest in bodily excretions. :-) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27076 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 09:15:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 09:15:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 01:15:56 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10956 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 01:15:55 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021202091502.BHHF8524.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 04:15:02 -0500 Message-ID: <012301c299e3$50dbc040$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: Cc: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photography Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 04:15:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Supra 800, yes. Pop Photo (and my experience) says it has "normal" saturation while all of the 1600 Fuji color neg films have "enhanced" saturation. My opinion is that the only hope of correcting to a normal skin tone (with tungsten lamps, not the big Trooper spots) is with a normally saturated portrait type of film. I've had really decent results without a blue filter, fixing the balance directly in the scanning software of my $300 Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II. It's not as nice as some others' scanners- no ICE but it's way better than the $150 flatbed with transparency adapter I used before. This one was with a tripod mounted OM-4 with silver nosed 50mm f/1.4 at about 1/60th at f4: http://www.hatstand.org/gallery/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album09&id=SA_1 100PM_BRYAN_T_Roll_E_F5_Lama I desaturated everything about 20 points in the Minolta software to get this result. You wouldn't want MORE saturation coming from the film! >From this summer's 3 day music fest, about 40 of my shots are at: http://www.hatstand.org/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album09 Would you send me some jpgs? I work with 2 Dead fans! Lama R. Jackson said, > I just got email from the Dead office saying it would be OK for me to > shoot some film at The Other Ones show at the Kaiser in Oakland next > Thursday. I haven't shot film at a concert in ages. Back in the late > 70's I used to shoot Kodak Ektachrome 400 for concerts, but there's a > lot of film that's come out since then. I was thinking of using Portra > or Supra 800. Has anyone got any suggestions? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27359 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 09:23:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 09:23:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 01:23:43 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10960 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 01:23:42 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <2002120209223305300d27l8e>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:22:33 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 01:21:01 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: lamadoo@fuse.net, OM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <012301c299e3$50dbc040$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Message-Id: <6001BD62-05D7-11D7-881F-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll be glad to. For the time being they'll have to be scanned from prints on a flatbed (I don't own a film scanner yet), but I'll be happy to share what I come away with. I'm no pro, but hopefully I'll get some work done that's decent enough. Hey, where was that festival you shot? That looks absolutely wonderful. I love the venue, wherever it is. -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 01:15 AM, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > Would you send me some jpgs? I work with 2 Dead fans! > > Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27906 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 10:06:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 10:06:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 02:06:35 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10977 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:06:34 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021202100541.BIOD8524.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 05:05:41 -0500 Message-ID: <019201c299ea$63ef0140$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <20021202033617.19562.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000801c299bb$ecf66520$a1554241@swbell.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photos Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 05:05:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Be aware too, that you should test your meter's ability with a test roll under low light before you go. For example, my OM-PC meters just fine in broad daylight but it needs a CLA. Under concert conditions, it needs a whopping +2 stops of compensation to give correct exposure! If you're gonna use an OM-2S, 4 (or its variants) or OM-PC, be sure to take a spare set of batteries. But you knew that. Better yet, load the new batteries BEFORE you go. Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28156 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 10:09:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 10:09:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 02:09:40 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10981 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:09:39 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <2002120210083105300epmi3e>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:08:31 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 02:06:59 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photos Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <019201c299ea$63ef0140$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, I didn't know that. I just got my OM-4T. I've been shooting with an OM-1n for years and I replace the batteries every time we get a new president. ;-) -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 02:05 AM, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > If you're gonna use an OM-2S, 4 (or its variants) or OM-PC, be sure to > take > a spare set of batteries. But you knew that. Better yet, load the new > batteries BEFORE you go. > > Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28916 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 11:27:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 11:27:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 03:27:09 2002 -0800 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (murphys.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.225]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id DAA11015 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 03:27:08 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 7196 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 11:25:32 -0000 Received: from dyn17-32.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.32.17) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 11:25:32 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] (OT) Concert photography Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:25:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37DC@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37DC@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:17:02 +1100, Marc Lawrence wrote: >Sorry for asking a generic photography question, but, what do >you mean when you say "crossed curves"? Also, is this a good=20 >general practice for such negative films, regardless of light >conditions (for instance, shooting daylight sports with 400 to get >a fast shutter speed on a slow and better-shut-down lens)? When a colour negative film is correctly exposed in the light for which it is balanced (usually daylight) the images in the blue, green and red sensitive layers have the same contrast. Plotting curves of density against relative exposure for each layer would give parallel (basically straight) lines although they would be displaced from one another vertically, so to speak. The filtration in the enlarger compensates for this displacement and yields a neutral print. If the lighting is off balance (excessively blue or red for example) the relative vertical displacement of the curves will change but, properly exposed, they will remain straight and parallel and you can change the enlarger filtration to yield a neutral print. Stage lighting has a colour temperature of about 3000K (less when dimmed) compared with daylight at around 5500K. This means that the balance is skewed away from blue towards red and the danger is that the blue sensitive layer can be under exposed while the green and red sensitive layers are OK. Then, the curves are no longer parallel (blue sensitive layer has too low a slope or is even no longer a straight line) and it is impossible to adjust the filtration in the enlarger to compensate. The result is that you can get neutral mid-tones and highlights but the shadow areas will look awful. Colour negative films are very tolerant of over exposure (even benefitting from it) and increasing exposure in tungsten lighting will ensure that the blue sensitive layer is properly exposed without detriment to the green and red layers. Although a blue (A-D) colour balance filter can be used on the camera, its filter factor is very large (about 2 and a half stops) and means that the effective speed of (say) a 400ASA film is reduced to about 80ASA. By using the film's tolerance and compensating during printing (whether during enlarging or with computer software folowing scanning from the negative), speed is preserved. Unlike conventional B&W films (in which graininess is increased by over exposure) chromogenic B&W films (like Ilford XP2) and colour negative films exhibit reduced graininess with increased exposure. Many years ago someone brought me some colour negatives that were so grossly over exposed that they were virtually black and no commercial outlet could print them. I succeeded and the results were quite remarkably good. The only serious problem was halation in the highlights. Hope this helps. Regards John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29566 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 12:13:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 12:13:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 04:13:23 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA11025 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 04:13:21 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021202121228.BNWT8524.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:12:28 -0500 Message-ID: <01d801c299fc$179d7a80$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <6D167066-05AE-11D7-AF54-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Subject: [OM] Color correcting concert photography Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:12:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is exclusively about color correcting Fuji Supra 800, shot without a blue filter under tungsten, concert light. The manual for my Minolta Dual Scan II film scanner is not well written to begin with and is not very well translated into American English either. After scanning for weeks, I found the pre-scan histograms for _individual_ channels (RGB) in the "Utility" software. From looking at all 3 histograms at once, it was obvious that the red channel had a much different highlight area from the other two channels. On a hunch, I first adjusted just the highlight point of the red, (whatever you call the "toe" at the highlight end of the histogram), then used the preview image to dial-in the midtone of the just the red channel. Bingo. >From my notes, "leave the green and blue histos untouched (G: 0 shadow; 1.00 midtone; 255 highlight B: 0 shadow; 1.00 midtone; 255 highlight) and merely adjust the Red to 216 for red highlight first, then 1.29 for the red midtone." In my opinion, this is the most effective way to color correct. It makes sense to me. It's exactly like setting the white point on a digital. Everyone of my images includes some specular highlight from eyeglasses or guitar strings or chrome plating on an amp. Something. The histograms show exactly where the white point is for each channel. It's child's play to tweak one channel, once you find the right window. The other methods I tried, like making straight scans and doing the color balance in the editing software, gave weird results like a perfectly adjusted midtone but a shifted highlight. (I had some frames that I had lit with an Olympus T32 flash. After I had perfected the skintone, the white pine paneling still registered cyan and slightly blue. Does everyone's T32 give +15 cyan and +10 blue light?) Besides being most effective, this method of adjusting setpoints before scanning is very simple and quick. You don't have to wait for your editing software to recalculate the color of every pixel of a 2820 dpi frame, for example. Not that I'm recommending it because it's quick. I'm recommending it because it produces the finest result on my particular scanner and Adobe Photoshop Elements Version 1. Your mileage may vary especially because (I believe) Elements, Version 1 is hobbled into 8 bits per channel. Gees, I'm long winded tonight. Did anybody read this far? :) Gees, I'm glad to have a computer and scanner. Now I can custom print and retouch color photos at home! How cool is that? Lama Now playing: Thelonious Monk's "Brilliant Corners" If you like music that helps you think, Monk's your guy. From: "R. Jackson" said, > I'm not an expert on darkroom technique by any stretch of the > imagination, but I'm pretty sure it means that the contrast in the > various layers of the film emulsion aren't analogous to each other. In > this case he's saying that the blue layer may not be exposed properly > unless you slightly overexpose and that trying to make a print where > the contrast of one layer doesn't match the others will produce > unwelcome artifacts. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30020 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 12:22:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 12:22:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 04:22:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA11037 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 04:22:57 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:15:17 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA15627 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:15:11 GMT Message-ID: <3DEB4ECE.20300@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 12:15:10 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] A few photos from Austria References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear all, I sent a mail about this yesterday but haven't seen it get through to the list. Apologies if the first one gets through after all. I took a brief trip to Salzburg two weeks ago, flying with my favourite airline Ryanair for just 25 pounds. I was there for just over 24 hours but managed to take a fair number of photos, some of which I've added to my website at http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/travel/austria Salzburg's a wonderful place, full of beautiful buildings, narrow streets and courtyards, surrounded by forest-covered hills and mountains, small enough to explore thoroughly on foot, and full of nice restaurants and coffee houses. I highly recommend a visit for anyone on European travels. I took the photos with an OM-1n + Tokina 28/2.8 and Zuiko 135/2.5, and they're on Fuji Sensia 100. The camera battery appeared to be dead on arrival in Salzburg, and foolishly I didn't have a spare. Couldn't find any on sale and so had to guess all my exposures. I was very pleased to find that most of them came out OK, and I'm thankful that I've got a camera that a) is fully functional without batteries and b) has taught me enough about metering over the years that I know what the exposure should be. Any comments and critique of the photos most welcome. Cheers, Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30551 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 13:02:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 13:02:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 05:02:32 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11045 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 05:02:31 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.130]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with SMTP id <20021202130138.BSIW8524.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:01:38 -0500 Message-ID: <01e001c29a02$f5a5efa0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: Cc: "Oly List" References: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37DC@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> Subject: Re: [OM] (OT) Concert photography Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:01:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Excellent job of writing! Because it is so lucid, you have successfully made a technical topic simple. This goes in my "Smart guys" folder. Thanks, John. By the way, that halation in the highlights is a very strange looking effect. As we say in Cincinnati, "Been there. Done that." Lama PS, It's already noon in Wales but it's barely dawn here in the middle of America. John Gruffydd wrote, in part: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the lighting is off balance the relative vertical displacement of the curves will change but, properly exposed, they will remain straight and parallel and you can change the enlarger filtration to yield a neutral print. Colour negative films are very tolerant of over exposure (even benefitting from it) and increasing exposure in tungsten lighting will ensure that the blue sensitive layer is properly exposed without detriment to the green and red layers. By using the film's tolerance and compensating during printing , speed is preserved. Hope this helps. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31117 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 13:48:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 13:48:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 05:48:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11074 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 05:48:37 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax80-a031.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.7.31]) by mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gB2DmXm02807 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:48:33 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] A few photos from Austria Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:46:09 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3DEB4ECE.20300@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Lovely shots, Roger. The one of the Dom's dome brought back memories. I'd bought my first non-normal lens, a Hektor 135/f4.5 for my M3 in Salzburg and we had gone up the hill to shoot the town probably from the same place as yourself. That was in 1960, dare say there's been some changes since. I must dig out the Kodachrome and compare. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Roger Wesson Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:15 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] A few photos from Austria Dear all, I sent a mail about this yesterday but haven't seen it get through to the list. Apologies if the first one gets through after all. I took a brief trip to Salzburg two weeks ago, flying with my favourite airline Ryanair for just 25 pounds. I was there for just over 24 hours but managed to take a fair number of photos, some of which I've added to my website at http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/travel/austria Salzburg's a wonderful place, full of beautiful buildings, narrow streets and courtyards, surrounded by forest-covered hills and mountains, small enough to explore thoroughly on foot, and full of nice restaurants and coffee houses. I highly recommend a visit for anyone on European travels. I took the photos with an OM-1n + Tokina 28/2.8 and Zuiko 135/2.5, and they're on Fuji Sensia 100. The camera battery appeared to be dead on arrival in Salzburg, and foolishly I didn't have a spare. Couldn't find any on sale and so had to guess all my exposures. I was very pleased to find that most of them came out OK, and I'm thankful that I've got a camera that a) is fully functional without batteries and b) has taught me enough about metering over the years that I know what the exposure should be. Any comments and critique of the photos most welcome. Cheers, Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31401 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 13:52:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 13:52:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 05:52:16 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11082 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 05:52:15 -0800 Received: from 209-122-227-73.s754.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.227.73] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Iqyf-0006o7-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 08:51:13 -0500 Message-ID: <001901c29a09$e9491820$49e37ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:50:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for the clarification, guys. Though it has been associated with (only) miscarriages, deformed sperm, eye irritation, nausea, kidney damage, I guess that was enough for Olympus to ban it (along with MEK, Inhibisol, benzyne, trichlorethane etc) from their service dept. over 20 years ago. THEN we couldn't even use freon. ......sheesh. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 11:44 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > > Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > > > A > >Acetone is a very strong carcinogen, I'd advise switching, Clint. > > Umm, no. Acetone (and other ketones) are made by the body. Some diseases > are diagnosed by finding the smell of acetone on the breath. > > Also, the solvent of nail polish and the chief ingredient of nail polish > remover, used daily by hundreds of millions of women, is acetone. There > haven't been too many reports of women dying of cancer of the fingers. > > The carcinogenic solvents are largely chorinated hydrocarbons, like the > now-banned carbon tetrachloride. Some dry cleaning solvents were also > banned. Liver cancer is the typical issue with chorinated solvents, just as > it is with alcoholism. > > Joe Gwinn > > Thanks, Joe. I feel better now. Worked my way through college in a > fiberglass boatyard. Lots of acetone - no gloves back then. > > Gary Edwards > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31418 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 13:52:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 13:52:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 05:52:19 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11086 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 05:52:18 -0800 Received: from 209-122-227-73.s754.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.227.73] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Iqyh-0006o7-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 08:51:15 -0500 Message-ID: <001a01c29a09$e9aac020$49e37ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:51:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Me too! _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 3:12 AM Subject: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! > William wrote: > > snip > >Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent. > > Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild detergent, works best > for any given project. Saliva, however, contains bacteria. I sure wouldn't > be using saliva on ANY optics. Fogging a lens with the breath is another > matter. That's just water vapor. > > Saliva on contact lenses? NOOO!!! Ask your optician. NOT GOOD! Sterile > saline solution ONLY! Susan, help us out here! Saliva doesn't belong in > cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as well as anything, until you > can get to soap & water and/or proper medical attention... geez... maybe we > should hold a first aid course here! Never "spit" on a wound. > > You guys are scarin' me now. > > Rich > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32093 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 14:10:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 14:10:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 06:10:38 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com ([194.201.127.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11124 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 06:10:36 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C29A0C.7456CECC" Subject: [OM] re:OT, Spam Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:09:40 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: re:OT, Spam Thread-Index: AcKaDHNu778GvU9bRlmWLzYaj/8yow== From: "Sam Shiell" To: "olympus@zuiko. sls. bc. ca \(E-mail\)" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29A0C.7456CECC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ...... scr (whatever that is) ............... If it's of any interest a "scr" is the extension of a screen saver, = which is executable.. Sam ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29A0C.7456CECC Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

...... scr (whatever that = is) ...............

If it's of any interest a "scr" is the = extension of a=20 screen saver, which is executable..

Sam

------_=_NextPart_001_01C29A0C.7456CECC-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32381 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 14:16:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 14:16:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 06:16:27 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11129 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 06:16:25 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP id <2002120214151700200socnle>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:15:17 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:15:12 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comment at bottom. At 3:36 AM +0000 12/2/02, olympus-digest wrote: > >Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:02:21 -0800 >From: Winsor Crosby >Subject: Re: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) > > > > > > >Trichloroethylene (TCE) has in the last few years been reclassified > >as a class 2 carcinogen, which means that various exposure-reducing > >precautions must be taken when it is used. TCE has not been banned > >from industrial use, but at least in the US it may no longer be sold > >to the general public. The major exposure-causing use is in the > >vapor degreasing of metals, a process using many gallons of solvent > >in an open-top boiler-condenser rig. There are millions of such > >rigs, but liver cancer isn't all that common, even among workers > >exposed daily. Despite all the hysteria now surrounding the subject > > > >None of the common solvents, even those now known to be carcinogens, > >are dangerous enough to be a problem for incidental users. > >Something else will kill us first. > > > >Joe Gwinn > >How do you know this? Are you a health professional? I'm not a doctor, but I do follow the debates in Science, Nature, The Wall Street Journal, et al. It's hardly a secret. >I have known as many people to die from liver cancer as any other kind. >Of course there are many known causes of liver cancer such as alcoholism and >hepatitis infections. You've hit the nail on the head. Alcoholism and hepatitis infections are far more common than heavy exposure to solvents. (My kid sister's first husband died young, of hepatitis.) How do I know that the risks of solvents are low? Because all these solvents were widely used industrially for decades, and yet the streets were not littered with the dead and dying, so whatever the effect it cannot be very strong an effect. And, because it was only after decades of debate were some uses of these solvents restricted -- the various health effects were debatable to slight, taking many decades of experience to build a statistically adequate case. And this is for people who use large amounts of the sovents every day, not incidental users. The reason to restrict access by incidental users is basically statistical cost-benefit, albeit based on a questioned extrapolation. Basically, suspected carcinogens are tested by making rats live in high concentrations of the candidate stuff, and then extrapolating the kill rate linearly down to very low doses. There are two major problems with this, but the method is used for lack of a better method, as the debate rages. The first problem is that rats are not humans, and yet we are extrapolating rat toxicity to humans. This mostly works, but there are a number of substances that are known to be toxic and/or carcinogenic in one species but not the other, in both directions. Second is the linear extrapolation to low doses: Most, perhaps all, substances show a threshold dose below which there is no effect whatsoever. However, it takes experiments of very long duration with very large numbers of animals to explore this, so there are few results yet available. These exper! iments are very expensive to run, and take longer than the usual academic career to complete, so it's difficult to find Principal Investigators to undertake such experiments. Anyway, the thinking is that weak carcinogen X will still cause a significant number of cancers in a large population, even if the individual risk of cancer is very low, so as a matter of public health, it's better to restrict X, unless there are no practical alternatives to X. Naturally, this triggers a fierce debate on the actual practicality of the proposed alternatives to X, not to mention the above-mentioned logical flaws in the entire enterprise. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32635 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 14:17:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 14:17:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 06:17:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.117]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11133 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 06:17:58 -0800 From: bsandyman@att.net Received: from mtiwebc14 ([204.127.135.40]) by mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021202141647.YXAA24110.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc14> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:16:47 +0000 Received: from [199.181.237.2] by mtiwebc14; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:16:46 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT minimilist lighting setup. Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:16:46 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 25 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: YnNhbmR5bWFuQGF0dC5uZXQ= Message-Id: <20021202141647.YXAA24110.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc14> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello all, I have volenteered myself to take pictures at a new years party at a friend of mines bar. She is going to do a Chinese New Year theme, and the employees are going to be dressed in traditional Chinese fashion. One of the highlights will be an opurtunity to be photographed with an employee, and buy a print of this. She had been thinking of getting a polaroid for this purpose, but we are now leaning towards digital. She has a digital camera, and is looking around for a photo capable printer. My question is how to set up lighting that is better then I will get off the flash of the digital camera. My thinking right now is to get this gadget that is a hot shoe on one end, and light sensor on the other. When the sensor detects a flash from the primary camera, it fires the hotshoe. I would get a couple or three of these and use three identical flashes I already have together with a soft box or some kind of diffusion filter. Of course if her digital camera has a hotshoe or a jack for external flash then I would rather use that. My concern is that the digital camera's metering system won't be able to handle external flash setups, and will over-expose everything. So I get flat frontal lighting or over-exposure as my only two options. Would the polaroid do any better? So how does my light set up sound? Is there something better? Am I basically hosed depending on how flexible the digital camera is? Would anyone like to give advice on a decent photo printer? What kind of dpi should I look for? Thanks! -- Clendon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 966 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:32:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:32:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:32:23 2002 -0800 Received: from web13707.mail.yahoo.com (web13707.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11185 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:32:22 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202153208.25885.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.102] by web13707.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 07:32:08 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:32:08 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021128213432.2169.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >If this was the LUG, there would be no stopping after a >comment like that. I'm still not satisfied. 50mm = 1x 100mm = 2x ???mm = 3x 200mm = 4x If these are the "standard" multiplication factors regarding general "magnification" of 35mm cameras, then why is 3x 135mm and not 150mm? AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1220 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:34:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:34:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:34:47 2002 -0800 Received: from web13707.mail.yahoo.com (web13707.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11189 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:34:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202153433.26330.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.102] by web13707.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 07:34:33 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] MRIs are us To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021128213432.2169.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I forgot why I had the MRI. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1500 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:38:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:38:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:38:45 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11193 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:38:44 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:38:18 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:38:18 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] MRIs are us Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:41:12 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2002 15:38:18.0505 (UTC) FILETIME=[D64CDF90:01C29A18] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca time for another perhaps.... -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz I forgot why I had the MRI. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1809 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:44:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:44:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:44:12 2002 -0800 Received: from web13705.mail.yahoo.com (web13705.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11197 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:44:11 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202154358.99820.qmail@web13705.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.102] by web13705.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 07:43:57 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:43:57 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021130045817.8159.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That "Lens flaw" looks an aweful lot like a piece of lint stuck in the focal-plane shutter opening. With no film in the camera, put the shutter on "bulb", remove the lens and look at the film opening very carefully while holding the shutter open. You will see a very tiny (probably only 3mm in length) piece of lint stuck in the bottom of the film opening. Remove lint with tweezers, and go on with life. If it was hoop shaped it would be a "flying shutter string". Impossible for the lens to have caused this unless there was a huge hair sticking out from the back that was pressing against the film. A tumbleweed attached to the rear element wouldn't cause this type of mark. The fact that you saw it appear with the use of the newly acquired lens is purely coincidental. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2095 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:46:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:46:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:46:44 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11201 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:46:43 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002120215453400300jbrppe>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:45:35 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:44:03 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] (OT) Concert photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <01e001c29a02$f5a5efa0$822d44d8@lhommedieu> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You've both made some difficult topics a lot easier to understand. Thank you. -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 05:01 AM, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > Excellent job of writing! Because it is so lucid, you have > successfully > made a technical topic simple. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2441 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:55:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:55:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:55:49 2002 -0800 Received: from web13702.mail.yahoo.com (web13702.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.135]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11207 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:55:47 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202155534.23429.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.102] by web13702.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 07:55:34 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:55:34 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] Time out for a food... To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021202033617.19562.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Went to Michigan for the Thanksgiving holiday. On the way out of town we stopped off at G&L Hotdogs in Muskegon. Ahhh! I can go on with life now. Sorry, absolutely no OM content. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2696 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 15:57:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 15:57:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 07:57:18 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11211 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:57:17 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120215560800200t4lhpe>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:56:09 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:54:37 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20021202154358.99820.qmail@web13705.mail.yahoo.com> Message-Id: <5C01D1F6-060E-11D7-9D96-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'd buy this explanation if the mark had appeared throughout the roll of film I shot, but the shots I used my 50 or my 135 to take came out clean. -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 07:43 AM, AG Schnozz wrote: > Impossible for the lens to have caused this unless there was a > huge hair sticking out from the back that was pressing against > the film. A tumbleweed attached to the rear element wouldn't > cause this type of mark. > > The fact that you saw it appear with the use of the newly > acquired lens is purely coincidental. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3001 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:01:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:01:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:01:26 2002 -0800 Received: from ottmex.cdic.ca (breaker.cdic.ca [209.217.114.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11215 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:01:25 -0800 Received: by ottmex with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:00:54 -0500 Message-ID: From: William Clark To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:00:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes I remember that. My mom is from Muskegon Michigan (we grew up in Canada though; my dad is Canadian). Where did you go....I love Michigan (cept Detroit) -Bill -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz [mailto:agschnozz@yahoo.com] Sent: December 2, 2002 10:56 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Time out for a food... Went to Michigan for the Thanksgiving holiday. On the way out of town we stopped off at G&L Hotdogs in Muskegon. Ahhh! I can go on with life now. Sorry, absolutely no OM content. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3651 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:03:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:03:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:03:28 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11223 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:03:25 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.112] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 30155625 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:02:42 -0500 Message-ID: <3DEB842C.D691F467@suite224.net> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:02:52 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw References: <20021202154358.99820.qmail@web13705.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Even though I am the one that said the lens before, I do really have to agree with this. Optically, my explanation is not plausible. John AG Schnozz wrote: > > That "Lens flaw" looks an aweful lot like a piece of lint stuck > in the focal-plane shutter opening. With no film in the camera, > put the shutter on "bulb", remove the lens and look at the film > opening very carefully while holding the shutter open. You will > see a very tiny (probably only 3mm in length) piece of lint > stuck in the bottom of the film opening. Remove lint with > tweezers, and go on with life. > > If it was hoop shaped it would be a "flying shutter string". > > Impossible for the lens to have caused this unless there was a > huge hair sticking out from the back that was pressing against > the film. A tumbleweed attached to the rear element wouldn't > cause this type of mark. > > The fact that you saw it appear with the use of the newly > acquired lens is purely coincidental. > > AG-Schnozz > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3934 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:05:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:05:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:05:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.alcatel.be (alc250.alcatel.be [195.207.101.250]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11233 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:05:07 -0800 From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be Received: from bemail04.net.alcatel.be (relay3 [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alcatel.be (8.11.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gB2FpqX31430 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:51:52 +0100 Subject: [OM] RE: [OT] MRIs are us To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:50:57 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL04/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 12/02/2002 16:51:52 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I had a brain scan but they didn't find anything... "Timpe, Jim" @Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 02-12-2002 04:41:12 PM Please respond to olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sent by: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" cc: Subject: RE: [OM] MRIs are us time for another perhaps.... -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz I forgot why I had the MRI. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4267 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:10:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:10:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:10:55 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11241 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:10:54 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:15:25 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:10:30 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] RE: [OT] MRIs are us Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:13:24 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2002 16:15:25.0843 (UTC) FILETIME=[05E5AE30:01C29A1E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's why I won't let them scan my cranium. Just my lower back and shoulders for now.... -----Original Message----- From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be I had a brain scan but they didn't find anything... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4521 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:11:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:11:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:11:44 2002 -0800 Received: from guinness (mx.last.plus.net [212.159.3.230]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11245 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:11:43 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: from [212.159.14.227] (helo=warrior.services.quay.plus.net) by guinness with smtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 18It6o-0002el-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:07:46 +0000 Received: (qmail 20734 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:07:03 -0000 Received: from dyn6-37.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.37.6) by warrior.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:07:03 -0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] re:OT, Spam Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:06:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:09:40 -0000, "Sam Shiell" wrote: >...... scr (whatever that is) ............... > >If it's of any interest a "scr" is the extension of a screen saver, = which is executable.. > >Sam And ones sent via email often carry viruses. John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4780 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:13:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:13:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:13:03 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11250 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:13:02 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120216115400200spbvpe>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:11:54 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:10:22 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DEB842C.D691F467@suite224.net> Message-Id: <8F756553-0610-11D7-9D96-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just can't imagine why it would come and go, though. Unless there actually was something stuck to the lens that was pressing up against the film, as was suggested. Maybe something caught in the mount or whatever. I shot some film in the Delores Park area of San Francisco a few days later and left the new lens at home without any problems popping up. I'll use to new lens again Wednesday and see if the mark pops up again. -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 08:02 AM, John and Julie Ockman wrote: > Even though I am the one that said the lens before, I do really have to > agree with this. Optically, my explanation is not plausible. > John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5168 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:21:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:21:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:21:34 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11266 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:21:32 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh75.interisland.net [12.17.134.75]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB2GILJ23296 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:18:21 -0800 Message-ID: <3DEB889A.C3561B93@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 08:21:46 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: RE: [OM] Lens cleaning (acetone a carcinogen?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id IAA11266 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > ... Visit all ya like, just > remember to go home :-) > Scott, You are paraphrasing an Oregon governor who was talking to Californians. mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5434 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:22:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:22:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:22:51 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11277 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:22:50 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120216214200200sogi3e>; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:21:42 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:20:10 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <8F756553-0610-11D7-9D96-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca BTW, I appreciate all the input on the subject. I'm a rank amateur despite a lot of years of taking photos and I tend to spend a lot of time chasing my tail when a problem pops up. I feel like my questions are just an annoyance to some of the more professional and experienced photographers here, so thank you for being patient and helpful despite my ignorance. -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5724 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:25:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:25:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:25:32 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11281 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:25:30 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:42:18 +0800 Message-ID: <3DEB88DF.9090004@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:22:55 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021126 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Xpan theory Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was thinking of the ultimate travel camera; and I was thinking that I might just take one lens next time and that's it.. I would love to have a 50mm or so, and maybe a 28mm if I took two instead of one. Then I thought about the xpan. The more I think about it, the more ingenious it is. With one lens and cheap 35mm film, I can do "real" panoramic shots. With that 45mm, it has the same coverage in pan mode as a 28mm. So a 45mm and a 28mm in one. Great. The lenses are slow because they are actually medium format lenses.. Now check out this thinking.. Because the CCD's are smaller, so the image circle need not be so big, what if you had the same setup as the xpan, with CCD's?? That would mean (because the CCD's are smaller) that the lenses can be just as compact, but faster, and you can have a choice of pan or regular.. Make it 14megapixels and have a 3 gig card in there, and you are doing some serious travel logs.. If such a camera existed, I would almost certainly be taking that on trips instead of an OM.... Your thoughts? Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6106 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:35:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:35:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:35:46 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11293 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:35:45 -0800 Received: from pool0618.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.212.108] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18ItXU-0001Bi-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 08:35:20 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021202080817.71618.qmail@web80104.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021202080817.71618.qmail@web80104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:35:18 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Digital and Wide Angles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Yes... But the website does actually show lateral chromatic >aberation as a result of the sensor and wide lenses, although as >might be expected it is both lens and scene related as they >describe: > > >>(http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_fullframe.html) > That is not the way I read it. His point is that color aberration is a quality of wide angle lenses, not the sensor. Anyone have experience the OM 18mm with high contrast subjects? Is there color aberration at the edges? -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6362 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:39:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:39:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:39:41 2002 -0800 Received: from netmail02.services.quay.plus.net (netmail02.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA11297 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:39:39 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 12183 invoked by uid 10001); 2 Dec 2002 16:38:02 -0000 Received: from dyn6-37.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.37.6) by netmail02.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:38:02 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:37:36 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20021202154358.99820.qmail@web13705.mail.yahoo.com> <5C01D1F6-060E-11D7-9D96-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> In-Reply-To: <5C01D1F6-060E-11D7-9D96-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 07:54:37 -0800, "R. Jackson" wrote: >I'd buy this explanation if the mark had appeared throughout the roll=20 >of film I shot, but the shots I used my 50 or my 135 to take came out=20 >clean. > Unfortunately I missed the initial posting, but the sharpness or otherwise of the "shadow" caused by a hair (or whatever) just infront of the film plane depends on the size of the exit pupil (and aperture setting) of the lens. Therefore it may not be noticeable at wide aperture but sharply defined at a small aperture. Been there, done that ;-) I once ruined a whole roll of irreplaceable shots (aren't they always?) on a Bronica because I hadn't noticed a hair loop stuck to the film magazine before I attached it to the camera. Regards John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6718 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:46:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:46:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:46:32 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp001.nwlink.com (smtp001.nwlink.com [209.20.130.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11309 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:46:31 -0800 Received: from miracler64ly0o (ip220.focal.du.nwlink.com [209.20.135.220] (may be forged)) by smtp001.nwlink.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gB2GkTIA013467 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:46:29 -0800 Message-ID: <040301c29a22$5cf6d100$c58714d1@miracler64ly0o> From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Subject: [OM] spit 'n piss Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:46:28 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0400_01C299DF.4DD47080" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0400_01C299DF.4DD47080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable People are confusing "sterile" with "antiseptic." They don't mean the = same thing. Spit isn't sterile, but it is mildly antiseptic -- which is why animals = lick their wounds. Some people's saliva is so antiseptic that they never = develop cavities. Urine is not antiseptic. But right out of the body, it is almost = bacteria-free. The Inuit use urine to clean their eating utensils -- the = ammonia in it cuts the seal grease. It's unlikely urine would make a = good stop bath, because it's alkaline rather than acidic. ------=_NextPart_000_0400_01C299DF.4DD47080 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
People are confusing "sterile" with "antiseptic." = They don't=20 mean the same thing.
 
Spit isn't sterile, but it is mildly antiseptic = -- which=20 is why animals lick their wounds. Some people's saliva is so antiseptic = that=20 they never develop cavities.
 
Urine is not antiseptic. But right out of the body, = it is=20 almost bacteria-free. The Inuit use urine to clean their eating utensils = -- the=20 ammonia in it cuts the seal grease. It's unlikely urine would make a = good stop=20 bath, because it's alkaline rather than = acidic.
------=_NextPart_000_0400_01C299DF.4DD47080-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7083 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 16:57:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 16:57:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 08:57:52 2002 -0800 Received: from ottmex.cdic.ca (breaker.cdic.ca [209.217.114.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11332 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:57:50 -0800 Received: by ottmex with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:57:19 -0500 Message-ID: From: William Clark To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] spit 'n piss Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:57:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C29A23.E00A27D0" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29A23.E00A27D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hmmm.....the things you learn from the OM list. -----Original Message----- From: William Sommerwerck [mailto:williams@nwlink.com] Sent: December 2, 2002 11:46 AM To: Olympus group Subject: [OM] spit 'n piss People are confusing "sterile" with "antiseptic." They don't mean the same thing. Spit isn't sterile, but it is mildly antiseptic -- which is why animals lick their wounds. Some people's saliva is so antiseptic that they never develop cavities. Urine is not antiseptic. But right out of the body, it is almost bacteria-free. The Inuit use urine to clean their eating utensils -- the ammonia in it cuts the seal grease. It's unlikely urine would make a good stop bath, because it's alkaline rather than acidic. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29A23.E00A27D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hmmm.....the things you learn from the OM list.
-----Original Message-----
From: William Sommerwerck [mailto:williams@nwlink.com]
Sent: December 2, 2002 11:46 AM
To: Olympus group
Subject: [OM] spit 'n piss

People are confusing "sterile" with "antiseptic." They don't mean the same thing.
 
Spit isn't sterile, but it is mildly antiseptic -- which is why animals lick their wounds. Some people's saliva is so antiseptic that they never develop cavities.
 
Urine is not antiseptic. But right out of the body, it is almost bacteria-free. The Inuit use urine to clean their eating utensils -- the ammonia in it cuts the seal grease. It's unlikely urine would make a good stop bath, because it's alkaline rather than acidic.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C29A23.E00A27D0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7749 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 17:31:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 17:31:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 09:31:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11372 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:31:32 -0800 Received: from [62.64.221.206] (helo=[62.64.221.206]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18IuOY-000AyF-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 17:30:10 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:54:30 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] re:OT, Spam Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks Sam. It doesn't work on a Mac, thank goodness. Chris At 14:09 +0000 02/12/02, Sam Shiell wrote: >...... scr (whatever that is) ............... > >If it's of any interest a "scr" is the extension of a screen saver, >which is executable.. > >Sam -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8141 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 17:45:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 17:45:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 09:45:36 2002 -0800 Received: from colossus.systems.pipex.net (colossus.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11398 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:45:35 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-241-160.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.241.160]) by colossus.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id CA56616000991 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:45:31 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Photos Online ! Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:45:30 -0000 Message-ID: <000701c29a2a$9b5f1940$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Everyone, For ages I've been thinking of putting some of my shots online. I've skirted around the whole "making my own web-page" thing, due to my own ineptitude with all things PC-based (!), but was sent a link to Pbase.com recently. So, for anyone interested, I have uploaded some of my pics here : http://www.pbase.com/jonmitch/galleries More will follow as and when I start scanning some more. For the moment, they are all scans of prints on a flat-bed scanner, so the quality isn't exactly wonderful on all of them. And I haven't yet got around to tweaking any of them digitally either, which could possibly improve things a bit. Bye for now, Jon Mitchell < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8759 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 18:32:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 18:32:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 10:32:35 2002 -0800 Received: from web13707.mail.yahoo.com (web13707.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA11432 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:32:33 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202183218.70640.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.200] by web13707.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 10:32:18 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:32:18 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: RE: [OM] Time out for a food... To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021202160136.3052.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bill wrote: >Where did you go....I love Michigan (cept Detroit) Whitehall. 15 miles north of Muskegon. Boy is the area changing. The economic boom of the Clinton era is finally starting to reach Muskegon. Seriously, Muskegon is a fantastic area to live in and with the new developments, it has finally shed much of the '80s economic disaster... Best feature? Lake Michigan shoreline. The sailing is heavenly. BTW, I miswrote. It's G&L Chili Dogs. They are running billboards all over town saying things like "Want a salad? Order extra onions" "A full-body massage for your tongue" "The Cure for that nasty salad aftertaste" and "Worth 1000 situps". The locals refer to eating at G&L's as getting their fix. US-31 BBQ is the other local eatery of note. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9027 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 18:34:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 18:34:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 10:34:44 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA11446 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:34:42 -0800 Received: (cpmta 10600 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 10:33:26 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 10:33:26 -0800 X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 18:33:26 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:31:11 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <000101c29a30$fd483230$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <20021202160136.3052.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Also, it is interesting that a 18mm has a FOV of 100 degrees - almost twice that of the 50mm! ;) and, if one is working on a system of halves, the 28mm fits between these two. This seems contrary to the 24-50-100 standard that many people employ. I have found that I like the 18-28-50-85-135 group better, however I use the 28 and 85 most, with the 135 coming in next, but this is mostly for macro. I'm still not satisfied. 50mm = 1x 100mm = 2x ???mm = 3x 200mm = 4x If these are the "standard" multiplication factors regarding general "magnification" of 35mm cameras, then why is 3x 135mm and not 150mm? AG-Schnozz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9306 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 18:35:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 18:35:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 10:35:45 2002 -0800 Received: from ottmex.cdic.ca (breaker.cdic.ca [209.217.114.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11450 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:35:44 -0800 Received: by ottmex with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:35:13 -0500 Message-ID: From: William Clark To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:35:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have been to Whitehall as well. It is a very nice area. The bech is superb, especially the "big red lighthouse". I remember you used to be able to take the Milwaukee Clipper accross the lake many years ago. My grandmother still lives in Muskegon. -Bill -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz [mailto:agschnozz@yahoo.com] Sent: December 2, 2002 1:32 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Time out for a food... Bill wrote: >Where did you go....I love Michigan (cept Detroit) Whitehall. 15 miles north of Muskegon. Boy is the area changing. The economic boom of the Clinton era is finally starting to reach Muskegon. Seriously, Muskegon is a fantastic area to live in and with the new developments, it has finally shed much of the '80s economic disaster... Best feature? Lake Michigan shoreline. The sailing is heavenly. BTW, I miswrote. It's G&L Chili Dogs. They are running billboards all over town saying things like "Want a salad? Order extra onions" "A full-body massage for your tongue" "The Cure for that nasty salad aftertaste" and "Worth 1000 situps". The locals refer to eating at G&L's as getting their fix. US-31 BBQ is the other local eatery of note. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9593 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 18:42:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 18:42:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 10:42:07 2002 -0800 Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.84]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11454 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:42:05 -0800 Received: from pool0505.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.250] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IvVk-00035z-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 10:41:41 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021202183218.70640.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021202183218.70640.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:41:39 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Bill wrote: >>Where did you go....I love Michigan (cept Detroit) > >Whitehall. 15 miles north of Muskegon. Boy is the area >changing. The economic boom of the Clinton era is finally >starting to reach Muskegon. > >Seriously, Muskegon is a fantastic area to live in and with the >new developments, it has finally shed much of the '80s economic >disaster... Best feature? Lake Michigan shoreline. The >sailing is heavenly. > >BTW, I miswrote. It's G&L Chili Dogs. They are running >billboards all over town saying things like "Want a salad? Order >extra onions" "A full-body massage for your tongue" "The Cure >for that nasty salad aftertaste" and "Worth 1000 situps". > >The locals refer to eating at G&L's as getting their fix. US-31 >BBQ is the other local eatery of note. > >AG-Schnozz My experience is that anyone eating chili north or east of Texas is clueless about the mess they are ingesting. They even put KIDNEY BEANS in it. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9926 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 18:49:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 18:49:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 10:49:11 2002 -0800 Received: from ottmex.cdic.ca (breaker.cdic.ca [209.217.114.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11474 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:49:09 -0800 Received: by ottmex with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:48:38 -0500 Message-ID: From: William Clark To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:48:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We have had "people" from Texas up here im Ottawa for those outdoor "cook-off" events andthey have kidney beans. I find that with them you can make the Chili hotter, as they counteract the heat a bit -Bill -----Original Message----- From: Winsor Crosby [mailto:wincros@earthlink.net] Sent: December 2, 2002 1:42 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... >Bill wrote: >>Where did you go....I love Michigan (cept Detroit) > >Whitehall. 15 miles north of Muskegon. Boy is the area >changing. The economic boom of the Clinton era is finally >starting to reach Muskegon. > >Seriously, Muskegon is a fantastic area to live in and with the >new developments, it has finally shed much of the '80s economic >disaster... Best feature? Lake Michigan shoreline. The >sailing is heavenly. > >BTW, I miswrote. It's G&L Chili Dogs. They are running >billboards all over town saying things like "Want a salad? Order >extra onions" "A full-body massage for your tongue" "The Cure >for that nasty salad aftertaste" and "Worth 1000 situps". > >The locals refer to eating at G&L's as getting their fix. US-31 >BBQ is the other local eatery of note. > >AG-Schnozz My experience is that anyone eating chili north or east of Texas is clueless about the mess they are ingesting. They even put KIDNEY BEANS in it. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10364 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:06:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:06:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:06:25 2002 -0800 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11497 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:06:24 -0800 Received: from pool0505.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.250] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18IvtH-0007X3-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:06:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:05:58 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >We have had "people" from Texas up here im Ottawa for those outdoor >"cook-off" events andthey have kidney beans. I find that with them you can >make the Chili hotter, as they counteract the heat a bit > >-Bill They just did not want to hurt you. :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10684 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:13:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:13:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:13:22 2002 -0800 Received: from imf40bis.bellsouth.net (mail125.mail.bellsouth.net [205.152.58.65]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11503 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:13:19 -0800 Received: from DownstairsComputer ([66.156.107.110]) by imf40bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021202191113.DYYH11643.imf40bis.bellsouth.net@DownstairsComputer> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:11:13 -0500 Message-ID: <009701c29a36$a54d1900$0100a8c0@DownstairsComputer> From: "Brian Haren" To: Subject: [OM] Lens cleaning - saliva, acetone, sulfuic acid, JP8, et al... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:11:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca All, OK, let me put a plug in for the chamoix & lens cleaning solution kit sold by Deutsche Optik in San Diego (www.deutscheoptik.com). A clean, washed chamoix is perhaps the best lens cleaning 'rag' I've ever used, and the Deutsche Optik solution (which they also use in their optical repair shop) works better than anything I've ever used (sorry, never had a chance to try acetone or carbon tet.). No connection whatever with DO, just plugging a worthy product. On an extended note, I do agree that most people clean their lenses too much. In over 23 years of photography I've only had 5 shots ruined by 'crud' on the lens, and that was with a digital P&S. Most of the cleaning I've found myself doing is to remove rain/water spot residue from my UV filters (oh, yeah, I once leaned over a birthday cake with an SLR & a 28 - 90 zoom around my neck and found myself cleaning frosting off the lens for the next hour). Love this discussion group - it's really helping me get over my Nikon/Leica addiction! Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11068 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:29:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:29:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:29:40 2002 -0800 Received: from lutetium (lutetium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.116]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11520 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:29:38 -0800 Received: from host213-122-151-153.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.151.153] helo=personalmyself) by lutetium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18IwDA-0004OI-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 19:26:33 +0000 Message-ID: <00ad01c29a38$c0570650$99977ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: References: <20021202183218.70640.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:26:44 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And what is WRONG with KIDNEY BEANS???? :-) Delicious with new potatoes and "proper" smoked bacon ! I can almost smell the bacon cooking. Regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" To: Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 6:41 PM Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... > My experience is that anyone eating chili north or east of Texas is > clueless about the mess they are ingesting. They even put KIDNEY > BEANS in it. > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11536 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:49:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:49:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:49:39 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc05.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11545 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:49:37 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18IwZU-0001RP-00 for ; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 12:49:36 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:48:49 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Omigod.....A chili debate could be worse than SUV's or some of those other "unwinable" subjects. Beans or not...I like it all. "A farting mule will never tire. A farting man is the man to hire." Does that also apply to women??? -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of William Clark Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:49 AM To: 'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca' Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... We have had "people" from Texas up here im Ottawa for those outdoor "cook-off" events andthey have kidney beans. I find that with them you can make the Chili hotter, as they counteract the heat a bit -Bill -----Original Message----- From: Winsor Crosby [mailto:wincros@earthlink.net] Sent: December 2, 2002 1:42 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... >Bill wrote: >>Where did you go....I love Michigan (cept Detroit) > >Whitehall. 15 miles north of Muskegon. Boy is the area >changing. The economic boom of the Clinton era is finally >starting to reach Muskegon. > >Seriously, Muskegon is a fantastic area to live in and with the >new developments, it has finally shed much of the '80s economic >disaster... Best feature? Lake Michigan shoreline. The >sailing is heavenly. > >BTW, I miswrote. It's G&L Chili Dogs. They are running >billboards all over town saying things like "Want a salad? Order >extra onions" "A full-body massage for your tongue" "The Cure >for that nasty salad aftertaste" and "Worth 1000 situps". > >The locals refer to eating at G&L's as getting their fix. US-31 >BBQ is the other local eatery of note. > >AG-Schnozz My experience is that anyone eating chili north or east of Texas is clueless about the mess they are ingesting. They even put KIDNEY BEANS in it. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11815 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:51:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:51:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:51:55 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11549 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:51:53 -0800 Received: from modem-3028.porcupine.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.203.212] helo=skelly) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Iwbe-0005AZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 19:51:51 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:51:50 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <00ad01c29a38$c0570650$99977ad5@personalmyself> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just sent the wife out for vindaloo and chips... and not a bean in sight. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Duggan Sent: 02 December 2002 19:27 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... And what is WRONG with KIDNEY BEANS???? :-) Delicious with new potatoes and "proper" smoked bacon ! I can almost smell the bacon cooking. Regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" To: Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 6:41 PM Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... > My experience is that anyone eating chili north or east of Texas is > clueless about the mess they are ingesting. They even put KIDNEY > BEANS in it. > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12094 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:53:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:53:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:53:02 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11563 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:53:00 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:52:36 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:51:54 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:55:32 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2002 19:52:36.0458 (UTC) FILETIME=[5CBFBCA0:01C29A3C] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I only consume good republican chili..... and only whilst driving my Hummer at 100mph down the car-pool lanes by myself on the way to the shooting range... -----Original Message----- From: James N. McBride Omigod.....A chili debate could be worse than SUV's or some of those other "unwinable" subjects. Beans or not...I like it all. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12374 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:55:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:55:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:55:29 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11569 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:55:27 -0800 Received: from modem-3028.porcupine.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.134.203.212] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Iwf5-0002JE-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 19:55:24 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:55:24 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ah, yes, forgot... good 'ol USA and low octane fuel. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Timpe, Jim Sent: 02 December 2002 19:56 To: 'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca' Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... I only consume good republican chili..... and only whilst driving my Hummer at 100mph down the car-pool lanes by myself on the way to the shooting range... -----Original Message----- From: James N. McBride Omigod.....A chili debate could be worse than SUV's or some of those other "unwinable" subjects. Beans or not...I like it all. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12640 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:58:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:58:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:58:03 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11573 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:58:01 -0800 Received: from [217.216.178.29] (cliente-217216178029.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.178.29]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gB2JraF05821 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:53:36 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:54:05 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca AG Schnozz wrote: >I'm still not satisfied. > > 50mm = 1x >100mm = 2x >???mm = 3x >200mm = 4x > >If these are the "standard" multiplication factors regarding >general "magnification" of 35mm cameras, then why is 3x 135mm >and not 150mm? Because the real "1x" is NOT 50mm, but 43.3 mm ;-). So 2x is about 85mm -- nice FL too! ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12891 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 19:58:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 19:58:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 11:58:29 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11577 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:58:28 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:58:04 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:58:04 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:00:59 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2002 19:58:04.0474 (UTC) FILETIME=[204301A0:01C29A3D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I only consume HIGH OCTANE chili, mind you.... -----Original Message----- From: IanG Ah, yes, forgot... good 'ol USA and low octane fuel. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13199 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 20:01:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 20:01:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 12:01:50 2002 -0800 Received: from siaag1af.compuserve.com (siaag1af.compuserve.com [149.174.40.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11585 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:01:48 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaag1af.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.18) id OAA16769 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:57:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:56:04 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] Possible sacrilege and blasphemy To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212021456_MC3-1-1D73-ACC7@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A few weeks ago I fished out of the Bay a Tamron 80-200/2.8. It looked great, although there was a fair amount of internal dust and a bit of zoo= m creep. Neither creep nor dust alone was serious enough to require remedi= al measures. The creep occurred only when the lens was pointed straight up = or straight down, and since I seldom photograph my feet and haven=92t seen a= UFO in broad daylight for several months now, this was not a big deal. And t= he dust, I am sure, bothered me much more by its mere presence than any actu= al effect on image quality would concern a rational person. But, since I could get both taken care of by KEH for $100, I sent the len= s across the river. Today, it returned, minus the crap and the creep. Out of curiosity, I took at look at Gary Reese=92s lens tests to see how = this particular Tamron stacks up against our Zuikos. Gary=92s tests were done= only at three focal lengths, but assuming the performance is reasonably uniform across the entire zoom range, generally speaking, not putting too= fine a point on it, without the use of 8x10 glossy photographs with lines= and arrows and writing on the back, this lens actually seems to outperfor= m some Zuiko primes that fall within its range (85/2, 85/2.8, 100/2.8, 135/2.8, 135/3.5, 180/2.8, 200/4, 200/5) and is at least the equal of som= e others (90/2 Macro, 135/4.5 Macro, although without the macro capability)= and is bested only marginally by the 100/2 and 180/2. Strangely, the Zui= ko zooms seem to have fared better, comparatively speaking. Verrrry interesting. Yes, compared to the typical Zuiko, it=92s big and heavy (7.25 in. and 3 lbs. 3 oz., with hood and tripod collar, as compare= d, say, with the Zuiko 35-80/2.8 at 4.5 in. and 1 lb. 8 oz. with hood and no= tripod collar). But I think it=92s found a home. Besides, it takes up i= n excellent fashion just where the aforementioned Zuiko 35-80/2.8 leaves of= f! Am I missing something? I almost wish it weren't so! I've got four of those Zuikos I've compared it to. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13988 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 21:06:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 21:06:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 13:06:50 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11644 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:06:48 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021202210258.RAHO13269.priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:02:58 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021202140210.01fffc88@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:02:58 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:48 PM 12/2/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Omigod.....A chili debate could be worse than SUV's or some of those other >"unwinable" subjects. Beans or not...I like it all. Chili's like barbeque. To paraphrase: "Chili: it's not just for breakfast anymore." 8^> Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14302 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 21:14:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 21:14:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 13:14:30 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts3.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11655 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:14:25 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.171.53]) by simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021202211004.KVPB2994.simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:10:04 -0500 Message-ID: <002801c29a47$39c89f40$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <200212021456_MC3-1-1D73-ACC7@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Possible sacrilege and blasphemy Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:10:19 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >A few weeks ago I fished out of the Bay a Tamron 80-200/2.8. >Am I missing something? >Walt A wheel. Did a wheel come with it? :-) (sigh.) By the time I can afford that fat glass, I'll be to old to carry it. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14593 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 21:18:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 21:18:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 13:18:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.160]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11660 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:18:08 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB2LI6s27797 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:18:06 +1100 Message-Id: <200212022118.gB2LI6s27797@mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 08:18:06 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Digital and Wide Angles Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Winsor Crosby wrote: > > > a quality of wide angle lenses, not the sensor. Anyone have > experience the OM 18mm with high contrast subjects? Is there color > aberration at the edges? I haven't specifically looked for it, but certainly haven't noticed anything in general use over 15 years. Those comments might only relate to *crap* lenses. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14983 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 21:30:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 21:30:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 13:30:51 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11673 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:30:49 -0800 Received: from pool0409.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.154] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Iy8z-0005FB-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 13:30:21 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212022118.gB2LI6s27797@mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au> References: <200212022118.gB2LI6s27797@mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:30:18 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Digital and Wide Angles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > Winsor Crosby wrote: >> >> >> a quality of wide angle lenses, not the sensor. Anyone have >> experience the OM 18mm with high contrast subjects? Is there color >> aberration at the edges? > >I haven't specifically looked for it, but certainly haven't noticed >anything in general >use over 15 years. Those comments might only relate to *crap* lenses. > >Wayne Harridge It was a Canon L WA lens. Pretty much state of the art. It was only visible at full pixel resolution. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15818 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 22:36:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 22:36:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 14:36:45 2002 -0800 Received: from studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de (studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de [129.69.21.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11764 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:36:39 -0800 Received: from FFpins.home.mydomain [129.69.192.110] by studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A05D64460104; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:36:13 +0100 Received: (from frieder@localhost) by FFpins.home.mydomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA00820 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:09:19 +0100 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:09:19 +0100 From: frieder.faig@studserv.uni-stuttgart.de To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital and Wide Angles Message-ID: <20021202200919.A765@FFpins.localhost> References: <20021202080817.71618.qmail@web80104.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 08:35:18AM -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: > That is not the way I read it. His point is that color aberration is > a quality of wide angle lenses, not the sensor. Anyone have > experience the OM 18mm with high contrast subjects? Is there color > aberration at the edges? Yes, there is. It is a lens and so it has color abberation. It is not a theoretical perfect physical simplification. The question is only how much it has. Does it cause a remarkable decrease in image quality or not. It seems that the demands of digital and analog sensor technology differ in this case. The 3.5/18 Zuik is a very good extreme wide angel lens for 35mm film, and I think other abberations are more critical for this lens. But you will find color abberations, when you look close enough *g* - at any lens! Frieder Faig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15827 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 22:36:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 22:36:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 14:36:49 2002 -0800 Received: from studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de (studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de [129.69.21.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11766 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:36:40 -0800 Received: from FFpins.home.mydomain [129.69.192.110] by studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A06064460104; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:36:16 +0100 Received: (from frieder@localhost) by FFpins.home.mydomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA00875 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:42:09 +0100 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:42:08 +0100 From: frieder.faig@studserv.uni-stuttgart.de To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Xpan theory Message-ID: <20021202204208.C765@FFpins.localhost> References: <3DEB88DF.9090004@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <3DEB88DF.9090004@achtung.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 12:22:55AM +0800, Albert wrote: > I was thinking of the ultimate travel camera; and I was thinking that I > might just take one lens next time and that's it.. I would love to have > a 50mm or so, and maybe a 28mm if I took two instead of one. > > Then I thought about the xpan. The more I think about it, the more > ingenious it is. With one lens and cheap 35mm film, I can do "real" > panoramic shots. With that 45mm, it has the same coverage in pan mode > as a 28mm. So a 45mm and a 28mm in one. Great. So you don`t have the 'how to fill the emty foreground'-Problem. > > The lenses are slow because they are actually medium format lenses.. > Now check out this thinking.. > > Because the CCD's are smaller, so the image circle need not be so big, > what if you had the same setup as the xpan, with CCD's?? That would > mean (because the CCD's are smaller) that the lenses can be just as > compact, but faster, and you can have a choice of pan or regular.. Make > it 14megapixels and have a 3 gig card in there, and you are doing some > serious travel logs.. > > If such a camera existed, I would almost certainly be taking that on > trips instead of an OM.... Hmm, you`d need a non standard pan-size image sensor. You would need a very high resolution lens with a comparable large image field which is only partly used, with a very high refraction (= short focal lenght) -> Expensive, only a small marked share... It is easyer to include a software stitimg mode in a standard digital. Of course most people don`t realize that this leads to a distorted cylindrical perspective, while the X-pan has normal rectangular perspective. Frieder Faig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15819 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 22:36:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 22:36:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 14:36:45 2002 -0800 Received: from studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de (studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de [129.69.21.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11765 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:36:39 -0800 Received: from FFpins.home.mydomain [129.69.192.110] by studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A05F64460104; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:36:15 +0100 Received: (from frieder@localhost) by FFpins.home.mydomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA00847 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:26:29 +0100 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:26:29 +0100 From: frieder.faig@studserv.uni-stuttgart.de To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Message-ID: <20021202202629.B765@FFpins.localhost> References: <20021128213432.2169.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <20021202153208.25885.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <20021202153208.25885.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 07:32:08AM -0800, AG Schnozz wrote: > >If this was the LUG, there would be no stopping after a > >comment like that. > > I'm still not satisfied. > > 50mm = 1x > 100mm = 2x > ???mm = 3x > 200mm = 4x > > If these are the "standard" multiplication factors regarding > general "magnification" of 35mm cameras, then why is 3x 135mm > and not 150mm? It is because trigonometric functions (sin, cos, tan) are not linear functions. ;-) Your last question was a bit different. The 135mm answer was given with respect to the angel of field. When you ask with this way, I'd guess you refer to the size of your subject on the film at a given distance. Under this magnification aspect the answer surly is 150mm is in the middle. Frieder Faig P.S. when you refer to the covered field area, the 141mm answer is the one you want. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16623 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 22:43:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 22:43:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 14:43:34 2002 -0800 Received: from siaar2ab.compuserve.com (siaar2ab.compuserve.com [149.174.40.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11782 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:43:31 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaar2ab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.15) id RAA00234 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:39:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:39:09 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I recently sent off two 36-exp. rolls of Fuji Provia to A&I. One set of slides came back last week. I was wondering where the others were until today, when an envelope arrived from a kind and considerate soul in La Crescenta, California, with a note explaining they had been mis-sent to him. He took the time and made the effort, plus spending $1.11 on postag= e, to send them to me. I think he=92s due more than a simple "Thanks a bunc= h" note, particularly since one of these shots may be my TOPE 12 entry. Would such a note and a $5 bill be insulting? How about a note and a couple of rolls of film? Maybe a note and an A&I mailer or two? Or would he be close enough to A&= I that he would not be using mailers? On the other hand, if not, how=92d h= e get my slides? Should I send him my OM-3? I=92m just so confused now. This isn=92t covered in my copy of Miss Mann= ers. = A little help from those of you endowed with more refined social graces a= nd sensibilities would be appreciated. We rustics here in the hinterland, f= ar from the enlightenment of the California paradise, are just plain bass-ackwards and ignorant about a lot of things. :-) Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16874 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 22:43:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 22:43:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 14:43:48 2002 -0800 Received: from web13702.mail.yahoo.com (web13702.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.135]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA11786 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:43:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20021202224325.19964.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.110] by web13702.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:43:25 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:43:25 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: RE: [OM] BIN on TTL Multi-Connector To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021127223227.32677.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca JTimpe wrote: >When did I ever admit to Schnozz visiting with me? >Not denying it, mind you.... I sure would! For the record, the Jimster and I have never met in person. Strange thing, though. He moved and didn't let me know his new address or phone number! Hmmm. You think he's afraid of me stalking him? After all, he has at least one silvernosed lens... AG-huntbrothers-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17417 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:10:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:10:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:10:37 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11817 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:10:35 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gB2N2sZ06689 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:02:54 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:09:15 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37E4@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Concert photography Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:09:13 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > john@coedana.plus.com [mailto:john@coedana.plus.com] wrote: > When a colour negative film is correctly exposed in the light for > which it is balanced (usually daylight) the images in the blue, green > and red sensitive layers have the same contrast... Jim beat me to it, so I'll just have to second him and say thanks, John, for making a technical topic so simple to understand. Like others here I work in IT, so I'm familiar with the difficulty, and thus admire the skills in those that can do so. My folder's just called "Photo-keeps" though. Your post is there now. Oh, and thanks as well to Rob for the same help. Cheers Marc (who traces back to Wales on his mother's side apparently) Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17710 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:19:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:19:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:19:12 2002 -0800 Received: from cedar.petroglyph.crestline.ca.us ([209.185.214.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11825 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:19:10 -0800 Received: by CEDAR with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:18:14 -0800 Message-ID: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F1949@CEDAR> From: Scott Gomez To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] A question of etiquette Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:18:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Beats me, Walt. I haven't got a copy of Miss Manners with the info, either and the only social Grace I've known recently was a gregarious lady. At a guess, I expect sending him postage reimbursement and some sort of "thanks for taking the time" (which needn't be monetary--a nice photo perhaps?) would be appropriate. And perhaps a nice "thank you" note to accompany it. I don't think it's necessary to sacrifice your OM-3. --- Scott Gomez Southern California Enlightened Lodge, Bavarian Illuminati -----Original Message----- From: Walt Wayman [mailto:hiwayman@compuserve.com] Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette I'm just so confused now. This isn't covered in my copy of Miss Manners. A little help from those of you endowed with more refined social graces and sensibilities would be appreciated. We rustics here in the hinterland, far from the enlightenment of the California paradise, are just plain bass-ackwards and ignorant about a lot of things. :-) Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17997 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:24:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:24:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:24:24 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11829 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:24:21 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gB2NGZZ07859 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:16:36 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:22:57 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472D37E5@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] A question of etiquette Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:22:54 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Walt Wayman [mailto:hiwayman@compuserve.com] wrote: Just my opinion, but... > Would such a note and a $5 bill be insulting? I would this not really find it insulting, but not completely "thoughtful" either. I'd still appreciate it though! > How about a note and a couple of rolls of film? To me, this would be the most favoured option. As money often cannot compensate for the non-monetary value of the photos, I think something that says "thoughtful", with a note, would be most appreciated. If it was me receiving it, the monetary value of the film would become irrelevant in comparison to the thoughts and connection behind it. That could be just me though. > Maybe a note and an A&I mailer or two? Sorry, not sure what this is. Are these "prepaid development" envelopes? > Should I send him my OM-3? I will send you the two films to send on, and you can compensate me with the OM-3. A perfectly justified response to me here would be to email me a jpeg of the OM-3 with the note "It's the thought that counts." > We rustics here in the hinterland, far from the enlightenment > of the California paradise, are just plain bass-ackwards and > ignorant about a lot of things. :-) The important thing is to *not* send your cousin Elly May to 'em! ;-) Cheers Marc (from a long line of outcasts, "hillbillies" and inbreds ;-) ) Sydney, Oz (or, as we called it, "The Big Smoke") < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18290 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:28:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:28:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:28:41 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11837 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:28:39 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021202231613.QDON4594.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:16:13 -0500 Message-ID: <025301c29a57$7ee58b00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:06:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:16:13 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Monday, 02 December, 2002 06:39 PM Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette I recently sent off two 36-exp. rolls of Fuji Provia to A&I. One set of slides came back last week. I was wondering where the others were until today, when an envelope arrived from a kind and considerate soul in La Crescenta, California, with a note explaining they had been mis-sent to him. He took the time and made the effort, plus spending $1.11 on postage, to send them to me. I think he's due more than a simple "Thanks a bunch" note, particularly since one of these shots may be my TOPE 12 entry. Would such a note and a $5 bill be insulting? How about a note and a couple of rolls of film? Maybe a note and an A&I mailer or two? Or would he be close enough to A&I that he would not be using mailers? On the other hand, if not, how'd he get my slides? Should I send him my OM-3? I'm just so confused now. This isn't covered in my copy of Miss Manners. A little help from those of you endowed with more refined social graces and sensibilities would be appreciated. We rustics here in the hinterland, far from the enlightenment of the California paradise, are just plain bass-ackwards and ignorant about a lot of things. :-) Walt ...... If this had happened to me I would consider sending the person an 8" x 10" enlargement of one of the photos as a token of my appreciation along with with a card and a brief handwritten note of thanks. Wouldn't cost a whole lot but the recipient would realize your appreciation for his kindness. John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18583 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:31:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:31:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:31:31 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11841 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:31:29 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.16c.17eab309 (3699) for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:27:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <16c.17eab309.2b1d464c@aol.com> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:27:08 EST Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16c.17eab309.2b1d464c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_16c.17eab309.2b1d464c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/2/02 4:43:43 PM Central Standard Time, hiwayman@compuserve.com writes: > Should I send him my OM-3? > > No. Send the OM 3 to me and I'll put on my wordsmith hat and write him a thank you note for you. He will be pleased, I will be pleased and you are already pleased. Sounds like a win,win,win kind of deal. Thanks for the camera. ;-) Bill Barber --part1_16c.17eab309.2b1d464c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/2/02 4:43:43 PM Central Standard Time, hiwayman@compuserve.com writes:


Should I send him my OM-3?



No.  Send the OM 3 to me and I'll put on my wordsmith hat and write him a thank you note for you.  He will be pleased, I will be pleased and you are already pleased.  Sounds like a win,win,win kind of deal.  Thanks for the camera.  ;-)  Bill Barber --part1_16c.17eab309.2b1d464c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18855 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:34:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:34:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:34:28 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11852 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:34:25 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.12] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id ACC7422D014E; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:29:11 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202182048.00bfb1c0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:33:16 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:54 11/28/02, Joe Gwinn wrote: >I was thinking also of the lenses used on view cameras, where the field of >view (that is, image circle) vastly exceeds the film size. Ditto, shift >lenses for 35mm. So, I was looking for an algorithm that included only >data that was true of all lenses, regardless of design, which leaves only >focal length. Cannot be done. A practical lens design has an "acceptance angle" independent of focal length which is the limiting factor for the FOV of the lens' _image_circle_. You are correct that technical camera lenses normally have an image circle diameter significantly larger than the film diagonal to allow for the adjustments moving the circle around across the film plane. It also means the 80mm Mamiya Sekor acceptance angle for an M645 must be much larger than the 85mm Zuiko acceptance angle for an OM. However, when one speaks (or writes) of a system FOV, the limiting factor is the film dimension, if it's properly designed with the lens' image circle being larger (even if slightly more) than the film dimension. Even in 35mm small format and medium format systems, the image circle is usually a little larger than the film gate, especially for shorter lenses. Reason? It mitigates cos^4 falloff in the corners by placing the bulk of this falloff outside the film gate. The tradeoff is the extra light that doesn't end up in the photograph potentially bouncing around inside the lens and reducing contrast, or worse yet causing aperture flare. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19317 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 23:53:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 23:53:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 15:53:24 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11868 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:53:21 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by apollo.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gB2NnXbx007277 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:49:39 -0500 Message-Id: <200212022349.gB2NnXbx007277@apollo.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 17:49:50 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <040301c29a22$5cf6d100$c58714d1@miracler64ly0o> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [OM] spit 'n piss Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:46:28 -0800, William Sommerwerck wrote: >Urine is not antiseptic. But right out of the body, it is almost bacteria-free. The Inuit use urine to clean their eating utensils -- the ammonia in it cuts the seal grease. It's unlikely urine would make a good stop bath, because it's alkaline rather than acidic. Well, darn. So much for a good excuse to drink beer in the darkroom. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19862 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 00:25:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 00:25:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 16:25:12 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11913 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:25:10 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 695CB5B298 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:24:23 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT Sydney, Oz recommendations In-Reply-To: Message from Wayne Harridge of "Wed, 27 Nov 2002 13:15:44 +1100." <200211270215.gAR2Fim31069@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au> X-Mailer: mh-e 6.1+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 11:24:23 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021203002423.695CB5B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <200211270215.gAR2Fim31069@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au>, Wayne Harridge writes: Wayne, >We will be visiting Sydney for a week in January, does anyone have any >recommendations for OM fodder fairly accessible to the city area ? We will be >staying at McMahon's Pt, near the ferry jetty and will have to rely on public >transport. I see many have already given you a lot of places to visit, so all I really can add is: don't just look down, when you're walking around Sydney CBD. ;-) There's plenty of photo ops on roof tops in the CBD, or lower down, you just need to have a look up every so often. Hint: Corner of Castlereagh and King Street, if my memory serves me well. (Haven't been in CBD for the last couple of weeks). Pop Quiz: What is on top of the building there? ;-) Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20126 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 00:26:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 00:26:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 16:26:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.160]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11917 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:26:44 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB30Qgs11347 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:26:42 +1100 Message-Id: <200212030026.gB30Qgs11347@mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 11:26:42 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] spit 'n piss Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Barry B. Bean wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:46:28 -0800, William Sommerwerck wrote: > > >Urine is not antiseptic. But right out of the body, it is almost > bacteria-free. The Inuit use urine to clean their eating utensils -- > the ammonia in it cuts the seal > grease. It's unlikely urine would make a good stop bath, because it's > alkaline rather than acidic. > > Well, darn. So much for a good excuse to drink beer in the darkroom. > Since developer is normally alkaline you still might have a good excuse. Just don't get the bottles mixed up ! Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20507 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 00:43:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 00:43:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 16:43:27 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11925 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:43:24 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.171.199]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021203003904.EBK2935.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:39:04 -0500 Message-ID: <000b01c29a64$6d816980$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: Subject: [OM] annoying epay ad Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:39:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This has to win top spot for the most annoying Olympus camera ad on epay. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942255003 Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20790 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 00:48:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 00:48:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 16:48:53 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes03-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11933 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:48:50 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes03-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021203004505.VEPT19405.priv-edtnes03-hme0.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:45:05 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021202174428.01f916a8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 17:45:04 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] spit 'n piss In-Reply-To: <200212022349.gB2NnXbx007277@apollo.email.starband.net> References: <040301c29a22$5cf6d100$c58714d1@miracler64ly0o> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 05:49 PM 12/2/2002 -0600, Barry B. Bean wrote: [snip] >Well, darn. So much for a good excuse to drink beer in the darkroom. You need an *excuse*? 8^> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21090 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 00:54:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 00:54:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 16:54:43 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11941 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:54:41 -0800 Received: from pool0867.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.137.102] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18J1KJ-0003Rc-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:54:15 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> References: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 16:54:09 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I recently sent off two 36-exp. rolls of Fuji Provia to A&I. One set of >slides came back last week. I was wondering where the others were until >today, when an envelope arrived from a kind and considerate soul in La >Crescenta, California, with a note explaining they had been mis-sent to >him. He took the time and made the effort, plus spending $1.11 on postage, >to send them to me. I think he=92s due more than a simple "Thanks a bunch" >note, particularly since one of these shots may be my TOPE 12 entry. > >Would such a note and a $5 bill be insulting? >How about a note and a couple of rolls of film? >Maybe a note and an A&I mailer or two? Or would he be close enough to A&I >that he would not be using mailers? On the other hand, if not, how=92d he >get my slides? >Should I send him my OM-3? > >I=92m just so confused now. This isn=92t covered in my copy of Miss= Manners. >A little help from those of you endowed with more refined social graces and >sensibilities would be appreciated. We rustics here in the hinterland, far >from the enlightenment of the California paradise, are just plain >bass-ackwards and ignorant about a lot of things. :-) > >Walt Walt, I don't think anyone is going to be concerned about being out $1.11 and if you send money it does get into other issues. I would send him maybe a little more than a note. Tell him who you are, what equipment you use and why, how long you have been shooting, what kind of pictures you like to take, and most of all how much you appreciate his thoughtfulness. I think it will please him that you took the time to thank him properly. You could throw in a wallet size pic of yourself with a big grin to let him know whom he made happy. Winsor -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21825 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 01:00:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 01:00:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 17:00:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11965 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:00:54 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6I00A6ZQGB0O@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:53:00 -0400 (AST) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:53:01 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] annoying epay ad In-reply-to: <000b01c29a64$6d816980$7212a20a@waynecul> To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/2/02 8:39 PM, "Wayne Culberson" wrote: > This has to win top spot for the most annoying Olympus camera ad on epay. > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942255003 > Wayne It never ceases to amaze me that there are people out there that think that having all your content scroll horizontally across the screen is a cool design. A few years back, a friend of mine had a contest to design the worst page on the net (we were both pretty heavy into web design at the time) as a joke. His page resulted in "Goth Boiz Page Uv Evil", mine was the 133720N3 (that's leetzone for those who don't read "leet caps") which was never completed, which arguably made it the worse of the 2 (that and because I was subjecting viewers to the horrors of a 6 frame layout designed to be displayed at 1280x1024 and higher). Honestly, though I think this page may have beaten us. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22387 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 01:33:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 01:33:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 17:33:53 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11989 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:33:51 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.117]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021203012934.DZXB4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:29:34 -0600 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:28:37 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.121.117] at Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:29:34 -0600 Message-Id: <20021203012934.DZXB4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Don't send money. Assume he uses your processor and send him a couple of mailers. Send as well a note of thanks and indicate the mailers are a token of your esteem and gratitude. Chapter 14 of the Manners Manual. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22640 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 01:34:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 01:34:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 17:34:14 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11993 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:34:10 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh156.interisland.net [12.17.134.156]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB31UqJ21693 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:30:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 17:34:16 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: RE: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id RAA11993 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > ....This seems contrary to the 24-50-100 standard that many people empl= oy.... > The standard that many people employ is the $$$ standard. Which is why I originally ended up with 28-50-135. Can't get any cheaper than that. Mathematical progressions don't figure into this equation :>) mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22936 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 01:38:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 01:38:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 17:38:11 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12011 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:38:09 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.12] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A9C47C1016C; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:32:52 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202185515.0303f760@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 X-Priority: 1 (Highest) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:36:58 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: <20021202153208.25885.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021128213432.2169.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:32 12/2/02, Ag Schnozz wrote: > >If this was the LUG, there would be no stopping after a > >comment like that. > >I'm still not satisfied. > > 50mm = 1x >100mm = 2x >???mm = 3x >200mm = 4x > >If these are the "standard" multiplication factors regarding >general "magnification" of 35mm cameras, then why is 3x 135mm >and not 150mm? > >AG-Schnozz Not true! Magnification is the ratio of the size of the object being photographed on film to its actual size. This is dependent on object distance from the front lens node and focal length, but **independent** of film format. Whether or not it fits in the film frame is determined by film format. Thus, the same object at the same distance will be very nearly the same size **on**film** with an 85mm Zuiko on an OM and an 80mm Sekor on an M645. The slight difference will be the 5mm difference in focal length. If you were to make a photograph of the same object with each one, then take the developed film out of the M645 and chop it down to 24mm x 36mm, the size of a 35mm format full frame, you would end up with very, very nearly the same, exact photograph as was created using the OM. Here's the math for magnification as related to focal length and distance from object (subject) to front lens node: Start with two of the basic lens equations: 1/f = 1/u + 1/v, where: f = focal length u = subject distance from front lens node, and v = critical focus distance of rear lens node to image on film plane M = v/u, M = I/O, and therefore I/O = v/u, where: M = magnification I = image size O = object size u and v are defined as above Solve for "v" in the first equation and get: v = (f * u)/(u - f) Substitute into the second equation and reduce: M = f/(u - f) Now see what happens to magnification for an object at 5 meters (or 5000mm) when we use the lens focal lengths you listed: M = 50/4950 for a 50mm lens M = 100/4900 for a 100mm lens M = 150/4850 for a 150mm lens M = 200/4800 for a 200mm lens You should be able to see it's not 1X, 2X, 3X and 4X magnification! Going back to the original problem of what focal length is effectively halfway "between" 100mm and 200mm, as regards magnification (versus FOV for a specific film format), it depends on object distance from the front lens node! f = [(150 * u) - 20000]/(u - 150), where: f = focal length with magnification halfway between u = distance from object to front lens node To derive this, set the difference between magnification of a "halfway" focal length "f" and that of a 100mm lens equal to the difference between the magnification for a 200mm lens and the same halfway focal length, then solve for the halfway focal length. At an object distance of infinity, the focal length is 150mm. As object distance is reduced, the magnification midpoint focal length increases and approaches 200mm. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23490 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 02:05:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 02:05:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 18:05:33 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12060 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:05:31 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002120302042200300ja0kfe>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:04:22 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEC1122.70802@attbi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:04:18 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So you haven't tried it yet since removing the hair from the back of the lens? Do you have any other Oly bodies to see if it shows up on a different body? It could still be something in the mirror box that isn't in the light path from the longer lenses but sticks into the path of the wide angle. Contary to what others have suggested, it doesn't have to be actually touching the film, just nearby. The example you provided is shot in bright light. I can't tell where the lens is focused, but closer stuff seems maybe sharper than distant stuff. A 28mm lens stopped way down has a lot of depth of field. If it is focused in mid or close range, something on a lens hood or even sticking out from the filter threads, etc. could possibly give an almost in focus image on the film. When you look through the viewfinder, the lens is wide open, with less DOF, so you wouldn't easily notice something like that through the viewfinder. Remember that in a retrofocus WA design, the front of the front element can be quite a distance in front of the optical nodes. I'm no repair expert, but pretty knowledgeable about camera/lens stuff and have done minor repairs on both. If you want to try another set of eyes, I may be nearby, as I live in Berkeley. Reply off list if I can help. Moose R. Jackson wrote: > BTW, I appreciate all the input on the subject. I'm a rank amateur > despite a lot of years of taking photos and I tend to spend a lot of > time chasing my tail when a problem pops up. I feel like my questions > are just an annoyance to some of the more professional and experienced > photographers here, so thank you for being patient and helpful despite > my ignorance. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23863 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 02:21:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 02:21:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 18:21:18 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12089 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:21:16 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120302200700100s9jvve>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:20:08 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:18:37 -0800 Subject: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> Message-Id: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is still what I use. My first OM was an OM-2n and I shot with a Vivitar 90-230mm f/4.5-5.6 zoom and also later a Vivitar 28-90mm f2.8-3.5 zoom. When I finally started noticing the difference in image quality people were getting with primes I changed over to a 28-50-135 setup and recently replaced my third party 28 and 135 with Zuikos. I still feel like it's a pretty powerful combination of lenses for most applications. Although I recently saw a lens like my old Vivitar 90-230mm on the nameless auction site for $14 and couldn't resist the urge to buy it. It's about like I remember it. I took my old one to dozens of concerts in the late 70's. As much concert funk as it absorbed I'm amazed it never sprouted fungus. This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a "standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 05:34 PM, Mike wrote: > The standard that many people employ is the $$$ standard. Which is why > I > originally ended up with 28-50-135. Can't get any cheaper than that. > Mathematical progressions don't figure into this equation :>) > > mike < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24182 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 02:29:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 02:29:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 18:29:56 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12103 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:29:53 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021203022844001000qskqe>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:28:44 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:27:14 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DEC1122.70802@attbi.com> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 06:04 PM, dreammoose wrote: > So you haven't tried it yet since removing the hair from the back of > the lens? Nope. I'm going to use it Wednesday a little, though. > Do you have any other Oly bodies to see if it shows up on a different > body? Yeah, I just recently bought a 4T, which is what I'm planning to use Wednesday. > It could still be something in the mirror box that isn't in the light > path from the longer lenses but sticks into the path of the wide > angle. Contary to what others have suggested, it doesn't have to be > actually touching the film, just nearby. Last night after that discussion I looked around inside my OM-1n and didn't really see anything that could have been a problem. I need to shoot some more film through it, though, and see what happens. I'm just hung up on the new camera right now and can't find much time for the old girl. ;-) > The example you provided is shot in bright light. I can't tell where > the lens is focused, but closer stuff seems maybe sharper than distant > stuff. A 28mm lens stopped way down has a lot of depth of field. If it > is focused in mid or close range, something on a lens hood or even > sticking out from the filter threads, etc. could possibly give an > almost in focus image on the film. When you look through the > viewfinder, the lens is wide open, with less DOF, so you wouldn't > easily notice something like that through the viewfinder. Remember > that in a retrofocus WA design, the front of the front element can be > quite a distance in front of the optical nodes. This is an excellent point. It was a very bright day when I took that photo and I had it stopped all the way down with my focus point shorter than infinity by about a half-inch. I was hoping all the DOF would make it seem like most everything was in focus. Perhaps including the offending object. The day was brutally windy and I changed lenses in the open a couple of times, so the potential for just about anything to be just about anywhere was there. > I'm no repair expert, but pretty knowledgeable about camera/lens stuff > and have done minor repairs on both. If you want to try another set of > eyes, I may be nearby, as I live in Berkeley. Reply off list if I can > help. I'm in Santa Rosa. If the images this week come back contaminated I may take you up on that. I appreciate the thoughtful response. -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24600 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 02:46:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 02:46:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 18:46:23 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts1.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12130 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:46:20 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.149.58]) by simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021203024200.XQMF27043.simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:42:00 -0500 Message-ID: <004201c29a75$9a1c6b00$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:42:18 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been > discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a > "standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just > curious. > > -Rob Today, I shifted over from the OM2s to the OM1n. Its pretty cold here in Canada right now, and the 1n works better when you're outdoors for awhile. So the Om2s, still my favorite, gets a little chance to hibernate. Today, like almost every day now, I took only a 50/1.8 and 100/2.8 with me, and a 35RC loaded with B&W. If I thought I would need it, I'd also take a Vivitar 28/2 I have, which is the one 3rd party I have which is as good as the Zuikos as far as I can see. But that is about it for me these days. I can carry this in my coat pockets without even taking a camera bag. I've basically laid aside using the zooms, as they are too big to carry, and too slow. Even the Zuiko 135/2.8 is too heavy for my pocket, and takes a different size filter. What kind of photography?...Shooting nature (read snow today), scenics, sunsets, etc., which is what I do mostly. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25063 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 03:14:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 03:14:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 19:14:13 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12162 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:14:10 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021203031025.TFLW13269.priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:10:25 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021202200717.01ffb3f8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:10:24 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) In-Reply-To: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> References: <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 06:18 PM 12/2/2002 -0800, Rob Jackson wrote: [snip] >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a "standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. OM-4, Zuiko 28/2.0. That's it. That's my ultimate "compact" setup with a 35mm SLR. If there's only one lens I can take, the 28's the one. If two, then the 28 and the Zuiko 90/2.0 or 100/2.0. If three, throw in the 21/2.0. More than that, and I might as well bring the entire kit. ;-) Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25638 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 03:54:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 03:54:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 19:54:54 2002 -0800 Received: from CYPHER.turbonet.com (cypher.turbonet.com [206.228.112.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12210 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:54:46 -0800 Received: from [206.228.118.23] by CYPHER.turbonet.com (GMS 8.00.3078/NT0409.00.990455ed) with ESMTP id scrsocaa for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:54:08 -0800 Message-ID: <3DEC2BD7.B8EAFC5C@turbonet.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 19:58:15 -0800 From: Bill Stanke X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus Users Group Subject: [OM] Solid cat on da bay Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Zuiks: Item on the auction site: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942795452 I haven't seen one of these offered in a long time. No connection, etc. Bill Stanke < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26234 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 04:38:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 04:38:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 20:38:21 2002 -0800 Received: from web80102.mail.yahoo.com (web80102.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.169.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA12246 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:38:17 -0800 Message-ID: <20021203043804.24277.qmail@web80102.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [63.206.91.31] by web80102.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:38:04 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:38:04 -0800 (PST) From: Dr Timothy Hughes Subject: [OM] Foveon CMOS sensor details To: Olympus List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1629969154-1038890284=:24269" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-1629969154-1038890284=:24269 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii For those interested in Digital camera sensors, here is Foveon's production X3 technology sensor used in the Fuji digital camera. It is a 10Megapixel (RGB) sensor or 3.4Megapixel full spectrum sensor. Note manufacturers always spec the RGB pixel count to get better sounding numbers. http://www.alt-vision.com/documents/F7_Datasheet.pdf The size is 20.7mmx13.8mm. Which is about one third of the area of 35mm film. If built in a full 35mm size sensor it would be about 30 (RGB) megapixels! It might become slower in that size because readout is serial. At 50mW power, for the current design this would not be a limitation for a larger sensor. Unfortunately they do not give the spectral response for color sensors. Regards, Tim Hughes TimHughes@ieee.org --0-1629969154-1038890284=:24269 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

For those interested in Digital camera sensors, here is Foveon's production X3 technology sensor used in the Fuji digital camera. It is a 10Megapixel (RGB) sensor or 3.4Megapixel full spectrum sensor. Note manufacturers always spec the RGB pixel count to get better sounding numbers.

http://www.alt-vision.com/documents/F7_Datasheet.pdf

The size is 20.7mmx13.8mm. Which is about one third of the area of 35mm film. If built in a full 35mm size sensor it would be about 30 (RGB) megapixels! It might become slower in that size because readout is serial. At 50mW power, for the current design this would not be a limitation for a larger sensor. Unfortunately they do not give the spectral response for color sensors.

Regards,

Tim Hughes

TimHughes@ieee.org

--0-1629969154-1038890284=:24269-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26520 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 04:43:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 04:43:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 20:43:15 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12254 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:43:13 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-123-119-110.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.123.119.110]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB34gfAQ187530 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:42:41 -0500 Message-ID: <001401c29a85$50ee0820$6e777b40@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021203005449.21147.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] great idea, but I thought of it first Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:34:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "If such a camera existed, I would almost certainly be taking that on trips instead of an OM.... Your thoughts? Albert" But seriously, Albert... I've got one. I traveled to Florence in Nov. 01 with it, and the 45 and 90, and nothing else. a bit of a mistake there, as I still needed something wider and not longer. In June 02, I took the Xpan, 45, 90, and an OM4 with 28-48 and 21/2 to Lisbon and Barcelona. Much better deal. I used the OM and the 28-48 about 600f the time. The 21, had I had it in Florence, would have been invaluable, but didn't need it in June. Now, I have the 30 for the Xpan, and would again travel with it alone. Although speed is a problem with the 30, it can be used without the center filter in the standard format. The Xpan is a remarkable camera, with but a couple of minor faults. It is as remarkable and groundbreaking as the OM1, without the recognition. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26839 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 04:51:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 04:51:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 20:51:55 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12262 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:51:53 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-123-119-110.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.123.119.110]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB34pLAQ494398 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:51:21 -0500 Message-ID: <001901c29a86$85316fe0$6e777b40@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021203005449.21147.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] To whom it may concern... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:43:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Whatever the amount of grease, our eating utensils are washed in the dishwasher. With water from the municipal supply. Using dishwasher soap, from the grocery store. Absolutely nothing else!!!! Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:12 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27124 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 04:59:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 04:59:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 20:59:23 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12270 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:59:21 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-123-119-110.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.123.119.110]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB34wnAQ264876 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:58:49 -0500 Message-ID: <001d01c29a87$8f958b00$6e777b40@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021203005449.21147.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] running the numbers Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:50:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bob said: "Also, it is interesting that a 18mm has a FOV of 100 degrees - almost twice that of the 50mm! ;) and, if one is working on a system of halves, the 28mm fits between these two. This seems contrary to the 24-50-100 standard that many people employ. I have found that I like the 18-28-50-85-135 group better, however I use the 28 and 85 most, with the 135 coming in next, but this is mostly for macro." I, too, started out with the 24-50-100 system when I went OM (My first lens with the previous system was a 35, but I kept to the system from then on), but that was before brother Gries even existed. In the last 8-10 years, though, I've changed. I'm with the 28-(opt. 35)-50-85-135 camp now. I have both the 18 and the 21. The 18 was first, and since I 've added the 21, I find I use it as the next wider lens, rather than the 18. Generally, I save the 18 for interiors. I can say this: until about 4-5 years ago, I never had owned a 28. Man, am I sorry I didn't get one sooner. I consider the 35 and the 28 general purpose wides, that can be used without a great deal of "wide angle perspective." The 24, 21, 18, and 16 require careful framing. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27405 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 05:01:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 05:01:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 21:01:15 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12274 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:01:12 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.123] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AB0E10CC00C6; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:03:10 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:57:18 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: Re: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca err, would anyone mind telling me what exactly chili is? all i can fathom (from watching the simpsons!) is that it's some sort of bean dish, cooked, and the hotter the better? what else is in it? i do know that while in texas, my uncle made this awesome thingy, all sorts of beans, slow cooked, thick and chunky, goes well with crusty bread on a chilly night. wasn't very hot, but nutritious up the wazoo /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27740 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 05:14:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 05:14:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 21:14:13 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA12284 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:14:08 -0800 Received: (cpmta 18284 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 21:13:07 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 21:13:07 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 05:13:07 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: Bill Stanke , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:13:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] Solid cat on da bay Message-ID: <3DEBF70E.23423.47A7A0B@localhost> In-reply-to: <3DEC2BD7.B8EAFC5C@turbonet.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Puny. Buy http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942936528 tOM On Monday, December 02, 2002 at 19:58 Bill Stanke wrote: > Hi Zuiks: > > Item on the auction site: > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942795452 > > I haven't seen one of these offered in a long time. > > No connection, etc. ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27994 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 05:14:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 05:14:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 21:14:43 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao04.cox.net (lakemtao04.cox.net [68.1.17.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12291 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:14:41 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021203051023.ULER1248.lakemtao04.cox.net@number1> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:10:23 -0500 Message-ID: <00ea01c29a8a$5701df20$0301a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <1c2.25060f3.2b1b1e58@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:10:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00E7_01C29A60.6D51A3C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00E7_01C29A60.6D51A3C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor!I'm glad to see you've changed = your spit-tune. :) Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Robert T McFetridge=20 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca=20 Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 11:28 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! I regret making light of the spit debate. I agree that spit is not = antiseptic. William wrote: snip >Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent. Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild detergent, = works best for any given project. Saliva, however, contains bacteria. = I sure wouldn't be using saliva on ANY optics. Fogging a lens with the = breath is another matter. That's just water vapor. Saliva on contact lenses? NOOO!!! Ask your optician. NOT GOOD! = Sterile saline solution ONLY! Susan, help us out here! Saliva doesn't = belong in cuts, either.... blood from a wound cleanses as well as = anything, until you can get to soap & water and/or proper medical = attention... geez... maybe we should hold a first aid course here! = Never "spit" on a wound. You guys are scarin' me now. Rich ------=_NextPart_000_00E7_01C29A60.6D51A3C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor!
I'm glad to see you've changed your spit-tune.  :)
 
Bryan Pilati
OM-2n; IS-3
Va-USA
Disclaimer:  I'm = always=20 joking
unless I should be serious.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Robert T=20 McFetridge
To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca =
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 = 11:28=20 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- = mankind's=20 benefactor!

I regret making light of the spit debate. I agree that spit is = not=20 antiseptic.

William=20 wrote:

snip
>Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural=20 Solvent.

Sometimes, just plain water, or water with some mild = detergent, works best for any given project.  Saliva, however, = contains=20 bacteria.  I sure wouldn't be using saliva on ANY optics.  = Fogging=20 a lens with the breath is another matter.  That's just water=20 vapor.

Saliva on contact lenses?  NOOO!!!  Ask your = optician.  NOT GOOD!  Sterile saline solution ONLY!  = Susan,=20 help us out here!  Saliva doesn't belong in cuts, either.... = blood from=20 a wound cleanses as well as anything, until you can get to soap = & water=20 and/or proper medical attention... geez... maybe we should hold a = first aid=20 course here!  Never "spit" on a wound.

You = guys are=20 scarin' me now.

Rich

------=_NextPart_000_00E7_01C29A60.6D51A3C0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28272 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 05:16:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 05:16:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 21:16:53 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao01.cox.net (lakemtao01.cox.net [68.1.17.244]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12296 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:16:50 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021203051233.ZMOU2199.lakemtao01.cox.net@number1> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:12:33 -0500 Message-ID: <00f801c29a8a$a4c16fa0$0301a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <050601c2987b$bca14480$21e214d1@miracler64ly0o> Subject: Re: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:12:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Try urinating on your Olympus camera if all else fails. Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 9:21 AM Subject: [OM] Saliva -- mankind's benefactor! > Several years ago I won a like-new OM-1 and 55/1.2. It was sent off to John > Hermanson for a CLA and curtain replacement. (John said the curtains didn't > need replacement. But they were wrinkled and I didn't want to take a chance. > So I had them replaced.) > > Anyhow, one part of the camera wasn't mint. The rubber on the bottom of the > Shoe 1 had deteriorated and left a big blotch of some whitish material on > the prism cover. I tried every solvent at my disposal -- including all sorts > of powerful organics and even GooGone -- but it just wouldn't budge. > > Then, in a moment of inspiration, I spit on the crud. And guess what? It > came off easily and completely. > > Don't spurn spit. It's Nature's Natural Solvent. > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28795 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 05:52:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 05:52:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 21:52:47 2002 -0800 Received: from web13704.mail.yahoo.com (web13704.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA12315 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:52:44 -0800 Message-ID: <20021203055231.24553.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.68.29] by web13704.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 21:52:31 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:52:31 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: RE: [OM] Time out for a food... To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021203005449.21147.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Bill Clark wrote: >I have been to Whitehall as well. It is a very nice area. The >beach is superb, especially the "big red lighthouse". I >remember you used to be able to take the Milwaukee Clipper >accross the lake many years ago. My grandmother still lives in >Muskegon. "Big Red" is in Holland. Really cool looking lighthouse. The White River lighthouse (Whitehall/Montague) is a really neat design that I believe is nearly identical to the Eagle Harbor lighthouse. AG __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29149 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:04:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:04:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:04:16 2002 -0800 Received: from web13708.mail.yahoo.com (web13708.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA12336 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:04:14 -0800 Message-ID: <20021203060400.56183.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.68.29] by web13708.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 22:04:00 PST Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:04:00 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] ADITL Chili To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021203005449.21147.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The way I see it, there is only one way to settle this Chili debate. Logistics could be a little tougher to figure out though. Beans or not, I've got a Chili recipe that will burn the socks off of any self-respecting Texan. And a freezer full of peppers just needing a hunk O'beef and a few days of cooking. You Texans think you are so tough? Bring it on! :) AG-roids of steel-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29532 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:20:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:20:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:20:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12340 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:20:07 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gB36J9W68508 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:19:09 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.80] (195-74-115-80.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.80]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB36J7o68456 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:19:08 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> References: <200212021739_MC3-1-1DD0-F423@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:19:10 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Walt I think that either your TY note and $5 or a simple present (perhaps a print of one of your photos) would be just the job. You can send me your OM3 if you like though, I shall not mind or be embarrassed... I promise ;-) Cheers Chris At 17:39 -0500 02/12/02, Walt Wayman wrote: >I recently sent off two 36-exp. rolls of Fuji Provia to A&I. One set of >slides came back last week. I was wondering where the others were until >today, when an envelope arrived from a kind and considerate soul in La >Crescenta, California, with a note explaining they had been mis-sent to >him. He took the time and made the effort, plus spending $1.11 on postage, >to send them to me. I think he=92s due more than a simple "Thanks a bunch" >note, particularly since one of these shots may be my TOPE 12 entry. > >Would such a note and a $5 bill be insulting? >How about a note and a couple of rolls of film? >Maybe a note and an A&I mailer or two? Or would he be close enough to A&I >that he would not be using mailers? On the other hand, if not, how=92d he >get my slides? >Should I send him my OM-3? > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29788 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:22:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:22:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:22:46 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail15.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.215]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12344 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:22:44 -0800 Received: (qmail 3771 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:22:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail15.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 3 Dec 2002 06:22:57 -0000 Message-ID: <3DEC508A.6070806@speakeasy.net> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:34:50 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Describing chili as a bean dish is somewhat like describing a 4T with 28-48 zoom by listing what's inscribed on the skylight filter... Chili is a meat dish. beans are purely optional, and speaking as a Texan, a corruption of the true form of chili. The usual meat is beef, ground somewhat coarser than the normal hamburger texture. Other valid meats are sometimes added as well, such as venison, rattlesnake, or whatever the hunter managed to bring in. And in the "reproduction" category, there are even vegetarian versions. Other ingredients: chili peppers, masa (a coarse flour), tomatoes, various spices, and lots of time spent simmering. For an ok version, check out a bowl of red at Chili's restaurant. Also see Wayne Allen's Chili page, but for the utterly chili besotted, there's The Annual Chili cookoff in Terlingua, Texas. Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa siddiq wrote: > err, would anyone mind telling me what exactly chili is? all i can fathom (from watching the simpsons!) is that it's some sort of bean dish, cooked, and the hotter the better? what else is in it? i do know that while in texas, my > uncle made this awesome thingy, all sorts of beans, slow cooked, thick and chunky, goes well with crusty bread on a chilly night. wasn't very hot, but nutritious up the wazoo > > /S > -- > "We apologise for the inconvenience." > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30041 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:23:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:23:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:23:53 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA12348 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:23:51 -0800 Received: (cpmta 9208 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 22:22:49 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 22:22:49 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 06:22:49 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 01:22:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] annoying epay ad Message-ID: <3DEC0768.23882.4BA58BD@localhost> References: <000b01c29a64$6d816980$7212a20a@waynecul> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear Andrew Dacey , Go to his daughter's site.... tOM On Monday, December 02, 2002 at 20:53 Andrew Dacey wrote: > On 12/2/02 8:39 PM, "Wayne Culberson" wrote: > > > This has to win top spot for the most annoying Olympus camera ad on epay. > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942255003 > > Wayne > > It never ceases to amaze me that there are people out there that think that > having all your content scroll horizontally across the screen is a cool > design. > > A few years back, a friend of mine had a contest to design the worst page on > the net (we were both pretty heavy into web design at the time) as a joke. > His page resulted in "Goth Boiz Page Uv Evil", mine was the 133720N3 (that's > leetzone for those who don't read "leet caps") which was never completed, > which arguably made it the worse of the 2 (that and because I was subjecting > viewers to the horrors of a 6 frame layout designed to be displayed at > 1280x1024 and higher). Honestly, though I think this page may have beaten > us. > > -- > Andrew "Frugal" Dacey > frugal@tildefrugal.net > http://www.tildefrugal.net/ > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30381 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:31:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:31:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:31:18 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12360 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:31:15 -0800 Received: from c2000524a (12-224-143-183.client.attbi.com[12.224.143.183]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <20021203063007052002rmfse>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:30:07 +0000 Message-ID: <000701c29a95$73095030$b78fe00c@c2000524a> From: "Paul Laughlin" To: References: Subject: Re: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:30:18 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "siddiq" To: Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 8:57 PM Subject: Re: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... > err, would anyone mind telling me what exactly chili is? all i can fathom (from watching the simpsons!) is that it's some sort of bean dish, cooked, and the hotter the better? what else is in it? i do know that while in texas, my > uncle made this awesome thingy, all sorts of beans, slow cooked, thick and chunky, goes well with crusty bread on a chilly night. wasn't very hot, but nutritious up the wazoo Well, there many variations in Chili. Start with Chile con Carne. It is basically made of coarsely ground, or finely cubed beef, ground red chile peppers (Chili Powder) and water. The meat is fried in oil and the ground chile peppers are added. Add a little water and simmer for about an hour. Then there are the additions that many people put in. I prefer some chopped onion, myself. A lot of people insist that it isn't chili, if it does not have beans in it. If I add beans, they are pinto beans. I don't really like kidney beans. Most people that make chili, have their own set of seasonings that they prefer. The best that I have ever eaten was made by a Mexican-American from San Antonio, Texas named Carlos Cazares. He used a whole chuck roast and made the basic recipe of diced meat, chili powder, oil, chopped onions and a little water. He and I ate the whole works, while watching the football games on a Sunday. Sure was good. Spent the next day wishing for ice cream, though. Paul in Portland OR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30675 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:36:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:36:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:36:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp4.cbn.net.id (smtp4.cbn.net.id [202.158.3.29]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12364 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:36:34 -0800 Received: from toshiba (ip28-90.cbn.net.id [202.158.28.90]) by smtp4.cbn.net.id (Postfix) with SMTP id 28C322BD35 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 13:35:48 +0700 (WIT) Message-ID: <013b01c29b14$26512ae0$0200a8c0@toshiba> From: "Trevor Urlwin" To: References: <000b01c29a64$6d816980$7212a20a@waynecul> <3DEC0768.23882.4BA58BD@localhost> Subject: Re: [OM] annoying epay ad Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 13:37:11 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You can certainly see grandpa's hand in that creation. ----- Original Message ----- From: "tOM Trottier" To: Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [OM] annoying epay ad > Dear Andrew Dacey , > > Go to his daughter's site.... > > tOM > > On Monday, December 02, 2002 at 20:53 > Andrew Dacey wrote: > > > On 12/2/02 8:39 PM, "Wayne Culberson" wrote: > > > > > This has to win top spot for the most annoying Olympus camera ad on epay. > > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942255003 > > > Wayne > > > > It never ceases to amaze me that there are people out there that think that > > having all your content scroll horizontally across the screen is a cool > > design. > > > > A few years back, a friend of mine had a contest to design the worst page on > > the net (we were both pretty heavy into web design at the time) as a joke. > > His page resulted in "Goth Boiz Page Uv Evil", mine was the 133720N3 (that's > > leetzone for those who don't read "leet caps") which was never completed, > > which arguably made it the worse of the 2 (that and because I was subjecting > > viewers to the horrors of a 6 frame layout designed to be displayed at > > 1280x1024 and higher). Honestly, though I think this page may have beaten > > us. > > > > -- > > Andrew "Frugal" Dacey > > frugal@tildefrugal.net > > http://www.tildefrugal.net/ > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > > ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- > ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- > 6115 > _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada > K1R 7V8 > (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 > "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a > little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor > safety." -- Benjamin Franklin > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30925 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:37:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:37:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:37:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12370 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:37:36 -0800 Received: from [206.170.5.191] by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001)) with ESMTP id <0H6J00IHI676T8@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 22:33:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 22:34:09 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Solid cat on da bay In-reply-to: <3DEC2BD7.B8EAFC5C@turbonet.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/2/02 7:58 PM, Bill Stanke at bstanke@turbonet.com wrote: > Hi Zuiks: > > Item on the auction site: > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942795452 > > I haven't seen one of these offered in a long time. > > No connection, etc. > > Bill Stanke > Cool lens, but definitely not hand-holdable... too heavy even if the magnification didn't kill you. I'm going to try it with my new Bogen 410 gear-head, should help the precise framing... I couldn't keep the ball head steady enough to get things just right. Mine came without filters and case, but I found that the filters for a Tokina 500/8 mirror lens fit it just fine. -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31215 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:43:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:43:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 22:43:45 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12376 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:43:41 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120306423200100qnooae>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:42:32 +0000 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:41:02 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <000701c29a95$73095030$b78fe00c@c2000524a> Message-Id: <30C28875-068A-11D7-97C8-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Lord, you're tellin' the truth there. I've got some family in Cincinnati who only think it's chili if it's full of kidney beans, cinnamon and served over spaghetti. In fact, in areas around there you'll find people who cook pasta or rice right in the chili. I have a friend who makes "white chili" with chicken breasts and great northern beans. I know someone else who makes a five-bean chili. My own take on chili is that it's all a question of peppers. I like to use a food processor to reduce an assortment of organic hot peppers to a chili salsa of sorts that I simmer for 5-6 hours with my meat. After a couple of hours the peppers kind of cook down to nothing and the heat is infused into the meat. I also add fresh garlic right before it's time to serve. My chili is just a meat chili, but I serve beans, rice and cornbread on the side, so's a feller can make up a bowl the way he likes it. ;-) -Rob On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 10:30 PM, Paul Laughlin wrote: > > Well, there many variations in Chili. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31963 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 07:48:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 07:48:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 23:48:49 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12420 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:48:47 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120307473800200snfphe>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:47:38 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEC618F.6030201@attbi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:47:27 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Concert photos References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you use 357 or SR44W silver oxide batteries, they will last a long time, although not as long as OM-1 batteries. The special case is dark settings where you have to use the backlight a lot, like concerts, stage shows, etc. In that case, it is prudent to have extra batteries. Moose R. Jackson wrote: > Actually, I didn't know that. I just got my OM-4T. I've been shooting > with an OM-1n for years and I replace the batteries every time we get > a new president. ;-) > > -Rob > > On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 02:05 AM, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > >> If you're gonna use an OM-2S, 4 (or its variants) or OM-PC, be sure >> to take >> a spare set of batteries. But you knew that. Better yet, load the new >> batteries BEFORE you go. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32248 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 07:54:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 07:54:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 02 23:54:23 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12424 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:54:21 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120307531300200sn55me>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:53:13 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEC62DE.7030405@attbi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:53:02 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, Santa Rosa's a little far for drop in. I thought from some of the places you photographed that you might be closer. I have several OM-1(n)s and a couple of OM-2n bodies, but I think I should get rid of most of them. The ones I really use are OM-4T(i) and OM-PC bodies. I hope that mystery mark disappears! Moose R. Jackson wrote: > Yeah, I just recently bought a 4T, which is what I'm planning to use > Wednesday. > > Last night after that discussion I looked around inside my OM-1n and > didn't really see anything that could have been a problem. I need to > shoot some more film through it, though, and see what happens. I'm > just hung up on the new camera right now and can't find much time for > the old girl. ;-) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32604 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 08:05:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 08:05:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 00:05:57 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA12433 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:05:54 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002120308044100300j556ce>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:04:41 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEC6595.1090402@attbi.com> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:04:38 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Possible sacrilege and blasphemy References: <200212021456_MC3-1-1D73-ACC7@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Welcome to the club. It is just as you say, the Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 is an amazing performing lens, and the price (other than $ :-) ) is size and weight. I also have 4 of the Zuikos primes in its range. They are all certainly easier to handle and hand hold individually than the Tamron. I don't think it's practical to use it without at least a monopod. It's companion, the 35-105/2.8 seems just as good to me, but that's even greater blasphemy. At least the 80-200/2.8 doesn't compete directly with any Zuiko zooms. The other sleeper is the 60-300 (with lots o' light and/or fast film) with that extra reach and super macro to 1:1.55. Moose Walt Wayman wrote: >A few weeks ago I fished out of the Bay a Tamron 80-200/2.8. > >Out of curiosity, I took at look at Gary Reese's lens tests to see how this >particular Tamron stacks up against our Zuikos. Gary's tests were done >only at three focal lengths, but assuming the performance is reasonably >uniform across the entire zoom range, generally speaking, not putting too >fine a point on it, without the use of 8x10 glossy photographs with lines >and arrows and writing on the back, this lens actually seems to outperform >some Zuiko primes that fall within its range (85/2, 85/2.8, 100/2.8, >135/2.8, 135/3.5, 180/2.8, 200/4, 200/5) and is at least the equal of some >others (90/2 Macro, 135/4.5 Macro, although without the macro capability) >and is bested only marginally by the 100/2 and 180/2. Strangely, the Zuiko >zooms seem to have fared better, comparatively speaking. > >Verrrry interesting. Yes, compared to the typical Zuiko, it's big and >heavy (7.25 in. and 3 lbs. 3 oz., with hood and tripod collar, as compared, >say, with the Zuiko 35-80/2.8 at 4.5 in. and 1 lb. 8 oz. with hood and no >tripod collar). But I think it's found a home. Besides, it takes up in >excellent fashion just where the aforementioned Zuiko 35-80/2.8 leaves off! > >Am I missing something? I almost wish it weren't so! I've got four of >those Zuikos I've compared it to. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 489 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 08:23:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 08:23:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 00:23:01 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA12449 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:23:00 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-232-198-15.client.attbi.com[12.232.198.15]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120308215200200st15he>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:21:52 +0000 Message-ID: <3DEC699A.8040701@attbi.com> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:21:46 -0800 From: dreammoose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wandering around, not too serious about the picture taking: OM-PC and Zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 Light kit for good light: OM-4T(i), Tokina AT-X 35-200/3.5-4.5, Vivitar Series1 19-35/3.5-4.5, Zuiko 50/1.4 (>1,100,000) and Vivitar 2x MacroTele converter. Light kit for poor light OM-4T(i), Tamron SP 35-105/2.8, Zuiko 28/2, Zuiko 50/1.4 (>1,100,000) and Vivitar 2x MacroTele converter (maybe 200/4, depending on expected need). Add-on for good light: Tamron SP 60-300/3.5-5.4 Add-on for poor light: Tamron or Tokina 80-200/2.8 My current photography leans heavily toward natural subjects outdoors, including modest macro. Moose R. Jackson wrote: > This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been > discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a > "standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just > curious. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 839 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 08:37:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 08:37:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 00:37:12 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA12453 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:37:11 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.2] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AD7F25CC00B6; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 02:38:23 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:32:12 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <3DEC699A.8040701@attbi.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OM1n and either 50/1.8 MIJ MC zuiko or 28/3.5 zuik, generally architecture /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1148 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 08:46:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 08:46:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 00:45:59 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA12457 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 00:45:58 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.2] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AF8E186E00C6; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 02:47:10 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:43:35 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: <98PJLHOK4YTR69WSD718PNKHA9GF.3dec6eb7@desktop> Subject: [OM] OM2 POW @photo.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca nice OMer shot at photo.net's picture of the week. http://www.photo.net/ /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2137 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 10:41:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 10:41:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 02:41:46 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA12507 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:41:45 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA54877 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:40:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021203005134.0271acb8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 02:42:16 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] flash, ASF's digital PIC, Medium Format etc. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What a weekend. Now I remember another reason I sold my F280 so many moons ago - how we have came full circle!!! We spent another (long) weekend in a science fiction convention. Lots of opportunity to take pictures of costumers. For the past year, I have been relying on fast primes but I still have to use ASA400 and sometimes ASA800 to get reasonable shutter speeds so I thought I will give the newly acquired F280 a try. Some are good, but a good number has the full on flash symptom - e.g. the area immediately in front of the flash is a bit burned out. I will have to dig up the last reply to my flash inquiry now. I guess I will have to get a bracket and another flash. I was hoping that I can stay "light." sigh. What gets me is that pictures from my wife's C-3000 came out more evenly illuminated. grr... I also took the two rolls of film to the beta Applied Science Fiction's DigiPIC station. It's the scan-and-destroy-your-negatives machine. It was quite a gamble to try it (eekkk no more negatives) but I knew that even at the best, most pictures will not benefit from scanning at higher res myself than what they claim they can do. On the whole it is a reasonable experience. The price is competitive with the price that I normally pay. A few dollars more but I get the pics in digital form (of course again you ONLY get the pics in digital forms). The built-in dye-sub printer is fast and the results look pretty good. The pictures look a bit more grainy when blown up, but it probably is just an artifact of Kodak Gold 100 vs. what I usually shoot, which is Provia 100F or 400F. I have one roll Fuji Superia 800 that was accidentally exposed at ASA1600 :-( and a good number of the pictures are half usable, especially for web display. I don't know if ASF will market the machines or not as this is only a trail period. Give it a shot if you have access to one. Also picked up the MF prints. Ah, definitely some shot are lost due to my inexperience w/ the MF rangefinder, but the pics look oh so good, even at 4x6.... Nice. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3396 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 12:21:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 12:21:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 04:21:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12574 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 04:21:36 -0800 Received: from [62.64.224.207] (helo=[62.64.224.207]) by mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18JC31-000FiD-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:21:07 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:30:46 +0000 To: Olympus List Messages From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] Gloves in the darkroom Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I accept advice (from some weeks ago) that it is inadvisable to get developer on your little pink skin; I now have a box of disposable vinyl gloves for use in the garage and in the darkroom. But now how do I avoid contaminating one print from another if I get one of the chemicals on my hands? I use a Nova Monochrome developing tank with 3 compartments and their proprietary clip system. If someone advises me to use tweezers I shall point out that I don't need to wear gloves if I use tweezers (the big plastic type). I have just developed my first mono film (Fuji Neo 400) from my first XA4. Although I have some problems with exposure when I have not used the +1.5 stop compensation lever with backlighting, it is a truly delightful way to take photos. And although I really liked Skip's shot of the girl in the car and the tones which he has produced, I have decided to stick with the more old-fashioned look of Ilford FP4+ and HP5+. The trick now is to find time to get into the darkroom. Chris -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3646 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 12:21:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 12:21:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 04:21:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12578 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 04:21:51 -0800 Received: from [62.64.224.207] (helo=[62.64.224.207]) by mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18JC35-000FiD-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:21:11 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:42:41 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My light set up is a body with either 35/2, 40/2 or 50/1.4 on the body, and a 28/2.8 and 135/2.8 attached end-to-end in the bag. The bag is a 7-year old Billingham Photo Hadley, in black and tan, which looks like a large, rather grubby handbag ("purse" for the N. Americans) but which can carry my mobile life quite easily (Palm m100, Ericsson T39, notebook, driving licence, XA with A16, T20, mini tripod and Camcane monopod heads). It can also fit A4 envelopes for work on the train and a newspaper for when don't feel like working ;-). Chris At 18:18 -0800 02/12/02, R. Jackson wrote: > >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been >discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just >curious. > >-Rob > -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3972 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 12:34:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 12:34:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 04:34:39 2002 -0800 Received: from front3.chartermi.net (24.213.60.109.up.mi.chartermi.net [24.213.60.109]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12595 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 04:34:38 -0800 Received: from [24.247.58.58] (HELO jakeway) by front3.chartermi.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9a) with SMTP id 48456152 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 07:30:50 -0500 Message-ID: <008e01c29ac7$ab998690$9600a8c0@jakeway> From: "Jodi Jakeway" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Gloves in the darkroom Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:29:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Chris. I don't use gloves, but I have running water always, and always rinse my hand while agitating/rocking the tray before I go onto the next chemical. Also, I only use my right hand to handle the prints, left to agitate the trays. Just rinse, rinse, rinse, and keep a towel handy! Jodi Jakeway Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Barker" To: "Olympus List Messages" Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 1:30 AM Subject: [OM] Gloves in the darkroom < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4835 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 14:04:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 14:04:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 06:04:48 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12866 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:04:47 -0800 Received: from 209-122-241-13.s679.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.241.13] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18JDeK-00067n-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 09:03:45 -0500 Message-ID: <000b01c29ad4$d5823620$0df17ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:04:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Open the camera back, fire the shutter on B and look for a hair or piece of lint. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. Jackson" To: Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 9:27 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Lens flaw > > On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 06:04 PM, dreammoose wrote: > > > So you haven't tried it yet since removing the hair from the back of > > the lens? > > Nope. I'm going to use it Wednesday a little, though. > > > Do you have any other Oly bodies to see if it shows up on a different > > body? > > Yeah, I just recently bought a 4T, which is what I'm planning to use > Wednesday. > > > It could still be something in the mirror box that isn't in the light > > path from the longer lenses but sticks into the path of the wide > > angle. Contary to what others have suggested, it doesn't have to be > > actually touching the film, just nearby. > > Last night after that discussion I looked around inside my OM-1n and > didn't really see anything that could have been a problem. I need to > shoot some more film through it, though, and see what happens. I'm just > hung up on the new camera right now and can't find much time for the > old girl. ;-) > > > The example you provided is shot in bright light. I can't tell where > > the lens is focused, but closer stuff seems maybe sharper than distant > > stuff. A 28mm lens stopped way down has a lot of depth of field. If it > > is focused in mid or close range, something on a lens hood or even > > sticking out from the filter threads, etc. could possibly give an > > almost in focus image on the film. When you look through the > > viewfinder, the lens is wide open, with less DOF, so you wouldn't > > easily notice something like that through the viewfinder. Remember > > that in a retrofocus WA design, the front of the front element can be > > quite a distance in front of the optical nodes. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5117 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 14:07:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 14:07:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 06:07:31 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12874 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:07:30 -0800 Received: from 209-122-241-13.s679.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.241.13] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18JDhw-0006uP-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 09:07:28 -0500 Message-ID: <006001c29ad5$5b4fc060$0df17ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> <3DEC699A.8040701@attbi.com> Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:07:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Black OM-2, 50mm f2 macro. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "dreammoose" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 3:21 AM Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) > Wandering around, not too serious about the picture taking: > OM-PC and Zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 > Light kit for good light: > OM-4T(i), Tokina AT-X 35-200/3.5-4.5, Vivitar Series1 19-35/3.5-4.5, > Zuiko 50/1.4 (>1,100,000) and Vivitar 2x MacroTele converter. > Light kit for poor light > OM-4T(i), Tamron SP 35-105/2.8, Zuiko 28/2, Zuiko 50/1.4 > (>1,100,000) and Vivitar 2x MacroTele converter (maybe 200/4, depending > on expected need). > Add-on for good light: Tamron SP 60-300/3.5-5.4 > Add-on for poor light: Tamron or Tokina 80-200/2.8 > > My current photography leans heavily toward natural subjects outdoors, > including modest macro. > > Moose > > R. Jackson wrote: > > > This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been > > discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a > > "standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just > > curious. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5753 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 14:08:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 14:08:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 06:08:48 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12879 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:08:46 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:12:24 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:06:45 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Lens flaw Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 06:10:26 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 14:12:24.0625 (UTC) FILETIME=[00C2F210:01C29AD6] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Or, if the camera has been to the other list member that specializes in OM work, a piece of 'Clint'..... sorry... operating on almost no sleep right now. Mind is tanked out. -----Original Message----- From: John Hermanson Open the camera back, fire the shutter on B and look for a hair or piece of lint. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6594 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:24:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:24:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 07:24:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12960 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:24:38 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB3FH2Iq022953 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:17:03 +0100 (MET) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:17:03 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Message-Id: <20021203161703.6dd509d6.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: References: <3DEC699A.8040701@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id HAA12960 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Most std. for me....Minox TLx. Never leaves my pocket :) OM-std would be OM2s/p w. 55/1.2. Nice bright lens..... --thomas On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 00:32:12 -0800 siddiq wrote: > OM1n and either 50/1.8 MIJ MC zuiko or 28/3.5 zuik, generally > architecture >=20 >=20 > /S > -- > "We apologise for the inconvenience."=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6886 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:25:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:25:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 07:25:17 2002 -0800 Received: from siaar2ab.compuserve.com (siaar2ab.compuserve.com [149.174.40.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12970 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:25:15 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaar2ab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.15) id KAA17558 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:21:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:17:57 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212031018_MC3-1-1D80-78E4@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for all the suggestions, folks. I=92ve decided to send the guy a = note and a couple of A&I mailers. He=92s close enough to Hollywood (about a d= ozen miles) that he could well be a walk-in customer. But a mailer should be kind of like chit at the company store and good for processing whether it= comes via mail, carrier pigeon or on the hoof. Now if I can just decipher his name. I hope his photography is better th= an his penmanship. I hate to just address it to George M. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7191 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:30:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:30:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 07:30:14 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12987 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:30:13 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.9] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 30261947 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 10:29:30 -0500 Message-ID: <3DECCDE7.9B564BAD@suite224.net> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 10:29:43 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] A question of etiquette References: <200212031018_MC3-1-1D80-78E4@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Walt, Have a try with what you think his name is with one of the online "white pages". Might do the trick. John Walt Wayman wrote: I hate to just address it to George M. > > Walt > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7444 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:30:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:30:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 07:30:28 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12990 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:30:25 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.33.31334bc4 (15887) for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:25:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from aol.com (mow-m04.webmail.aol.com [64.12.184.132]) by air-id08.mx.aol.com (v89.21) with ESMTP id MAILINID82-1203102539; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 10:25:39 -0500 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 10:25:39 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <79DA7C29.0E9D9096.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't really have a single standard setup. There are a few basic configurations I find myself gravitating towards, though: Really light: OM-4, 50/1.4 This is my walk-around setup. If I know I'll be in bright conditions I'll sometimes replace the 50/1.4 with the 35-70/4 Medium light rev A: OM-4, 24/2, 50/1.4, 100/2 Speed and quality... Medium light rev B: OM-4, 28-48/4, 100-200/5 Lots of flexibility, small and light (either lens can go in my pocket, so I dont even need a bag). Great for a walk in the park or zoo. Sometimes I'll throw in a 50/1.8 if I think I might need the speed. Not light: OM-4, OM-1/winder 2, 24/2, 50/1.4, 100/2, 65-200/4 or 200/4, T32, BG2, 7mm, 14mm and 25mm extension tubes When I don't know what I'll be needing. It all fits in one bag, and I'm ready for pretty much anything. If I know I'll be doing mostly flash I'll take an OM-2n instead of the OM-4 (need to justify those OM-2n's!) I find the OM-2n pretty much the equal of the OM-4 for this Ok, this was really just an exercise for me to justify all this stuff to myself. My name is Paul, and I'm a Zuikoholic... Paul Schings < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7698 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:32:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:32:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 07:32:52 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12994 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:32:51 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021203152905.VUMP4607.priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:29:05 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021203082627.00bb2688@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 08:29:04 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Solid cat on da bay In-Reply-To: <3DEBF70E.23423.47A7A0B@localhost> References: <3DEC2BD7.B8EAFC5C@turbonet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:13 AM 12/3/2002 -0500, Tom Trottier wrote: >Puny. >Buy http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1942936528 > >tOM Ah, yes -- the Meade LX200 "Go-to." Awesome telescope. Used one for about two hours whilst on vacation at the Star Hill Inn near Las Vegas, New Mexico. With the optional GPS module, you just input the M-catalogue number (or whatever other stellar catalogue number you have), and, if the object's above the horizon, the telescope simply slews to the correct location. No fuss, no muss. Sure beats trying to slew the 'scope around manually on a cold winter night wearing gloves. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8024 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:40:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:40:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 07:40:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13000 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:40:23 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:36:18 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA26970 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:36:14 GMT Message-ID: <3DECCF6E.5050001@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 15:36:14 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] A few photos from Austria References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks, John. It would certainly be very interesting to see what things in the view have changed since 1960 and what things are exactly the same. If you're able to scan any of the old slides I'd love to see them. I'm certain that one major difference would be the number of tourists. Even in November there were plenty of them - Ryanair's fault for giving away flights I suppose! Cheers, Roger John Wheeler wrote: > Lovely shots, Roger. The one of the Dom's dome brought back memories. I'd > bought my first non-normal lens, a Hektor 135/f4.5 for my M3 in Salzburg and > we had gone up the hill to shoot the town probably from the same place as > yourself. That was in 1960, dare say there's been some changes since. I must > dig out the Kodachrome and compare. > > John. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Roger Wesson > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:15 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] A few photos from Austria > > > Dear all, > > I sent a mail about this yesterday but haven't seen it get through to > the list. Apologies if the first one gets through after all. > > I took a brief trip to Salzburg two weeks ago, flying with my favourite > airline Ryanair for just 25 pounds. I was there for just over 24 hours > but managed to take a fair number of photos, some of which I've added to > my website at http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/travel/austria < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8577 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 16:20:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 16:20:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 08:20:13 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h014.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.242]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA13033 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:20:12 -0800 Received: (cpmta 854 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 08:19:10 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.242) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 08:19:10 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 16:19:10 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] FOV numbers Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:16:51 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <000001c29ae7$6395a6b0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021203140737.5170.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I do think that a 28-50-135 is the best all around kit. Very versatile and not too heavy, although I did recommend to a friend recently the 28-50-100 as I think the 135 may have been a bit too long for him. I certainly don't want this to become a bragging competition. The only reason I have any of the "fancy" glass is through a small arch. photo. business that usually only pays for the equipment, and some of the grad school bills. The 18 is invaluable for interiors and is a good complement to the 24 shift. If I had all the money in the world, I would use the 21/2, 50/2, and 100/2 as my kit, but based on size, weight, and ergonomics I mostly use a 85/2 and OM-1n. The 28/2 (and most recently the 50/3.5) have been used to complement this minimalist kit. I "borrow" the 18 occasionally from the arch. stuff, and recently sold a 21/3.5 as it did not get used enough (which I maybe now regret). This past w/e I used the 18/3.5 quite a bit as I lent the 28/2 to a friend. I was amazed with the DOF, and if things turn out as good as they looked in the camera, I will really have a reason to regret letting the 21/3.5 go. So, I guess what it all comes down to is that your "kit" will depend on what you are shooting and what you are comfortable with. This rarely has anything to do with actual FOV numbers, and more with what your eye sees. Bob Gries < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8885 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 16:29:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 16:29:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 08:29:51 2002 -0800 Received: from web14402.mail.yahoo.com (web14402.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.59]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA13048 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:29:50 -0800 Message-ID: <20021203162937.59226.qmail@web14402.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.12.96.44] by web14402.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 08:29:37 PST Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:29:37 -0800 (PST) From: "W. Xato" Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021203140737.5170.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In my fanny pack I use the 49mm filter kit of 16/3.5, 21/3.5, 28/2, 35/2.8, 50/3.5, Sigma 90/2.8 macro, 200/5 with OM4T and OM3. Volumewise the Vivitar S1 19-35 doesn't take any more room that the 3 Zuikos in that range but it won't fit into the slots of the pack and won't take my filters. The Tamron 35-100/2.8 takes up less room than the 50/3.5 and 90/2.8 but it has no macro capabilities. If going for wildlife, the big Tarmon 400/4 comes out and has it own pack. Warren __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9164 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 16:30:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 16:30:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 08:30:21 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA13052 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:30:20 -0800 Received: (cpmta 10203 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 08:29:19 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 08:29:19 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 16:29:19 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] WTT OM-1 black for OM-2(n) black Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:26:59 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <000101c29ae8$ce2b4e70$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, I miss my first OM-2n and have an extra OM-1. pics can be seen here if anyone is interested. Please contact me off-list. http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/zuiko-OM-1.htm Thanks! Robert G. Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 E: rgg@gnrarch.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9522 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 16:44:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 16:44:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 08:44:00 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com (sagan.skybridgegroup.com [194.201.127.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13062 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:43:58 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [OM] OT: Xenon studio flash Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:42:13 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: OT: Xenon studio flash Thread-Index: AcKa6u4fQ5hQQQpoQsq4kX5gMmYr1g== From: "Sam Shiell" To: "olympus@zuiko. sls. bc. ca \(E-mail\)" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Anyone know anything about the Xenon "Design 132 Studio flash". There's one on the bay (Item #1942939388) but I can find nothing about = this item on the internet (there's no other details on the item... I = asked the seller to check) Sounds like it might be a good deal, but I'd like to know a bit more = before I bid (or not)=20 Cheers Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9870 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 16:53:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 16:53:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 08:53:08 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13079 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:53:07 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021203164041.XWJF4594.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:40:41 -0500 Message-ID: <000d01c29ae7$13171d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> <004201c29a75$9a1c6b00$7212a20a@waynecul> Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:14:36 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:40:41 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wayne Culberson" To: Sent: Monday, 02 December, 2002 10:42 PM Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) > > > This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been > > discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a > > "standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just > > curious. > > > > -Rob > > Today, I shifted over from the OM2s to the OM1n. Its pretty cold here in > Canada right now, and the 1n works better when you're outdoors for awhile. > So the Om2s, still my favorite, gets a little chance to hibernate. Today, > like almost every day now, I took only a 50/1.8 and 100/2.8 with me, and a > 35RC loaded with B&W. If I thought I would need it, I'd also take a Vivitar > 28/2 I have, which is the one 3rd party I have which is as good as the > Zuikos as far as I can see. But that is about it for me these days. I can > carry this in my coat pockets without even taking a camera bag. I've > basically laid aside using the zooms, as they are too big to carry, and too > slow. Even the Zuiko 135/2.8 is too heavy for my pocket, and takes a > different size filter. > What kind of photography?...Shooting nature (read snow today), scenics, > sunsets, etc., which is what I do mostly. > Wayne My grab 'n run rig is a 4T with 24/2.8 and 85/2 [or 90/2 macro], Sekonic 508 meter and a piece of gray card. jh > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10282 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 17:10:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 17:10:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 09:10:41 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h008.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.236]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA13096 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:10:40 -0800 Received: (cpmta 2120 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 09:09:39 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.236) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 09:09:39 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 17:09:39 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] last call Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:07:19 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001001c29aee$707f7390$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Last call for anyone who wants to participate in the Winter Exchange. Contact me off-list if interested. I will be mailing the addresses tomorrow morning. Robert G. Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 E: rgg@gnrarch.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10742 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 17:30:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 17:30:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 09:30:32 2002 -0800 Received: from web80003.mail.yahoo.com (web80003.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.168.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA13115 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:30:30 -0800 Message-ID: <20021203173017.55258.qmail@web80003.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [199.135.24.113] by web80003.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 09:30:17 PST Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:30:17 -0800 (PST) From: "Garry D. Lewis" Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3740 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021203005449.21147.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-456295137-1038936617=:54816" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-456295137-1038936617=:54816 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >It's unlikely urine would make a good stop bath, because it's >alkaline rather than acidic. >Well, darn. So much for a good excuse to drink beer in the >darkroom. but it can be used as a developer(Stanislaw Stawowy's Urinol). If you don't believe me, goto- http://www.geocities.com/Stanislaw_Stawowy/photos/pod.htm yours developing in the wind, Garry D. Lewis --0-456295137-1038936617=:54816 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

>It's unlikely urine would make a good stop bath, because it's
>alkaline rather than acidic.

>Well, darn. So much for a good excuse to drink beer in the >darkroom.

but it can be used as a developer(Stanislaw Stawowy's Urinol). If you don't believe me, goto-

http://www.geocities.com/Stanislaw_Stawowy/photos/pod.htm

                    yours developing in the wind,

                                   Garry D. Lewis



--0-456295137-1038936617=:54816-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11131 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 17:44:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 17:44:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 09:44:49 2002 -0800 Received: from pat.uio.no (7411@pat.uio.no [129.240.130.16]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13131 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:44:47 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by pat.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18JH2Y-0001vS-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:40:58 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18JH2X-00058H-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:40:57 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021203170452.01ebe880@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 18:40:51 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202182048.00bfb1c0@mail.spitfire.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 00:33 03.12.02, Joh A. Lind wrote: >Even in 35mm small format and medium format systems, the image circle is >usually a little larger than the film gate, especially for shorter >lenses. Reason? It mitigates cos^4 falloff in the corners by placing the >bulk of this falloff outside the film gate. The tradeoff is the extra >light that doesn't end up in the photograph potentially bouncing around >inside the lens and reducing contrast, or worse yet causing aperture flare. I'm no expert optical engineer, but this "reason" doesn't make any sense. You can't just "place the bulk of the falloff outside the filmgate", the cos^4 is there from pure geometry (and the simple lens approximation), and it can't be moved around. It's a simple monotonous function in the region that the equation applies (0 to 90 degrees). For instance, one of the four cos terms comes from the fact that if a person looks straight into a circular opening (=a lens) of area A, and then moves an angle x to the side, the opening will no longer appear as a circle but as an ellipse of area A*cos(x). True, there are lens designs that have better falloff characteristics than the simple lens approximation implies, but for any given lens design or geometry the falloff can't be reduced by introducing mechanical vignetting (= making the image circle smaller). Just think of an OM lens mounted on a halfframe body, the falloff inside the halfframe is exactly the same even if you stack 4 or 5 filters to vignette the parts of the image circle outside the halfframe image. I could even argue that masking a full 35mm frame down to halfframe with black tape before taking the picture is vignetting, just at a different position in the optical path, and that wouldn't affect the unmasked part of the frame, would it? I venture to say that contrast is the only reason (besides costs of larger lens elements) why lenses are designed to vignette and thus always having an image circle just slightly larger than the film/sensor diagonal. And a good reason it is. Thomas Bryhn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11438 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 17:48:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 17:48:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 09:48:46 2002 -0800 Received: from web80003.mail.yahoo.com (web80003.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.168.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA13152 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:48:44 -0800 Message-ID: <20021203174832.58089.qmail@web80003.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [199.135.24.113] by web80003.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 09:48:32 PST Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:48:32 -0800 (PST) From: "Garry D. Lewis" Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3741 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021203140737.5170.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-113104671-1038937712=:58028" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-113104671-1038937712=:58028 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Chili is a meat dish. Having been in this "heated" debate before , with a few of my fellow Hispanic co-workers, you are wrong Steve. Both meat and bean are Tejas additions to a basic chile soup. yours adding to the un-wind-able thread, }:^)> Garry D. Lewis --0-113104671-1038937712=:58028 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

>Chili is a meat dish.

Having been in this "heated" debate before , with a few of my fellow Hispanic co-workers, you are wrong Steve. Both meat and bean are Tejas additions to a basic chile soup.

              yours adding to the un-wind-able thread, }:^)>

                           Garry D. Lewis

--0-113104671-1038937712=:58028-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12205 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 18:39:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 18:39:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 10:39:44 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA13206 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:39:42 -0800 Received: (cpmta 1754 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 10:38:40 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 10:38:40 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 18:38:40 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] WE 2002 current list Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:36:20 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <002001c29afa$e0255640$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Below is the current list of participants. If there are any errors or omissions please contact me. Siddiq Bill Barber Iwert Bernakiewicz Jim Couch Wayne Culberson Jez Cunningham John Cwiklinski Steve Dropkin Scott Gomez Steve Goss Benson Honig Daryl Hurley Ira Kahn Tal Lancaster Marc Lawrence Mike Lazzari Ralf Loi James N. McBride John.Oregan Bill Pearce Doroth=E9e Rapp Paul Schings Dave Shupe Brian Swale Jim Timpe Mickey Trageser Mike Veglia Roger Wesson Skip Williams Robert G. Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc.=20 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 E: rgg@gnrarch.com=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12671 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 19:02:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 19:02:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 11:02:45 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h008.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.236]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA13223 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:02:41 -0800 Received: (cpmta 2946 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 11:01:40 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.236) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 11:01:40 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 19:01:40 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:01:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] 500/8 mirror tamron available Message-ID: <3DECB942.12655.77112D0@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1941096942 No connection ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13063 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 19:15:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 19:15:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 11:15:33 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m06.mx.aol.com (imo-m06.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.161]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13236 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:15:26 -0800 Received: from chatschaturjan86@netscape.net by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1b2.36aec53 (22683) for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:13:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from netscape.net ([63.146.251.226]) by air-in04.mx.aol.com (v89.21) with ESMTP id MAILININ44-1203141332; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:13:32 -0500 Message-ID: <3DED2D36.1070006@netscape.net> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:16:22 -0800 From: Andy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (nscd2) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 current list References: <002001c29afa$e0255640$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Is this a list of people who submit, or are there lurkers on this? -- Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13363 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 19:21:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 19:21:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 11:21:13 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13256 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:21:10 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:25:14 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:20:18 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] WE 2002 current list Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:23:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 19:25:14.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[B4605580:01C29B01] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's the list of those who elect to participate. No lurking. -----Original Message----- From: Andy [mailto:chatschaturjan86@netscape.net] Is this a list of people who submit, or are there lurkers on this? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13657 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 19:26:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 19:26:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 11:26:12 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13260 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:26:10 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:30:42 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:25:02 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] BIN on TTL Multi-Connector Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:28:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 19:30:42.0265 (UTC) FILETIME=[77D78C90:01C29B02] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Phone number didn't change. Only the names to protect the innocent. -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz Strange thing, though. He moved and didn't let me know his new address or phone number! Hmmm. You think he's afraid of me stalking him? After all, he has at least one silvernosed lens... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13973 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 19:34:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 19:34:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 11:34:21 2002 -0800 Received: from siaar2ab.compuserve.com (siaar2ab.compuserve.com [149.174.40.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13268 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:34:16 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaar2ab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.15) id OAA19541 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:30:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:30:15 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] Possible sacrilege and blasphemy To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212031430_MC3-1-1DD1-ADCC@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message text written by INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Moose wrote: >Welcome to the club. It is just as you say, the Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 is = >an amazing performing lens, and the price (other than $ :-) ) is size = >and weight. Both Moose and Wayne have remarked on the cost of this lens. Of course, that=92s a relative thing. I=92m sure to Bill Gates a Hasselblad of each= color wouldn=92t be a big deal. But I got the thing off the Bay for $320, plus= $10 shipping, and even after the $100 dusting and zoom creep fix, I=92m still= well ahead of the $500-650 range listed in McBroom=92s Camera Bluebook fo= r one in this condition. I wouldn=92t have paid that much, though. As I recall, I set a snipe for $333.33 and felt like I got a pretty good deal,= not a real Fang, but a Fangette maybe, or at least a faux Fang. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14327 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 19:41:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 19:41:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 11:41:09 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13279 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:41:05 -0800 Received: from 216-164-250-172.s553.tnt3.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([216.164.250.172] helo=bri_acct_sct) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18JItn-0007AA-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:40:03 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20021203144001.011fe008@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:40:01 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? In-Reply-To: <20021203140737.5170.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:07:46 -0500 >From: "John Hermanson" >Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? > >Black OM-2, 50mm f2 macro. Mine's a 3Ti w/MD2 and the 35-80/2.8. Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15162 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 20:47:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 20:47:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 12:47:21 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f192.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13338 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:47:18 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:46:24 -0800 Received: from 65.168.37.103 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 20:46:24 GMT X-Originating-IP: [65.168.37.103] From: "Jim Johnson" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 15:46:24 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 20:46:24.0977 (UTC) FILETIME=[0B826410:01C29B0D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I like my OM 2s with a 35 f2.8. It's my favorite for travel. I'll take along a 35-70 zoom if I feel like carrying the extra weight. Jim >This is still what I use. > >My first OM was an OM-2n and I shot with a Vivitar 90-230mm f/4.5-5.6 zoom >and also later a Vivitar 28-90mm f2.8-3.5 zoom. When I finally started >noticing the difference in image quality people were getting with primes I >changed over to a 28-50-135 setup and recently replaced my third party 28 >and 135 with Zuikos. I still feel like it's a pretty powerful combination >of lenses for most applications. Although I recently saw a lens like my old >Vivitar 90-230mm on the nameless auction site for $14 and couldn't resist >the urge to buy it. It's about like I remember it. I took my old one to >dozens of concerts in the late 70's. As much concert funk as it absorbed >I'm amazed it never sprouted fungus. > >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been discussed >to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a "standard" compact >setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. > >-Rob > >On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 05:34 PM, Mike wrote: > >>The standard that many people employ is the $$$ standard. Which is why I >>originally ended up with 28-50-135. Can't get any cheaper than that. >>Mathematical progressions don't figure into this equation :>) >> >>mike > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15492 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 20:56:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 20:56:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 12:56:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13342 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:56:04 -0800 Received: from pool0692.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.182] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18JK4o-0007Gd-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:55:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212031430_MC3-1-1DD1-ADCC@compuserve.com> References: <200212031430_MC3-1-1DD1-ADCC@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:55:27 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Possible sacrilege and blasphemy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Message text written by INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Moose wrote: > >>Welcome to the club. It is just as you say, the Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 is >>an amazing performing lens, and the price (other than $ :-) ) is size >>and weight. > >Both Moose and Wayne have remarked on the cost of this lens. Of course, >that=92s a relative thing. I=92m sure to Bill Gates a Hasselblad of each c= olor >wouldn=92t be a big deal. But I got the thing off the Bay for $320, plus $= 10 >shipping, and even after the $100 dusting and zoom creep fix, I=92m still >well ahead of the $500-650 range listed in McBroom=92s Camera Bluebook for >one in this condition. I wouldn=92t have paid that much, though. As I >recall, I set a snipe for $333.33 and felt like I got a pretty good deal, >not a real Fang, but a Fangette maybe, or at least a faux Fang. > >Walt A good fee for a giant lens. Perhaps a fee faux fang. Jack < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16351 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 22:13:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 22:13:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 14:13:38 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13408 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:13:36 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-50.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.50]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB3MC5Y21223 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:12:06 +1300 Message-Id: <200212032212.gB3MC5Y21223@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:11:58 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, If I want a really light standard setup it would have to be the OM10 (a very light body with autopilot on demand) and a Zuiko 50/1.8 MIJ + hood. Next choice (bigger, heavier) would be OM 2, 10 or 4T with the Zuiko 35~105. Now I know I have bought two wide angle zooms during the last year - the Samyang 18~28 and the Tokina AT-X 24~40 (neither are small or light). I did so because I wanted to have the capability to cover those focal length ranges should occasion require it - and I was attracted by the reported excellent resolution of this AT-X lens model. But I must say I am puzzled about so many people preferring a wide angle as a standard lens. Even as wide as 21 or 24mm. I tend to use the other end of the focal length scale. If I am on walk-about, I really struggle to find subjects that need such a wide angle. I wonder if this if because I'm not into shooting in streets, buildings closeup, building interiors or events full of people (which I tend to avoid like the plague). What is it that people have in common, who use wide angles consistently? Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16710 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 22:29:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 22:29:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 14:29:43 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13412 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:29:41 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002120322283200300j6ovfe>; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:28:32 +0000 Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:27:03 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <200212032212.gB3MC5Y21223@central.caverock.net.nz> Message-Id: <5946625A-070E-11D7-9490-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've gotta say that I'm amazed at the diversity of people here on the list, just among those who've taken the time to respond to this. There are people who carry two or three superfast wide-angle primes, people who carry a favorite giganto-zoom, someone who carries a couple of compact lenses in his coat pocket, people who just carry a 50...there's a real assortment of photographers here. I was kind of expecting some consensus with a slight variation. "Oh, of course we all carry such and such because the variable of the cosign of the internodal convergence overlaps at the second function of the whoosits." It's really cool to see that there's so much variety here, though. Among the folks who operate at Manhattan Project levels there are a lot of people with very quirky and personal reasons for carrying what they do. For myself, I lean towards wide angle lenses a lot because I tend to feel that the narrow angle of incidence in long focal lengths can feel really claustrophobic. I start to feel like it's crossing the line from photography into surveillance above 135mm a lot of the time. Then again, I'm not really a photographer, I'm just a guy who likes to take pictures. -Rob On Tuesday, December 3, 2002, at 02:11 PM, Brian Swale wrote: > But I must say I am puzzled about so many people preferring a wide > angle > as a standard lens. Even as wide as 21 or 24mm. > > I tend to use the other end of the focal length scale. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16992 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 22:33:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 22:33:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 14:33:12 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13416 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:33:10 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:37:42 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:32:02 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:35:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 22:37:42.0281 (UTC) FILETIME=[977E1F90:01C29B1C] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What we should all aspire to... I haven't responded to this thread yet. Of late, I've usually got my 4t with either 35-70/3.6 or 35-105 on it. Perhaps not the smallest or lightest, but it's sure versatile. -----Original Message----- From: R. Jackson Then again, I'm not really a photographer, I'm just a guy who likes to take pictures. -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17272 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 22:35:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 22:35:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 14:35:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13420 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:35:48 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6K00G0EEOVP5@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:34:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 14:36:18 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Possible sacrilege and blasphemy To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <011101c29b1c$65ee49a0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/3/2002 Moose writes: << Welcome to the club. It is just as you say, the Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 is an amazing performing lens, and the price (other than $ :-) ) is size and weight. I also have 4 of the Zuikos primes in its range. They are all certainly easier to handle and hand hold individually than the Tamron. I don't think it's practical to use it without at least a monopod. >> Ditto. I love mine. Doesn't get as much use now that I more often than not use the E-10 in that focal length range now. While I find the tripod mount handy for holding the lens to guide through pans (can't hold the hood like I would prefer since it would disturb zoom/focus position) I must admit I have never threaded a tripod or monopod to it since I owned it. I find it an excellent lens and don't find it difficult to hand hold at all. (The 350/2.8, OTOH, is a beast to hand hold.) << It's companion, the 35-105/2.8 seems just as good to me, but that's even greater blasphemy. At least the 80-200/2.8 doesn't compete directly with any Zuiko zooms. >> Good to know... << The other sleeper is the 60-300 (with lots o' light and/or fast film) >> Yes, that was my one and only lens for a decade. Got some nice results and learned a lot about racing photography with a SP 60-300. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17844 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 23:06:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 23:06:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 15:06:23 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13444 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:06:21 -0800 Received: from modem-2335.orangutan.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.135.233.31] helo=skelly) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18JM7O-0000Lx-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:06:18 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] WE 2002 current list Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:06:20 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <002001c29afa$e0255640$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'd like to submit a print but everything I do now is digital from scanned negs, the limited printing I do is on a little Epson 880 producing reasonable quality not quite A4 size 'photoreal'. Although these are of acceptable 'home' quality they are not as good as I would like so my questions are.... are there professional labs geared up to produce exhibition quality prints from digital files (file sizes from 30mb up to 120mb) can anybody recommend such a lab (preferably UK but USA / Europe is fine) what sort of prices are we talking here? many thanks Ian PS getting traditional prints from the negs is not really an option as I do like to 'play' with the scans quite a lot. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18264 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 23:23:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 23:23:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 15:23:48 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h015.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.243]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA13471 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:23:46 -0800 Received: (cpmta 3217 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 15:22:41 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.243) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 15:22:41 -0800 X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 23:22:41 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 18:22:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Message-ID: <3DECF66D.27786.8600396@localhost> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Standard: OM3, OM4T, winder, 21, 50/1.4, 85/2, Vivitar 300/3, sunpak 433D flash tOM ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18691 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 23:43:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 23:43:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 15:43:50 2002 -0800 Received: from hestia.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13491 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:43:48 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by hestia.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gB3NdvSu025057 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:40:00 -0500 Message-Id: <200212032340.gB3NdvSu025057@hestia.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 17:40:16 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:18:37 -0800, R. Jackson wrote: >What do most of you carry as a >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? Om4t plus either 21/3.5 or one of my 50s for walking around shooting. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19555 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 00:56:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 00:56:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 16:56:39 2002 -0800 Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.122]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13543 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:56:35 -0800 Received: from pool0681.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.171] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18JNpd-0003fu-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 16:56:06 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:55:58 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >> >> >>This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been >>discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a >>"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just >>curious. >> >>-Rob >> If I am going to hang something around my neck it is the OM4T and 35-80/2.8 on a comfortable Domke strap. Why cut your options? Not Olympus light but it is lighter than the competition even if you add the the 24/2.8 I tuck in my pocket. I do not want to carry a camera around the neck, then a nameless p&S with 35/2.8 in its little belt pouch. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19806 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 00:57:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 00:57:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 16:57:47 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13547 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:57:44 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9E7F5B298 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:56:57 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) In-Reply-To: Message from "R. Jackson" of "Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:18:37 -0800." <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:56:57 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021204005657.B9E7F5B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com>, "R. Jackson" writes: >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been >discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just >curious. The compact one is simply OM-3 and Zuiko 24/2.8 and Zuiko 100/2.8. Both lenses are small and fit easily in my pockets, they both use same size filters and I rarely need something longer than the 100mm lens. 24mm is great for city/landscape photos, because most of the time I can walk closer, but can't walk further back. And 100mm is for those times when you can't walk closer, or want a more compressed image. And of course for those few times when I want to isolate a single subject. On occasions, I alternate 24/2.8 with 35/2.8, without any real reason behind it. (Because I just feel like it.) Compact and lightweight? Sure is. Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20750 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 02:33:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 02:33:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 18:33:30 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA13605 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:33:27 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.177.12d94fbd (4468) for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 21:30:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc@aol.com> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 21:30:20 EST Subject: [OM] OT A *bay Warning To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Happy Holidays, Zuiks, It's Christmas time. Watch out for the urge to overbid on evilBay. Really want that item? Look at those pics closely, and email the seller about any undisclosed information and ask serious questions. No response, or you don't like the response? Walk away. This is a good month to just watch the action. Want to read more? Here's the Motley Fool take on evilBay: Fool.com: Ebay Inc. [Post of the Day] December 3, 2002 http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=foolwatch&source=EDNWFT Rich (The voice of experience...) --part1_177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Happy Holidays, Zuiks,

It's Christmas time.  Watch out for the urge to overbid on evilBay.  Really want that item?  Look at those pics closely, and email the seller about any undisclosed information and ask serious questions.  No response, or you don't like the response?  Walk away.

This is a good month to just watch the action.

Want to read more?  Here's the Motley Fool take on evilBay:  Fool.com: Ebay Inc. [Post of the Day] December 3, 2002

http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=foolwatch&source=EDNWFT

Rich (The voice of experience...) --part1_177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21502 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 03:34:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 03:34:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 19:34:29 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13669 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 19:34:26 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.17] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A681C6001BE; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 22:29:05 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021203212308.05cf2470@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 22:33:18 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021203170452.01ebe880@tid.uio.no> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202182048.00bfb1c0@mail.spitfire.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:40 12/3/02, Thomas Bryhn wrote in part: >True, there are lens designs that have better falloff characteristics than >the simple lens approximation implies, but for any given lens design or >geometry the falloff can't be reduced by introducing mechanical vignetting >(= making the image circle smaller). I may have not been clear enough with what I wrote. It was intended to express just the opposite. The cos^4(theta) falloff for a simple rectilinear lens, where "theta" is the off-axis ray path angle, is caused by two effects which are multiplied together to arrive at the combined effect. Cos(theta) falloff is attributed to the effect you write of from the aperture becomimg more football shaped the farther off-axis a ray path becomes. Some lens designs mitigate this by making the apparent entrance pupil (aperture as viewed from the front) enlarge/tip some for off-axis ray paths. The rest of the effect, a cos^3(theta) falloff is the spreading of light gathered from a solid angle to a flat piece of film. The light gathered by the lens over a solid angle spreads out more (is magnified more) nearer the edge and in the corners than in the center. The farther from the center, the greater the spreading. It is how a rectilinear lens maps flat planes in space to a flat film plane from a position that is effectively a point in space, or at least very nearly a point. This is the effect that making the image circle somewhat larger than the minimum required can mitigate. Make it too large though, and the lens suffers from loss of contrast and risk of flare from the extra light bouncing around inside the light box (region between lens rear element and film plane). Multiply the two effects together for the entire cos^4(theta) falloff. I'm not a lens designer either, but this is what I recall from several decades ago about practical lenses when studying basic optical physics as an undergraduate. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22246 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 04:34:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 04:34:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 20:34:31 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao01.cox.net (lakemtao01.cox.net [68.1.17.244]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13693 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:34:16 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021204042918.KHNX2199.lakemtao01.cox.net@number1> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:29:18 -0500 Message-ID: <008501c29b4d$c1a37fa0$0301a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <5946625A-070E-11D7-9490-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:29:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I wish I could afford an OM-4Ti, heh. Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. Jackson" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 5:27 PM Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup > I've gotta say that I'm amazed at the diversity of people here on the > list, just among those who've taken the time to respond to this. There > are people who carry two or three superfast wide-angle primes, people > who carry a favorite giganto-zoom, someone who carries a couple of > compact lenses in his coat pocket, people who just carry a 50...there's > a real assortment of photographers here. I was kind of expecting some > consensus with a slight variation. "Oh, of course we all carry such and > such because the variable of the cosign of the internodal convergence > overlaps at the second function of the whoosits." It's really cool to > see that there's so much variety here, though. Among the folks who > operate at Manhattan Project levels there are a lot of people with very > quirky and personal reasons for carrying what they do. > > For myself, I lean towards wide angle lenses a lot because I tend to > feel that the narrow angle of incidence in long focal lengths can feel > really claustrophobic. I start to feel like it's crossing the line from > photography into surveillance above 135mm a lot of the time. Then > again, I'm not really a photographer, I'm just a guy who likes to take > pictures. > > -Rob > > On Tuesday, December 3, 2002, at 02:11 PM, Brian Swale wrote: > > > But I must say I am puzzled about so many people preferring a wide > > angle > > as a standard lens. Even as wide as 21 or 24mm. > > > > I tend to use the other end of the focal length scale. > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22608 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 04:47:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 04:47:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 20:47:40 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13708 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:47:08 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.17] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A73E51810146; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:40:30 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202231007.03758350@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:44:43 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) In-Reply-To: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> References: <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 21:18 12/2/02, Rob asked: >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been >discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. > >-Rob I try to plan for what I'm most likely to encounter and make the lenses and other gear most likely to be used easiest to access. Used to try a "standard kit" but gave up. There's too much variation in light levels and desired perspectives. Currently I put the 35mm small format gear into a Tamrac 608 if I need to carry gear around on my shoulder continuously, or don't want to cart in a large bag. The rest of the small format gear, if it can at least make the trip to the general destination, is put into a much larger bag and stays in the car trunk (just in case). Wedding (for reception and other candids, and similar events): The 35mm gear, medium format gear, studio lights, stands and umbrellas add up to a good size load, so I keep the OM stuff carried in to a minimum. OM-4 with 50/1.2 and OM-2S with 50/1.4 standard "body caps." In addition, I typically pack the 35-105/3.5~4.5, 85/2 and 135/2.8, although the 50mm lenses receive the brunt of the workload. I use the 85/2 and occasionally the 135/2.8 for available light shots during the ceremony from the back. The zoom can be tough to use for reception work after the lights go down for dancing as it is a slower lens that creates a dimmer viewfinder making focusing more difficult in low light. Have used it in brightly lit receptions though (mid-afternoon stuff in rooms with enormous windows). The bag also holds a Metz 40 MZ flash head with OM and generic SCA modules. Items such as the flash bracket and spare mondo potato-masher flash handles go into a separate bag. All the rest of the OM system is in a Tamrac Superlight 9 in the car trunk for even more backup. The entire load of camera gear is on site, but I carry in only what I need with a first line of backup. The M645, two lenses and film inserts for it are in yet another small bag, and the lighting stuff is in yet another bag, but they're only used for altar returns. Blues concerts in small, dimly lit clubs: This demands fast lenses for shooting "available darkness" in spite of using TMax P3200 or Delta 3200 at EI 1600. Even though the bands are typically on a riser they are lit by about a dozen standard floods with colored filters and the dimmer control for them is usually put at about half power by the light/sound guy. He has a penchant for very low lighting which requires prodding him occasionally to crank up the lights just a little. Favored aperture is f/2.8 for a little more DOF, as long as shutter speed is at least 1/30th. I pack the OM-4 with 50/1.2 and OM-2S with 50/1.4 standard "body caps." The 85/2 is packed and receives the brunt of the workload with a few shots done using the 50mm. The 35/2 is also thrown in just in case I want a fast wide, but have yet to use it. The OM-2S is the backup body. General daytime, outdoor "walk-around" stuff (no architecturals or night shooting): OM-4 with 50/1.2 "body cap" loaded with Kodachrome 64, and OM-2S with 50/1.4 "body cap" loaded with Scala 200X (or Plus-X Pan, Ilford FP4 or Delta 100). Additional lenses: 24/2, 35-105/3.5~4.5 and 135/2.8. Included are a Metz 40 MZ with G15 flash handle (similar to BG-2), and a Winder 2, plus extra film in the side pockets. Add the 2X-A TC to use with the 135/2.8 for something like an airshow. In severe cold, the OM-4 is sometimes replaced with the OM-1n. Urban night street shooting: Same as daytime load, except ditch the 35-105 slower zoom and heave in the 24/2 and 35/2 fast lenses. Also load the bodies up with ISO 200 to ISO 400 Ektachrome or Fujichrome and Tri-X. Architecturals (day and night): Same as daytime load, but add the 35/2.8 Shift in place of the Winder 2, ensure cable release is on board, and sling the tripod over the shoulder too. Sometimes throw in a roll of Ektachrome 160T for night stuff; been known to use Portra 160 NC at night too. In severe cold, the OM-2S is replaced with the mechanical OM-1n. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22939 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 04:55:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 04:55:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 20:55:39 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtai03.cox.net (lakemtai03.cox.net [68.1.17.252]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13712 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:55:21 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021204042819.FKQU1248.lakemtao04.cox.net@number1> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:28:19 -0500 Message-ID: <007b01c29b4d$9e2f9220$0301a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <3DECCF6E.5050001@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Subject: Re: [OM] A few photos from Austria Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:28:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Really nice photos. I set one as my background. Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Wesson" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 10:36 AM Subject: Re: [OM] A few photos from Austria > Thanks, John. It would certainly be very interesting to see what things > in the view have changed since 1960 and what things are exactly the > same. If you're able to scan any of the old slides I'd love to see them. > > I'm certain that one major difference would be the number of tourists. > Even in November there were plenty of them - Ryanair's fault for giving > away flights I suppose! > > Cheers, > Roger > > John Wheeler wrote: > > > Lovely shots, Roger. The one of the Dom's dome brought back memories. I'd > > bought my first non-normal lens, a Hektor 135/f4.5 for my M3 in Salzburg and > > we had gone up the hill to shoot the town probably from the same place as > > yourself. That was in 1960, dare say there's been some changes since. I must > > dig out the Kodachrome and compare. > > > > John. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Roger Wesson > > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:15 PM > > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > Subject: [OM] A few photos from Austria > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > I sent a mail about this yesterday but haven't seen it get through to > > the list. Apologies if the first one gets through after all. > > > > I took a brief trip to Salzburg two weeks ago, flying with my favourite > > airline Ryanair for just 25 pounds. I was there for just over 24 hours > > but managed to take a fair number of photos, some of which I've added to > > my website at http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/travel/austria > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23211 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 04:59:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 04:59:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 20:59:13 2002 -0800 Received: from web40610.mail.yahoo.com (web40610.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.78.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA13716 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:59:07 -0800 Message-ID: <20021204045822.38620.qmail@web40610.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.130.155.201] by web40610.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 20:58:22 PST Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:58:22 -0800 (PST) From: Andre Goforth Subject: Re: [OM] OT A *bay Warning--OM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I wish I had read this email a week ago. I bought a XA on eBay. It is a disaster. Instead of "almost like new" it is "ugly" and does not work. Seller is refusing to take it back. Here is the lesson learned(kinda obvious now but let me share it) buy a kind of mechandise like cameras from sellers who have good ratings and deal mostly, if not exclusively, in that type of item. Second, always ask what the return policy is. I didn't in this case. (Dumb :{ ) Looking at the stuff the person who sold me the camera it is apparent they don't know squat about cameras. It looks shiny and has a box so it is like new! Andre --- Doggre@aol.com wrote: > > Happy Holidays, Zuiks, > > It's Christmas time. Watch out for the urge to > overbid on evilBay. Really > want that item? Look at those pics closely, and > email the seller about any > undisclosed information and ask serious questions. > No response, or you don't > like the response? Walk away. > > This is a good month to just watch the action. > > Want to read more? Here's the Motley Fool take on > evilBay: HREF="http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=foolwatch&source=EDNWFT">Fool.com: > Ebay > Inc. [Post of the Day] December 3, 2002 > > http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=foolwatch&source=EDNWFT > > > > Rich (The voice of experience...) > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23586 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 05:13:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 05:13:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 21:13:01 2002 -0800 Received: from shell.aros.net (shell.aros.net [207.173.16.19]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13722 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 21:12:58 -0800 Received: from aros.net (42dbdab3.dsl.aros.net [66.219.218.179]) by shell.aros.net (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gB45Cd28078442 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:12:39 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from biesele@aros.net) Message-ID: <3DEDA01D.C4E984F2@aros.net> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:26:37 -0700 From: bill biesele X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.10-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup References: <5946625A-070E-11D7-9490-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Lightweight setup? XA and lots of film. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24288 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 06:08:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 06:08:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 22:08:46 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13761 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:08:39 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.196] by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6K002G3ZFV42@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 22:02:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 22:03:24 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] OT A *bay Warning In-reply-to: <177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc@aol.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/3/02 6:30 PM, Doggre@aol.com at Doggre@aol.com wrote: > > Happy Holidays, Zuiks, > > It's Christmas time. Watch out for the urge to overbid on evilBay. Really > want that item? Look at those pics closely, and email the seller about any > undisclosed information and ask serious questions. No response, or you don't > like the response? Walk away. > > This is a good month to just watch the action. > > Want to read more? Here's the Motley Fool take on evilBay: HREF="http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=foolwatch&source=E > DNWFT">Fool.com: Ebay > Inc. [Post of the Day] December 3, 2002 > > http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=foolwatch&source=EDNWFT > > > Rich (The voice of experience...) > Well, I may add a note of a recent experience... I noticed a listing for a deep rear cap for the 80/4 macro lens... with a BIN of ~$14. Hmm, I could use this and the price is low enough to just snap it up... but I wonder what John H sells it for. Well, a quick nip over to www.zuiko.com shows that he's got it for $12, Buy It Anytime... Same deal on the recent auction of a tripod collar... the auction settled somewhat higher than the John H. regular price. So, the lesson I guess is know your targets before you bid it up... BTW John, if you want to send me something for this free advertising either item would do nicely . -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... Actually, there's probably an order coming your way soon... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24795 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 06:41:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 06:41:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 22:41:48 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13798 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:41:44 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP id <20021204064035002005i35de>; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:40:35 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 01:40:31 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comment below. At 12:54 AM +0000 12/3/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:33:16 -0500 >From: "John A. Lind" >Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) > >At 10:54 11/28/02, Joe Gwinn wrote: > > >I was thinking also of the lenses used on view cameras, where the field of > >view (that is, image circle) vastly exceeds the film size. Ditto, shift > >lenses for 35mm. So, I was looking for an algorithm that included only > >data that was true of all lenses, regardless of design, which leaves only > >focal length. > >Cannot be done. A practical lens design has an "acceptance angle" >independent of focal length which is the limiting factor for the FOV of the >lens' _image_circle_. You are correct that technical camera lenses >normally have an image circle diameter significantly larger than the film >diagonal to allow for the adjustments moving the circle around across the >film plane. It also means the 80mm Mamiya Sekor acceptance angle for an >M645 must be much larger than the 85mm Zuiko acceptance angle for an OM. True enough. That in a nutshell is why I focused on focal length. >However, when one speaks (or writes) of a system FOV, the limiting factor >is the film dimension, if it's properly designed with the lens' image >circle being larger (even if slightly more) than the film dimension. Even >in 35mm small format and medium format systems, the image circle is usually >a little larger than the film gate, especially for shorter >lenses. Reason? It mitigates cos^4 falloff in the corners by placing the >bulk of this falloff outside the film gate. The tradeoff is the extra >light that doesn't end up in the photograph potentially bouncing around >inside the lens and reducing contrast, or worse yet causing aperture flare. I think we are talking past each other. Everything you say above is true, but it butresses my argument, which isn't likely the intent. In your posting on magnification, you start with the formula for paraxial rays through thick lenses, 1/f = 1/u + 1/v, where u is the distances from object to front node, v is the distance from back node to film, and f is the lens focal length. This is what I had in mind as well. I would claim that the "intermediate" focal length is that focal length whose magnification (computed according to your analysis) is the geometric mean of the magnification of the larger and smaller focal lengths whose intermediate is sought. This will be close or equal to the geometric ratio of the focal lengths. (I don't have time to work the math out right now, but perhaps in a few days.) Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25627 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 07:02:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 07:02:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 23:02:26 2002 -0800 Received: from web13702.mail.yahoo.com (web13702.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.135]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA13822 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:02:20 -0800 Message-ID: <20021204070206.35632.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.68.29] by web13702.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:02:06 PST Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:02:06 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] What's your standard setup To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021204064153.24848.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Most std. for me....Minox TLx. Never leaves my pocket :) There's a Zuiko 350/2.8 and two rolls of film in my pocket! > OM-std would be OM2s/p w. 55/1.2. Nice bright lens..... Actually pretty close to mine. My grab and go is an OM2S with 35/2.8 (silvernosed of course). If I have a coat pocket available I'll bring along my 100/2.8. Otherwise my "go kit" contains one or two bodies, 24/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/3.5, 100/2.8, 135/3.5 and 200/4, filters, etc. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25877 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 07:04:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 07:04:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 23:04:15 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13828 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:04:07 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.17] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A7A6CAC01CE; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 01:58:46 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204015123.05430610@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:03:00 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202231007.03758350@mail.spitfire.net> References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 21:18 12/2/02, Rob asked: >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been >discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. > >-Rob How I burned nearly 5 rolls of 36-exp. film in three days and still made about 1000 miles per day, without any speeding tickets, during the recent 2nd Annual Great Road Trip: During the trek homeward, I put the OM-4 with 35-105 mounted on it in the middle of the back seat along with a body cap, lens back cap, 135/2.8, 24/2, and lens hoods for the 35-105 and 24/2. Stored extra film in a small box in the cargo net inside the trunk. Made it very easy to grab the camera and start shooting. Didn't shoot through the car window either. Usually hiked a short distance to get a decent composition and/or rid it of man-made "clutter" found around roadways (e.g. signs, power lines, etc.). Only needed to use the 135/2.8 and 24/2 a couple of times. The 35-105 was able to do nearly everything. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26369 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 07:31:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 07:31:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 23:31:08 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13850 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:31:04 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.120] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AF8B539400C2; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 01:32:27 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:28:50 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <30C28875-068A-11D7-97C8-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca thanks for all the info, this chili stuff sounds darn good, almost like "kheema" (south india cuisine; ground beef, ginger, garlic, whatever else you want, beans, peas, potatoes, if you want it, add it). /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26702 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 07:40:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 07:40:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 03 23:40:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13869 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 23:40:47 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.200]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6L4QU00.E5P for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:56:54 +0800 Message-ID: <004001c29b67$f1d80c80$c85b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021204015123.05430610@mail.spitfire.net> Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:37:05 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Were you happy witht eh pictures taken by the 35-105 zoom? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John A. Lind" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 3:03 PM Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) > At 21:18 12/2/02, Rob asked: > > >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been > >discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a > >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. > > > >-Rob > > How I burned nearly 5 rolls of 36-exp. film in three days and still made > about 1000 miles per day, without any speeding tickets, during the recent > 2nd Annual Great Road Trip: > > During the trek homeward, I put the OM-4 with 35-105 mounted on it in the > middle of the back seat along with a body cap, lens back cap, 135/2.8, > 24/2, and lens hoods for the 35-105 and 24/2. Stored extra film in a small > box in the cargo net inside the trunk. Made it very easy to grab the > camera and start shooting. Didn't shoot through the car window > either. Usually hiked a short distance to get a decent composition and/or > rid it of man-made "clutter" found around roadways (e.g. signs, power > lines, etc.). Only needed to use the 135/2.8 and 24/2 a couple of > times. The 35-105 was able to do nearly everything. > > -- John > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27256 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 08:22:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 08:22:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 00:22:37 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA13900 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 00:22:36 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA03844 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 00:21:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204002008.0282a568@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:23:08 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am looking at the Metz flash units. I understand that their standard OM adapter (SCA321?) does not support the Super FP Sync on the OM-3/4Ts. Fine. So it is a small market. The question is what does it take to get it to work? Is it possible to modify a SCA-321 somehow to get the Metz unit to fire in HSS mode? Is this an impossible dream? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27544 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 08:27:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 08:27:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 00:27:50 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA13904 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 00:27:48 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18JUsi-0002wp-00 for ; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 01:27:44 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 01:26:55 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Our Texans are proud of their hot chili but some of the food in Southern India is much hotter than anything made in the good old USA. A baked potato with sour cream can burn your lips off. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of siddiq Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 12:29 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... thanks for all the info, this chili stuff sounds darn good, almost like "kheema" (south india cuisine; ground beef, ginger, garlic, whatever else you want, beans, peas, potatoes, if you want it, add it). /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27862 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 08:39:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 08:39:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 00:39:33 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA13908 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 00:39:32 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.120] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AF99509700CE; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:40:57 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:38:01 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: [OM][OT] TOPE idea, was Time out for a food... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca here's a TOPE topic... FOOD! or food from your background, or your fav food.. mmmmm /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29415 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 11:54:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 11:54:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 03:54:49 2002 -0800 Received: from hpc-hamburg.de (mail.hpc-hamburg.de [212.18.79.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA13973 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 03:54:48 -0800 Received: from [130.30.140.100] (helo=hpc-user-hew) by hpc-hamburg.de with smtp (Exim 1.92 #2) for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca id 18JZ6Y-0003Ns-00; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:57:58 +0059 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:51:58 +0100 Message-ID: <01C29B93.EE630600.h.wiechel@hpc-hamburg.de> From: Harry Wiechel To: "'Olympus Mailing List'" Subject: [OM] ...what a beautiful camera Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:51:54 +0100 Organization: HPC X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ... feel I have to come out of lurking mode with this: I recently had my OM4Ti clad in red snake skin from Morgan Sparks and... WOW, what an eyecatcher it is now! I thought long before doing this but ....must say, I have not regreted it at all. it now makes people turn their head. I just cannot think of a more beautiful camera. ....and those new digital jonnies just look (and probably feel) poxy in comparison (IMHO). ...Long live film! Harry < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30678 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 13:46:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 13:46:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 05:46:26 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA14156 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 05:46:25 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.12b.1c77eabd (4560) for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:44:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <12b.1c77eabd.2b1f60bd@aol.com> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:44:29 EST Subject: Re: [OM] What's your standard setup To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_12b.1c77eabd.2b1f60bd_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_12b.1c77eabd.2b1f60bd_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/2002 1:02:39 AM Central Standard Time, agschnozz@yahoo.com writes: > My grab and go is an OM2S with > 35/2.8 (silvernosed of course). I like your choice of camera bodies. Some have accused me of having a sick mind and my mental vision of AG schnozz is a guy with an Olympus OM in his hand and a little silver colored nose protector strapped to his face. Those people may be right. Until now, I've stayed out of this conversation mainly because my light kit (the one in my SUV with a bath towel draped over it) changes from time to time depending on what I anticipate using or in which I have an interest in becoming more familiar. Some of the standards are extra batteries, film, lens cleaning gear, rubber bands, small notebook, model release forms, lighted magnifying glass, large clips, pen, small level, small table top tripod, clean handkerchief . . . Now for the working end of things. An OM 2S and 35-105mm Zuiko. Beyond that what will most often appear is a T-20 flash, 90mm f2.5 Tamron, extension tubes, one of the super wide angles (17mm Tamron, 18mm Zuiko or 21mm F2 Zuiko) and perhaps something a little longer than the 35-105. All the lens will have lens hoods. My usual filter kit includes a circular polarizer, Softar 1 & graduated neutral density. This all fits into one of the smaller Tamrac shoulder bags. If I was pressed to have an absolute minimalist kit, it would probably include the Tamron 60-300mm on an OM 2S with the 28-48mm Zuiko in my pocket. If pressed to be as unobtrusive as possible, which is difficult for a 6'4'' 240 lb guy with a camera to do, it would probably be an OM 2S with the 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 close focus Zuiko. Bill Barber --part1_12b.1c77eabd.2b1f60bd_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/2002 1:02:39 AM Central Standard Time, agschnozz@yahoo.com writes:

My grab and go is an OM2S with
35/2.8 (silvernosed of course).


I like your choice of camera bodies.  Some have accused me of having a sick mind and my mental vision of AG schnozz is a guy with an Olympus OM in his hand and a little silver colored nose protector strapped to his face.  Those people may be right.

Until now, I've stayed out of this conversation mainly because my light kit (the one in my SUV with a bath towel draped over it) changes from time to time depending on what I anticipate using or in which I have an interest in becoming more familiar.  Some of the standards are extra batteries, film, lens cleaning gear, rubber bands, small notebook, model release forms, lighted magnifying glass, large clips, pen, small level, small table top tripod, clean handkerchief . . .  Now for the working end of things.  An OM 2S and 35-105mm Zuiko.  Beyond that what will most often appear is a T-20 flash, 90mm f2.5 Tamron, extension tubes, one of the super wide angles (17mm Tamron, 18mm Zuiko or 21mm F2 Zuiko) and perhaps something a little longer than the 35-105.  All the lens will have lens hoods. My usual filter kit includes a circular polarizer, Softar 1 & graduated neutral density.  This all fits into one of the smaller Tamrac shoulder bags.  If! I was pressed to have an absolute minimalist kit, it would probably include the Tamron 60-300mm on an OM 2S with the 28-48mm Zuiko in my pocket.  If pressed to be as unobtrusive as possible, which is difficult for a 6'4'' 240 lb guy with a camera to do, it would probably be an OM 2S with the 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 close focus Zuiko.  Bill Barber         --part1_12b.1c77eabd.2b1f60bd_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31010 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 13:59:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 13:59:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 05:59:03 2002 -0800 Received: from dfw-gate3.raytheon.com (dfw-gate3.raytheon.com [199.46.199.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA14260 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 05:59:02 -0800 Received: from ds02c00.directory.ray.com (ds02c00.directory.ray.com [147.25.138.118]) by dfw-gate3.raytheon.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gB4Dw0Md026597 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:58:00 -0600 (CST) Received: from ds02c00.directory.ray.com (root@localhost) by ds02c00.directory.ray.com (8.12.6/8.12.1) with ESMTP id gB4DvxDB011804 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:57:59 GMT Received: from mk2-mta02.mck.us.ray.com (mk2-mta02.mck.us.ray.com [138.126.191.160]) by ds02c00.directory.ray.com (8.12.6/8.12.1) with ESMTP id gB4DvwQs011792 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:57:58 GMT Subject: [OM] Re:{OM} WTB filter and/or step up ring To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: From: "Thomas A Simmons" Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:54:24 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Looking for Wratten 44 filter, 62MM and/or a 55 to 62 step up adapter Pls reply with cond, price, photo if avail Tom Tucson, AZ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31463 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 14:24:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 14:24:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 06:24:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mons.uio.no (mons.uio.no [129.240.130.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14277 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:24:16 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by mons.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18JaO2-0006lA-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:20:26 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18JaO0-0002wU-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:20:24 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021204125947.01ec1e80@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 15:20:10 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021203212308.05cf2470@mail.spitfire.net> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20021203170452.01ebe880@tid.uio.no> <4.3.2.7.2.20021202182048.00bfb1c0@mail.spitfire.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 04:33 04.12.02, John A. Lind wrote: >The rest of the effect, a cos^3(theta) falloff is the spreading of light >gathered from a solid angle to a flat piece of film. The light gathered >by the lens over a solid angle spreads out more (is magnified more) nearer >the edge and in the corners than in the center. The farther from the >center, the greater the spreading. It is how a rectilinear lens maps flat >planes in space to a flat film plane from a position that is effectively a >point in space, or at least very nearly a point. This is the effect that >making the image circle somewhat larger than the minimum required can >mitigate. Make it too large though, and the lens suffers from loss of >contrast and risk of flare from the extra light bouncing around inside the >light box (region between lens rear element and film plane). OK, we agree about where the cos^3(theta) term come from. If we stick to the simple lens approximation, how is theta defined and found? It's all defined by focal lenght and the film format, image circle doesn't enter into the equation at all. So for *this approximation* any lens of a given focal length will show the same falloff, because the angles are always the same. For complex lenses I'm sure the lens designer can do all sorts of funny things to circumvent cos^4 - but you argue that a larger image circle will give less falloff. To me this also implies that a smaller image circle would give more falloff. So I make up an example where I reduce the image circle by vignetting, and I have at least managed to convince myself that this doesn't do anything to the rate of falloff. I don't want to insult you, but I think you confuse vignetting and falloff. One would want to vignette as much of the light falling outside of the film area as possible (and as early as possible), to not have it bounce around inside the lens or camera. For practical reasons you can't create a lens hood that goes to infinity, so the object causing vignetting will have to be placed somewhere out of focus. This of course means that the shadowing effect will be gradual, so you have the choice of vignetting inside the film frame at full aperture, or an image circle that is always a bit larger than the film frame (and as a side effect causes a loss in contrast). Then the larger image circle helps avoid uneven illimination from vignetting, but the falloff would still be the same in either case. It would be interesting if someone could compare a couple of tests of lenses from different manufacturers. I believe some tests measure falloff at a few apertures, and lenses of similar focal lengths would show *about* the same degree of falloff if I'm not mistaken. I can't be proven right, but any large deviations can certainly prove me wrong. Thomas Bryhn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31894 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 14:47:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 14:47:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 06:47:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14293 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:47:33 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:43:45 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gB4EhLK16167 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:43:22 GMT Message-ID: <3DEE1487.2060307@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 14:43:19 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) References: <5.1.0.14.0.20021203170452.01ebe880@tid.uio.no> <4.3.2.7.2.20021202182048.00bfb1c0@mail.spitfire.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20021204125947.01ec1e80@tid.uio.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thomas Bryhn wrote: > At 04:33 04.12.02, John A. Lind wrote: > >> The rest of the effect, a cos^3(theta) falloff is the spreading of >> light gathered from a solid angle to a flat piece of film. The light >> gathered by the lens over a solid angle spreads out more (is magnified >> more) nearer the edge and in the corners than in the center. The >> farther from the center, the greater the spreading. It is how a >> rectilinear lens maps flat planes in space to a flat film plane from a >> position that is effectively a point in space, or at least very nearly >> a point. This is the effect that making the image circle somewhat >> larger than the minimum required can mitigate. Make it too large >> though, and the lens suffers from loss of contrast and risk of flare >> from the extra light bouncing around inside the light box (region >> between lens rear element and film plane). > > > OK, we agree about where the cos^3(theta) term come from. If we stick to > the simple lens approximation, how is theta defined and found? It's all > defined by focal lenght and the film format, image circle doesn't enter > into the equation at all. So for *this approximation* any lens of a > given focal length will show the same falloff, because the angles are > always the same. > For complex lenses I'm sure the lens designer can do all sorts of funny > things to circumvent cos^4 - but you argue that a larger image circle > will give less falloff. To me this also implies that a smaller image > circle would give more falloff. So I make up an example where I reduce > the image circle by vignetting, and I have at least managed to convince > myself that this doesn't do anything to the rate of falloff. I think you're both arguing the same thing. John is not saying that a larger image circle has less fall-off - just that the smaller your film format the less of the falloff you record on film. By only recording on film the centre of the image circle you eliminate obtrusive light falloff towards the edge of the recorded image, although of course the light falloff towards the edge of the image circle is the same. Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32162 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 14:50:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 14:50:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 06:50:14 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14297 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:50:13 -0800 Received: from M2W071.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.71]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:49:45 -0500 Message-ID: <54360-220021234144945618@M2W071.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:49:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Dec 2002 14:49:45.0644 (UTC) FILETIME=[62ED0EC0:01C29BA4] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca =2E=2E=2E=2E=2ETo Dream=2E=2E=2E=2EThe Impossible Dream=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E IOW, I'd be amazed if you can figure that one out=2E With the low prices = of the F280, it's not worth it, to me=2E The HSS-capabile Metz are pretty pricey=2E The Metz 54MZ-3 that does HSS with the Leica M7 is $350=2E00 in= kit form for Canon, Minota, Nikon=2E The Leica version is $312+$60=3D$372=2E = =20 BTW, the SCA modules for HSS and the 54MZ-3 are all numbered 3xx2=2E I wouldn't be surprised if they're substantially different than the older modules=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Richard F=2E Man richard@imagecraft=2Ecom Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:23:08 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz I am looking at the Metz flash units=2E I understand that their standard O= M=20 adapter (SCA321?) does not support the Super FP Sync on the OM-3/4Ts=2E Fi= ne=2E=20 So it is a small market=2E The question is what does it take to get it to=20= work? Is it possible to modify a SCA-321 somehow to get the Metz unit to=20= fire in HSS mode? Is this an impossible dream? // richard =20 On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site=2E [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previou= s=20 replies in your msgs=2E ]=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32509 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 15:02:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 15:02:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 07:02:33 2002 -0800 Received: from dfw-gate2.raytheon.com (dfw-gate2.raytheon.com [199.46.199.231]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA14309 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:02:31 -0800 Received: from ds02c00.directory.ray.com (ds02c00.directory.ray.com [147.25.138.118]) by dfw-gate2.raytheon.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gB4F1UhK004497 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:01:30 -0600 (CST) Received: from ds02c00.directory.ray.com (root@localhost) by ds02c00.directory.ray.com (8.12.6/8.12.1) with ESMTP id gB4F1Qav012687 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:01:29 GMT Received: from mk2-mta02.mck.us.ray.com (mk2-mta02.mck.us.ray.com [138.126.191.160]) by ds02c00.directory.ray.com (8.12.6/8.12.1) with ESMTP id gB4F1KQs012610 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:01:20 GMT Subject: [OM] Re: {OT} Another meteor shower To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: From: "Thomas A Simmons" Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:57:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://SkyandTelescope.com/observing/objects/meteors/article_802_1.asp The last two paragraphs may interest y'all. The moon sets about 2AM on Sat 14 Dec which is when the radiant of the shower is at it's best. Tom Tucson, AZ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1109 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 16:43:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 16:43:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 08:43:42 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14400 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:43:41 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA75582 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:42:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 08:44:12 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <54360-220021234144945618@M2W071.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:49 AM 12/4/2002 -0500, Skip wrote: >.....To Dream....The Impossible Dream..... > >IOW, I'd be amazed if you can figure that one out. With the low prices of >the F280, it's not worth it, to me. The HSS-capabile Metz are pretty >pricey. The Metz 54MZ-3 that does HSS with the Leica M7 is $350.00 in kit >form for Canon, Minota, Nikon. The Leica version is $312+$60=$372. Yea, you're right. Anyway, I guess my goal is better served to get a unit that can diffuse the lights better to avoid the harsh front on light. The Metz 54-MZ3 does seem appealing in that regard nevertheless. I can shoemount it most of the time, and get a bracket for certain stuff. Other choices for good flash? Looking at the archive, the Metz comes up a lot, although looks like the old "favoriate" Metz 40MZ has been replaced by the 54-MZ. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1523 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 16:59:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 16:59:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 08:59:23 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14424 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:59:21 -0800 Received: from [62.64.202.102] (helo=[62.64.202.102]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18JcvD-000ERK-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:02:53 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <008e01c29ac7$ab998690$9600a8c0@jakeway> References: <008e01c29ac7$ab998690$9600a8c0@jakeway> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:34:09 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Gloves in the darkroom Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks Jodi. Chris At 07:29 -0500 03/12/02, Jodi Jakeway wrote: >Hello Chris. >I don't use gloves, but I have running water always, and always rinse my >hand while agitating/rocking the tray before I go onto the next chemical. >Also, I only use my right hand to handle the prints, left to agitate the >trays. Just rinse, rinse, rinse, and keep a towel handy! >Jodi Jakeway > -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1562 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 16:59:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 16:59:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 08:59:29 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14427 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:59:28 -0800 Received: from [62.64.202.102] (helo=[62.64.202.102]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18JcvM-000ERK-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:03:00 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc@aol.com> References: <177.12d94fbd.2b1ec2bc@aol.com> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:33:58 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] OT A *bay Warning Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Good points Rich. Their adoption of PayPal with its rather opaque terms of service (at least for overseas customers, IMO) will not help with maintaining trust in the Internet auction... Chris At 21:30 -0500 03/12/02, Doggre@aol.com wrote: >Happy Holidays, Zuiks, > >It's Christmas time. Watch out for the urge to overbid on evilBay. >Really want that item? Look at those pics closely, and email the >seller about any undisclosed information and ask serious questions. >No response, or you don't like the response? Walk away. > >This is a good month to just watch the action. > >Want to read more? Here's the Motley Fool take on evilBay: >Fool.com: >Ebay Inc. [Post of the Day] December 3, 2002 > >http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2002/021203.htm?ref=3Dfoolwatch&source=3D= EDNWFT > >Rich (The voice of experience...) -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2129 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 17:07:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 17:07:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 09:06:59 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14440 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:06:58 -0800 Received: from pool0262.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.7] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Jcyj-0007LN-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 09:06:30 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:06:27 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Yea, you're right. Anyway, I guess my goal is better served to get a >unit that can diffuse the lights better to avoid the harsh front on >light. The Metz 54-MZ3 does seem appealing in that regard >nevertheless. I can shoemount it most of the time, and get a bracket >for certain stuff. > >Other choices for good flash? Looking at the archive, the Metz comes >up a lot, although looks like the old "favoriate" Metz 40MZ has been >replaced by the 54-MZ. > >// richard I read an informative article with lots of pictures some time ago that dealt with diffusers. They don't really work unless they are really large and really close like umbrellas and light boxes. The harshness is inversely dependant on the size of the light source and directly dependant on the distance. Notwithstanding all the gadgets for sale out there, unless you can bounce a lot of light off other sources like ceilings and walls you are pretty much stuck. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2513 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 17:22:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 17:22:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 09:22:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14448 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:22:23 -0800 Received: from [62.64.237.132] (helo=[62.64.202.102]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18JdAX-0007im-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:18:41 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:09:06 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I should not confuse TexMex dishes with Indian Siddiq. Indian food is far richer in taste than the average chilli (yes, I know, what's verage?). There is normally little in the way of exotic spices in the chillis I have tasted in the US, (although I use roast cumin and coriander with cayenne and chopped chillis in my own chilli con carne). I have a lovely vindaloo recipe which takes about 3 times as long to complete as my chilli, mainly becauase of the amount of preparation of garlic, ginger and all the spices. I reckon a full Kheema will have a few more spices than you have listed, although I do understand that there is nothing really set in these affairs. South Indian recipes will be "hotter" than elsewhere in India, but no Indian recipe will be profligate with chilli or cayenne ... it's taste that an Indian cook is after, not a new tongue coating ;-). At 23:28 -0800 03/12/02, siddiq wrote: >thanks for all the info, this chili stuff sounds darn good, almost >like "kheema" (south india cuisine; ground beef, ginger, garlic, >whatever else you want, beans, peas, potatoes, if you want it, add >it). > >/S >-- -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2932 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 17:37:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 17:37:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 09:37:49 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14474 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:37:47 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.81] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id AC285DE40146; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:32:24 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204122940.0597a8f0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:36:42 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> References: <54360-220021234144945618@M2W071.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:44 12/4/02, Richard wrote: >At 09:49 AM 12/4/2002 -0500, Skip wrote: >>.....To Dream....The Impossible Dream..... >> >>IOW, I'd be amazed if you can figure that one out. With the low prices of >>the F280, it's not worth it, to me. The HSS-capabile Metz are pretty >>pricey. The Metz 54MZ-3 that does HSS with the Leica M7 is $350.00 in kit >>form for Canon, Minota, Nikon. The Leica version is $312+$60=$372. You wouldn't be able to use it in HSS with an OM-4T or OM-3ti. Metz' only SCA module for the OM system supports only the three Shoe 4 contacts. [snip] >Other choices for good flash? Looking at the archive, the Metz comes up a >lot, although looks like the old "favoriate" Metz 40MZ has been replaced >by the 54-MZ. AFIK the 40 MZ-3i is still in production (along with another 40 MZ), although Metz seems to be excluding mentioning it while pushing the 54 MZ heavily to the upscale Wunderbrick with mondo zoom, and the digital market. Browse the major on-line stores; it's still there. Personally, I prefer the lower profile of the 40 MZ for bracket mounting and it doesn't have the enormous swing in GN from one end to the other end of its focal length settings. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3394 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 17:59:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 17:59:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 09:59:17 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14516 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:59:11 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.81] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A12F5E830146; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:53:51 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204125240.059804b0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:58:10 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: <3DEE1487.2060307@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20021203170452.01ebe880@tid.uio.no> <4.3.2.7.2.20021202182048.00bfb1c0@mail.spitfire.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20021204125947.01ec1e80@tid.uio.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes. Thanks Roger! -- John At 09:43 12/4/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >I think you're both arguing the same thing. John is not saying that a >larger image circle has less fall-off - just that the smaller your film >format the less of the falloff you record on film. By only recording on >film the centre of the image circle you eliminate obtrusive light falloff >towards the edge of the recorded image, although of course the light >falloff towards the edge of the image circle is the same. > >Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3817 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 18:12:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 18:12:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 10:12:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14533 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:12:24 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6L00K61X0VVY@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:07:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:10:01 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <009f01c29bc0$5d90ec00$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My "standard setup" is contained in two bags (don't want the E-10 and OMs getting too cozy, never know what kind of offspring they may produce ;-)...). In the MiniTrekker (backpack): OM-4T with MD2 mounted to Zuiko 350/2.8 OM-2S with Winder Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 LD Tamron SP 140F Converter Zuiko 1.4XA Converter Zuiko 2XA Converter Zuiko 21/3.5 Misc. stuff (batteries, lens cleaning supplies, sharpie marker, business cards, etc.) Provia F film In the Orion AW (waist pack): E-10 TCON-14b Converter FL-40 Flash 544mb worth of memory cards (and needing more) 5 sets of NiMh Batteries (plus chargers if traveling) Misc. stuff (lens cleaning supplies, sharpie marker, business cards, etc.) Overflow Provia F film Left at home is a bunch of stuff...(zuikoholism and all ya know?) The E-10 takes the brunt of the load in the "normal" focal length range. The OMs are now used for wide angle and telephoto pretty much. A bucket-load of cash (which I don't have) and an exciting new 4/3 system (which remains to be seen) could change this whole picture. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4324 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 18:36:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 18:36:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 10:36:54 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14572 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:36:50 -0800 Received: from user75.net070.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([209.26.2.75] helo=oemcomputer) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18JeNj-0000H4-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:36:23 -0800 Message-ID: <008f01c29bc4$2c92aae0$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <98PJLHOK4YTR69WSD718PNKHA9GF.3dec6eb7@desktop> Subject: Re: [OM] OM2 POW @photo.net Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:37:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "siddiq" > nice OMer shot at photo.net's picture of the week. > > http://www.photo.net/ Wow, interesting photo ... but did you read the comments/discussion? Those people consume entirely toooo much caffeine ;-). Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4640 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 18:44:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 18:44:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 10:44:07 2002 -0800 Received: from web13704.mail.yahoo.com (web13704.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA14585 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:44:05 -0800 Message-ID: <20021204184349.81683.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.200] by web13704.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:43:49 PST Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:43:49 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: RE: [OM] BIN on TTL Multi-Connector To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021204064153.24848.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca JTimpe wrote: >Phone number didn't change. Only the names to protect the >innocent. Ok, that explains your wife, but how about you? Got a darkroom built in those new digs yet? I figured that you could cop at least a few hundred square feet for photo stuff. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4991 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 18:53:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 18:53:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 10:53:07 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14596 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:53:02 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:57:34 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:51:53 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] BIN on TTL Multi-Connector Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:55:41 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Dec 2002 18:57:34.0859 (UTC) FILETIME=[01AB35B0:01C29BC7] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've never ventured into home developing. I'm just relieved that we've finally sold our other place. In my usual impeccable timing, we listed the old for sale just as a boiling hot market screeched almost to a complete halt. Nothing like double house payments to temper your zuikoholism temporarily... -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz Got a darkroom built in those new digs yet? I figured that you could cop at least a few hundred square feet for photo stuff. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6038 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 20:05:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 20:05:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 12:05:58 2002 -0800 Received: from firebird.planetinternet.be (brussels-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.34.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14718 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:05:55 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-190-19.adsl.pi.be [212.239.190.19]) by firebird.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0453BD3812 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:05:23 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 21:05:23 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] What's your standard setup From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <12b.1c77eabd.2b1f60bd@aol.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca as described earlier, since morocco my standard set-up is OM4Ti + 35shift. It is very nice for landscapes when you want to control the place of the horizon... in my pockets are a 21f3.5 and 85f2. for strawling around with a really free feeling I take the OM4 + 40mm. Very light, very compact. I do mostly architecture (in use) and street views, snapshots of things that catch my attention, this could bottles with pigment in a japanese shop or a nice doorstop, a postbox or streetsigns. For all these a 35 shift comes in really handy, since you don't always have a ladder with you and I like balanced 'perspectiveless' objectshots. Combine it with a 2x teleconverter and you have a wonderfull 70mmf5.6 24mm shift a very interesting instrument. When going out at the annual fun fair I take the 50 1.2 only, and it is really nice to hear people say: "hey, your flash didn't go off!" iwert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6427 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 20:21:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 20:21:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 12:21:14 2002 -0800 Received: from orngca-mls01.socal.rr.com (orngca-mls01.socal.rr.com [66.75.160.16]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14751 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:21:13 -0800 Received: from davegael (66-74-234-209.san.rr.com [66.74.234.209]) by orngca-mls01.socal.rr.com (8.11.4/8.11.3) with SMTP id gB4KJpQ26545 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:19:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000501c29bd2$a5a8b650$d1ea4a42@davegael> From: "Dave Dougherty" To: "OLYMPUS" Subject: [OM] Re: Digital compared to Film Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:20:50 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Below is a link to an article out of a German lab. Interesting read. Dave Dougherty http://www.uschold.com/pdf/Report%20SLR%20Public %20N.pdf < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7001 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 20:59:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 20:59:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 12:59:12 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14785 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:59:10 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA85440 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:58:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:59:42 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:06 AM 12/4/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: ...I read an informative article with lots of pictures some time ago that dealt with diffusers. They don't really work unless they are really large and really close like umbrellas and light boxes. The harshness is inversely dependant on the size of the light source and directly dependant on the distance. Notwithstanding all the gadgets for sale out there, unless you can bounce a lot of light off other sources like ceilings and walls you are pretty much stuck. >-- Well OK, but all I want is less harsh pictures, like the one my wife gets w/ her digi-cam :-) I mean it is embarrassing for me to tout the virtues of my OM system, while her dinky little C-3000 gets better flash pics! re: John's Lind comment on 40 MZs Thanks! I will take a look and search for it. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7757 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 21:41:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 21:41:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 13:41:05 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14845 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:41:03 -0800 Received: from pool0618.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.178.108] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18JhFx-0006x1-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 13:40:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <008f01c29bc4$2c92aae0$010000c0@oemcomputer> References: <98PJLHOK4YTR69WSD718PNKHA9GF.3dec6eb7@desktop> <008f01c29bc4$2c92aae0$010000c0@oemcomputer> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:40:31 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] OM2 POW @photo.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "siddiq" > >> nice OMer shot at photo.net's picture of the week. >> > > http://www.photo.net/ > >Wow, interesting photo ... but did you read the comments/discussion? Those >people consume entirely toooo much caffeine ;-). > >Jamie >Fort Myers, FL Thanks for pointing out the commentary. Very amusing. Shames this list on one of its bad days. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8138 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 21:59:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 21:59:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 13:59:08 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14849 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:59:07 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19692 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:58:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204135907.08120c70@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 13:59:39 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital compared to Film In-Reply-To: <000501c29bd2$a5a8b650$d1ea4a42@davegael> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:20 PM 12/4/2002 -0800, Dave Dougherty wrote: >Below is a link to an article out of a German lab. Interesting read. > >Dave Dougherty > >http://www.uschold.com/pdf/Report%20SLR%20Public %20N.pdf Looks like it could have been commissioned by Olympus to justify the 4/3 systems :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8470 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 22:06:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 22:06:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 14:06:31 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14873 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:06:29 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Jhf1-0000aw-00 for ; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 15:06:27 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:05:37 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021202231007.03758350@mail.spitfire.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If I'm on a specific assignment the equipment is selected for that specific set of needs. Over the years some standards have evolved though. If I'm backpacking, and not primarily there for photography, I usually take an OM-1N with a 24mm f-2 and either an 85mm f-2 or a 135mm f-2.8. My mini car kit or boat kit is an OM-2N with a 28-85mm f-2.8 and either a 60-300 or a 100-500mm zoom. My normal car kit is a fully stuffed LowePro OmniPro bag containing: OM-4t or OM-3 OM-2N or OM-1 21mm f-3.5 24mm f-2 50mm f-1.2 85mm f-2 2XA 1.4X 28-48mm zoom 35-105mm zoom or 90mm f-2 macro 85-250 Zoom T20 flash head 8X mini binoculars Tape Recorder This kit also has a LowePro Lens Case 5 with either a Zeiss 100-500 zoom or a Vivitar 120-600 zoom. All this gear sits between the bucket seats or in the passenger seat and is readily available for snap shooting. If long distance critter shots are expected on short notice the 650-1300mm Exacta zoom with its dedicated OM-1 and its special case go along too. If I'm going to someplace where some serious photo opportunities can be expected, the 350mm f2.8 and its special aluminum case go along in the back of the van with another aluminum case usually containing the following: OM-1 body with long telephoto compatible screen 17mm f-3.5 28mm f-2.8 35mm f-2 135mm f-2.8 180mm f-2.8 300mm f-4.5 1000mm f-11 2XA 1.4X If I'm planning on doing field macro work a special bag containing the following is added: Variable extension tube Extension tube set 20mm f-3.5 (usually stays home) 38mm f-2.8 macro 50mm f-3.5 macro (usually stays home on the slide duplicator) 80mm f-4 (if I had one but don't yet) 90mm f-2 macro 135mm f-3.5 macro Ring flash If significant flash photography is needed, another aluminum case is added with: 2 T32 flash heads and attachments 2 Bounce-Grip 2 assemblies and cables 1 F280 flash and remote cable I have a bag that the studio flashes and umbrellas fit in but they usually stay home since I no longer do weddings. If fast action or remote photography is anticipated another bag with motor drives and remote actuators is added. Then, of course, there are the tripods, monopods, groofwin pod, bean bags, reflectors, folding blind, shoulder pods, some other camera supports and a cooler of beverage. This is why I drive a full-size 4x4 van much of the time. I am embarrassed to admit how often I take most of this stuff and use very little of it. If I'm going for a walk in the park I take an OM2N with a 35-70 f-3.6. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John A. Lind Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 9:45 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) At 21:18 12/2/02, Rob asked: >This brings up a question, though (and one that has probably been >discussed to death, so forgive me). What do most of you carry as a >"standard" compact setup and for what kind of photography? I'm just curious. > >-Rob I try to plan for what I'm most likely to encounter and make the lenses and other gear most likely to be used easiest to access. Used to try a "standard kit" but gave up. There's too much variation in light levels and desired perspectives. Currently I put the 35mm small format gear into a Tamrac 608 if I need to carry gear around on my shoulder continuously, or don't want to cart in a large bag. The rest of the small format gear, if it can at least make the trip to the general destination, is put into a much larger bag and stays in the car trunk (just in case). Wedding (for reception and other candids, and similar events): The 35mm gear, medium format gear, studio lights, stands and umbrellas add up to a good size load, so I keep the OM stuff carried in to a minimum. OM-4 with 50/1.2 and OM-2S with 50/1.4 standard "body caps." In addition, I typically pack the 35-105/3.5~4.5, 85/2 and 135/2.8, although the 50mm lenses receive the brunt of the workload. I use the 85/2 and occasionally the 135/2.8 for available light shots during the ceremony from the back. The zoom can be tough to use for reception work after the lights go down for dancing as it is a slower lens that creates a dimmer viewfinder making focusing more difficult in low light. Have used it in brightly lit receptions though (mid-afternoon stuff in rooms with enormous windows). The bag also holds a Metz 40 MZ flash head with OM and generic SCA modules. Items such as the flash bracket and spare mondo potato-masher flash handles go into a separate bag. All the rest of the OM system is in a Tamrac Superlight 9 in the car trunk for even more backup. The entire load of camera gear is on site, but I carry in only what I need with a first line of backup. The M645, two lenses and film inserts for it are in yet another small bag, and the lighting stuff is in yet another bag, but they're only used for altar returns. Blues concerts in small, dimly lit clubs: This demands fast lenses for shooting "available darkness" in spite of using TMax P3200 or Delta 3200 at EI 1600. Even though the bands are typically on a riser they are lit by about a dozen standard floods with colored filters and the dimmer control for them is usually put at about half power by the light/sound guy. He has a penchant for very low lighting which requires prodding him occasionally to crank up the lights just a little. Favored aperture is f/2.8 for a little more DOF, as long as shutter speed is at least 1/30th. I pack the OM-4 with 50/1.2 and OM-2S with 50/1.4 standard "body caps." The 85/2 is packed and receives the brunt of the workload with a few shots done using the 50mm. The 35/2 is also thrown in just in case I want a fast wide, but have yet to use it. The OM-2S is the backup body. General daytime, outdoor "walk-around" stuff (no architecturals or night shooting): OM-4 with 50/1.2 "body cap" loaded with Kodachrome 64, and OM-2S with 50/1.4 "body cap" loaded with Scala 200X (or Plus-X Pan, Ilford FP4 or Delta 100). Additional lenses: 24/2, 35-105/3.5~4.5 and 135/2.8. Included are a Metz 40 MZ with G15 flash handle (similar to BG-2), and a Winder 2, plus extra film in the side pockets. Add the 2X-A TC to use with the 135/2.8 for something like an airshow. In severe cold, the OM-4 is sometimes replaced with the OM-1n. Urban night street shooting: Same as daytime load, except ditch the 35-105 slower zoom and heave in the 24/2 and 35/2 fast lenses. Also load the bodies up with ISO 200 to ISO 400 Ektachrome or Fujichrome and Tri-X. Architecturals (day and night): Same as daytime load, but add the 35/2.8 Shift in place of the Winder 2, ensure cable release is on board, and sling the tripod over the shoulder too. Sometimes throw in a roll of Ektachrome 160T for night stuff; been known to use Portra 160 NC at night too. In severe cold, the OM-2S is replaced with the mechanical OM-1n. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8793 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 22:14:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 22:14:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 14:14:15 2002 -0800 Received: from batch3.csd.uwm.edu (root@batch3.csd.uwm.edu [129.89.7.226]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14881 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:14:13 -0800 Received: from alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (root@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu [129.89.169.1]) by batch3.csd.uwm.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gB4MCv05004948 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:12:57 -0600 (CST) Received: from [129.89.124.240] (dhcp-124-240.imt.uwm.edu [129.89.124.240]) by alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gB4MCuSo012728 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:12:56 -0600 (CST) X-Sender: amr3@alphaa.csd.uwm.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:13:23 -0600 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Alan Magayne-Roshak Subject: [OM] ( OM ) standard lightweight setup Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 >From: "Brian Swale" >Hi folks, > >......... > >But I must say I am puzzled about so many people preferring a wide angle >as a standard lens. Even as wide as 21 or 24mm. > >................ > >I tend to use the other end of the focal length scale. > > >Brian ................................................................................ Me too. I only seem to use my OM gear for motorcycle rides these days, and take along the 21 3.5, 50 1.8, 100 2.8, and 200 4 + a 135mm Leitz Elmar that I reworked into a soft-focus lens and use via a short-mount and T-adapter. But I almost always end up using only the 100 and the Elmar. It must be four or five years since I've used the 21mm. I know my favorite focal length is 85-90. I've got four disparate lenses in this range for my Leicas. (I need and use ultra-wides at my job, but for personal work I just don't like that look) (I like to isolate the main subject; the 100 2.8 is hardly ever stopped down past f/4.5) Alan Magayne-Roshak Senior Photographer Visual Imaging Univ. of Wis.- Milwaukee Information & Media Technologies amr3@uwm.edu (414) 229-4282 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9384 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 22:52:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 22:52:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 14:52:50 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14893 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:52:47 -0800 Received: from default ([213.1.5.178]) by care4free.net ; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 22:49:02 -0000 Message-ID: <001701c29be7$747b8d40$b20501d5@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:44:26 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As far as I have one it is probably my OM1n and Zuiko 35-70/4. That's for just going for a walk down the lane by the river or somesuch. Otherwise I'd take either one prime or maybe a couple, depending on which side I was hanging that day... ;-) Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 25-11-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9633 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 22:53:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 22:53:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 14:53:37 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14897 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:53:35 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021204224108.RFJR4292.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:41:08 -0500 Message-ID: <011d01c29be4$8fa996a0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 18:29:07 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:41:08 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1.2 shot wide open would make a photo as sharp as this f1.0 photo? http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1.htm jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9937 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 22:59:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 22:59:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 14:59:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14909 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:59:48 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-a140.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.74.140]) by mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gB4Mxjs11753 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:59:45 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:57:15 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Wazoo" ??? Is this to do with a North American exhaust system? Please explain. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of siddiq Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 3:57 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... err, would anyone mind telling me what exactly chili is? all i can fathom (from watching the simpsons!) is that it's some sort of bean dish, cooked, and the hotter the better? what else is in it? i do know that while in texas, my uncle made this awesome thingy, all sorts of beans, slow cooked, thick and chunky, goes well with crusty bread on a chilly night. wasn't very hot, but nutritious up the wazoo /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10358 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 23:15:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 23:15:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 15:15:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14930 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:15:23 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-a140.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.74.140]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gB4NFHF14785 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:15:20 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] A few photos from Austria Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:12:44 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3DECCF6E.5050001@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Will do, Roger. Probably will need an excavator to dig them out and then there's always the chance that the image, like me, is somewhat faded... Regards, John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Roger Wesson Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 2:36 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] A few photos from Austria Thanks, John. It would certainly be very interesting to see what things in the view have changed since 1960 and what things are exactly the same. If you're able to scan any of the old slides I'd love to see them. I'm certain that one major difference would be the number of tourists. Even in November there were plenty of them - Ryanair's fault for giving away flights I suppose! Cheers, Roger John Wheeler wrote: > Lovely shots, Roger. The one of the Dom's dome brought back memories. I'd > bought my first non-normal lens, a Hektor 135/f4.5 for my M3 in Salzburg and > we had gone up the hill to shoot the town probably from the same place as > yourself. That was in 1960, dare say there's been some changes since. I must > dig out the Kodachrome and compare. > > John. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Roger Wesson > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:15 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] A few photos from Austria > > > Dear all, > > I sent a mail about this yesterday but haven't seen it get through to > the list. Apologies if the first one gets through after all. > > I took a brief trip to Salzburg two weeks ago, flying with my favourite > airline Ryanair for just 25 pounds. I was there for just over 24 hours > but managed to take a fair number of photos, some of which I've added to > my website at http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/travel/austria < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10612 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 23:19:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 23:19:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 15:19:27 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14935 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:19:25 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021204231540.FUKM4607.priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:15:40 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021204160937.00bb1ed8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 16:15:39 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:57 AM 12/5/2002 +1100, John Wheeler wrote: >"Wazoo" ??? Is this to do with a North American exhaust system? Please >explain. Ahem. "Wazoo." Slang term for "anus." Sometimes also referred to as "asshole," "fudge factory," "poop chute," "chocolate whizzwang," "Hershey hole," etc. The phrase "up the wazoo" usually means that someone has an excess or surfeit of something, typically (but not always) something *good*. For instance, "That girl's so rich, she's got money up the wazoo." Variant: "...money coming out the/her wazoo." This latter phrase was the basis for an extremely funny SuperBowl ad for an online investment agency a few years ago. Always ready with a definition, Garth ("Thanks, Definition Man." "No problem, Estimate Boy.") < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11118 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 23:45:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 23:45:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 15:45:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14954 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:45:36 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-a140.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.74.140]) by mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gB4NjWN07047 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:45:32 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:43:03 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20021204160937.00bb1ed8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks, Garth. I'm beginning to understand... John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Garth Wood Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 10:16 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... At 09:57 AM 12/5/2002 +1100, John Wheeler wrote: >"Wazoo" ??? Is this to do with a North American exhaust system? Please >explain. Ahem. "Wazoo." Slang term for "anus." Sometimes also referred to as "asshole," "fudge factory," "poop chute," "chocolate whizzwang," "Hershey hole," etc. The phrase "up the wazoo" usually means that someone has an excess or surfeit of something, typically (but not always) something *good*. For instance, "That girl's so rich, she's got money up the wazoo." Variant: "...money coming out the/her wazoo." This latter phrase was the basis for an extremely funny SuperBowl ad for an online investment agency a few years ago. Always ready with a definition, Garth ("Thanks, Definition Man." "No problem, Estimate Boy.") < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11455 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 23:59:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 23:59:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 15:59:24 2002 -0800 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (murphys.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.225]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA14962 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:59:22 -0800 From: roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk Received: (qmail 3588 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 23:57:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pitchfork.servers.plus.net) (192.168.230.20) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 23:57:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 20307 invoked by uid 99); 4 Dec 2002 23:57:50 -0000 Date: 4 Dec 2002 23:57:50 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Vivitar macro lens CC: X-Mailer: PlusMail Message-ID: <20021204235750.worldtraveller@force9> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, Just wondering if anyone knows what a reasonable price would be for a Vivitar 55/2.8 1:1 macro lens? Cheers, Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11799 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 00:08:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 00:08:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 16:08:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14983 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:08:25 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB508Nu25330 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:08:23 +1100 Message-Id: <200212050008.gB508Nu25330@mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:08:23 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > John Hudson <13874@rogers.com> wrote: > > > Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1.2 shot wide > open > would make a photo as sharp as this f1.0 photo? > > http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1.htm > That may be difficult to determine from a flatbed scan of a 6x4 print presented as a low res web image. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12112 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 00:12:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 00:12:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 16:12:42 2002 -0800 Received: from mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.160]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14991 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:12:39 -0800 Received: from webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.124]) by mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB50Cas23028 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:12:36 +1100 Message-Id: <200212050012.gB50Cas23028@mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:12:36 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Vivitar macro lens Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Just wondering if anyone knows what a reasonable price would be for a > Vivitar 55/2.8 1:1 macro lens? > Dunno exactly, but there was one on the auction site within the last week, last I looked it was $AU99 ($US50) and no bids. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12496 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 00:23:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 00:23:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 16:23:37 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15007 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:23:35 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.1] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id ACD9342100DA; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:24:57 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 16:15:23 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: Re: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/4/2002 2:57:15 PM, "John Wheeler" wrote: >"Wazoo" ??? Is this to do with a North American exhaust system? Please >explain. > >John. er, yes, as Garth said... generally used to indicate superlative form of whatever you are trying to describe, in a nutshell. /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12604 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 00:23:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 00:23:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 16:23:43 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15011 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:23:39 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.1] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id ACDB1C7F00D2; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:24:59 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 16:12:28 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] OM2 POW @photo.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/4/2002 1:40:31 PM, Winsor Crosby wrote: >>From: "siddiq" >> >>> nice OMer shot at photo.net's picture of the week. >>> >> > http://www.photo.net/ >> >>Wow, interesting photo ... but did you read the comments/discussion? Those >>people consume entirely toooo much caffeine ;-). >> >>Jamie >>Fort Myers, FL > >Thanks for pointing out the commentary. Very amusing. Shames this >list on one of its bad days. i dont bother with more than the first few comments, which are worth reading, before the entire forums descends into a flamefest, no matter what the photo. /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12999 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 00:24:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 00:24:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 16:24:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15012 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:23:40 -0800 Received: from webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.124]) by mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB50NZF17428 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:23:35 +1100 Message-Id: <200212050023.gB50NZF17428@mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:23:35 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Vivitar macro lens Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Just wondering if anyone knows what a reasonable price would be for a > Vivitar 55/2.8 1:1 macro lens? > $US105 See: http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=802030943 Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13991 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 00:50:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 00:50:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 16:50:55 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15041 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:50:53 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18JkE7-0004C2-00 for ; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:50:52 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:50:03 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20021204160937.00bb1ed8@pop.telusplanet.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wazoo is also the nickname for Washington State University...........perhaps for many of the same considerations.........naaaaa, it's a good school. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Garth Wood Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 4:16 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: RE: [OM][OT] Time out for a food... At 09:57 AM 12/5/2002 +1100, John Wheeler wrote: >"Wazoo" ??? Is this to do with a North American exhaust system? Please >explain. Ahem. "Wazoo." Slang term for "anus." Sometimes also referred to as "asshole," "fudge factory," "poop chute," "chocolate whizzwang," "Hershey hole," etc. The phrase "up the wazoo" usually means that someone has an excess or surfeit of something, typically (but not always) something *good*. For instance, "That girl's so rich, she's got money up the wazoo." Variant: "...money coming out the/her wazoo." This latter phrase was the basis for an extremely funny SuperBowl ad for an online investment agency a few years ago. Always ready with a definition, Garth ("Thanks, Definition Man." "No problem, Estimate Boy.") < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14318 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 01:01:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 01:01:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 17:01:31 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15049 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:01:29 -0800 Received: from M2W052.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.52]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:01:07 -0500 Message-ID: <244640-22002124511770@M2W052.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:01:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Dec 2002 01:01:07.0116 (UTC) FILETIME=[CAC97EC0:01C29BF9] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be as sharp, but two shots with eac= h lens wide-open would probably look quite different, especially at night=2E= =20 The bokeh is likely to be quite different=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Wayne Harridge wayneharridge@optusnet=2Ecom=2Eau Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:08:23 +1100 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1=2E2 or f1=2E0 > John Hudson <13874@rogers=2Ecom> wrote: >=20 >=20 > Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1=2E2 shot wide > open > would make a photo as sharp as this f1=2E0 photo? >=20 > http://www=2Ealaska=2Enet/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1=2Ehtm >=20 That may be difficult to determine from a flatbed scan of a 6x4 print presented as=20 a low res web image=2E Wayne Harridge http://members=2Eoptusnet=2Ecom=2Eau/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14567 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 01:01:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 01:01:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 17:01:52 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15053 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:01:50 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.100.38] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A47B710260; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 19:57:31 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204194958.053cfc30@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:00:45 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 15:59 12/4/02, Robert F. Man wrote: >>At 09:06 AM 12/4/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >>...I read an informative article with lots of pictures some time ago that >>dealt with diffusers. They don't really work unless they are really >>large and really close like umbrellas and light boxes. The harshness is >>inversely dependant on the size of the light source and directly >>dependant on the distance. Notwithstanding all the gadgets for sale out >>there, unless you can bounce a lot of light off other sources like >>ceilings and walls you are pretty much stuck. >>-- > >Well OK, but all I want is less harsh pictures, like the one my wife gets >w/ her digi-cam :-) I mean it is embarrassing for me to tout the virtues >of my OM system, while her dinky little C-3000 gets better flash pics! I agree with Winsor about size of diffuser versus distance. For my cousin's wedding I used a Sunpak 555 potato masher with a Lumiquest Softbox (the full size one, not the mini). Near zero suitable ceiling or wall to use for bounce in churches and large reception halls. When using it I must watch to keep in close, otherwise its effect is lost. Stuck with the fast 50mm for that reason, even though there's some perspective risk getting in close. Remember that not only is light quality important, but its direction is also. Using the handle mounted flash for close in shots of dancing couples created some nice modeling of facial features, and its offset creates a different light direction compared to using the rotating camera bracket that keeps the flash directly above the lens. I will likely use it again for shooting dancing couples to see how consistent the effect is. BTW, when using the rotating bracket, I usually have a Metz bounce card mounted on the 40 MZ. Its panel is about the same size as the Lumiquest Softbox panel and it raises the light source a little more. Both are significantly better than a shoe mounted T series flash. You ought to be able to get better flash pix than the C-3000. Most cameras with built-in flash are pretty harsh, provide very frontal lighting and are high risk for red-eye. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15007 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 01:17:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 01:17:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 17:17:06 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15075 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:17:03 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.100.38] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A80EAE0276; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:12:46 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204200724.053d22f0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:16:00 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 15:59 12/4/02, Richard F. Man wrote: >re: John's Lind comment on 40 MZs >Thanks! I will take a look and search for it. I may have spoken too soon. :-( During October B&H still had the dedicated 40 MZ-3i (uses SCA 300/3000 modules) and the non-dedicated 40 MZ-1i. Now the only one left listed is the one with Nikon AF dedicated SCA module for $275 and it's out of stock. Just checked Adorama and they don't list the 40 MZ-3i either. Could be what I saw in October was dwindling store stock. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15723 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 02:11:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 02:11:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 18:11:40 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15115 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 18:11:36 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([205.206.23.84]) by priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021205020750.FHKO21412.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 19:07:50 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021204190606.00baad78@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 19:07:50 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 In-Reply-To: <011d01c29be4$8fa996a0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 06:29 PM 12/4/2002 -0400, John Hudson wrote: >Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1.2 shot wide open >would make a photo as sharp as this f1.0 photo? > >http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1.htm Whoa, careful there, folks. He's applied an Unsharp Mask in Corel Photopaint 5, and we have no idea what parameters he used. I'm more than willing to bet that, combined with the judicious use of PS, I could get my 50/1.2 to produce photos of such sharpness, even wide open... Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16880 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 04:06:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 04:06:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 20:06:22 2002 -0800 Received: from web80109.mail.yahoo.com (web80109.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.169.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA15176 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:06:17 -0800 Message-ID: <20021205040602.72301.qmail@web80109.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [63.206.88.13] by web80109.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:06:02 PST Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:06:02 -0800 (PST) From: Dr Timothy Hughes Subject: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz To: Olympus List Cc: richard@imagcraft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-834556392-1039061162=:66929" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-834556392-1039061162=:66929 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Winsor wrote in regard to Richard's quest for diffuse flash: >> I read an informative article with lots of pictures some time ago that dealt with diffusers. They don't really work unless they are really large and really close like umbrellas and light boxes. The harshness is inversely dependant on the size of the light source and directly dependant on the distance. Notwithstanding all the gadgets for sale out there, unless you can bounce a lot of light off other sources like ceilings and walls you are pretty much stuck. << Winsor, Modern Photography from about 10years ago had a similar article comparing both flashes and various diffuser combinations. They showed that small diffusers did not work nearly as well as advertised. Large handlemount flashes with interchangeable reflectors usually will offer both a diffuse matt white reflector as well as a bright silver reflector as options. Wedding photographers seem to really prefer the diffuse reflectors. There used to be an excellent website with example photogrphas comparing these different reflectors and their coverage,light drop off,efficiency paint used etc. It was a small CA business which made reflectors to fit Quantum etc flashes. Unfortunately the url for the site no longer works. It seems the somewhat collimated light from a bright reflector is usually a bit worse than even a small diffuser, so I often use a T20 with plastic diffuser (cut from plastic milk jug carton) tapped over the front. For more light I combine this with a T32 or potato masher (Sunpack) set to bounce off the ceiling/wall etc. The flash extender for the T20 also helps a little to take the flash off axis. Also the old trick of covering the flash ready LED contact on the shoe of a T series allows the later OM's to operate in a limited way as fill+auto exposure like the original OM2. An intermediate solution is to use a Sunpak handle mount flash with it's custom (inexpensive) diffuser that is like a mini-umbrella. When expanded it looks like a flat kite (about 1 foot by 1 foot ) and mounts on a stalk on the front of the flash which gets angled backwards slightly with the reflectro facing towards the ceiling. Although somewhat fragile in the wind it is quite useable on camera. This worked better in Modern's tests than the lumiquest type strap on diffusers. I have a robust homemade version where I take one of those polyethelene foam bags used to ship cameras etc (about 16inx16in x1/8"). I point the flash head towards the ceiling and put the open end of the bag over the flash head with a little tape.This keeps the bag fairly rigid so it looks like a giant flash bulb when it goes off! It works well with wide lenses too, since it is slightly bowed out at the edge. Regards, Tim Hughes TimHughes@ieee.org --0-834556392-1039061162=:66929 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Winsor wrote in regard to Richard's quest for diffuse flash:

>>   I read an informative article with lots of pictures some time ago
that dealt with diffusers.  They don't really work unless they are
really large and really close like umbrellas and light boxes.  The
harshness is inversely dependant on the size of the light source and
directly dependant on the distance. Notwithstanding all the gadgets
for sale out there, unless you can bounce a lot of light off other
sources like ceilings and walls you are pretty much stuck.

<<

Winsor, Modern Photography from about 10years ago had a similar article comparing both flashes and various diffuser combinations. They showed that small diffusers did not work nearly as well as advertised.

    Large handlemount flashes with interchangeable reflectors usually will offer both a diffuse matt white reflector as well as a bright silver reflector as options.  Wedding photographers seem to really prefer the diffuse reflectors. There used to be an excellent website with example photogrphas comparing these different reflectors and their coverage,light drop off,efficiency paint used etc.  It was a small CA business which made reflectors to fit Quantum etc flashes. Unfortunately the url for the site no longer works. 

           It seems the somewhat collimated light from a bright reflector  is usually a bit worse than even a small diffuser, so I often use a T20 with plastic diffuser (cut from plastic milk jug carton) tapped over the front. For more light I combine this with a T32 or potato masher (Sunpack) set to bounce off the ceiling/wall etc. The flash extender for the T20 also helps a little to take the flash off axis.

Also the old trick of covering the flash ready LED contact on the shoe of a T series allows the later OM's to operate in a limited way as fill+auto exposure like the original OM2.

An intermediate solution is to use a Sunpak handle mount flash with it's custom (inexpensive) diffuser that is like a mini-umbrella. When expanded it looks like a flat  kite (about 1 foot by 1 foot ) and mounts on a stalk on the front of the flash which gets angled backwards slightly with the reflectro facing towards the ceiling. Although somewhat fragile in the wind it is quite useable on camera. This worked better in Modern's tests than the lumiquest type strap on diffusers.    I have a robust homemade version where I take one of those polyethelene foam bags used to ship cameras etc (about 16inx16in x1/8"). I point the flash head towards the ceiling and put the open end of the bag over the flash head with a little tape.This keeps the bag fairly rigid so it looks like a giant flash bulb when it goes off! It works well with wide lenses too, since it is slightly bowed out at the edge.

Regards,

Tim Hughes

TimHughes@ieee.org

--0-834556392-1039061162=:66929-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17130 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 04:08:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 04:08:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 20:08:28 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA15181 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:08:26 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA90354 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:07:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204200453.08125618@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:08:57 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204200724.053d22f0@mail.spitfire.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:16 PM 12/4/2002 -0500, John wrote: >At 15:59 12/4/02, Richard F. Man wrote: > >>re: John's Lind comment on 40 MZs >>Thanks! I will take a look and search for it. > >I may have spoken too soon. :-( > >During October B&H still had the dedicated 40 MZ-3i (uses SCA 300/3000 >modules) and the non-dedicated 40 MZ-1i. Now the only one left listed is >the one with Nikon AF dedicated SCA module for $275 and it's out of >stock. Just checked Adorama and they don't list the 40 MZ-3i >either. Could be what I saw in October was dwindling store stock. KEH has a 40MZ-3 for $215 and they even have the SCA321 for the OM! Presumably the 40 MZ-3 is not much different from the 40MZ-3i? I can get the 54-MZ new locally (Keeble and Schuat) for $312. Saving $100 is good. I wonder if there is a spec of the 40-MZ3 somewhere so I know what I am missing.... One thing to consider is that I hope to be able to use the flash in the next DSLR system too.... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17412 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 04:11:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 04:11:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 20:11:42 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA15188 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:11:25 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA91764 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:10:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204200922.028c4d48@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:11:53 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204194958.053cfc30@mail.spitfire.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:00 PM 12/4/2002 -0500, John wrote: >At 15:59 12/4/02, Robert F. Man wrote: >>>At 09:06 AM 12/4/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >>>...I read an informative article with lots of pictures some time ago >>>that dealt with diffusers. They don't really work unless they are >>>really large and really close like umbrellas and light boxes. The >>>harshness is inversely dependant on the size of the light source and >>>directly dependant on the distance. Notwithstanding all the gadgets for >>>sale out there, unless you can bounce a lot of light off other sources >>>like ceilings and walls you are pretty much stuck. >>>-- >> >>Well OK, but all I want is less harsh pictures, like the one my wife gets >>w/ her digi-cam :-) I mean it is embarrassing for me to tout the virtues >>of my OM system, while her dinky little C-3000 gets better flash pics! > >I agree with Winsor about size of diffuser versus distance. For my >cousin's wedding I used a Sunpak 555 potato masher with a Lumiquest >Softbox (the full size one, not the mini). Near zero suitable ceiling or >wall to use for bounce in churches and large reception halls. When using >it I must watch to keep in close, otherwise its effect is lost. Stuck >with the fast 50mm for that reason, even though there's some perspective >risk getting in close. > >Remember that not only is light quality important, but its direction is >also. Using the handle mounted flash for close in shots of dancing >couples created some nice modeling of facial features, and its offset >creates a different light direction compared to using the rotating camera >bracket that keeps the flash directly above the lens. I will likely use >it again for shooting dancing couples to see how consistent the effect >is. BTW, when using the rotating bracket, I usually have a Metz bounce >card mounted on the 40 MZ. Its panel is about the same size as the >Lumiquest Softbox panel and it raises the light source a little >more. Both are significantly better than a shoe mounted T series flash. First of all, when you say rotating bracket, is the Metz G16 one of those? >You ought to be able to get better flash pix than the C-3000. Most >cameras with built-in flash are pretty harsh, provide very frontal >lighting and are high risk for red-eye. One interesting thing is I just got the roll of Provia 100F slide back, and it seems that the flash pictures look BETTER than the Kodak 100. Is it possible that the film can make a difference? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18286 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 05:17:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 05:17:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 21:17:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA15245 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:17:31 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-24.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039065228!953 Received: (qmail 14639 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 05:13:49 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-24.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 05:13:49 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB54qHD24847 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:52:18 +0800 Message-ID: <3DEEE17B.62EFBBFA@accura.com.hk> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:17:47 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204200922.028c4d48@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think the different is the printing lab, which did a bad job. C.H.Ling "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > One interesting thing is I just got the roll of Provia 100F slide back, and > it seems that the flash pictures look BETTER than the Kodak 100. Is it > possible that the film can make a difference? > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18772 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 05:48:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 05:48:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 21:48:25 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15265 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:48:23 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA27981 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:47:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204214651.028d0950@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 21:48:53 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <3DEEE17B.62EFBBFA@accura.com.hk> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204200922.028c4d48@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, there is another variable. The Kodak 100 was "scanned" using the ASF destroy-your-negative-scanning-station. So possibly it's scanning and the exposure saving were not top notch. The print looks pretty much the same as the pics on the CD. At 01:17 PM 12/5/2002 +0800, you wrote: >I think the different is the printing lab, which did a bad job. > >C.H.Ling > >"Richard F. Man" wrote: > > > > > One interesting thing is I just got the roll of Provia 100F slide back, and > > it seems that the flash pictures look BETTER than the Kodak 100. Is it > > possible that the film can make a difference? > > > >________________________________________________________________________ >This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan >service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working >around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com >________________________________________________________________________ > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19051 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 05:52:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 05:52:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 21:52:56 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15269 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:52:51 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EF8A5B298 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:52:03 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: Message from Dr Timothy Hughes of "Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:06:02 -0800." <20021205040602.72301.qmail@web80109.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 16:52:03 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021205055203.1EF8A5B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <20021205040602.72301.qmail@web80109.mail.yahoo.com>, Dr Timothy Hughes writes: > It was a small CA business which made reflectors to fit Quantum etc fla >shes. Unfortunately the url for the site no longer works. Did you try if it's archived by Archives.org? http://web.archives.org helped me quite a few times when looking for stuff that used to be on the web but isn't anymore. Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19530 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 06:20:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 06:20:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 22:20:17 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA15294 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:20:15 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.100.38] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id AF1A126028E; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 01:15:54 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021205001407.00e3fb30@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 01:18:52 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204200922.028c4d48@192.168.100.11> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021204194958.053cfc30@mail.spitfire.net> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 23:11 12/4/02, Richard F. Man wrote: >First of all, when you say rotating bracket, is the Metz G16 one of those? No. The Metz G15 (SCA 300) and G16 (SCA 3000/3002) are "potato masher" style flash handles. You can use either one with the 40 MZ-3i, and an SCA-300A cable with SCA-321 module. They're the equivalent of an OM BG-2, except they're made to mount the Metz flash heads that use SCA modules. While you can keep the flash above the lens, it's also always offset to the left or the right depending on which side of the camera you mount the handle, and whether you have the camera oriented horizontally or vertically. Two styles of flash brackets keep the flash directly above the lens regardless of camera orientation (if adjusted correctly). These are "flip flash" and "camera rotating" brackets. An example of a "flip flash" bracket is the Stroboframe Quick Flip 350 or the Newton N7200. http://www.saundersphoto.com/html/strobo.htm http://www.newtoncamerabrackets.com/newton.html You hold camera and when you turn it vertically, you manually flip the arm holding the flash to keep it above the lens. Examples of a "camera rotating" bracket are the Stroboframe RL-2000 and Newton N7000. You hold the bracket, the camera mounts inside it, and a bracket mechanism allows rotating the camera between horizontal or vertical while the bracket itself is always in the same orientation. Most have a hand grip on the left side with a built-in cable release. I have a Newton 7000 rotating bracket. Although some people like them, I found the flip style cumbersome to use and much prefer the camera rotating types. With the rotators, the right hand focuses lens, winds film and rotates camera as needed. Left hand holds bracket and trips shutter using built-in cable release. A bit different than just holding the camera alone, but once you use a decent camera rotating bracket a few times, it feels natural and divides the tasks and workload between the left and right hands well. >One interesting thing is I just got the roll of Provia 100F slide back, >and it seems that the flash pictures look BETTER than the Kodak 100. Is it >possible that the film can make a difference? It won't with regard to light quality or direction. However, for a number of other reasons I'm not surprised your flash pictures look better overall with Provia 100F slide film than with "Kodak 100" if what you mean by this is Kodak's Gold 100 print film. Gold 100 is Kodak's low end ISO 100 consumer print film and IMO it leaves a lot to be desired. Has bright but bland and inaccurate color rendition and even Portra 400 NC is finer grained. By comparison, Provia 100F is a pro slide film with moderate saturation, excellent color accuracy, and it's also the finest grained currently made. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20122 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 07:13:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 07:13:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 04 23:13:40 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA15317 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 23:13:38 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA57522 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 23:12:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204231326.08131008@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 23:14:08 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943488745 No Connection etc. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21067 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 08:56:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 08:56:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 00:56:05 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA15365 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 00:56:03 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-51.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.51]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB58s9K29276; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:54:10 +1300 Message-Id: <200212050854.gB58s9K29276@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: litefoot@easycall.com.ph, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:54:24 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Clemente asked > Were you happy with the pictures taken by the 35-105 zoom? I know the question wasn't directed to me, but I am a strong supporter of this lens. I have access to two of them if I want; one I bought new about 20 years ago (about USD 225 then at current exchange rates), and one I bought as a very grubby user for my daughter (cost about $75 USD in a local shop 5 years ago) and which has cleaned up very well - and it's sharper and less prone to flare than my "NIB" model (not that my one is prone to flare - it isn't. The tests I did had the sun full-on in the lens.). Both are multi-coated, serial number <500,000. I find the zoom range allows me to take well-framed shots that I could absolutely never consider with just one prime lens when optimum camera position is impossible. Time and geography constraints are minimised with this lens. In other words, if you don't have the time (due to speed of action of the subject) to get in to the best position for a prime lens; or there's a cliff or a rock wall in front or behind that limits where you can walk, this lens will get you a good result in many cases. The one-touch zoom action is very fast and easy to use. After 20 years mine has not yet developed "zoom creep". Also the "macro" mode, though not really macro, is also very useful for close- ups although the dimming in this mode can be an obstacle where light is a little lacking. I find it acceptably sharp for snapshots at 5x7 inches, and with a tripod it should go higher quite satisfactorily. I haven't often enough put it to the enlargement test to say anything about that. Probably many prime lenses are sharper. It is quite contrasty. Gary Reese has tests of it here. http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default_m.htm Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21665 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 09:54:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 09:54:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 01:54:18 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA15378 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 01:54:17 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB59kjIq020930 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:46:45 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:46:44 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? Message-Id: <20021205104644.312378c2.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <200212050854.gB58s9K29276@central.caverock.net.nz> References: <200212050854.gB58s9K29276@central.caverock.net.nz> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id BAA15378 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Brian, I have a sample of this lens as well, and I can strongly support what you say. I am happy with it - moreso than I am with my 35-70/3.6, although that is also a nice lens. If pressed, I'd actually keep the 35-105 rather than the 35-70/3.6..... --thomas On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:54:24 +1300 "Brian Swale" wrote: > Clemente asked=20 >=20 > > Were you happy with the pictures taken by the 35-105 zoom? >=20 > I know the question wasn't directed to me, but I am a strong > supporter of this lens. >=20 > I have access to two of them if I want; one I bought new about 20 > years ago (about USD 225 then at current exchange rates), and one I > bought as a very grubby user for my daughter (cost about $75 USD in > a local shop 5 years ago) and which has cleaned up very well - and > it's sharper and less prone to flare than my "NIB" model (not that > my one is prone to flare - it isn't. The tests I did had the sun > full-on in the lens.). Both are multi-coated, serial number > <500,000. >=20 > I find the zoom range allows me to take well-framed shots that I > could absolutely never consider with just one prime lens when > optimum camera position is impossible.=20 >=20 > Time and geography constraints are minimised with this lens. In > other words, if you don't have the time (due to speed of action of > the subject) to get in to the best position for a prime lens; or > there's a cliff or a rock wall in front or behind that limits where > you can walk, this lens will get you a good result in many cases. > The one-touch zoom action is very fast and easy to use. After 20 > years mine has not yet developed "zoom creep". >=20 > Also the "macro" mode, though not really macro, is also very useful > for close- ups although the dimming in this mode can be an obstacle > where light is a little lacking.=20 >=20 > I find it acceptably sharp for snapshots at 5x7 inches, and with a > tripod it should go higher quite satisfactorily. I haven't often > enough put it to the enlargement test to say anything about that. >=20 > Probably many prime lenses are sharper. It is quite contrasty. Gary > Reese has tests of it here. >=20 > http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default_m.htm >=20 > Brian >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23318 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 12:42:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 12:42:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 04:42:51 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA15472 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 04:42:49 -0800 Received: (qmail 8849 invoked by uid 104); 5 Dec 2002 12:41:11 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 12:41:08 -0000 Message-ID: <00cb01c29c5c$5d2f4b20$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <011d01c29be4$8fa996a0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:46:41 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This one is taken with 50/1.2 wide open, PS unsharp mask 100,0.3,0. http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-01.jpg Standard lens is design at infinity, the performance for distance objects is usually better than this portrait shot. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> > > Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1.2 shot wide open > would make a photo as sharp as this f1.0 photo? > > http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1.htm > > jh > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24414 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 14:25:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 14:25:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 06:25:39 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15600 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 06:25:38 -0800 Received: from M2W064.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.64]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:25:15 -0500 Message-ID: <29950-22002124514251618@M2W064.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:25:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Dec 2002 14:25:15.0913 (UTC) FILETIME=[214FA790:01C29C6A] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca CH, What's up with the bokeh in that picture?! It looks horrible=2E Look at = the OOF highlights to the left/down of the girl=2E Why would the OOF spot hav= e a hotspot _inside_ the blurred circle? ALso, the large OOF spots left/above= are pretty harsh=2E Could you take another picture with OOF stuff all around the subject? Thanks, Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: C=2EH=2ELing chling@accura=2Ecom=2Ehk Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:46:41 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1=2E2 or f1=2E0 This one is taken with 50/1=2E2 wide open, PS unsharp mask 100,0=2E3,0=2E http://www=2Eaccura=2Ecom=2Ehk/50-12-01=2Ejpg Standard lens is design at infinity, the performance for distance objects = is usually better than this portrait shot=2E C=2EH=2ELing ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers=2Ecom> > > Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1=2E2 shot wide o= pen > would make a photo as sharp as this f1=2E0 photo? > > http://www=2Ealaska=2Enet/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1=2Ehtm > > jh > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25243 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 15:42:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 15:42:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 07:42:42 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15683 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 07:42:40 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021205153854.JQMS4607.priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:38:54 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205083818.00bc9b20@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 08:38:54 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204231326.08131008@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:14 PM 12/4/2002 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: >http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943488745 > >No Connection etc. As usual, no international bidders. What are we, poison? Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25524 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 15:47:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 15:47:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 07:46:59 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes40.telusplanet.net (defout.telus.net [199.185.220.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15687 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 07:46:58 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes40.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021205154313.LGHY10951.priv-edtnes40.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:43:13 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 08:43:12 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 In-Reply-To: <29950-22002124514251618@M2W064.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:25 AM 12/5/2002 -0500, Skip Williams wrote: >CH, > >What's up with the bokeh in that picture?! It looks horrible. Look at the >OOF highlights to the left/down of the girl. Why would the OOF spot have a >hotspot _inside_ the blurred circle? ALso, the large OOF spots left/above >are pretty harsh. > >Could you take another picture with OOF stuff all around the subject? To translate, C.H., I *think* Skip meant "out of focus" for "OOF." And I *think* that some of the odd "OOF" artifacts come from application of the Unsharp Mask. I've certainly seen some weird stuff using that procedure... Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25823 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 15:52:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 15:52:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 07:52:58 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc05.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15691 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 07:52:57 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18JyJ6-0002Yr-00 for ; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 08:52:56 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:52:08 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205083818.00bc9b20@pop.telusplanet.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've had no trouble with international transactions. Have surely had some bad domestic ones though....especially with people from Kentucky. I'm done doing business there. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Garth Wood Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 8:39 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? At 11:14 PM 12/4/2002 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: >http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943488745 > >No Connection etc. As usual, no international bidders. What are we, poison? Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26156 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 16:02:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 16:02:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 08:02:19 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA15695 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:02:17 -0800 Received: (qmail 355 invoked by uid 706); 5 Dec 2002 15:23:11 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 15:22:26 -0000 Message-ID: <004801c29c72$da737640$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <29950-22002124514251618@M2W064.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:27:03 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, honest say, the original prints looks quite uncomfortable although its sharpness it ok. It is one of the reason I sold the 50/1.2, I only kept it for two months. Here is another one, I think it is also wide open, the focus is a bit off (on the shirt rather than the face). It looks to have similar problem, see the bright rings around the light spots. http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-02.jpg C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: > CH, > > What's up with the bokeh in that picture?! It looks horrible. Look at the > OOF highlights to the left/down of the girl. Why would the OOF spot have a > hotspot _inside_ the blurred circle? ALso, the large OOF spots left/above > are pretty harsh. > > Could you take another picture with OOF stuff all around the subject? > > Thanks, > > Skip > > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: C.H.Ling chling@accura.com.hk > Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:46:41 +0800 > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 > > > This one is taken with 50/1.2 wide open, PS unsharp mask 100,0.3,0. > > http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-01.jpg > > Standard lens is design at infinity, the performance for distance objects is > usually better than this portrait shot. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> > > > > > Are there any opinions as to whether the Zuiko 50mm / f1.2 shot wide open > > would make a photo as sharp as this f1.0 photo? > > > > http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/bus1.htm > > > > jh > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26432 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 16:06:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 16:06:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 08:06:14 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15700 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:06:12 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.39] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 30500400 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:05:20 -0500 Message-ID: <3DEF792C.252E7B@suite224.net> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:05:00 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jim, What was your experience with Kentucky? I sure had a bad one there too. Contact me off list if you want. And I have seen a couple of auctions I avoided just because I did not know if the were related to my bad experience. John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27121 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 16:59:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 16:59:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 08:59:27 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA15748 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:59:23 -0800 Received: (qmail 24765 invoked by uid 706); 5 Dec 2002 15:58:18 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 15:57:50 -0000 Message-ID: <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:03:01 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have used very mild unsharp mask, here is the original version without unsharp mask: http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-o.jpg Technical details: Film: Kodak Ektapress 100 (PJ100) negative Lens: Zuiko 50/1.2 wide open 1/250s. Nikon LS4000 - scan at 3000dpi and resample to 800pixel horizontal C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garth Wood" > At 09:25 AM 12/5/2002 -0500, Skip Williams wrote: > >CH, > > > >What's up with the bokeh in that picture?! It looks horrible. Look at the > >OOF highlights to the left/down of the girl. Why would the OOF spot have a > >hotspot _inside_ the blurred circle? ALso, the large OOF spots left/above > >are pretty harsh. > > > >Could you take another picture with OOF stuff all around the subject? > > > To translate, C.H., I *think* Skip meant "out of focus" for "OOF." > > And I *think* that some of the odd "OOF" artifacts come from application of the Unsharp Mask. I've certainly seen some weird stuff using that procedure... > > > Garth > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27584 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:22:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:22:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:22:18 2002 -0800 Received: from colossus.systems.pipex.net (colossus.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15777 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:22:15 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by colossus.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 34D4516000650 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:22:12 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:22:10 -0000 Message-ID: <000201c29c82$d8254d40$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Everyone, Well, it's advice time again. A good friend of mine has just acquired himself a new Digital Camera. Sorry to say it's not an Olympus (despite my pushing him towards the E-20 !). It's a N*k*n Coolp*x 5700. On it he has some sort of arrangement (looks like it just slides over the lens ?) to hold any filters he wishes to attach. Now comes the tricky part. He has learned that Zuiko lenses are particularly good for Macro stuff, and has expressed an interest in obtaining a 50/1.8 and fitting it backwards onto the filter ring of this camera. Apparently this should work (any comments ?). So my real question is, is this possible, will it work to any degree of quality at all, and is there such a thing as a reversing ring like this (ie it has the "positive" filter thread on each end of it !) ? OK, so that's 3 questions in one - sorry ! Anyway, any help is as always appreciated. It's his Birthday coming up very soon, and I thought that I may be able to do something along these lines ... Thanks, Jon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27866 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:25:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:25:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:25:53 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15781 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:25:51 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.100.40] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id AB1B40C0248; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:21:31 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021205121254.0569f100@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:24:55 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204214651.028d0950@192.168.100.11> References: <3DEEE17B.62EFBBFA@accura.com.hk> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204125751.028bce18@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204084042.0285d470@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021204200922.028c4d48@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 00:48 12/5/02, Richard F. Man wrote: >Well, there is another variable. The Kodak 100 was "scanned" using the ASF >destroy-your-negative-scanning-station. So possibly it's scanning and the >exposure saving were not top notch. The print looks pretty much the same >as the pics on the CD. Negatives are inherently much more difficult to evaluate than transparencies. Not only the negative colors (CMY), but the orange mask require significant mental manipulation to translate what the eyes see and brain processes. In addition to this and significant differences in color, contrast and granularity, C.H. Ling makes a very valid point about the print versus the negative. A print is a photograph of the film, and just about everything that can be done to botch the image on film can be done to botch the print, although the specific method to carry it out might differ some. Never underestimate the ability of a printer or scanner operator to uglify a print made from an outstanding negative. They can do similar mangling of prints from transparencies, but that's much, much easier to detect with print in hand while looking at the transparency on a light table. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28226 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:37:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:37:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:37:55 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15785 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:37:53 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.98.138]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021205173337.ZZXM4606.out001.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:33:37 -0600 Message-ID: <002101c29c84$72f8a870$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:33:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [141.157.98.138] at Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:33:37 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I really don't care for that bokeh. It's harsh and distracting. I think I'll stick with my silvernosed 50/1.4. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 11:03 AM Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 > I have used very mild unsharp mask, here is the original version without > unsharp mask: > > http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-o.jpg > > Technical details: > > Film: Kodak Ektapress 100 (PJ100) negative > Lens: Zuiko 50/1.2 wide open 1/250s. > Nikon LS4000 - scan at 3000dpi and resample to 800pixel horizontal > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Garth Wood" > > > > At 09:25 AM 12/5/2002 -0500, Skip Williams wrote: > > >CH, > > > > > >What's up with the bokeh in that picture?! It looks horrible. Look at > the > > >OOF highlights to the left/down of the girl. Why would the OOF spot have > a > > >hotspot _inside_ the blurred circle? ALso, the large OOF spots > left/above > > >are pretty harsh. > > > > > >Could you take another picture with OOF stuff all around the subject? > > > > > > To translate, C.H., I *think* Skip meant "out of focus" for "OOF." > > > > And I *think* that some of the odd "OOF" artifacts come from application > of the Unsharp Mask. I've certainly seen some weird stuff using that > procedure... > > > > > > Garth > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28533 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:43:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:43:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:43:29 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15789 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:43:28 -0800 Received: from M2W065.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.65]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:43:06 -0500 Message-ID: <184670-22002124517435959@M2W065.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:43:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Dec 2002 17:43:06.0060 (UTC) FILETIME=[C47858C0:01C29C85] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That actually looks much nicer, the bokeh is smoother=2E When I saw the first picture, the bokeh in the orange flowers literally JUMPED OUT at me=2E= =20 But this image is much, much smoother=2E You might want to try sharpening only the girl by using a layer mask=2E =20= I've been hunting for some Noctilux examples to compare against=2E The bi= t thing that many people like is the smooth, relativly even out-of-focus areas of that lens=2E Look at these: http://www=2Eshinozuka-family=2Ecom/f1/ (images #1, #6, #7) The backgrou= nd seems to just blur out of existance in most of these=2E=20 http://www=2Evothphoto=2Ecom/spotlight/reviews/noctilux=2Ehtm A nice revi= ew and a few photos=2E http://www=2Eluminous-landscape=2Ecom/reviews/lenses/noctilux=2Eshtml One= very nice picture with the man and woman showing nice smooth bokeh=2E http://www=2Ealaska=2Enet/~rowlett/images/noctilux/andyneck=2Ehtm http://w2=2Eavis=2Ene=2Ejp/~camel/portrait_05=2Ehtm COOL! http://w2=2Eavis=2Ene=2Ejp/~camel/room2-30=2Ehtm http://w2=2Eavis=2Ene=2Ejp/~camel/room2-29=2Ehtm http://w2=2Eavis=2Ene=2Ejp/~camel/room2-33=2Ehtm This one looks a bit har= sh=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: C=2EH=2ELing chling@accura=2Ecom=2Ehk Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:03:01 +0800 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1=2E2 or f1=2E0 I have used very mild unsharp mask, here is the original version without unsharp mask: http://www=2Eaccura=2Ecom=2Ehk/50-12-o=2Ejpg Technical details: Film: Kodak Ektapress 100 (PJ100) negative Lens: Zuiko 50/1=2E2 wide open 1/250s=2E Nikon LS4000 - scan at 3000dpi and resample to 800pixel horizontal C=2EH=2ELing ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garth Wood" > At 09:25 AM 12/5/2002 -0500, Skip Williams wrote: > >CH, > > > >What's up with the bokeh in that picture?! It looks horrible=2E Look = at the > >OOF highlights to the left/down of the girl=2E Why would the OOF spot = have a > >hotspot _inside_ the blurred circle? ALso, the large OOF spots left/above > >are pretty harsh=2E > > > >Could you take another picture with OOF stuff all around the subject? > > > To translate, C=2EH=2E, I *think* Skip meant "out of focus" for "OOF=2E"= > > And I *think* that some of the odd "OOF" artifacts come from application= of the Unsharp Mask=2E I've certainly seen some weird stuff using that procedure=2E=2E=2E > > > Garth > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28803 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:45:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:45:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:45:00 2002 -0800 Received: from colossus.systems.pipex.net (colossus.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15797 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:44:58 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by colossus.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id BFBF416000660 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:44:54 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:44:53 -0000 Message-ID: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors. The prices they are charging me are going up and up and the quality is getting worse. Now I've recently acquired a very nice OM-4 from a list member (thank you, anonimous enabler !) and love the fact that I can use the spot meter to choose which area of the frame I want to meter from and get exposed correctly. But WHAT IS THE BL**DY POINT IF THE D*MNED DEVELOPER AVERAGES EVERYTHING OUT WHEN ITS PRINTED !!!! Just had a very unpleasant argument with the girl behind the counter. She kept explaining that the machine would take the average light reading across the frame, and that it would be best for my pictures that way. I pointed her to some of the prints that they had grossly over-exposed and expressed over and over again that *I* will choose how I want my pictures exposed not *HER* and certainly not a bl**dy *MACHINE* !!!! She still thinks that the machine knows best. I GIVE UP !!! Right now I can't see very many options available to me. 1) I can pay even more and have a pro-lab do my developing / printing (most likely for the moment). 2) I can shoot slide film (good, but I would then want a slide scanner and a good photo printer). 3) I can go digital (yeah, like I'd dump my OM's - NEVER !!!). So for the moment I shall be having to pay 10GBP (I think that's a little over 15 USD) for each film I want developed and printed 6x4. Looking to the future a little more, I have been thinking of a slide / neg scanner for some time now. I like the idea of scanning my pics in and being able to display them on my PC / on the web. Scanning prints on a flatbed scanner just doesn't quite cut it !! But if I am to dump prints altogether, I would need a good quality printer to do my own photo printing. Doesn't this start to get a little on the expensive side ? Not just the hardware, but the consumables ? I'm starting to seriously regret not buying that "minilab" I saw on Ebay a few months back for 300GBP. Full colour processing machine. Good one too. Would have taken up most of the lounge, and the smell in the house would have been rather unpopular, but AT LEAST I WOULD GET THE RESULTS I WANT !!! Anyway, returning to the Slide /Neg scanner issue. Some months back I borrowed one off a work colleague to try out. A C*n*n I think. Scanned my TOPE entry (flash photography - can't remember the TOPE number) with it, I believe. However, I was unimpressed with it. Very unimpressed. Didn't seem to have ANY amount of "dynamic range" in the tones at all. And the colours were NOTHING like what I had on my prints (which back then were quite good !) or what I expected from the negatives. I am now loathed to splash out a lot of wedge (moolah, cash, whatever !) for something without being sure that it is going to get me the kind of quality I expect. I was sniffing around a M*n*lta (Dual Scan ?) for a while, but never actually bought one. Then I heard (from my friendly enabler) that he'd had a lot of troubles with one (like, returned 3 times within warranty for a replacement !). Has anyone got any recommendations ? I know this one comes up quite a lot, but would just like to know that what I was seeing on the scanner I borrowed is not "the normal" but rather because it was a couple of years old. Well, thanks if you have read this far. I appreciate any advice anyone has to offer. Sorry for the rant. It just seems to me that these days I can't get any decent level of service or quality anywhere. It's like this nation is being dumbed down. Everyone just accepts lower quality and doesn't complain. It's happening everywhere, with everything. In the car I bought 6 months ago, poor build quality of the interior (bits of plastic falling off allover the place !), very poor level of service from the garage. Sometimes it just feels like I have to do everything myself. Anyway, sorry for using your bandwidth !! Jon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29153 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:53:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:53:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:53:12 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15801 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:53:11 -0800 From: suchismit@attbi.com Message-Id: <200212051753.JAA15801@fw.sls.bc.ca> Received: from rwcrwbc56 (rwcrwbc56.attbi.com[204.127.198.45]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002120517515305200guf5le>; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:51:53 +0000 Received: from [161.215.27.111] by rwcrwbc56; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:51:52 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:51:52 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 5 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: c3VjaGlzbWl0QGF0dGJpLmNvbQ== Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John, Zuiko excels in TRUE macro lenses. A 50/1.8 even reversed is not a true macro lens. And if that is how your friend wishes to use it a Zuiko will not be much different from a Canon, Nikon, Pentax or the likes. Secondly, simply reversing the lens is not likely to do much good. Non macro lenses are optimized for use where the distance between the lens and film is much smaller than that between the lens and subject. More specifically, the distance between the subject (object) and the front surface(actually node) of the lens should be greater than the distance between the film (image) and the rear surface (node) of the lens. For extreme close ups where the above relation is reversed, you will benefit from reversing the lens only if the distance between the lens and film is greater than that between the lens and subject.In other words you will have to add considerable extension such as a bellows, between the lens and camera body. To answer you question, for doing macro work with a Plain Jane 50/1.8 your friend can use any brand. They are all high quality and nearly equal in performance. Also, for good results the lens will have to be reversed on bellows or equivalent. Theoretically, the longer the extension better the performance, but the working distance will greatly diminish. -Tim > Hi Everyone, > > Well, it's advice time again. A good friend of mine has just acquired > himself a new Digital Camera. Sorry to say it's not an Olympus (despite my > pushing him towards the E-20 !). It's a N*k*n Coolp*x 5700. On it he has > some sort of arrangement (looks like it just slides over the lens ?) to hold > any filters he wishes to attach. > > Now comes the tricky part. He has learned that Zuiko lenses are > particularly good for Macro stuff, and has expressed an interest in > obtaining a 50/1.8 and fitting it backwards onto the filter ring of this > camera. Apparently this should work (any comments ?). > > So my real question is, is this possible, will it work to any degree of > quality at all, and is there such a thing as a reversing ring like this (ie > it has the "positive" filter thread on each end of it !) ? OK, so that's 3 > questions in one - sorry ! > > Anyway, any help is as always appreciated. It's his Birthday coming up very > soon, and I thought that I may be able to do something along these lines ... > > Thanks, > > Jon > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29402 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 17:53:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 17:53:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 09:53:54 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15805 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:53:53 -0800 Received: from pool0860.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.213.95] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K0Bk-0004Xb-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 09:53:28 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:53:26 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I have used very mild unsharp mask, here is the original version without >unsharp mask: > >http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-o.jpg > >Technical details: > >Film: Kodak Ektapress 100 (PJ100) negative >Lens: Zuiko 50/1.2 wide open 1/250s. >Nikon LS4000 - scan at 3000dpi and resample to 800pixel horizontal > >C.H.Ling I have to admit that the subtleties of bokeh escape me. I can certainly see some of the grotesqueries of the bokeh from a mirror lens, but I am not really disturbed by the out of focus areas of this print. Certainly not horrible. I suppose that since sharpening works by increasing the contrast between adjacent pixels that a transition from a light area to a dark would be emphasized. The 1.2 does seem have a "look" to it that I have noticed in other images that is hard to pin down. If the subject is gloomy, it seems to emphasize it a bit. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29840 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:07:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:07:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:07:05 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15833 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:07:03 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.98.138]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021205180247.NCUA4233.pop016.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:02:47 -0600 Message-ID: <003101c29c88$860b5490$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:02:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [141.157.98.138] at Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:02:47 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jon, I understand your frustration. I have different levels of service requirments. 1. It absolutely must be right in every respect: I take it to Penn Camera and pay $16 for 4x6 prints. They take the time to make the prints represent the negative. 2. I want good results, but need it now: I take it to the best of the 1 hour places locally. If the print isn't up to standard because of the printer configuration, I scan the neg and print it myself. #2 costs half as much and saves 3-4 days. I have not experienced any negative damage at this place, but realize it's inevitable. Other 1 hour places charge half again as much, but I wouldn't bring my negs within a block of the store. I probably have 1 roll for option 1 for every 4 for option 2. Having a scanner on hand is a big plus. Especially since it's a 45 minute drive to the #1 place. Anyway, you're not alone out there! -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 12:44 PM Subject: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! > OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors. The prices they > are charging me are going up and up and the quality is getting worse. Now > I've recently acquired a very nice OM-4 from a list member (thank you, > anonimous enabler !) and love the fact that I can use the spot meter to > choose which area of the frame I want to meter from and get exposed > correctly. But WHAT IS THE BL**DY POINT IF THE D*MNED DEVELOPER AVERAGES > EVERYTHING OUT WHEN ITS PRINTED !!!! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30252 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:20:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:20:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:20:16 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15854 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:20:14 -0800 Received: from modem-180.orangutan.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.135.224.180] helo=skelly) by cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18K0ba-0004Hl-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:20:11 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:20:12 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA15854 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I shoot colour neg, 1/3rd stop or more underrated, and put the roll throu= gh the cheapest lab I can find (about =A34 at the local chemist). The prints= , I give to my wife, and then I scan the negs, play with them in Photoshop an= d print the occasional one on an Epson 880 (cheap, cheerful and better than the labs can do). Mostly I just show them on the computer. This week I shall be sending a few of my scanned files off for printing b= y a lab - hopefully to get high quality prints. Standard lab printing is not good but I've never yet had a truly badly developed film back. I've found neg to have a number of advantages over slide... easier to expose, easier to scan, the set of prints act as both = big contacts and as a colour guide and finally my wife gets a set of prints a= ll of her own. I'm using a Nikon Super Coolscan and it has been able to get details off both negs and slides which has surprised me... regards Ian PS I've also scanned archived stuff although one downer is that all the relatives and neighbours want their stuff copied and 'improved' now. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Jon Mitchell Sent: 05 December 2002 17:45 To: Olympus Mailing List Subject: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors. The prices the= y are charging me are going up and up and the quality is getting worse. No= w I've recently acquired a very nice OM-4 from a list member (thank you, anonimous enabler !) and love the fact that I can use the spot meter to choose which area of the frame I want to meter from and get exposed correctly. But WHAT IS THE BL**DY POINT IF THE D*MNED DEVELOPER AVERAGES EVERYTHING OUT WHEN ITS PRINTED !!!! Just had a very unpleasant argument with the girl behind the counter. Sh= e kept explaining that the machine would take the average light reading acr= oss the frame, and that it would be best for my pictures that way. I pointed her to some of the prints that they had grossly over-exposed and expresse= d over and over again that *I* will choose how I want my pictures exposed n= ot *HER* and certainly not a bl**dy *MACHINE* !!!! She still thinks that th= e machine knows best. I GIVE UP !!! Right now I can't see very many options available to me. 1) I can pay even more and have a pro-lab do my developing / printing (mo= st likely for the moment). 2) I can shoot slide film (good, but I would then want a slide scanner an= d a good photo printer). 3) I can go digital (yeah, like I'd dump my OM's - NEVER !!!). So for the moment I shall be having to pay 10GBP (I think that's a little over 15 USD) for each film I want developed and printed 6x4. Looking to the future a little more, I have been thinking of a slide / ne= g scanner for some time now. I like the idea of scanning my pics in and be= ing able to display them on my PC / on the web. Scanning prints on a flatbed scanner just doesn't quite cut it !! But if I am to dump prints altogeth= er, I would need a good quality printer to do my own photo printing. Doesn't this start to get a little on the expensive side ? Not just the hardware= , but the consumables ? I'm starting to seriously regret not buying that "minilab" I saw on Ebay = a few months back for 300GBP. Full colour processing machine. Good one to= o. Would have taken up most of the lounge, and the smell in the house would have been rather unpopular, but AT LEAST I WOULD GET THE RESULTS I WANT != !! Anyway, returning to the Slide /Neg scanner issue. Some months back I borrowed one off a work colleague to try out. A C*n*n I think. Scanned = my TOPE entry (flash photography - can't remember the TOPE number) with it, = I believe. However, I was unimpressed with it. Very unimpressed. Didn't seem to have ANY amount of "dynamic range" in the tones at all. And the colours were NOTHING like what I had on my prints (which back then were quite good !) or what I expected from the negatives. I am now loathed to splash out a lot of wedge (moolah, cash, whatever !) = for something without being sure that it is going to get me the kind of quali= ty I expect. I was sniffing around a M*n*lta (Dual Scan ?) for a while, but never actually bought one. Then I heard (from my friendly enabler) that he'd had a lot of troubles with one (like, returned 3 times within warran= ty for a replacement !). Has anyone got any recommendations ? I know this = one comes up quite a lot, but would just like to know that what I was seeing = on the scanner I borrowed is not "the normal" but rather because it was a couple of years old. Well, thanks if you have read this far. I appreciate any advice anyone h= as to offer. Sorry for the rant. It just seems to me that these days I can= 't get any decent level of service or quality anywhere. It's like this nati= on is being dumbed down. Everyone just accepts lower quality and doesn't complain. It's happening everywhere, with everything. In the car I boug= ht 6 months ago, poor build quality of the interior (bits of plastic falling off allover the place !), very poor level of service from the garage. Sometimes it just feels like I have to do everything myself. Anyway, sorry for using your bandwidth !! Jon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30890 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:21:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:21:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:21:41 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15860 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:21:39 -0800 Received: from pool0860.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.213.95] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K0bd-0000Qx-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:20:13 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <184670-22002124517435959@M2W065.mail2web.com> References: <184670-22002124517435959@M2W065.mail2web.com> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:20:06 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >That actually looks much nicer, the bokeh is smoother. When I saw the >first picture, the bokeh in the orange flowers literally JUMPED OUT at me. >But this image is much, much smoother. > >You might want to try sharpening only the girl by using a layer mask. > >I've been hunting for some Noctilux examples to compare against. The bit >thing that many people like is the smooth, relativly even out-of-focus >areas of that lens. Look at these: > >http://www.shinozuka-family.com/f1/ (images #1, #6, #7) The background >seems to just blur out of existance in most of these. I really don't think this is so simple and clear. #3 has OOF halos with bright edges, #6 reflections are doubled one above the other, but it seems to be the only one where the distances are similar to those in CH Ling's print. #7 also has a few hard edged halos. > >http://www.vothphoto.com/spotlight/reviews/noctilux.htm A nice review and >a few photos. Again on the first picture, the window frame in the back, at least on the bottom, looks like a double exposure instead of smoothly blurred. The mothers face with bright areas, but out of focus looks lumpy to me. >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/noctilux.shtml One very >nice picture with the man and woman showing nice smooth bokeh. The halos are smooth but the lit structure in back again looks like a shaky double exposure. Not to go through them all. I have been a Leica fan too, but I don't think the differences between the two lenses jump out at you. It may be that superb bokeh is not possible when sacrifices are made for speed. I do wonder whether the OM bokeh might be seen differently if there were a half dozen self congratulatory "reviews" of the 1.2 on the web with the word legendary scattered about. Maybe we should have done that and saved the OM system. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31143 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:22:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:22:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:22:16 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15866 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:22:14 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 02:52:44 +0800 Message-ID: <3DEF98A9.2000809@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 02:19:21 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021126 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... References: <200212051753.JAA15801@fw.sls.bc.ca> In-Reply-To: <200212051753.JAA15801@fw.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif/om-sif/macrophotogroup/close-up_lenses.htm This is what he is talking about (I suspect). Reverse the 50mm lens, and you have a macro lens. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31496 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:29:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:29:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:29:38 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA15878 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:29:37 -0800 Received: (cpmta 21603 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 10:28:36 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 10:28:36 -0800 X-Sent: 5 Dec 2002 18:28:36 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:26:07 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <00eb01c29c8b$c76cd1e0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-reply-to: <20021205182024.30303.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca C.H.: The bokeh looks a bit harsh on this shot. Though well composed, and nicely colored it is a bit distracting to me. If this because it is not at infinity? Bob This one is taken with 50/1.2 wide open, PS unsharp mask 100,0.3,0. http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-01.jpg Standard lens is design at infinity, the performance for distance objects is usually better than this portrait shot. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31799 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:33:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:33:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:33:49 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m06.mx.aol.com (imo-m06.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.161]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15882 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:33:47 -0800 From: KFrohling@netscape.net Received: from KFrohling@netscape.net by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1c.63b56bd (16214) for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:31:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from netscape.net (mow-m19.webmail.aol.com [64.12.180.135]) by air-in01.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILININ12-1205133151; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:31:51 -0500 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:31:51 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <18DF2613.03FA2538.023433A8@netscape.net> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Jon Mitchell" wrote: >2) I can shoot slide film (good, but I would then want a slide scanner and a >good photo printer). You could consider using one of the web-based photo printing service like dotPhoto, who print pretty mauch the image you upload. Kerry Frohling Fullerton, CA __________________________________________________________________ The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32048 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:34:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:34:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:34:06 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15886 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:33:54 -0800 Received: from pool0860.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.213.95] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K0oT-0002Pt-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:33:29 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:33:26 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Right now I can't see very many options available to me. > >1) I can pay even more and have a pro-lab do my developing / printing (most >likely for the moment). >2) I can shoot slide film (good, but I would then want a slide scanner and a >good photo printer). >3) I can go digital (yeah, like I'd dump my OM's - NEVER !!!). > >So for the moment I shall be having to pay 10GBP (I think that's a little >over 15 USD) for each film I want developed and printed 6x4. > >Looking to the future a little more, I have been thinking of a slide / neg >scanner for some time now. I like the idea of scanning my pics in and being >able to display them on my PC / on the web. Scanning prints on a flatbed >scanner just doesn't quite cut it !! But if I am to dump prints altogether, >I would need a good quality printer to do my own photo printing. Doesn't >this start to get a little on the expensive side ? Not just the hardware, but the consumables ? -snip After spending about six months on a film scanner list, the brand with the most queries for help, sad stories of bad support, and complaints about software incompatibility and mechanics was Nikon. Only a few Canon problems. Not many Polaroid problems. Not much noise about Minolta, but then I don't think so many were bought. I had one with no problems, but I did not like the images, but it was not one of the good ones. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32414 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:41:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:41:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:41:12 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15915 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:41:10 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB5IXaIq011706 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:33:37 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:33:36 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Message-Id: <20021205193336.31c09c40.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <000201c29c82$d8254d40$0800a8c0@reac.local> References: <000201c29c82$d8254d40$0800a8c0@reac.local> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA15915 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:22:10 -0000 "Jon Mitchell" wrote: > Hi Everyone, >=20 > Well, it's advice time again. A good friend of mine has just > acquired himself a new Digital Camera. Sorry to say it's not an > Olympus (despite my pushing him towards the E-20 !). It's a N*k*n > Coolp*x 5700. On it he has some sort of arrangement (looks like it > just slides over the lens ?) to hold any filters he wishes to > attach. >=20 > Now comes the tricky part. He has learned that Zuiko lenses are > particularly good for Macro stuff, and has expressed an interest in > obtaining a 50/1.8 and fitting it backwards onto the filter ring of > this camera. Apparently this should work (any comments ?). It does work. I have done it, with reasonable success, on an Olympus C3030z. Your friend will probably need some step-up-down ring arrangement....or, and this is my favourite, get some Cokin filter "rings" (those for mounting their square filters) and some epoxy. It'll be cheaper than a real "reverse-ring", and will also be way cooler (you can customize it, rather than use a combo of step-up-down and reverser rings.... And any cool hardware hack requires epoxy (and a dremel, preferably - sanding off the excess epoxy, perhaps?) anyways.... >=20 > So my real question is, is this possible, will it work to any > degree of quality at all, and is there such a thing as a reversing > ring like this (ie it has the "positive" filter thread on each end > of it !) ? OK, so that's 3 questions in one - sorry ! >=20 Well, as I said, Cokin and epoxy. I've build a number of weird things that way. You should be able to get by with somewhere in the amounts of 20-30 USD. He will be able to get decent results - with care, even good results, I think. --thomas > Anyway, any help is as always appreciated. It's his Birthday > coming up very soon, and I thought that I may be able to do > something along these lines ... >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Jon >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32707 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:45:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:45:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:45:32 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA15927 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:45:30 -0800 Received: (cpmta 26058 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 10:44:28 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 10:44:28 -0800 X-Sent: 5 Dec 2002 18:44:28 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:44:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Message-ID: <3DEF583A.16710.11AE0B53@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I do the same as Ian, but I check the prints before leaving the establishment (a drugstore). If prints are too yellow (quite often when I use available light), or don't reflect what the negs look like, I go to the person at the counter, and they always send them back for free proper reprinting. They usually charge 5.99 Canadian for developing and processing for 24, with an extra set of prints for just 99 cents. I don't use 1-hour processors generally. I figure big labs have better quality control. I've been told that quantity prices for chemicals and paper these days are very cheap, at least in Canada. That 4x6 print costs them less than 5 cents Canadian for chemicals and paper. tOM On Thursday, December 05, 2002 at 18:20 IanG wrote: > I shoot colour neg, 1/3rd stop or more underrated, and put the roll thro= ugh > the cheapest lab I can find (about =A34 at the local chemist). The print= s, I > give to my wife, and then I scan the negs, play with them in Photoshop a= nd > print the occasional one on an Epson 880 (cheap, cheerful and better tha= n > the labs can do). Mostly I just show them on the computer. > > This week I shall be sending a few of my scanned files off for printing = by a > lab - hopefully to get high quality prints. > > Standard lab printing is not good but I've never yet had a truly badly > developed film back. I've found neg to have a number of advantages over > slide... easier to expose, easier to scan, the set of prints act as both= big > contacts and as a colour guide and finally my wife gets a set of prints = all > of her own. > > I'm using a Nikon Super Coolscan and it has been able to get details off > both negs and slides which has surprised me... > > regards > Ian > > PS I've also scanned archived stuff although one downer is that all the > relatives and neighbours want their stuff copied and 'improved' now. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Jon Mitchell > Sent: 05 December 2002 17:45 > To: Olympus Mailing List > Subject: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! > > > OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors. The prices th= ey > are charging me are going up and up and the quality is getting worse. N= ow > I've recently acquired a very nice OM-4 from a list member (thank you, > anonimous enabler !) and love the fact that I can use the spot meter to > choose which area of the frame I want to meter from and get exposed > correctly. But WHAT IS THE BL**DY POINT IF THE D*MNED DEVELOPER AVERAGE= S > EVERYTHING OUT WHEN ITS PRINTED !!!! > > Just had a very unpleasant argument with the girl behind the counter. S= he > kept explaining that the machine would take the average light reading ac= ross > the frame, and that it would be best for my pictures that way. I pointe= d > her to some of the prints that they had grossly over-exposed and express= ed > over and over again that *I* will choose how I want my pictures exposed = not > *HER* and certainly not a bl**dy *MACHINE* !!!! She still thinks that t= he > machine knows best. I GIVE UP !!! > > Right now I can't see very many options available to me. > > 1) I can pay even more and have a pro-lab do my developing / printing (m= ost > likely for the moment). > 2) I can shoot slide film (good, but I would then want a slide scanner a= nd a > good photo printer). > 3) I can go digital (yeah, like I'd dump my OM's - NEVER !!!). > > So for the moment I shall be having to pay 10GBP (I think that's a littl= e > over 15 USD) for each film I want developed and printed 6x4. > > Looking to the future a little more, I have been thinking of a slide / n= eg > scanner for some time now. I like the idea of scanning my pics in and b= eing > able to display them on my PC / on the web. Scanning prints on a flatbe= d > scanner just doesn't quite cut it !! But if I am to dump prints altoget= her, > I would need a good quality printer to do my own photo printing. Doesn'= t > this start to get a little on the expensive side ? Not just the hardwar= e, > but the consumables ? > > I'm starting to seriously regret not buying that "minilab" I saw on Ebay= a > few months back for 300GBP. Full colour processing machine. Good one t= oo. > Would have taken up most of the lounge, and the smell in the house would > have been rather unpopular, but AT LEAST I WOULD GET THE RESULTS I WANT = !!! ... ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 591 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:52:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:52:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:52:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15935 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:52:42 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB5Ij9Iq012380 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:45:10 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:45:09 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Message-Id: <20021205194509.5337e25f.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:44:53 -0000 "Jon Mitchell" wrote: > OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors. The > prices they are charging me are going up and up and the quality is > getting worse. Now I've recently acquired a very nice OM-4 from a > list member (thank you, anonimous enabler !) and love the fact that > I can use the spot meter to choose which area of the frame I want > to meter from and get exposed correctly. But WHAT IS THE BL**DY > POINT IF THE D*MNED DEVELOPER AVERAGES EVERYTHING OUT WHEN ITS > PRINTED !!!! > > Just had a very unpleasant argument with the girl behind the > counter. She kept explaining that the machine would take the > average light reading across the frame, and that it would be best > for my pictures that way. I pointed her to some of the prints that > they had grossly over-exposed and expressed over and over again > that *I* will choose how I want my pictures exposed not*HER* and > certainly not a bl**dy *MACHINE* !!!! She still thinks that the > machine knows best. I GIVE UP !!! Well, I would ask to see the manager or the owner....then I would change to a pro lab, that (i) knows what it is doing, (ii) are able to reproduce it and (iii) listens to the customer rather than argues with him. > > Right now I can't see very many options available to me. > > 1) I can pay even more and have a pro-lab do my developing / > printing (most likely for the moment). > 2) I can shoot slide film (good, but I would then want a slide > scanner and a good photo printer). > 3) I can go digital (yeah, like I'd dump my OM's - NEVER !!!). I have taken the approach myself of either doing black and white and do all lab-work myself, or doing slides. The slides are developed by a pro lab, and I bought one of those smart "Braun Novomat" projectors with a build in screen. Thus, I can both project them large and wide, or just sit enjoy something the size of a laptop screen, without having to set up a big screen. Those slides I really like, I print. I do all printing myself, slides or bw. Not that I doubt that the pro lab can do a good job, but I just like doing the labwork. However it is very few slides I actually print, since they are more impressive on the screen. > > So for the moment I shall be having to pay 10GBP (I think that's a > little over 15 USD) for each film I want developed and printed 6x4. > > Looking to the future a little more, I have been thinking of a > slide / neg scanner for some time now. I like the idea of scanning > my pics in and being able to display them on my PC / on the web. > Scanning prints on a flatbed scanner just doesn't quite cut it !! > But if I am to dump prints altogether, I would need a good quality > printer to do my own photo printing. Doesn't this start to get a > little on the expensive side ? Not just the hardware, but the > consumables ? I got myself a slide scanner a while ago. I am sure that it is grossly outdated by now :) Anyways, I find that I like the results from the "traditional" process of printing better than the digital one, so I mostly just scan if I need to put something on the WWW. This could also just be an indication of me being incompetent with digital image manipulation....this would not be a surprise atall... > > I'm starting to seriously regret not buying that "minilab" I saw on > Ebay a few months back for 300GBP. Full colour processing machine. > Good one too. > Would have taken up most of the lounge, and the smell in the house > would have been rather unpopular, but AT LEAST I WOULD GET THE > RESULTS I WANT !!! > > Anyway, returning to the Slide /Neg scanner issue. Some months > back I borrowed one off a work colleague to try out. A C*n*n I > think. Scanned my TOPE entry (flash photography - can't remember > the TOPE number) with it, I believe. However, I was unimpressed > with it. Very unimpressed. Didn't seem to have ANY amount of > "dynamic range" in the tones at all. And the colours were NOTHING > like what I had on my prints (which back then were quite good !) or > what I expected from the negatives. That's how I feel from my slides as well when I scan them....my scanner is a Canon too, btw. However look at some of the stuff that fellow listees have done with their slidescanners. There truely are possibilities, if one has the ability to wrestle GIMP. --thomas < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 911 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:56:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:56:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 10:56:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15943 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:56:06 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:51:56 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA15121 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:51:54 GMT Message-ID: <3DEFA04A.9000102@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:51:54 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My recommendation is switch to slide film and get a scanner (my recommendation as always is the Acer Scanwit - examples of scans from it can be found at http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/photo/scanstuff if you're interested). As to printing, depends how much you want to do. I only ever get my favourite slides enlarged, to 8x10 or 11x14, and that costs me GBP3 or GBP6 at the developers down the road from me, who do a very good job. Most of my photos I just put on my web page for people to see. If you want to print out a few photos from each film, or all your photos, the expense of consumables would be much greater, but probably still cheaper than paying 10 quid for decent developing each time. Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1320 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:11:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:11:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 11:11:45 2002 -0800 Received: from pioneernet.net (mail.pioneernet.net [207.115.64.224]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15956 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:11:43 -0800 Received: from bob [66.147.197.16] by pioneernet.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A4D69E360108; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:11:18 -0800 From: "Bob Fenstermacher" To: Subject: [OM] Fried 18v Motor drive contacts Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:11:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0002_01C29C4F.0AB811E0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C29C4F.0AB811E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It's been awhile since I jumped in on any discussions. Been learning a lot though. You guys and gals have been a wealth of information-Thanks. Got a question that I haven't seen brought up currently nor in archives . I have two 18v hand grips for a couple of motor drive 1's that I have used for my OM-1MD. The motor drives work fine with the normal rechargeable battery packs but occasionally, I've used the two 18v hand grips that I've acquired over the years. After working for some time, both of the 18v packs have fried the contacts at the top and ruined the contacts on the Motor Drives 1 as well. Last Thanksgiving, at a 50th anniversary restaurant dinner for my in-laws, the grip starts smoking. I was thankful that the sprinkler system didn't go off. Would have made for some great shots though. The normal pack on a third Motor Drive 1 works fine. Haven't had any problems since then. What causes this? Anyone else experience anything like it? John, any suggestions/comments? TIA, Bob F, aka nwrecruiting-headhunter from Washington. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C29C4F.0AB811E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 
It's = been awhile=20 since I jumped in on any discussions.   Been learning a lot=20 though.  You guys and gals have been a wealth = of=20 information-Thanks.
 
Got a = question that=20 I haven't seen brought up currently nor in=20 archives . 
 
I have = two 18v hand=20 grips for a couple of motor drive 1's that I have used for my = OM-1MD.  The=20 motor drives work fine with the normal rechargeable battery packs but=20 occasionally, I've used the two 18v hand grips that I've acquired over = the=20 years.  After working for some time,  both of the 18v packs = have fried=20 the contacts at the top and ruined the contacts on the Motor Drives = 1 as=20 well.
 
Last=20 Thanksgiving, at a 50th anniversary restaurant dinner for my in-laws, = the grip=20 starts smoking.  I was thankful that the sprinkler system didn't go = off. Would have made for some great shots  though. 
 
The = normal pack on a=20 third Motor Drive 1 works fine.  Haven't had any problems since=20 then. 
 
What = causes=20 this?  Anyone else experience anything like it?  John, any=20 suggestions/comments?
 
TIA,
 
Bob = F,  aka=20 nwrecruiting-headhunter from = Washington.
------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C29C4F.0AB811E0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1573 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:14:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:14:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 11:14:34 2002 -0800 Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15960 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:14:32 -0800 Received: from pool0711.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.201] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K1Rn-0003dI-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:14:07 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DEFA04A.9000102@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> <3DEFA04A.9000102@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:14:02 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Digital Christmas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 'Tis the season. Full page daily ads from Samy's Camera in the Los Angeles Times. Even big ones from Ritz. All digital cameras - no film. What is bizarre is that they also list film scanners. I guess for your old pictures. Pre-digital. Lots of 4 megapixel cameras in the $500-700 range. 5 or 6 megapixels for about $2000-4000. Does anyone doubt that a 7 or 8 megapixel camera will be available in the lower price range next year? Equivalent to going on a snipe hunt: waiting for an OM5, a Foveon chip in a good, competitively priced camera, any new professional system camera from Olympus. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1857 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:16:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:16:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 11:16:00 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15964 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:15:58 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021205190320.BFDF4992.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:03:20 -0500 Message-ID: <003601c29c8a$c7a08180$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> <3DEF583A.16710.11AE0B53@localhost> Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:18:58 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:03:20 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "tOM Trottier" To: Sent: Thursday, 05 December, 2002 02:44 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! I do the same as Ian, but I check the prints before leaving the establishment (a drugstore). If prints are too yellow (quite often when I use available light), or don't reflect what the negs look like, I go to the person at the counter, and they always send them back for free proper reprinting. They usually charge 5.99 Canadian for developing and processing for 24, with an extra set of prints for just 99 cents. I don't use 1-hour processors generally. I figure big labs have better quality control. ................ I use Wal-Mart to develop negatives and to make cheap machine prints from which I can pick and choose the ones I want enlarged. The enlarging gets sent to a pro lab. To date Wal-Mart has not fouled up getting my negatives developed and am left wondering why I should take them anywhere else. What's more, Wal-Mart is the pick up point for Kodachrome slide film now that the pro labs [at least in Vancouver, BC and also out here in New Brunswick] have given up sending the film for processing. jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2242 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:26:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:26:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 11:26:57 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f42.sea2.hotmail.com [207.68.165.42]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15983 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:26:54 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:26:00 -0800 Received: from 199.91.33.254 by sea2fd.sea2.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 19:25:59 GMT X-Originating-IP: [199.91.33.254] From: "Charles Geilfuss" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Re: Macro/Reversing Ring/Macro Coupler Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 19:25:59 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Dec 2002 19:26:00.0085 (UTC) FILETIME=[2479CC50:01C29C94] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Greetings Jon, If I understand your post correctly, your friend wishes to mount a reversed 50mm lens in front of the N*k*n's built-in lens. This is easily done (in concept) with SLR's by simply connecting the two lenses nose-to-nose with a Macro Coupler. These can be made or purchased pretty cheaply. B&H sells them (pg. 67 current catalog) for about $8 and they come in different size combinations depending on the filter ring size of the lenses. Alternately for about the same price you can super-glue two step-up rings nose to nose to achieve the same thing. It is possible to achieve pretty dramatic magnifications (1:1 to 5:1) depending on the lenses you use. To calculate the magnification factor, divide the focal length of the rear lens by the focal length of the front lens eg. with a 100mm mounted on the camera body and a reversed 50mm mounted on front: 100/50=2:1 magnification. Getting good results is another matter since it is quite tricky to get a flat field across the full frame. Depth of field is non-exsistant. Lots of light and f32 is the order of the day at high mag. I have gotten some pretty good results but usually plan on cropping the edges of prints. This having been said, I don't know how you would reverse mount an SLR film lens to the front of a digital camera lens due to the size disparity. (I know, I just left a great opening for one of you wags) I have seen photos on PhotoSig that were done this way with digital cameras (non-SLR) but I believe they use a special reversed lens that is made for the smaller digital lenses. Anyone who knows differently, please set me straight. Charlie Geilfuss _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2725 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:53:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:53:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 11:53:58 2002 -0800 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (murphys.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.225]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA15999 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:53:55 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 26667 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:52:22 -0000 Received: from dyn197-50.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.50.197) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:52:22 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 19:52:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> In-Reply-To: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:44:53 -0000, "Jon Mitchell" wrote: >Just had a very unpleasant argument with the girl behind the counter. = She >kept explaining that the machine would take the average light reading = across >the frame, and that it would be best for my pictures that way. I = pointed >her to some of the prints that they had grossly over-exposed and = expressed >over and over again that *I* will choose how I want my pictures exposed = not >*HER* and certainly not a bl**dy *MACHINE* !!!! She still thinks that = the >machine knows best. I GIVE UP !!! Jon, My son works in a photo retailer, although they send their stuff away for processing. I believe there has been a big upheaval recently in the major players for mass photo processing in the UK. I know his shop has a lot more quality control complaints than they used to - he has to deal with the complainers! I'll ask his advice as someone "on the inside". I have to confess it doesn't bother me too much as I process my own :-) Regards John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3019 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:57:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:57:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 11:57:38 2002 -0800 Received: from hermes.sc.intel.com (fmr03.intel.com [143.183.121.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16015 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:57:36 -0800 Received: from petasus.sc.intel.com (petasus.sc.intel.com [10.3.253.4]) by hermes.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/d: outer.mc,v 1.51 2002/09/23 20:43:23 dmccart Exp $) with ESMTP id gB5JsOX24504 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:54:24 GMT Received: from mipos2.intel.com (mipos2-seg48.sc.intel.com [143.183.48.42]) by petasus.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/d: inner.mc,v 1.27 2002/10/16 23:46:59 dmccart Exp $) with ESMTP id gB5Jt5808102 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:55:05 GMT Received: from zws705.sc.intel.com (zws705.sc.intel.com [143.183.38.136]) by mipos2.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/MailSET/hub) with ESMTP id gB5Jtn815495 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:55:49 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Lau Received: (from dlau@localhost) by zws705.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/MailSET/client) id gB5JsI009014 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:54:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:54:18 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200212051954.gB5JsI009014@zws705.sc.intel.com> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:33, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: >On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:22:10 -0000 >"Jon Mitchell" wrote: >> Now comes the tricky part. He has learned that Zuiko lenses are >> particularly good for Macro stuff, and has expressed an interest in >> obtaining a 50/1.8 and fitting it backwards onto the filter ring of >> this camera. Apparently this should work (any comments ?). >It does work. I have done it, with reasonable success, on an Olympus >C3030z. Hmmm... Are you sure that it works??? It sounds like Jon's friend is reversing a Zuiko 50/1.8 IN FRONT OF the lens on his N*k*n digital camera -- I assume that's what Jon meant when he said "fitting ... onto the filter ring". Now we are talking about having two lenses in series, each independently focussed! I am not sure that this will work as intended, and even if it does, it will not be straight forward. -Dan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3527 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 20:21:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 20:21:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 12:21:01 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16052 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:20:58 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021205201712.KZRS1559.priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:17:12 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205131616.00bb0020@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:17:11 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 In-Reply-To: <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:03 AM 12/6/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: >I have used very mild unsharp mask, here is the original version without >unsharp mask: > >http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-o.jpg Weird. Almost like a mirror lens (the "doughnut-like" shape of the out of focus highlights...). Must dig my 50/1.2 out and see if I get the same artifacts. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3876 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 20:31:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 20:31:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 12:31:43 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16060 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:31:40 -0800 Received: from M2W052.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.52]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:31:18 -0500 Message-ID: <111570-220021245203118740@M2W052.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Digital Christmas Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:31:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Dec 2002 20:31:18.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[443CF7C0:01C29C9D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Above the consumer models, the market seems to be shaking out into three camps=2E 1=2E Advanced P&S, up to 4-5 MP, possibly more with new chip designs=2E P= rices from $500-1100=2E Examples: CN G2/3, NK CP5000=2E More money buys more features, more flexibility/control, better processors, but not necessarily= more pixels=2E The higher-end cameras just make a lot more of the MP they= 've got=2E 2=2E ZLR-types, some SLR, some electronic VF=2E Prosumer, 4-5-6 MP=2E Fu= ji 6200, Minolta D-7, NK CP 5700, Sony 707, etc=2E $8-1500=2E More money ge= ts more lens range, more features, but not more MPs=2E=2E=2Eyet=2E =20 These first two categories are limited in their MP by the OEM chip availability=2E As Winsor predicts, the next round of chips will either h= ave more MP, and/or lower noise, faster speeds, less power, more density (e=2E= g=2E, Foveon X3)=2E =20 3=2E Interchangagle Lens, DSLRs - 3-4-5-->14 MP! As in film cameras, the initial jump in price gets you an interchangable lens camera=2E More mone= y then goes to more pixels, and/or faster frame rates, and/or better quality= pixels, and/or more features=2E So you can spend your money on the NK D1x= for high speed or the same on a Fuji S2 for more pixels=2E The sky's the limite here=2E The pros will pay dearly to get the latest toys, and have them be worth 1/2 of their purchase price in 12 months! This is the same game that's been played in the computer industry for years=2E First they ratchet up the easily-ratcheted componants, touting t= hat at the panacea (processor speed, graphics bit-depth, HD space, memory)=2E=20= Then when the architecture or subsystems hit the wall, the makers have to begin to improve processor architecture, memory througput, I/O subsystem performance, software or firmware quality, etc=2E =20 So my conclusion is that the mainstream cameras have settled in on 4-5 MP as the number that produces acceptable results for 950f the consumers=2E= =20 They'll work on new marketing angles for that sweetspot while introducing = a plethera of new models to tempt the temptable above and below that midline= =2E Let's just hope that they're not junk that gets churned out of 6 month product development cycles=2E The way that consumers treat their cameras,= I'd expect many, many to get broken within 12 months of purchase=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Winsor Crosby wincros@earthlink=2Enet Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:14:02 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Digital Christmas 'Tis the season=2E Full page daily ads from Samy's Camera in the Los=20 Angeles Times=2E Even big ones from Ritz=2E All digital cameras - no=20 film=2E What is bizarre is that they also list film scanners=2E I guess=20= for your old pictures=2E Pre-digital=2E Lots of 4 megapixel cameras in=20= the $500-700 range=2E 5 or 6 megapixels for about $2000-4000=2E Does=20 anyone doubt that a 7 or 8 megapixel camera will be available in the=20 lower price range next year? Equivalent to going on a snipe hunt: waiting for an OM5, a Foveon=20 chip in a good, competitively priced camera, any new professional=20 system camera from Olympus=2E --=20 Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4177 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 20:38:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 20:38:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 12:37:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16072 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:37:57 -0800 Received: from user239.net070.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([209.26.2.239] helo=oemcomputer) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K2kX-0000VE-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:37:33 -0800 Message-ID: <009801c29c9e$44247140$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> <3DEFA04A.9000102@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Christmas Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:38:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Winsor Crosby" > 'Tis the season. Full page daily ads from Samy's Camera in the Los > Angeles Times. Even big ones from Ritz. All digital cameras - no > film. It's truly amazing. To look at the ads, you'd think that digital is all that camera makers are selling. I suspect that it has more to do with the manufacurers and retailers co-oping ad expenditures to create a "hot" Christmas product and gain some market share. It has always been my impression that when the industry sells 20+ million single-use cameras and upwards of another 40-60 million rolls of film a year, it knows it can get an equal amount of $$ out of the film market the next year. (Oddly enough, the major film producers keep spending money on IMPROVING film!) Advertising is all about the next big thing. I seem to recall (perhaps incorrectly) that the industry will sell 2-3 million digital cams this year. One difference in the marketing picture is that electronics companies (c*sio, p*nasonic, h-p, s*ny, sh*rp: long addicted to slash-'n-burn marketing) are now making and attempting to sell digital cameras. Photgraphy stuff has come out of the photo shops and discount stores and is being sold in electronics and office supply stores - different marketing. More traditional photo manufacturers (Nikon and Oly) have no choice, it seems. > Lots of 4 megapixel cameras in > the $500-700 range. 5 or 6 megapixels for about $2000-4000. Does > anyone doubt that a 7 or 8 megapixel camera will be available in the > lower price range next year? It still amazes me though, the absolute "disposable" nature of even "pro" gear. Has anyone looked at the prices of a 2-year old D-1 lately? On eBoy, the bids are hovering around 1200-1400. Minimum bids of 1500 are going unmet and BINs at $1995 seem way out of the market, especially as people try to unload new $1500 D100s. Makes me want to rush right out ... and sit on my hands (with an OM in each one, thank yew.) Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4474 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 20:43:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 20:43:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 12:43:05 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16076 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:43:03 -0800 Received: from [217.216.178.29] (cliente-217216178029.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.178.29]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gB5KcjR18210 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:38:45 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:39:19 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, everyone. > It's a N*k*n Coolp*x 5700. On it he has > some sort of arrangement (looks like it just slides over the lens ?) to hold > any filters he wishes to attach. > > Now comes the tricky part. He has learned that Zuiko lenses are > particularly good for Macro stuff, and has expressed an interest in > obtaining a 50/1.8 and fitting it backwards onto the filter ring of this > camera. Apparently this should work (any comments ?). This seems to be the so-called "afocal setup". In fact, the 50/1.8 is acting like an achromatic, aplanatic, acomatic (?), anastigmatic, flat-field, orthoscopic close-up lens. In other words, a super-duper magnifying glass -- that's what junky 50/1.8s are for, as we all already know ;-) >Zuiko excels in TRUE macro lenses. A 50/1.8 even reversed is not a true macro >lens. And if that is how your friend wishes to use it a Zuiko will not be >much different from a Canon, Nikon, Pentax or the likes. I agree, any 50/1.8 will do the job. But the afocal setup makes the reversed lens work like at "infinity" focusing, so a *true* macro, like the Zuiko 80mm F4, will perform *poorly* in this particular setup. However, I think a Zuiko is the best for this task because: a) It's compact and lightweight b) The flange-to-film (flange-to-subject, when reversed) distance is somewhat larger than most other SLRs, which means a bit more of working distance. c) The lens keeps always wide-open when reversed -- a hassle with a bellows, but needed for the afocal method. d) Last, but not least, IT'S A ZUIKO :-) >Secondly, simply reversing the lens is not likely to do much good. Non macro >lenses are optimized for use where the distance between the lens and film >is much smaller than that between the lens and subject. Yes, that's the problem when reversing a standard lens on a bellows -- an extreme extension is needed for optimum performance. But the afocal method is fine for moderately high reproduction ratios: the reversed lens takes the subject where the film should be normally, and renders the image at infinity (where the subject usually goes) -- the scheme is reversed as the lens is, so everything's OK. Then, the main (fixed) lens on the (digital) camera won't have any problem to take the rendered image at infinity, as usual. To avoid light loss, the entrance pupil (the aperture) of the reversed lens should be larger than that of the main lens. Digicam lenses are usually small, so that won't be a problem. BTW, the total magnification is: (main focal length)/(reversed focal length). This won't give a high magnification with a digicam, but due to the small size of the CCD, if would allow extreme close-ups! Hope this helps, ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5293 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 21:46:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 21:46:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 13:46:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16121 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:46:07 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB5Lk5m12279 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:46:05 +1100 Message-Id: <200212052146.gB5Lk5m12279@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:46:05 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Dan Lau wrote: > > Hmmm... Are you sure that it works??? It sounds like Jon's > friend is reversing a Zuiko 50/1.8 IN FRONT OF the lens on > his N*k*n digital camera -- I assume that's what Jon meant > when he said "fitting ... onto the filter ring". Now we are > talking about having two lenses in series, each independently > focussed! I am not sure that this will work as intended, and > even if it does, it will not be straight forward. My main concern about hanging a Zuiko (glass & metal) lens on the front of a typical digital (plastic & maybe a little glass) camera would be the mechanical problems experienced by the digital's lens focussing and zooming mechanisms. Think of those tiny motors and plastic bearing surfaces with a heavy chunk of metal and glass hanging on the end. What is this going to do for the life of the digital camera ? Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5988 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 22:41:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 22:41:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 14:41:52 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16154 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:41:50 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.113]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021205223731.EWVI2935.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:37:31 -0500 Message-ID: <003d01c29cae$f4da8780$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <111570-220021245203118740@M2W052.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Christmas Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:37:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Lots of 4 megapixel cameras in >the $500-700 range. 5 or 6 megapixels for about $2000->4000. Does >anyone doubt that a 7 or 8 megapixel camera will be >available in the >lower price range next year? >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California I've been looking seriously at the 4 and 5 MP cameras, especially the Olympus C-4000 and C-5050. It's like the computer scene, you'll have to jump on board somewhere, and it'll be getting cheaper and better for a while yet. I guess its obvious all of us here own computers, right? Right now I'm trying to convince myself to wait for summer (here in Canada), as that is when I do much more photograhy. By then what I'm looking at now will hopefully have come down significantly to make room for the newer toys, or the newer better ones will be about the same price as the current ones. For someone like myself, who shoots 95 0.000000or his own enjoyment only, who files 700f the stuff never to be viewed again in the next ?? years, who likes taking a lot of pictures, and would like to take a lot more, the newer digital offerings and current prices are just now starting to look quite attractive. As far as worrying about how long the camera lasts, I suspect I could discard the camera after one to two years, based on savings of cost of developing. I hate the thought of giving up slides, and likely never will completely. But it is a trade off for being able to shoot 5 or 10 or ? times as much. I think 8x10 and 11x14 enlargements are pretty much equal to my aging eyes, from the examples I'm seeing. I'm also thinking that one 8x10 on the wall, from 36 shots, would be more value to me than 36 pics in the closet. Also, my recent experience in trying MF (TLR) has kind of nullified for me the argument that a more expensive format (120 versus 35mm, film versus digital) slows you down and makes you think more. Doesn't work for me. Its something like shooting guns. I have a lot more fun firing off 100 rounds from my .223, than I'd have from firing 20 shots from a 7mm STW, for about the same price. The other question that really doesn't bother me too much, but is worth thinking about, is "When does the competition from digital cameras start seriously affecting the value of OM stuff?" I'm guessing we're going to see a significant effect soon. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6289 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 22:49:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 22:49:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 14:49:43 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts6.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16162 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:49:42 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.113]) by simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021205224523.QGRQ3900.simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:45:23 -0500 Message-ID: <004a01c29cb0$0e562920$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <200212052146.gB5Lk5m12279@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au> Subject: Re: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:45:46 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > My main concern about hanging a Zuiko (glass & metal) lens on the front of a > typical digital (plastic & maybe a little glass) camera would be the mechanical > problems experienced by the digital's lens focussing and zooming mechanisms. > Think of those tiny motors and plastic bearing surfaces with a heavy chunk of > metal and glass hanging on the end. What is this going to do for the life of the > digital camera ? > > > Wayne Harridge The Olympus C series I've been looking at have a sort of an (optional) housing, that is independent of the lens, that is screwed onto the camera for attaching filters, or something like this setup. Any movement of the digital lens would be completely unaffected by attachements or weight to the filter ring. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6746 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:08:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:08:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:08:56 2002 -0800 Received: from colossus.systems.pipex.net (colossus.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16179 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:08:54 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by colossus.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id E5620160006DA for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:08:51 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: Subject: RE: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:08:52 -0000 Message-ID: <000501c29cb3$470febe0$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <004a01c29cb0$0e562920$7212a20a@waynecul> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The Olympus C series I've been looking at have a sort of an (optional) housing, that is independent of the lens, that is screwed onto the camera for attaching filters, or something like this setup. Any movement of the digital lens would be completely unaffected by attachements or weight to the filter ring. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > Exactly the set-up I believe the N*k*n has, which I was trying to describe. Still not sure of the strength of this, though ... ! Jon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7091 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:17:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:17:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:17:45 2002 -0800 Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16183 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:17:42 -0800 Received: from pool1041.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.214.21] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K5FV-000586-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:41 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <009801c29c9e$44247140$010000c0@oemcomputer> References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> <3DEFA04A.9000102@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> <009801c29c9e$44247140$010000c0@oemcomputer> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:11:52 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Christmas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >It still amazes me though, the absolute "disposable" nature of even "pro" >gear. Has anyone looked at the prices of a 2-year old D-1 lately? On >eBoy, the bids are hovering around 1200-1400. Minimum bids of 1500 are >going unmet and BINs at $1995 seem way out of the market, especially as >people try to unload new $1500 D100s. > >Makes me want to rush right out ... and sit on my hands (with an OM in each >one, thank yew.) > >Jamie >Fort Myers, FL You wonder whether film has topped out, more or less. With film companies devoting more and more resources to digital perhaps film development may slow down even if there is still potential in it. Kodak seems dedicated to producing chips and Fuji is producing a lot of digital products along side the film. Maybe the next film break through will come from Agfa? -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7172 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:17:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:17:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:17:50 2002 -0800 Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16187 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:17:47 -0800 Received: from pool1041.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.214.21] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K5FW-000586-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:43 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212052146.gB5Lk5m12279@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au> References: <200212052146.gB5Lk5m12279@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:17:38 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: Re: [OM] HELP ! Zuiko Lenses, reversing for Macro, and Digital ... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >My main concern about hanging a Zuiko (glass & metal) lens on the front of a >typical digital (plastic & maybe a little glass) camera would be the >mechanical >problems experienced by the digital's lens focussing and zooming mechanisms. >Think of those tiny motors and plastic bearing surfaces with a heavy chunk of >metal and glass hanging on the end. What is this going to do for >the life of the >digital camera ? > >Wayne Harridge Very good point. A destroyed zoom/focus mechanism would not be a great Christmas present. Remember the apocryphal tales of modern plastic zoom lenses with aluminum foil covered plastic gears. I can't believe Nikon does not have a simple magnifier that would slip in the filter holder that would do as well. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7628 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:21:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:21:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:21:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16192 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:21:21 -0800 Received: from user239.net070.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([209.26.2.239] helo=oemcomputer) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18K5J1-0006Em-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:21:19 -0800 Message-ID: <00b401c29cb5$248980c0$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> <3DEFA04A.9000102@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> <009801c29c9e$44247140$010000c0@oemcomputer> Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Christmas Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:22:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Winsor Crosby" > You wonder whether film has topped out, more or less. With film > companies devoting more and more resources to digital perhaps film > development may slow down even if there is still potential in it. > Kodak seems dedicated to producing chips and Fuji is producing a lot > of digital products along side the film. Maybe the next film break > through will come from Agfa? ... or Konica? Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7878 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:22:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:22:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:22:27 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16201 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:22:21 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-85-7.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.85.7]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB5NLnHl663910 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:21:49 -0500 Message-ID: <001c01c29cb2$44ed2860$07554241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021205182024.30303.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] ASF processing Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:01:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "The Kodak 100 was "scanned" using the ASF destroy-your-negative-scanning-station. So possibly it's scanning and the exposure saving were not top notch. " If I recall, the "hi-res" scan with this system is good for an 8x10 at 300dpi. I suspect they are not aiming the system at spohisticated photographers. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8191 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:27:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:27:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:27:02 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16211 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:27:00 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-85-7.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.85.7]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB5NQSHl568250 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:26:29 -0500 Message-ID: <002001c29cb2$eb3c3b20$07554241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021205182024.30303.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] f1.0 vs. f1.2 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:06:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have the 1.2, but not the Noctilux, as I would have to sell my house. I would guess that the bokeh on the Noctilux is noticeably better, as it is, 1. about the cost of the Zuiko and the camera it came on and the car you drive, and, b. that is, after all, what Leica is all about. I don't find the bokeh on mine disgusting, but it isn't by any means perfect. Where I do have a problem is making these judgements on the basis of a photo on the web. Any time something is scanned and unsharp masked, it will become more harsh, the degree depending on the amount of USM. Also, it can't be in any lens' favor viewing a 72 dpi scan. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8548 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:36:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:36:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 15:36:03 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16223 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:36:01 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021205233447001006pspce>; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:34:47 +0000 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:33:23 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: [OM] Tamron 17mm f3.5 From: "R. Jackson" To: OM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I got the lens in the mail today. The mount is an Adaptall 2 with a small "OL" marking on it. That's the good one, right? It certainly doesn't seem to be something that would eat that little nub. Nice lens, BTW. -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9440 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 00:47:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 00:47:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 16:47:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16266 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:47:55 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB60lqF07351 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:47:52 +1100 Message-Id: <200212060047.gB60lqF07351@mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:47:52 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Digital Christmas Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Jamie Costello wrote: > > From: "Winsor Crosby" > > > You wonder whether film has topped out, more or less. With film > > companies devoting more and more resources to digital perhaps film > > development may slow down even if there is still potential in it. > > Kodak seems dedicated to producing chips and Fuji is producing a > lot > > of digital products along side the film. Maybe the next film break > > through will come from Agfa? > > ... or Konica? > ... or Ilford ? Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10026 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:27:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:27:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 17:27:38 2002 -0800 Received: from web20002.mail.yahoo.com (web20002.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.47]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA16304 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:27:31 -0800 Message-ID: <20021206012716.9217.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20002.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:27:16 PST Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:27:16 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: [OM] [FS] post reduced price on most items To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212060047.gB60lqF07351@mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I still have several items availible including a desireable 80/4 and B-300. please reply to royer007@yahoo.com . Thanks Mark Lloyd 1: Olympus SPn in EX+ condition. Only a few bright spots on the metal and some wear under the lever. Recently had a complete CLA this summer by Clint at Photosphere only this summer so I guarantee this camera is in perfect working order. Great little camera it just doesnt fit my photographic style. Asking $230 (reduced) plus shipping for this little beauty. For more info on the SPn go here http://www.cameraquest.com/olysp.htm 2: B-300 in EX+ condition with case and caps. In great condition I just don't need it and need the cash for my LF binge. Asking $165 (reduced) plus shipping for this adapter. 3: 80/4 auto-macro lens with 65-116 auto tube as well as 80mm close up lens plus soft case and front and rear caps. I am selling this as a set because I don't have the long rear cap for the 80mm macro lens. Auto extension tube is in EX condition works perfectly and includes its tripod collar. 80mm close up lens is also in EX condition with a little wear but nothing serious perfect glass (comes with its box and wrenchas an extra bonus!. 80/4 macro lens itself is in EX- condtion and perfect front glass but some minor coating marks on the very edge of the rear element like maybe it got scraped mounting the lens to the auto tube. They are on the very periphery of the lens though and I guarantee that they won't interfere with image quality. I am selling this set for $450 (reduced) plus postage since I figure $250 for the 80/4 lens, $80 for the close up lens, and $120 for the auto extension tube with tripod mount. 4: Focusing screens (all come with their cases except 1-13 screens) $5.00 screens sold AS-IS no returns 3 1-13 screens at $5.00 a piece only slightly worn maybe a minor mark or two but probably not. 1-3 screen in EX+ condition $15 1-9 screen in EX+ condition $10 5: Film I know I won't be using anytime soon. 1 propack Fuji NPH 400 pro film cold stored expires 8/03 so plenty of time left asking $15 plus shipping for this film. 5 individually wrapped rolls of Portra 160NC also cold store and expires again 8/03. Asking $15 as well for this film plus shipping. will refund if film turns out bad but otherwise sold AS-IS. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10283 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:29:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:29:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 17:29:42 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA16312 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:29:30 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-17.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039138103!91 Received: (qmail 3495 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:28:24 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-17.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:28:24 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB614HD01785 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:04:18 +0800 Message-ID: <3DEFFDAF.33F3F0C9@accura.com.hk> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 09:30:23 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 References: <184670-22002124517435959@M2W065.mail2web.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Haven't gone through all yet, but the OOF effect is just not better than the Zuiko 50/1.2! look at the two swimming pool photos, the background is just same distracting, the out-focous bright lines has double lines. C.H.Ling "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > > That actually looks much nicer, the bokeh is smoother. When I saw the > first picture, the bokeh in the orange flowers literally JUMPED OUT at me. > But this image is much, much smoother. > > You might want to try sharpening only the girl by using a layer mask. > > I've been hunting for some Noctilux examples to compare against. The bit > thing that many people like is the smooth, relativly even out-of-focus > areas of that lens. Look at these: > > http://www.shinozuka-family.com/f1/ (images #1, #6, #7) The background > seems to just blur out of existance in most of these. > > http://www.vothphoto.com/spotlight/reviews/noctilux.htm A nice review and > a few photos. > > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/noctilux.shtml One very > nice picture with the man and woman showing nice smooth bokeh. > > http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/andyneck.htm > > http://w2.avis.ne.jp/~camel/portrait_05.htm COOL! > http://w2.avis.ne.jp/~camel/room2-30.htm > http://w2.avis.ne.jp/~camel/room2-29.htm > http://w2.avis.ne.jp/~camel/room2-33.htm This one looks a bit harsh. > > Skip > > O ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10964 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:33:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:33:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 17:33:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA16320 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:32:54 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-26.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039138248!7450 Received: (qmail 31402 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:30:49 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-26.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:30:49 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB617iD01912 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:07:44 +0800 Message-ID: <3DEFFE7D.E4441E2A@accura.com.hk> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 09:33:49 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 References: <00eb01c29c8b$c76cd1e0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, infinity must be perfect as there is no more OOF background, don't know about the foreground :-) Usually normal lenses will have the highest resolution at infinity, other quality may vary. C.H.Ling Robert Gries wrote: > > C.H.: > > The bokeh looks a bit harsh on this shot. Though well composed, and > nicely colored it is a bit distracting to me. If this because it is not > at infinity? > > Bob > > > This one is taken with 50/1.2 wide open, PS unsharp mask 100,0.3,0. > > http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-01.jpg > > Standard lens is design at infinity, the performance for distance > objects is usually better than this portrait shot. > > C.H.Ling > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11225 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:34:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:34:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 17:34:42 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16324 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:34:19 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA50901 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:32:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205172835.02738ea0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:33:56 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 In-Reply-To: <184670-22002124517435959@M2W065.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:43 PM 12/5/2002 -0500, you wrote: >That actually looks much nicer, the bokeh is smoother. When I saw the >first picture, the bokeh in the orange flowers literally JUMPED OUT at me. >But this image is much, much smoother. > >You might want to try sharpening only the girl by using a layer mask. > >I've been hunting for some Noctilux examples to compare against. The bit >thing that many people like is the smooth, relativly even out-of-focus >areas of that lens. Look at these: > >http://www.shinozuka-family.com/f1/ (images #1, #6, #7) The background >seems to just blur out of existance in most of these. AH yes, the infamous Noct. I am sure it's somewhere on his website that there is a color picture of one of the kids in a pile of leaves taken with the Noct, and the leaves look as if they are spinning due to the out of focus effect!! It was mentioned in the rec.photo.equipment.35mm not too long ago. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11779 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:56:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:56:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 17:56:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA16350 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:55:58 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-4.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039139682!187 Received: (qmail 17807 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:54:43 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-4.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:54:43 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB61UnD02557 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:30:49 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF003E7.4ECA1793@accura.com.hk> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 09:56:55 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] f1.0 vs. f1.2 References: <20021205182024.30303.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <002001c29cb2$eb3c3b20$07554241@swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca May be it is hard to accept for 50/1.2 owner, sorry about that. You can insist the problem only due to digitize but it actually shown on 4x6 print with optical lab. This bokeh can only be found on my only non Zuiko 28-70 3.5-4.5 Tokina SD lens. The mild unsharp mark actually make it look more like the print (poorer look), as you all know all scans will look a little burr on monitor if no unsharp mask is used. C.H.Ling Bill Pearce wrote: > > I have the 1.2, but not the Noctilux, as I would have to sell my house. I > would guess that the bokeh on the Noctilux is noticeably better, as it is, > 1. about the cost of the Zuiko and the camera it came on and the car you > drive, and, b. that is, after all, what Leica is all about. I don't find the > bokeh on mine disgusting, but it isn't by any means perfect. > > Where I do have a problem is making these judgements on the basis of a photo > on the web. Any time something is scanned and unsharp masked, it will become > more harsh, the degree depending on the amount of USM. Also, it can't be in > any lens' favor viewing a 72 dpi scan. > > Bill Pearce ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12034 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:57:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:57:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 17:57:15 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16355 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:57:09 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021206014427.SZMR4992.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:44:27 -0500 Message-ID: <008f01c29cc0$5a5a0ca0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205172835.02738ea0@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:42:27 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:44:27 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Thursday, 05 December, 2002 09:33 PM Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 > At 12:43 PM 12/5/2002 -0500, you wrote: > >That actually looks much nicer, the bokeh is smoother. When I saw the > >first picture, the bokeh in the orange flowers literally JUMPED OUT at me. > >But this image is much, much smoother. > > > >You might want to try sharpening only the girl by using a layer mask. > > > >I've been hunting for some Noctilux examples to compare against. The bit > >thing that many people like is the smooth, relativly even out-of-focus > >areas of that lens. Look at these: > > > >http://www.shinozuka-family.com/f1/ (images #1, #6, #7) The background > >seems to just blur out of existance in most of these. > > AH yes, the infamous Noct. I am sure it's somewhere on his website that > there is a color picture of one of the kids in a pile of leaves taken with > the Noct, and the leaves look as if they are spinning due to the out of > focus effect!! It was mentioned in the rec.photo.equipment.35mm not too > long ago. I read this comment and thought of this image: http://www.wm.edu/CAS/ASP/faculty/brown/photography/People/deuci.htm Don't ask me for the connection in my thoughts other than perhaps Richard's use of the word "kids". I particularly like the evenness of the out of focus part of the photo. jh > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13996 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 05:17:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 05:17:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 21:17:31 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16490 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:17:28 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.41] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A1E03740158; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:13:04 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021205235757.033c58e0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:16:32 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: What's your standard setup? (was [OM] Mind Bender) In-Reply-To: <004001c29b67$f1d80c80$c85b68cb@titoy> References: <87E0DC12-0665-11D7-8A7D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> <3DEC0A17.11ADCDE6@interisland.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021204015123.05430610@mail.spitfire.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 02:37 12/4/02, Clemente asked: >Were you happy witht eh pictures taken by the 35-105 zoom? Still waiting for roll #4 of Kodachrome 64 and the roll of Ilford FP4. Very pleased with Kodachrome rolls 1-3. The 35-105 has surprising contrast, in spite of the number of elements, and mine is pretty darn sharp with little pincushion or barrel distortion too. Originally bought the lens with some trepidation about it being an older 3X design and the large number of elements/groups. I'm more a prime lens user. Got the first roll of K64 back after buying it a few years ago, was very pleasantly surprised, and it instantly became a "keeper." Wouldn't think of selling it now. Do wish it was an f/2.8 which would make focusing easier in low light, and switch to f/2 (or faster) primes under those conditions. I might have done some of the shots on the road trip using the 35/2.8 Shift (which I do use for some landscapes) if the time to set up a tripod and make very deliberate shots had been available. With pure landscapes without close and large man-made objects, perspective lines are much easier to manage and didn't encounter serious compositional problems. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14314 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 05:26:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 05:26:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 21:26:50 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16494 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:26:46 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 13:59:43 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF03479.8040506@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 13:24:09 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021126 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OM vs. Leica Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My gf's uncle I just found out, is an avid shooter. According to his wife, there's a hole that he throws his paycheck into, named Leica. (Those are her words, not mine!) I was very shocked that my girlfriend, who knows nothing about cameras, and who has only heard of C* and N*, also knows Leica. (Notice I hold Leica's in high enough regard to type it out, but not the other two...) She tells me everytime she is over there, her uncle tries to brainwash her by telling her things like "If you EVER get a camera, buy a Leica, it's the only purchase you'll never regret". Leica cult... If I get a chance to visit him this new years, then I will be prepared. I would like to have both of us take the same shots, me representing the OM and Zuiko group. We'll see how the OM stacks up against the Leicas. I don't have a tripod here, no doubt he does, and so I think that will make the bigger difference, whether or not both of us shoot off tripod, or if only one of us does. (I have no doubts mine on tripod will beat his without one in sharpness). What do you guys think? I think he's definitely got the Summicron 50mm, and I think at least another 35mm that I know of... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14564 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 05:28:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 05:28:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 21:28:20 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16499 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:28:15 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.41] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A467162B011C; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:23:51 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021206001751.00c0a580@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:27:21 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021204002008.0282a568@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:23 12/4/02, Richard F. Man wrote: >I am looking at the Metz flash units. I understand that their standard OM >adapter (SCA321?) does not support the Super FP Sync on the OM-3/4Ts. >Fine. So it is a small market. The question is what does it take to get it >to work? Is it possible to modify a SCA-321 somehow to get the Metz unit >to fire in HSS mode? Is this an impossible dream? If I understand Metz' SCA system correctly, I believe HSS requires the additional flash head interface contacts present in an SCA3000 or SCA3002 series module. If it does, it would require modifying one of those modules with the proper number of contacts in the correct locations. You'd have to reverse engineer an SCA-321, implement that in a suitable SCA-3000 module, then figure out how the HSS is controlled, design the necessary additional circuitry for it and add that too. AFIK there's zero documentation floating around about the Metz' SCA modules and the interface with the flash heads. I started to reverse engineer an SCA-321 once, and eventually threw in the towel. It's not straightforward. There *is* some circuitry beyond just wires inside it, and IIRC it uses much more than three contacts between module and flash head to translate an OM Shoe 4 to Metz' SCA-300 interface with their flash heads. Ugh! My brain hurts just thinking about it. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15342 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 06:45:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 06:45:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 22:45:47 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA16512 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 22:45:45 -0800 Received: (cpmta 22453 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 22:44:44 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 22:44:44 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 06:44:44 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 01:44:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] Bargain outfit? Message-ID: <3DF0010A.10775.14417567@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943712293 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15740 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:05:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:05:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 23:05:54 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16521 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:05:51 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.178.12e014e8 (4560) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 02:03:58 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <178.12e014e8.2b21a5de@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 02:03:58 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Bargain outfit? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_178.12e014e8.2b21a5de_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_178.12e014e8.2b21a5de_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/2002 12:46:08 AM Central Standard Time, Tom@Abacurial.com writes: > 1943712293 I'd say it is priced about "right" but a Fang it isn't. Bill Barber --part1_178.12e014e8.2b21a5de_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/2002 12:46:08 AM Central Standard Time, Tom@Abacurial.com writes:

1943712293


I'd say it is priced about "right" but a Fang it isn't.  Bill Barber --part1_178.12e014e8.2b21a5de_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16071 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:19:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:19:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 23:19:37 2002 -0800 Received: from olympus.noc.uoa.gr (olympus.noc.uoa.gr [195.134.100.100]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16529 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:19:34 -0800 From: notaris@math.uoa.gr Received: from olympus.noc.uoa.gr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olympus.noc.uoa.gr (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gB67G6OT000025; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:16:06 +0200 (EET) Received: (from ierax@localhost) by olympus.noc.uoa.gr (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gB67G5b9000024; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:16:05 +0200 (EET) X-Authentication-Warning: olympus.noc.uoa.gr: ierax set sender to notaris@math.uoa.gr using -f Received: from 195.134.81.143 ( [195.134.81.143]) as user notaris@eudoxos.math.uoa.gr by webmail.uoa.gr with HTTP; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:16:04 +0200 Message-ID: <1039158964.3df04eb4e3001@webmail.uoa.gr> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:16:04 +0200 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: notaris@math.uoa.gr Subject: [OM] Mr. Maitani's book MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.1 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello to everyone! Do you friends know that Mr. Maitani has a knew book on the Olympus Pen series? The book is very recent (maybe of the past month or so), it is in Japanese and concerns the Pen series only. It is already selling in the Japanese market. I hope that someone will translate it in English. Whether Mr. Maitani will write another book on the OM series and a last one on the XA series is not clear. I guess it depends on many factors, one of which is the time and energy he has. Although the Pen, the OM and the XA series were the three milestones in his career, it seems that the Pen was the biggest one, maybe because that's how it all started. So let's see if his "writing era" will stop to this book. Regards to all, Sotiri Notaris -- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16381 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:26:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:26:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 23:26:58 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16533 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:26:56 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA67289 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:26:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 23:27:25 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: <3DF03479.8040506@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 01:24 PM 12/6/2002 +0800, Albert wrote: >I would like to have both of us take the same shots, me representing the >OM and Zuiko group. We'll see how the OM stacks up against the Leicas. >I don't have a tripod here, no doubt he does, and so I think that will >make the bigger difference, whether or not both of us shoot off tripod, or >if only one of us does. (I have no doubts mine on tripod will beat his >without one in sharpness). What do you guys think? I think he's >definitely got the Summicron 50mm, and I think at least another 35mm that >I know of... >... As much as I love the Zuikos, I bet the Leica will win on the following situations: - Low shutter speeds. This would show up even on 4x6 prints, I bet - Low light wide open shots. The Leicas are optimized for the wide apertures - quiet shutter. Apparently, Tiger Woods' caddies just chuck an amateur photog's gear down to a lake for making that clicking sound at the wrong moment. A leica or any RF really, would be a big plus here. - that "decisive" moment thing. With not much experience w/ using a RF, I don't really know how that works. Certainly, I don't see much evidence of this style of photography from the *amateurs* pics on the webs. So avoid those four and I bet you can give it a good run for the money, especially your Tokina is even less expensive than the Zuiko and the price/performance ratio is no comparison. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16724 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:43:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:43:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 23:43:55 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16537 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:43:52 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:17:15 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 15:41:19 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My Om1n+50mm1.8 cost me $125. I spent $80 for cleanup, (new foam, battery conversion, new seals, full cleaning of lens and camera...) So $205 TOTAL. I think his Summicron costs more then my entire setup. Also, if I'm being attacked, I will not hesitate to beat him over the head with my OM, but I know Leica users would never do that to their "babies'. Here's what I can do: If it's off the tripod, then I'll have mirror lockup. I will try not to shoot in low light conditions; as you are correct, wide open is not that great, and also, RF's have about 1-2 stop advantage over SLRs in slower shutter speeds. If it's in the day time, and I have a roll of Reala in mine, and we our outdoors, trust me, I'll give him a SERIOUS run for his money. What I would like to do is (hehehe) take some portrait shots outdoors of his wife with my Tokina 90mm (sharpest in my bag, sharper then my Zuiko's) with something like Reala, and let HIM develop it... And have his wife comment on it... My Tokina is very sharp, even wide open. Drop that background out, (it has great bokeh too) and pick out her zits in the picture... I'll let you all know how to battle goes... At least if I lose, it's not to a C* or N* < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17110 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:55:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:55:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 05 23:55:46 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16564 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:55:43 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA75454 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:54:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 23:56:14 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:41 PM 12/6/2002 +0800, Albert wrote: >My Om1n+50mm1.8 cost me $125. I spent $80 for cleanup, (new foam, battery >conversion, new seals, full cleaning of lens and camera...) So $205 >TOTAL. I think his Summicron costs more then my entire setup. Also, if >I'm being attacked, I will not hesitate to beat him over the head with my >OM, but I know Leica users would never do that to their "babies'. >.. His 'cron can buy your setup, plus the Tokina 90, plus a good used OM-4T, plus a good tripod, plus .... You get the point :-) Oh yes, don't forget the Leica Glow in his advantages :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17538 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 08:09:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 08:09:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 00:09:13 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA16637 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:09:10 -0800 Received: from [62.64.200.174] (helo=[62.64.200.174]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18KDUD-000BtZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:05:25 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:02:29 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] Sharpening, was shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Do you use any basic "rules of thumb" to decide on what unsharp mask you will apply CH? A chap called Martin Evening wrote some articles in Amateur Photographer last year and he related the threshold to the resolution of the file. I might have a look at his articles again (there has to be a benefit to my collecting loads of old photographic magazines). Chris At 00:03 +0800 06/12/02, C.H.Ling wrote: >I have used very mild unsharp mask, here is the original version without >unsharp mask: > >http://www.accura.com.hk/50-12-o.jpg > >Technical details: > >Film: Kodak Ektapress 100 (PJ100) negative >Lens: Zuiko 50/1.2 wide open 1/250s. >Nikon LS4000 - scan at 3000dpi and resample to 800pixel horizontal > >C.H.Ling -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17789 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 08:09:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 08:09:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 00:09:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA16640 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:09:41 -0800 Received: from [62.64.200.174] (helo=[62.64.200.174]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18KDUH-000BtZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:05:29 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:19:33 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hey, hey Jon, calm, calm! It will be OK! Say OOOOOOOMMM ;-) If it helps, I use ColourCare (see www.colourcare.co.uk) through my local chemist and they are pretty quick (next day from before 0930). More importantly for me, they process a 120 film for the same price as 35mm and their quality is a better average than you seem to be getting. I got particularly bad service from Max Spielman (in Cambridge) some months ago, so I sent the complete package to their head office in Liverpool; it only took them a month to send back decent set of prints from my perfectly fine negatives. I have had Minolta Scan Dual, a Scan Elite and now a Canoscan FS4000. The Elite was good, but the FS4000 is more than I really need most of the time. You will not have been successful at your first go with a scanner, because it does take some practice to get the settings right. You would be able to buy a secondhand scan elite for about =A3300 GBP I reckon (check the classifieds in AP). A decent photo printer will cost less than =A3200 GBP new. I would offer to sell you my old Stylus Photo 750, but I am still using it with my 1290. The inks are pricey for the proprietary brands, but much cheaper if you get generic (whose performance is fine as far as I can make out, they just smell different). Good luck Chris At 17:44 +0000 05/12/02, Jon Mitchell wrote: >OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors. The prices they >are charging me are going up and up and the quality is getting worse. Now >I've recently acquired a very nice OM-4 from a list member (thank you, >anonimous enabler !) and love the fact that I can use the spot meter to >choose which area of the frame I want to meter from and get exposed >correctly. But WHAT IS THE BL**DY POINT IF THE D*MNED DEVELOPER AVERAGES >EVERYTHING OUT WHEN ITS PRINTED !!!! etc... -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18160 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 08:21:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 08:21:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 00:21:18 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA16651 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:21:16 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:54:45 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:18:41 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I will go ahead and make the bold statement that short of the Leica leather case; there is no piece of Leica equipment he owns that is cheaper then my ENTIRE SETUP. I think I'll win in the portrait department. Why? Because one thing I have noticed is that RF's are hard to beat in the "candid" street shots, but for things which require extremely close focus, RF's lose by a lot. My 90mm Macro will do a number on him, when I want to take a pic of his eyes or her eyes, and have the entire eye fill the frame. Not really possible with an RF.. Also, I think if I told his wife how much _I_ spent on my setup, she'll lecture him until the day one of them dies... Leica is a cult.. The camera is only secondary.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18412 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 08:21:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 08:21:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 00:21:53 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA16654 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:21:51 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:56:52 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF05DDB.2090406@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:20:43 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you had to pick between the two, which would you pick? Mamiya 7, Fuji GW670III? And why? Which has better glass, or about the same? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19172 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 09:31:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 09:31:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 01:31:22 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA16688 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 01:31:19 -0800 From: Pandionhalietius@aol.com Received: from Pandionhalietius@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1c5.2aa7659 (25305) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 04:29:26 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 04:29:26 EST Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Both are superb with razor sharp lenses. I have had the Mamiya 7 and a GW690III (I really like the 6x9), but choosing between the Mamiya 7 and the 67 Fuji is a coin toss unless you want the interchanging lenses of the Mamiya 7. That is the big plus. The 35mm film adapter is very neat too. You can use 35mm films that are not available for 120/220 cameras. It also comes down to economics. The Fuji cameras are one of, if not, the best value on the photographic market hands down. The Mamiya 7 has a built in meter which is good for shooting fast versus the all mechanical meterless Fuji, but the Mamiya's meter for landscapes was sort of irratic (for me atleast) anyways. I used a hand meter. Can't go wrong either way! John R > If you had to pick between the two, which would you pick? > > Mamiya 7, Fuji GW670III? And why? > > Which has better glass, or about the same? > --part1_1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Both are superb with razor sharp lenses. I have had the Mamiya 7 and a GW690III (I really like the 6x9), but choosing between the Mamiya 7 and the 67 Fuji is a coin toss unless you want the interchanging lenses of the Mamiya 7.  That is the big plus.  The 35mm film adapter is very neat too.  You can use 35mm films that are not available for 120/220 cameras.
It also comes down to economics.  The Fuji cameras are one of, if not, the best value on the photographic market hands down.
The Mamiya 7 has a built in meter which is good for shooting fast versus the all mechanical meterless Fuji, but the Mamiya's  meter for landscapes was sort of irratic (for me atleast) anyways. I used a hand meter.

Can't go wrong either way!

John R

If you had to pick between the two, which would you pick?

Mamiya 7, Fuji GW670III?  And why?

Which has better glass, or about the same?


 --part1_1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19650 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 10:06:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 10:06:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 02:06:24 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA16710 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 02:06:21 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:40:06 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF07600.6060405@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:03:44 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question References: <1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <1c5.2aa7659.2b21c7f6@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You have the fuji and the Mamiya; can the panoramic adapter be used in the fuji? I assumed it was just a takeup spool for the 35mm. Is that true? If so, that's awesome, you can use it in your Fuji. I really like the Fuji; the only thing stopping me from getting it is the fact that it has no meter... That slows down the process CONSIDERABLY... It's only down side as far as I can see.. When my meter died in my OM in Thailand, I found out just how tough it is to shoot without a meter. My match needle Om1n is not that accurate, but at least it gets me to within 1-2 fstops of what I want. In cloudy days or indoors, I have no clue.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20024 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 10:23:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 10:23:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 02:23:56 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA16724 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 02:23:55 -0800 From: Pandionhalietius@aol.com Received: from Pandionhalietius@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.ae.32a243e6 (3842) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:22:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:22:05 EST Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_ae.32a243e6.2b21d44d_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_ae.32a243e6.2b21d44d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit No panorama on the Fuji, just the Mamiya 7. The 690 cropped down does the same and it is a nice sweeping shot John R > > You have the fuji and the Mamiya; can the panoramic adapter be used in > the fuji? I assumed it was just a takeup spool for the 35mm. Is that > true? If so, that's awesome, you can use it in your Fuji. > > I really like the Fuji; the only thing stopping me from getting it is > the fact that it has no meter... That slows down the process > CONSIDERABLY... It's only down side as far as I can see.. > > When my meter died in my OM in Thailand, I found out just how tough it > is to shoot without a meter. My match needle Om1n is not that accurate, > but at least it gets me to within 1-2 fstops of what I want. In cloudy > days or indoors, I have no clue --part1_ae.32a243e6.2b21d44d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit No panorama on the Fuji, just the Mamiya 7.  The 690 cropped down does the   same  and it is a nice sweeping shot
John R

You have the fuji and the Mamiya; can the panoramic adapter  be used in
the fuji?  I assumed it was just a takeup spool for the 35mm.  Is that
true?  If so, that's awesome, you can use it in your Fuji.

I really like the Fuji; the only thing stopping me from getting it is
the fact that it has no meter...  That slows down the process
CONSIDERABLY...  It's only down side as far as I can see..

When my meter died in my OM in Thailand, I found out just how tough it
is to shoot without a meter.  My match needle Om1n is not that accurate,
but at least it gets me to within 1-2 fstops of what I want.  In cloudy
days or indoors, I have no clue


 --part1_ae.32a243e6.2b21d44d_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21032 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 11:56:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 11:56:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 03:56:23 2002 -0800 Received: from netmail01.services.quay.plus.net (netmail01.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.219]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id DAA16804 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 03:56:21 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 8902 invoked by uid 10001); 6 Dec 2002 11:54:49 -0000 Received: from dyn179-40.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.40.179) by netmail01.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 11:54:49 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Sharpening, was shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:54:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:02:29 +0000, Chris Barker wrote: > I might have a look at his articles again (there has to=20 >be a benefit to my collecting loads of old photographic magazines). I no longer keep them willy-nilly (they'd sink the house in its foundations :-) but I was clearing the attic some while ago and came across an AP from (I think) the early '60's. Those were the days when a Praktica Nova sold for around 150 UKP *then*. Factoring inflation, I suppose that would be the equivalent of (what?) say 3,000 UKP now? Makes the stuff we buy now look dirt cheap! John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22012 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 13:02:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 13:02:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 05:02:12 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16821 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:02:09 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 21:36:30 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF09F37.6060009@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 20:59:35 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca But can you use the adapter in the fuji? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22448 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 13:31:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 13:31:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 05:31:19 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16826 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:31:18 -0800 Received: from 209-122-225-242.s242.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.225.242] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18KIYa-0005pF-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:30:16 -0500 Message-ID: <000201c29d2b$9d04b080$f2e17ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:20:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There's was an article in Newsday yesterday about an Ebay seller who had been arrested for scamming buyers out of almost $500,000 in non-existent computer items. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "James N. McBride" To: Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 10:52 AM Subject: RE: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? > I've had no trouble with international transactions. Have surely had some > bad domestic ones though....especially with people from Kentucky. I'm done > doing business there. /jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Garth Wood > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 8:39 AM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? > > > At 11:14 PM 12/4/2002 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: > >http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943488745 > > > >No Connection etc. > > > As usual, no international bidders. What are we, poison? > > Garth > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22466 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 13:31:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 13:31:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 05:31:22 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16830 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:31:21 -0800 Received: from 209-122-225-242.s242.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.225.242] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18KIYb-0005pF-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:30:18 -0500 Message-ID: <000301c29d2b$9d74b060$f2e17ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Fried 18v Motor drive contacts Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:28:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The 18v grip (and nicad pack) can fry the motor drive pins. Sometimes it will do it if the motor / nicad (already screwed together as a pair) are then mounted to the camera with the nicad / grip switch turned ON. (I discovered this caution is featured in atleast the nicad instruction book, it may be in the 18V grip instructions too, I'm not sure) This can cause a power surge and may cause the experienced motor damage. In the 18v grip it can also melt the battery contacts inside the grip AND the contacts on the battery holder. This melting can also occur with the 18v grip if the switch is OFF, depending on what day of the week it is, or where the moon was positioned the night before ;-) _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Fenstermacher" To: Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 2:11 PM Subject: [OM] Fried 18v Motor drive contacts > > > It's been awhile since I jumped in on any discussions. Been learning a lot though. You guys and gals have been a wealth of > information-Thanks. > > Got a question that I haven't seen brought up currently nor in archives . > > I have two 18v hand grips for a couple of motor drive 1's that I have used for my OM-1MD. The motor drives work fine with the > normal rechargeable battery packs but occasionally, I've used the two 18v hand grips that I've acquired over the years. After > working for some time, both of the 18v packs have fried the contacts at the top and ruined the contacts on the Motor Drives 1 as > well. > > Last Thanksgiving, at a 50th anniversary restaurant dinner for my in-laws, the grip starts smoking. > > The normal pack on a third Motor Drive 1 works fine. Haven't had any problems since then. > > What causes this? Anyone else experience anything like it? John, any suggestions/comments? > > TIA, > > Bob F, aka nwrecruiting-headhunter from Washington. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23049 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 13:45:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 13:45:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 05:45:44 2002 -0800 Received: from sun01.tidewater.net (root@[12.27.189.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16840 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:45:43 -0800 Received: from g6p3d7 (dial53.tidewater.net [12.27.188.67]) by sun01.tidewater.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gB6DiXJ20534 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:44:33 -0500 Message-ID: <004e01c29d2d$ea054be0$43bc1b0c@g6p3d7> From: "Bob Whitmire" To: References: <3DF05DDB.2090406@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:46:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Mamiya 7, Fuji GW670III? And why? I have a Fuji GSW690III, and I love it. There's nothing like 6x9, which, as someone else pointed out, crops to a nice panoramic effect, if that's what you want, and, full-frame, makes a hell of an enlargement. The Fuji's glass is about as good as glass can get. Shoot directly into the sun and flare is minimal to non-existent. Personally, I like the all-mechanical aspect, especially during the depths of a Maine winter. Nothing to go wrong. I use my trusty Pentax spotmeter, which lives in my parka pocket, and bracket with chromes. Seldom fail to get the shot I was after. Having a fixed lens also helps with composition. I don't spend a lot of time agonizing over which lens to use. Shoe-leather zooms are highly underrated. I've never used a Mamiya 7, but as I recall the investment will be quite a bit more. If you want and need interchangeable glass and price is no object . . . --Bob Whitmire < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23397 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 14:00:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 14:00:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 06:00:28 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA16848 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:00:26 -0800 Received: (qmail 4648 invoked by uid 706); 6 Dec 2002 13:59:24 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 13:59:16 -0000 Message-ID: <00fb01c29d30$683526a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Sharpening, was shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:04:31 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For unsharp mask, the radius is the parameter you have to choose first. The smaller the number the more natural look you will get, usual value may be around 0.3 to 0.5 for viewing on monitor, bigger value is needed for higher resolution or larger file printing output, you also need higher value when the picture is seriously out of focus, which can sharpen the "rough" details. The "Amount" can be set according to the sharpness intensity you needed, move the slider to get the effect you wanted. Threshold is set to 1 or above if you want to reduce the noise generated by sharpening. But a too high value will cause uneven (selecting) sharpening effect that make the picture look unnatural. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Barker" > Do you use any basic "rules of thumb" to decide on what unsharp mask > you will apply CH? > > A chap called Martin Evening wrote some articles in Amateur > Photographer last year and he related the threshold to the resolution > of the file. I might have a look at his articles again (there has to > be a benefit to my collecting loads of old photographic magazines). > > Chris > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23753 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 14:15:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 14:15:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 06:15:30 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16862 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:15:29 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-222.s1157.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.222] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18KJFL-0005bg-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 09:14:28 -0500 Message-ID: <003701c29d31$caa0a840$dee47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <000301c29d2b$9d74b060$f2e17ad1@hppav> Subject: Re: [OM] Fried 18v Motor drive contacts Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:14:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The fried md pins applied to MD 1 only. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hermanson" To: Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:28 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Fried 18v Motor drive contacts > The 18v grip (and nicad pack) can fry the motor drive pins. Sometimes it > will do it if the motor / nicad (already screwed together as a pair) are > then mounted to the camera with the nicad / grip switch turned ON. (I > discovered this caution is featured in atleast the nicad instruction book, > it may be in the 18V grip instructions too, I'm not sure) This can cause a > power surge and may cause the experienced motor damage. In the 18v grip it > can also melt the battery contacts inside the grip AND the contacts on the > battery holder. > This melting can also occur with the 18v grip if the switch is OFF, > depending on what day of the week it is, or where the moon was positioned > the night before ;-) > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > please call 1-800-221-3000 > _________________________________ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Fenstermacher" > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 2:11 PM > Subject: [OM] Fried 18v Motor drive contacts > > > > > > > > It's been awhile since I jumped in on any discussions. Been learning a > lot though. You guys and gals have been a wealth of > > information-Thanks. > > > > Got a question that I haven't seen brought up currently nor in archives . > > > > I have two 18v hand grips for a couple of motor drive 1's that I have used > for my OM-1MD. The motor drives work fine with the > > normal rechargeable battery packs but occasionally, I've used the two 18v > hand grips that I've acquired over the years. After > > working for some time, both of the 18v packs have fried the contacts at > the top and ruined the contacts on the Motor Drives 1 as > > well. > > > > Last Thanksgiving, at a 50th anniversary restaurant dinner for my in-laws, > the grip starts smoking. > > > The normal pack on a third Motor Drive 1 works fine. Haven't had any > problems since then. > > > > What causes this? Anyone else experience anything like it? John, any > suggestions/comments? > > > > TIA, > > > > Bob F, aka nwrecruiting-headhunter from Washington. > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24214 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 14:47:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 14:47:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 06:47:06 2002 -0800 Received: from shell.datasync.com (shell.datasync.com [205.216.82.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16880 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:47:04 -0800 Received: (from farrar@localhost) by shell.datasync.com (8.8.8/Datasync) id IAA06198 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:47:03 -0600 Message-Id: <200212061447.IAA06198@shell.datasync.com> Subject: [OM] Good BIN on big zoom To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:47:03 -0600 (CST) From: "Paul Farrar" In-Reply-To: from "John Hermanson" at Dec 06, 2002 09:14:28 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL5] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Tokina 80-200/2.8 ATX zoom http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943614784 No endorsement, etc. Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24537 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 14:55:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 14:55:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 06:55:06 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA16884 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:55:04 -0800 Received: (cpmta 15003 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 06:54:02 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 06:54:02 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 14:54:02 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] bokeh - was: shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:51:29 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001501c29d36$f63e7b80$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021206012947.10330.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think that the double line OOF is what is most distracting, and although present in the Nocti, it is much less apparent. When I was trying out the 50/1.2 I found this to be one of the flaws. I wonder if the 55/1.2 performs any better for bokeh? Also, if we are talking bokeh, then there isn't anything smoother than the 85/2... Ahhh. Here it is right here - always the faithful companion... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24955 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:19:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:19:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:19:03 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA16909 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:19:01 -0800 Received: (cpmta 6309 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:18:00 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:18:00 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 15:18:00 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:15:27 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001901c29d3a$4ecc96d0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just to clarify a few things, I wanted to review the intentions of the exchanges. Required is an 8x10 print of photographic quality. This means that ink jet prints are accepted (though not preferred) but must be of archival quality. Also, a description of your working method, equipment, film, subject, etc. should accompany the photograph. Also, the print must be received by (and opened on) December 21st 2002. This photograph should be a representation of the work that has most interested you over the past year. What we are looking for is not necessarily the "prettiest", but something which is (hopefully) unique to the OM equipment that you used. Some good examples (though all submission were excellent!) are Niels Vandrup's who consciously took an event, film, and equipment combination to achieve the desired product. Similarly Daryl Hurley worked tirelessly to achieve excellent results. I hope that we can learn about working methods and potential uses of our equipment. As we often concentrate on particular subjects and methods, the print will have its value as YOUR work, and not something that may be seen as universally "good". One participant even chooses his photograph for the particular recipient. That is, knowing what kind of work they do, and what their interests are, he selects the photograph that best suits them. Though not all of us have a body of work large enough to make such decisions, I can certainly appreciate the time he puts into his decisions! I hope this helps, and feel free to ask ANY questions! I'm only half-way through my first cup of coffee and may not have explained things clearly. ;) Bob P.S. I am on digest mode, so I may not have immediate responses. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25303 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:28:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:28:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:28:48 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA16921 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:28:47 -0800 Received: (cpmta 16986 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 07:27:46 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 07:27:46 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 15:27:46 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] 55/1.2 loan? Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:25:13 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001e01c29d3b$ac223730$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Does anyone have a 55/1.2 that they wouldn't mind loaning? I'd be glad to loan something of equal or greater value in return. Maybe you could satisfy your 16/3.5 curiosity! ;) This lens has been getting a lot of frequent flier miles lately... Robert G. Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 E: rgg@gnrarch.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25590 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:33:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:33:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:33:28 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16925 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:33:26 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.39] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A3B64DED0064; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 09:35:18 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 07:31:47 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <001901c29d3a$4ecc96d0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Message-Id: <93DAB9E9B9WUWQC0HZTUROJXWLKXRT.3df0c2e3@desktop> Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/6/2002 7:15:27 AM, "Robert Gries" wrote: >Also, the print must be received by (and opened on) December 21st 2002. how long usually does it take a first class post to reach Europe from USA? /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25882 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:38:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:38:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:38:46 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16929 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:38:44 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021206152618.XEIZ4292.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:26:18 -0500 Message-ID: <010e01c29d3b$ed85dec0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:27:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:26:18 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" To: Sent: Friday, 06 December, 2002 04:18 AM Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica snip > Leica is a cult.. The camera is only secondary.. Leica did not aquire its reputation by accident ..... and neither did Rolex, Oxford and Cambridge, and Rolls Royce cars for example. If Oskar Barnack's light box acquired its reputation by accident there are and have been a lot of confused people out there, Robert Capa and Cartier-Bresson among them!. jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26226 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:46:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:46:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:46:23 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16948 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:45:57 -0800 Received: from M2W051.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.51]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:45:02 -0500 Message-ID: <262990-22002125615452937@M2W051.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:45:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2002 15:45:02.0940 (UTC) FILETIME=[7103C1C0:01C29D3E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert, et=2Eal, I'm an avid OM and Leica user, so I have a good frame of reference=2E (Al= l of you who know me knew that I'd weigh in on this topic=2E) First, let's get it straight that the lenses are within spitting distance of each other=2E Yes, the Leica lenses test better, especially wide open,= but it's not easy to see the difference=2E In most situations, hand-holdi= ng shake and mirror slap ruin each image enough to make side-by-side tests worthless=2E There are some bokeh differences too, but that's very depende= nt on each lens=2E Second, the Leica (or any other good interchangable lens rangefinder) is a= better machine at close-quarter candid or people photography than any SLR=2E= =20 It's delay time is very small (12-15 milliseconds), it's quieter, and the lenses can be hand-held at 1-3 shutterspeeds slower due to less body vibration=2E That doesn't mean the Leica shooters make better pictures=2E= But I find that I connect better with my subject, the camera doesn't get in th= e way as much, and people aren't as intimidated by a Leica than just about any SLR=2E Yes, the OM's are small and just about the same size as a Leic= a M, but there's something very different about taking pictures with your right eye (while the left one is looking at the subject) versus "hiding" behind an SLR, looking at your subject through the camera=2E It's the eye-to-eye connection that's lost=2E It's hard to describe, but it's very= real=2E (Let's not mention Macro, Telephoto, etc as differences=2E Those are OBVIOUSLY the domain of the SLR; RF userss don't have any business there except for those crazy hard-core guys=2E) Third, the construction of a Leica body is just about the most sturdy of any 35mm camera short of a Nikon F/F2 or Canon F1=2E It feels very solid,= more so than any of the OM bodies, and I've used them all except the OM3/3Ti=2E The big problem is that they darned things are so expensive=2E Granted th= ey will never wear out in my lifetime, which is more than I can say for my OM4Ti, which I expect to last only another 10-15 years until I have irreplacable circuit problems=2E The OM1 may function longer=2E But my L= eica M3 will still be viable in 30-40 years, barring abuse=2E It was made in t= he late 50's, and is as solid as ever=2E The lenses are also very sturdy, mu= ch more so than the Zuikos=2E Much of the Leica image quality comes from the= superior mechanical construction of their lenses=2E So what does it cost to get a minimal Leica M outfit? M3 double-stroke or= M4-2 user-grade body: $5-700=2E 50/2 Summicron Collapsible: $2-400 OR 35/= 2 Summicron (the classic Leica lens) $4-700 OR 50/2 M-mount Wetzler Summicro= n $400-500=2E So around $1,000, less if you buy a screwmount body, but they= 're not anywhere near the M bodies for REAL usability, IMO=2E Yea, it's a cult, but it's very nice=2E Don't knock it until you try it=2E= =20 And be careful, that first step is the beginning of a long decent=2E I kn= ow one long-time OM user who bought an M4-P on a whim and now has 5-6 lenses and 3 bodies=2E He's in DEEEEP=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Albert olympus@achtung=2Ecom Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 15:41:19 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs=2E Leica My Om1n+50mm1=2E8 cost me $125=2E I spent $80 for cleanup, (new foam,=20 battery conversion, new seals, full cleaning of lens and camera=2E=2E=2E) = So=20 $205 TOTAL=2E I think his Summicron costs more then my entire setup=2E=20= Also, if I'm being attacked, I will not hesitate to beat him over the=20 head with my OM, but I know Leica users would never do that to their=20 "babies'=2E Here's what I can do: If it's off the tripod, then I'll have mirror=20 lockup=2E I will try not to shoot in low light conditions; as you are=20 correct, wide open is not that great, and also, RF's have about 1-2 stop=20= advantage over SLRs in slower shutter speeds=2E If it's in the day time, and I have a roll of Reala in mine, and we our=20= outdoors, trust me, I'll give him a SERIOUS run for his money=2E What I would like to do is (hehehe) take some portrait shots outdoors of=20= his wife with my Tokina 90mm (sharpest in my bag, sharper then my=20 Zuiko's) with something like Reala, and let HIM develop it=2E=2E=2E And ha= ve=20 his wife comment on it=2E=2E=2E My Tokina is very sharp, even wide open=2E= =20 Drop that background out, (it has great bokeh too) and pick out her=20 zits in the picture=2E=2E=2E =20 I'll let you all know how to battle goes=2E=2E=2E At least if I lose, it'= s=20 not to a C* or N* < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26548 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:56:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:56:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:56:21 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA16956 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:55:47 -0800 Received: (qmail 26224 invoked by uid 706); 6 Dec 2002 15:46:59 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:46:28 -0000 Message-ID: <019401c29d3f$61b5cc80$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <001501c29d36$f63e7b80$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: Re: [OM] bokeh - was: shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:51:43 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gries" > I think that the double line OOF is what is most distracting, and > although present in the Nocti, it is much less apparent. When I was > trying out the 50/1.2 I found this to be one of the flaws. Without side to side comparision of the same scene, I can't agree with you, the Nocti doesn't look better to my eyes. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26801 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:59:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:59:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 07:59:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.yifansoft.com (qmailr@ns1.yifansoft.com [64.61.26.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA16969 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:59:07 -0800 Received: (qmail 21979 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:50:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO computer) (218.50.156.109) by host6.yifansoft.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:50:45 -0000 Message-ID: <008d01c29d40$4ff4b460$6d9c32da@computer> From: "Woody K." To: Subject: [OM] FS: 100/2 & MD-1 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:57:07 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello list, There are 100/2 and MD-1 for sale. - 100/2 EX+ $425 Includes orginal front and rear caps, All are clean and clear except some signs of use on the aperture ring and mount. - Motor Drive 1 EX+ $100 Light signs of use and paint is near intact. Both things includes shipping anywhere. If interested please contact me off list. Regards, Woody < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27098 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:03:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:03:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:03:04 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.183]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16986 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:03:02 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18KKwL-0001bZ-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:02:57 +0100 Received: from [80.130.163.13] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18KKwK-0005M6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:02:56 +0100 Message-ID: <3DF0CA3E.2010801@doro-foto.de> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:03:10 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification References: <93DAB9E9B9WUWQC0HZTUROJXWLKXRT.3df0c2e3@desktop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello :) siddiq schrieb: > how long usually does it take a first class post to reach Europe from USA? got my SE print within a week iirc anyway in warptime ;) - but I can't say if that would be *usually the case.... cheers :Doro < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27481 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:15:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:15:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:15:38 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16996 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:14:38 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:49:24 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF0CC4A.9060600@achtung.com> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:11:54 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <262990-22002125615452937@M2W051.mail2web.com> In-Reply-To: <262990-22002125615452937@M2W051.mail2web.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You all took my comments wrong. I am not and do not knock the Leica Cameras. I have quite a few friends that have them, and they are tanks, and their quality is second to none. But regardless how they are, you have to think that these things can do the dishes, walk the dog, take out the trash, and impregnant your wife, the way some of them speak about it. Good quality? Yes. Great lenses? Some of the best. God manifesting itself in 6 inches? I don't think so. I find that certain brands of things, (Leica, HK for guns, etc..) that these people elevate these things above the clouds... Also, I know quite a few people who take seriously SERIOUSLY bad pictures and they own a leica, hasselblad, contax etc... I've seen good pics out of a point and shoot, and I've seen bad pics out of a Leica. It's the shooter that places the biggest roll. My friend who has a leica, he told me, "I just bought a Leica, and a Summicron 50mmf2!! Now my pictures are going to be the best in the world." Err... No photo experience, etc... and this was his comment. Obviously, someone has sold him on the fact that it's the camera and not the photographer that makes the pictures. His pictures?? HORRIBLE. His friend (who bought a Hasselbald 903SWC) took some of the worst photos I've seen, and he's seen. Sold the camera, said it SUCKED... Err.. Are you sure it was the camera and not the dunce behind it? All I'm saying is, a good photographer forgets about the camera and is in touch with the subject, I find to a certain extent, RF's tend to do that more then SLR's. Leicas are great if you have the $$$, if not, then you won't die if you don't own one (contrary to what my gf's uncle has told her). Again, good glass, but I'll bet you if I shot my OM on a tripod vs a Leica in shakey hands, I'd have the same quality if not, better picture qualities. Again, I've tested it before; Me OM1n + 50mmf1.8, Friend #1 Minolta9xi + 50mmf1.7, Friend #2 LeicaM6 + 50mm f2.0 Summicron. All shot off the same tripod at the same subject. Same film, same development. We laid it out on the table. COULD NOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE. None of us could pick it out. So while I'll buy that maybe the Leica Bokeh is generally more pleasent, I have to say that I'm not convinced that other aspects don't play more critical of a roll in the overall quality of the pictures; photographer and tripod, to name the two biggest ones.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27667 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:19:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:19:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:19:05 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17008 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:18:42 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:55:03 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF0CD99.8070901@achtung.com> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:17:29 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question References: <3DF05DDB.2090406@achtung.com> <004e01c29d2d$ea054be0$43bc1b0c@g6p3d7> In-Reply-To: <004e01c29d2d$ea054be0$43bc1b0c@g6p3d7> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for the comment Bob. I REALLY want that Fuji 6x9, the few pics I've seen from it tells me first grade glass. No falloff (that I can see) and 6x9 is awesome. The film plane is huge. Do you think the 6x9 is better or 6x7? From what I understand, it's the same camera, just the crank ratio has been tweaked and the film mask tweaked also. I think 6x7 is more convient, but if you are going to go big, and you are going to carry the camera, might as well go all the way? Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27840 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:22:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:22:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:22:38 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17013 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:21:02 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:57:30 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF0CE2F.4010102@achtung.com> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:19:59 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Photo of the week is an OM shot Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=679319 Photo of the week is an OM shot. WOW.... Talk about feeling in a photo.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28318 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:23:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:23:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:23:32 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.yifansoft.com (qmailr@ns1.yifansoft.com [64.61.26.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA17014 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:21:30 -0800 Received: (qmail 6228 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:07:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO computer) (211.179.63.140) by host6.yifansoft.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:07:29 -0000 Message-ID: <001501c29d42$a2eeb330$8c3fb3d3@computer> From: "Woody K." To: References: <008d01c29d40$4ff4b460$6d9c32da@computer> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: 100/2 & MD-1 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 01:10:42 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ah, Will consider to trade 100/2 for OM-4T(i) champagne(not a black). Thanks, Woody ----- Original Message ----- From: "Woody K." To: Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 12:57 AM Subject: [OM] FS: 100/2 & MD-1 Hello list, There are 100/2 and MD-1 for sale. - 100/2 EX+ $425 Includes orginal front and rear caps, All are clean and clear except some signs of use on the aperture ring and mount. - Motor Drive 1 EX+ $100 Light signs of use and paint is near intact. Both things includes shipping anywhere. If interested please contact me off list. Regards, Woody < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29058 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:30:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:30:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:30:29 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA17044 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:30:26 -0800 Received: (qmail 23216 invoked by uid 706); 6 Dec 2002 16:22:01 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:21:24 -0000 Message-ID: <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: Subject: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:25:56 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There is one comparison if you are interested. Same film, camera and scanner, no sharpening. One common point, both lenses are super sharp but the bokeh are different! 35-70/3.6 wide open (I think) http://www.accura.com.hk/3570.jpg 50/1.2 (F2 or 2.8) http://www.accura.com.hk/5007.jpg Ah! let me introduce, she is my wife :-) C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29543 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:46:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:46:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:46:33 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA17074 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:46:32 -0800 Received: (cpmta 2625 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 08:45:30 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 08:45:30 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 16:45:30 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE:[OM] air postage Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:42:57 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <002b01c29d46$8838f1a0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021206162338.28371.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >how long usually does it take a first class post to reach Europe from USA? That depends.... ;) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29817 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:48:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:48:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:48:00 2002 -0800 Received: from ouse.qinetiq.com (ouse.qinetiq.com [192.102.214.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA17082 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:47:58 -0800 Received: (qmail 19197 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:45:16 +0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dart.qinetiq.com) (10.0.5.21) by ouse.qinetiq.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:45:16 +0000 Received: from allen.qinetiq.com (Not Verified[10.0.20.10]) by dart.qinetiq.com) id ; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:45:16 +0000 Received: from tay.qinetiq.com (10.0.20.12) by allen.qinetiq.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:45:16 +0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ZIPPY) (10.184.80.114) by tay.qinetiq.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:45:16 +0000 Received: by ZIPPY with Microsoft Mail id <01C29D46.D97796C0@ZIPPY>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:45:14 -0000 Message-ID: <01C29D46.D97796C0@ZIPPY> From: Chris Barrett To: "'OM list'" Subject: [OM] Photo of the week is an OM shot Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:42:28 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote: "Subject: [OM] Photo of the week is an OM shot http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=679319 Photo of the week is an OM shot. WOW.... Talk about feeling in a photo.." Be warned folks - that's what you look like if you sell all your OM equipment Chris Malvern < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30204 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 16:54:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 16:54:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 08:54:51 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17104 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:54:49 -0800 Received: from pool0164.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.134.164] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18KLk3-00053l-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:54:19 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212060047.gB60lqF07351@mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au> References: <200212060047.gB60lqF07351@mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:54:16 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Digital Christmas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > > >... or Ilford ? > >Wayne Harridge I thought about them, but they seem so specialized with black and white. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30546 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:01:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:01:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:01:08 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com (sagan.skybridgegroup.com [194.201.127.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17117 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:00:59 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:00:03 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: [OM] Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Thread-Index: AcKdSOq19zI39wUqQyiQgWiHM8CIMQ== From: "Sam Shiell" To: "olympus@zuiko. sls. bc. ca \(E-mail\)" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Chris,=20 You're not the only one to feel this.... The odds are that I've lost out = on a deal I was trying to set up with my company (who do Corporate = Events) because my favourite lab made a pigs ear of the printing AND did = something wrong with the negs. Yep it does make you wonder what's the = point.=20 Thanks to everyone else for tips and ideas on this. I can't afford a = film scanner but I'll give ColourCare a whirl (if I can find somewhere = that they operate from). btw the deal I was trying to set up was to be the company's "official" = events photographer. When I get time (ha) I'll give you a run-down but = basically I took a couple of days holiday and spent the day = photographing anything and everything that happened in a HUGE Corporate = Event that we organised (for the Welshies amongst us it was in the = Celtic Manor hotel in Newport - I'd have looked you up if I'd have had = time) Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30799 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:01:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:01:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:01:36 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17126 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:01:29 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.190.11cb9168 (24895) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:55:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <190.11cb9168.2b22307a@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:55:22 EST Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_190.11cb9168.2b22307a_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_190.11cb9168.2b22307a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/2002 9:19:21 AM Central Standard Time, rgg@gnrarch.com writes: > Required is an 8x10 print of photographic quality Bob, I have in the past taken a little liberty in size, having sent a full frame printed on an 8X10 piece of paper. I find myself often tending to compose full frame. I will be taking some stuff to the processor on Monday to have some 10X15 prints made and anticipate likely sending that size print. Does that create a problem for the exchange? Bill Barber --part1_190.11cb9168.2b22307a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/2002 9:19:21 AM Central Standard Time, rgg@gnrarch.com writes:

Required is an 8x10 print of photographic quality


Bob, I have in the past taken a little liberty in size, having sent a full frame printed on an 8X10 piece of paper.  I find myself often tending to compose full frame.  I will be taking some stuff to the processor on Monday to have some 10X15 prints made and anticipate likely sending that size print.  Does that create a problem for the exchange?  Bill Barber  --part1_190.11cb9168.2b22307a_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31051 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:02:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:02:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:02:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17132 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:02:20 -0800 Received: from [62.64.217.234] (helo=[62.64.217.234]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18KLpr-000AfM-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:00:22 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <00fb01c29d30$683526a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <00fb01c29d30$683526a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:49:36 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Sharpening, was shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks CH. I use completely different numbers at the moment. I will try the minimalist approach. Chris At 22:04 +0800 06/12/02, C.H.Ling wrote: >For unsharp mask, the radius is the parameter you have to choose first. The >smaller the number the more natural look you will get, usual value may be >around 0.3 to 0.5 for viewing on monitor, bigger value is needed for higher >resolution or larger file printing output, you also need higher value when >the picture is seriously out of focus, which can sharpen the "rough" >details. > >The "Amount" can be set according to the sharpness intensity you needed, >move the slider to get the effect you wanted. > >Threshold is set to 1 or above if you want to reduce the noise generated by >sharpening. But a too high value will cause uneven (selecting) sharpening >effect that make the picture look unnatural. > >C.H.Ling -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31052 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:02:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:02:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:02:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17133 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:02:20 -0800 Received: from [62.64.217.234] (helo=[62.64.217.234]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18KLpw-000AfM-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:00:24 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021205084021.045c67b8@pop.telusplanet.net> <010001c29c77$cc44d6e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:51:14 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Sharpening, was shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oh, my wife cannot understand why I might want to keep last week's edition of AP. But I have a cellar pretty well to myself and 3 years' worth still fits in there for the moment. I do like looking at old prices - I could not afford them then! Chris At 11:54 +0000 06/12/02, john@coedana.plus.com wrote: >On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:02:29 +0000, Chris Barker > wrote: > >> I might have a look at his articles again (there has to >>be a benefit to my collecting loads of old photographic magazines). > > >I no longer keep them willy-nilly (they'd sink the house in its >foundations :-) but I was clearing the attic some while ago and came >across an AP from (I think) the early '60's. Those were the days when >a Praktica Nova sold for around 150 UKP *then*. Factoring inflation, I >suppose that would be the equivalent of (what?) say 3,000 UKP now? > >Makes the stuff we buy now look dirt cheap! -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31803 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:26:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:26:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:26:05 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17154 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:26:01 -0800 Received: from user80.net096.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.223.80] helo=oemcomputer) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18KMEK-0002ZD-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 09:25:36 -0800 Message-ID: <002c01c29d4c$9f7f7180$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:26:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "C.H.Ling" > > Ah! let me introduce, she is my wife :-) > CH.: I have always thought you were a very lucky guy with very good taste. Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32067 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:29:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:29:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:28:59 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17158 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:28:57 -0800 Received: from jjohnso4.attbi.com (c-66-56-1-50.atl.client2.attbi.com[66.56.1.50]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <20021206172748052001b07qe>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:27:48 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206122309.00a709e0@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: jjohnso4@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 12:27:32 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca, olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Johnny Johnson Subject: Re: [OM] Photo of the week is an OM shot In-Reply-To: <3DF0CE2F.4010102@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:19 AM 12/7/02 +0800, Albert wrote: >http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=679319 > >Photo of the week is an OM shot. WOW.... Talk about feeling in a photo.. Yeah, and if you read far enough down in the comments the photographer says that it's a shot of a dummy (possibly wax) plus heavy editing in Photoshop. Now, does that take away any of the "feeling" from the image? I guess that's up to each individual to decide. Later, Johnny __________________________ Johnny Johnson Lilburn, GA mailto:jjohnso4@attbi.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32555 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:50:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:50:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 09:50:17 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17166 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:50:14 -0800 Received: from modem-976.panther.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.135.243.208] helo=skelly) by cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18KMc7-0001Lm-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:50:12 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:50:20 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <93DAB9E9B9WUWQC0HZTUROJXWLKXRT.3df0c2e3@desktop> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca urrgggghhhhhhhh .... a lot less time than it's gonna take me to select and get printed a file. 10 day turnaround on exhibition print and mount plus 3/4 days by airmail to California and it's Christmas and I've not had quality prints made before and and and uuurrrggghhhh we can always send small files by email and pretend (ooops sorry I'm not really suggesting cheating at all).... uurrrggghhh regards Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of siddiq Sent: 06 December 2002 15:32 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification 12/6/2002 7:15:27 AM, "Robert Gries" wrote: >Also, the print must be received by (and opened on) December 21st 2002. how long usually does it take a first class post to reach Europe from USA? /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 611 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 18:07:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 18:07:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 10:07:52 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA17193 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:07:50 -0800 Received: (cpmta 7234 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 10:06:48 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 10:06:48 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 18:06:48 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 13:06:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] 2n bargain in Europe Message-ID: <3DF0A0E6.31650.16B1E7C8@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943787209 no connection ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1129 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 18:23:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 18:23:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 10:23:34 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17239 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:23:31 -0800 From: suchismit@attbi.com Message-Id: <200212061823.KAA17239@fw.sls.bc.ca> Received: from rwcrwbc56 (rwcrwbc56.attbi.com[204.127.198.45]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <200212061822230520021ghve>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:22:23 +0000 Received: from [161.215.27.111] by rwcrwbc56; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:22:22 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:22:22 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 5 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: c3VjaGlzbWl0QGF0dGJpLmNvbQ== Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Some time in the future I would like to slowly get into MF. I have narrowed down to two choices, but doesn't mean the others are out. A used Bronica SQ-Ai or a used 'Blad 501cm. Anyone has any experience with either/both of them? The Blad system is just too expensive, but is the slight difference in image quality worth the high price? Resale value is not that important to me as I usually keep my equipment. Also,I am not a poser -the camera will be the *taker* of the images and not the *subject* :) I would rather people WOW at the images than the camera. How do the late PS lens lenses compare with the FE/CFi ? I expect to hear things like the latter has a higher tonal range and a 'certain something'. But does that really translate to so many hundreds of dollars more ? And will that really matter after the image has been scanned and photoshopped ? Thanks, Tim ps: I am planning on renting 501CM+ 80/2.8 planar next weekend. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1435 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 18:28:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 18:28:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 10:28:02 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17243 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:28:00 -0800 Received: from matt.starmatt.com (h00045ad18176.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.218.145.169]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <200212061826520520021gjee>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:26:52 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206131218.0494f530@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: m4880960/mail.starmatt.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 13:27:13 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Matt BenDaniel Subject: [OM] Rejoining In-Reply-To: <3DF0A0E6.31650.16B1E7C8@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, I'm rejoining the OM list. I was on it for a while during 2000-2001. When I started to do astrophotography, initially I decided on the OM system. Starting two years ago, I switched most of my work to Pentax 67, but I still use OM equipment and really like it. Please see my web site for a gallery of astrophotos. If anyone has questions about using OM equipment for astrophotography, please ask me. I've published articles and images in Sky & Telescope magazine and other leading magazines and books. The main reason I've rejoined is to float some Oly items for sale. I know it is less risky to exchange equipment with the knowledgeable members of this community, than it is on eBay. With the poor economy and pending xmas season, is this a bad time to sell this stuff? I'm writing a web page now to describe an 80mm f4 auto macro I want to sell. I've been considering parting with a 250/2 in EX+ condition or thereabouts. BTW these two items already for sale on eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3344&item=1943437596 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3344&item=1943614784 If anyone here makes an attractive private offer, I would cancel either of those auctions. I have a Sigma 16mm f2.8 that I don't want to sell, but I'd consider upgrading to a pre-owned Zuiko 16mm, if anyone recommends that for astrophotography. -- Matt BenDaniel matt@starmatt.com http://starmatt.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1747 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 18:31:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 18:31:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 10:31:31 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.comcast.net (smtp.comcast.net [24.153.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17247 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:31:29 -0800 Received: from comcast.net (pcp02036052pcs.mnhwkn01.nj.comcast.net [68.83.186.91]) by mtaout05.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6P00JX6H0FF4@mtaout05.icomcast.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:12:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:12:03 -0500 From: Ed Senior Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3DF0CC53.8030006@comcast.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No, Albert, Leica is a sect... we're the cult! Ed Senior Albert wrote: > Leica is a cult.. The camera is only secondary.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2092 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 18:36:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 18:36:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 10:36:56 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17255 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:36:54 -0800 Received: from c2000524a (12-224-143-183.client.attbi.com[12.224.143.183]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120618354500100pnoj5e>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:35:45 +0000 Message-ID: <00a201c29d56$4e2a52a0$b78fe00c@c2000524a> From: "Paul Laughlin" To: References: <002b01c29d46$8838f1a0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: Re: RE:[OM] air postage Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:35:51 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gries" To: Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:42 AM Subject: RE:[OM] air postage > >how long usually does it take a first class post to reach Europe from > USA? I ordered an item from Ireland a couple of weeks ago. It took approximately a week by air mail. Paul in Portland OR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2636 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 18:54:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 18:54:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 10:54:40 2002 -0800 Received: from web13709.mail.yahoo.com (web13709.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.251]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA17268 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:54:38 -0800 Message-ID: <20021206185425.78857.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.169] by web13709.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 10:54:25 PST Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:54:25 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021206012947.10330.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I figured it out. The bad bokeh is not the fault of the lens. The camera had a 2-x series focus screen installed. Install a 1-4 in the camera and try again. Guaranteed to make the final print much better. That F1.2 lens will be just fine. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3430 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 19:28:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 19:28:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 11:28:53 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17297 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:28:49 -0800 Received: from matt.starmatt.com (h00045ad18176.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.218.145.169]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2002120619273905100oekn9e>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:27:39 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206142551.021946a8@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: m4880960/mail.starmatt.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 14:28:03 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Matt BenDaniel Subject: [OM] FS: Auto 80mm In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206131218.0494f530@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <3DF0A0E6.31650.16B1E7C8@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://starmatt.com/ebay/oly80.html Link above describes 80mm macro lens for sale. I'm still learning how to grade and describe lenses. Comments welcome. -- Matt BenDaniel matt@starmatt.com http://starmatt.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3930 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 19:42:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 19:42:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 11:42:33 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f13.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17315 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:42:29 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:38:40 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 19:38:40 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Photo of the week is an OM shot Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:38:40 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2002 19:38:40.0854 (UTC) FILETIME=[1457AF60:01C29D5F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Johnny wrote: >> Yeah, and if you read far enough down in the comments the photographer says that it's a shot of a dummy (possibly wax) plus heavy editing in Photoshop. Now, does that take away any of the "feeling" from the image? I guess that's up to each individual to decide. << I also saw these comments, but still believe the photograph, itself, is very good. The photograph begs the viewer for forgiveness, pity, etc. regardless of the reason the subject is condemned in the first place. On the other hand (and probably contradicting myself here), the author had to manipulate the photo (i.e. Photoshop et al) to bring out the desired result. I think I have more feeling about digitally manipulating a photograph (subject) to produce the desired result than what the author is trying to portray. My 0.02 USD, again. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4569 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 20:02:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 20:02:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 12:02:16 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f191.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.191]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17329 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:02:14 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:58:22 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 19:58:22 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] High Speed Sync using Metz Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:58:22 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2002 19:58:22.0279 (UTC) FILETIME=[D486D570:01C29D61] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John Lind wrote: >> An example of a "flip flash" bracket is the Stroboframe Quick Flip 350 or the Newton N7200. http://www.saundersphoto.com/html/strobo.htm http://www.newtoncamerabrackets.com/newton.html You hold camera and when you turn it vertically, you manually flip the arm holding the flash to keep it above the lens. << The Newton is very convenient and quite practical. In my lab (garage), I have made a bracket for my BG-2 that is similar to the Newton. The drawback is that I can only flip the OM body vertically to the left, but the T flash remains above the lens. (Please note that this is for my personal use, only, and is not for sale or sharing). For those that are mechanically inclined, this is very simple, a very low cost option and the results are worth the effort. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5195 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 20:29:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 20:29:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 12:29:09 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.195]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17354 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:29:05 -0800 Received: from default ([62.6.122.116]) by care4free.net ; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 20:25:14 -0000 Message-ID: <000d01c29d65$b27a1c40$747a063e@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: [OM] 40/2 at Ffordes Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:25:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Anyone interested in a 40/2 can find one now at https://secure.ffordes.com/index.htm for the princely sum of 245 UKP. No connection (and no OMoney..) Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 25-11-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6015 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 21:21:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 21:21:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 13:21:48 2002 -0800 Received: from studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de (studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de [129.69.21.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17422 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 13:21:46 -0800 Received: from FFpins.home.mydomain [129.69.192.192] by studsv07.stud.uni-stuttgart.de with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A4D14BE400BE; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 22:21:21 +0100 Received: (from frieder@localhost) by FFpins.home.mydomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA01497 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 21:32:31 +0100 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 21:32:31 +0100 From: frieder.faig@studserv.uni-stuttgart.de To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Message-ID: <20021206213231.A1420@FFpins.localhost> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 04:18:41PM +0800, Albert wrote: > > Also, I think if I told his wife how much _I_ spent on my setup, she'll > lecture him until the day one of them dies... > I`m confused: Why do you want to make such a lot of effort, to make this men your enemy?? Maybe If he likes you, and your interest in classic cameras, you might get the chance to borrow some nice Leica-equipment to play. Then you can get some nice candid-shots with Leica glow, and true macro with your camera. Frieder Faig P.S.: Be careful there is more than a SLR + a good sharp macro lens to make such a impressive one eye only-picture as Man-Ray! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6438 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 21:42:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 21:42:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 13:42:54 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17445 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 13:42:52 -0800 From: Pandionhalietius@aol.com Received: from Pandionhalietius@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1c8.2b3a05e (25305) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:36:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1c8.2b3a05e.2b227277@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:36:55 EST Subject: [OM] Parts numbers for Zuiko 28 lenses To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c8.2b3a05e.2b227277_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1c8.2b3a05e.2b227277_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Once before I needed a front element from Olympus and after they sent me the wrong part, someone was kind enough on the list to get me the right part number and I called Olympus and it went smooth. I am hoping for a repeat performance. Looking for the part# of the front element Zuiko 28mmf2 and 24mm f2. Any help greatly appreciated! Thanks John --part1_1c8.2b3a05e.2b227277_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Once before I needed a front element from Olympus and after they sent me the wrong part, someone was kind enough on the list to get me the right part number and I called Olympus and it went smooth.
I am hoping for a repeat performance.
Looking for the part# of the front element Zuiko 28mmf2 and 24mm f2.

Any help greatly appreciated!

Thanks
John
--part1_1c8.2b3a05e.2b227277_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6709 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 21:45:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 21:45:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 13:45:07 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA17453 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 13:45:05 -0800 Received: (cpmta 21377 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 13:44:01 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 13:44:01 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 21:44:01 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: Matt BenDaniel , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:43:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] Rejoining Message-ID: <3DF0D3C9.21507.1778AF37@localhost> In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206131218.0494f530@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <3DF0A0E6.31650.16B1E7C8@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Friday, December 06, 2002 at 13:27 Matt BenDaniel wrote: > I've been considering parting with a 250/2 in EX+ condition or thereabouts. What's the price? ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7167 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 22:05:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:05:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 14:05:22 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17478 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:05:20 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.118.252]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021206220104.MQYC4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:01:04 -0600 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 16:58:47 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [151.198.118.252] at Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:01:04 -0600 Message-Id: <20021206220104.MQYC4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net>, on 12/07/02 at 12:25 AM, "C.H.Ling" said: >There is one comparison if you are interested. Same film, camera and >scanner, no sharpening. One common point, both lenses are super sharp >but the bokeh are different! I have long admired this stunning beauty, which I recognized as your wife from your other posted photos. She is also very patient, since she has posed for so many tests! Please give her my compliments. So far as the two photos are concerned, I left them both on screen and switched back and forth between them to view the differences. Perhaps it is because the Web doesn't allow fine enough discriminations, but I can say that there is *no* discernible difference between them in sharpness *or* in bokeh to my eye. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7473 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 22:14:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:14:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 14:14:31 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17496 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:14:29 -0800 Received: from matt.starmatt.com (h00045ad18176.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.218.145.169]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021206221320053002l1p2e>; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:13:20 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206164450.049f2eb0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: m4880960/mail.starmatt.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:13:41 -0500 To: "Tom A.Trottier" From: Matt BenDaniel Subject: [OM] FS: 250/2 Cc: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <3DF0D3C9.21507.1778AF37@localhost> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20021206131218.0494f530@pop3.norton.antivirus> <3DF0A0E6.31650.16B1E7C8@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 16:43 06-12-02 -0500, tOM Trottier wrote: >On Friday, December 06, 2002 at 13:27 >Matt BenDaniel wrote: > >> I've been considering parting with a 250/2 in EX+ condition or thereabouts. > >What's the price? tOM, $2700. Please see: http://starmatt.com/ebay/zuiko250f2.html I'll need to place some better pix of it on the web page. -- Matt BenDaniel matt@starmatt.com http://starmatt.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7781 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 22:20:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:20:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 14:20:12 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17502 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:20:10 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-113.s1048.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.113] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18KQoN-0003pI-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:19:08 -0500 Message-ID: <001601c29d75$80f17f00$71e47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <1c8.2b3a05e.2b227277@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Parts numbers for Zuiko 28 lenses Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:19:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 24 f2 is LC0614 28 f2 is LC0624 _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:36 PM Subject: [OM] Parts numbers for Zuiko 28 lenses > Once before I needed a front element from Olympus and after they sent me the > wrong part, someone was kind enough on the list to get me the right part > number and I called Olympus and it went smooth. > I am hoping for a repeat performance. > Looking for the part# of the front element Zuiko 28mmf2 and 24mm f2. > > Any help greatly appreciated! > > Thanks > John > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8094 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 22:29:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:29:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 14:29:53 2002 -0800 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com (gadolinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.111]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17512 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:29:50 -0800 Received: from host213-1-87-249.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.1.87.249] helo=Inwin) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18KQvk-0000Fw-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 22:26:45 +0000 Message-ID: <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" References: <200209280150.g8S1oPe22114@central.caverock.net.nz> Subject: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:27:20 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- >Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:54:24 +1300 >From: "Brian Swale" >Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? >I know the question wasn't directed to me, but I am a strong supporter of >this lens. One disappointing aspect of the 35-105mm zoom is that it is the lens with the most horriblest (**) aperture ring of any Zuiko. I got my mint sample via Ebay, but prior to that I examined two others in a shop, and all three had this horrible aperture ring. It feels as though the aperture ring is full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. As all three samples exhibited this characteristic, I surmise that this is normal for the 35-105mm Zuiko. -- from Cy in the UK (**) The grammarians among you will have noticed that "most horriblest" is a double superlative, and therefore grammatically incorrect. However, even Shakespeare used double superlatives on occasion, for dramatic effect (see "Hamlet"). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8451 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 22:37:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:37:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 14:37:09 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound02.telus.net [199.185.220.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17538 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:37:07 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021206223321.SGPR21763.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:33:21 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021206153241.0404b810@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 15:33:20 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 In-Reply-To: <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:25 AM 12/7/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: [snip] >35-70/3.6 wide open (I think) > >http://www.accura.com.hk/3570.jpg > > >50/1.2 (F2 or 2.8) > >http://www.accura.com.hk/5007.jpg > >Ah! let me introduce, she is my wife :-) She's lovely. Patient, too. ;-) Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8756 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 22:42:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:42:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 14:42:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mail01.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail01.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA17542 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:42:42 -0800 From: ReinholdLetschert@eircom.net Received: (qmail 63215 messnum 519888 invoked from network[159.134.206.132/unknown]); 6 Dec 2002 22:41:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?) (159.134.206.132) by mail01.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 63215) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 22:41:59 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 22:41:59 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Message-ID: <3DF127B7.1552.431835@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> >snip >If Oskar Barnack's light box acquired its reputation by accident >there are and have been a lot of confused people out there, >Robert Capa and Cartier-Bresson among them!. >From: "om@skipwilliams.com" >Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica >snip >Albert, et al, > >I'm an avid OM and Leica user, so I have a good frame of >reference >snip >Second, the Leica (or any other good interchangable lens >rangefinder) is a better machine at close-quarter candid or >people photography than any SLR >snip I couldn't have put it any better. And, it is the photographer that takes the picture, not the camera. Albert, in taking on a competition like that you show that all the hype about Leica annoys you. There is no need for that. I often use 2 old chisels for woodworking. When I grind and hone them properly they will make as good a cut that any of my Stanley's, each of which cost about 5 times as much than the old ones together. The dearer ones do stay sharp longer, but not 5 times as long. But with technical items usually 10% more quality, precision or whatever you want to call it, just costs twice as much. My cameras (including a pre WWII Contax II) do what I NEED them for. There are other cameras for other needs (and, naturally enough, showing off is also a valid one amongst them). I don't give a hoot. --- Reinhold < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9218 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 23:00:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 23:00:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 15:00:36 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17569 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:00:34 -0800 From: Pandionhalietius@aol.com Received: from Pandionhalietius@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1bb.a501945 (25305) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:58:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1bb.a501945.2b228598@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:58:32 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Parts numbers for Zuiko 28 lenses To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1bb.a501945.2b228598_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1bb.a501945.2b228598_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/2002 2:20:56 PM Pacific Standard Time, omtech@erols.com writes: > 24 f2 is LC0614 > 28 f2 is LC0624 Thank you kindly John! --part1_1bb.a501945.2b228598_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/6/2002 2:20:56 PM Pacific Standard Time, omtech@erols.com writes:

24 f2 is LC0614
28 f2 is LC0624


Thank you kindly John! --part1_1bb.a501945.2b228598_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9521 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 23:06:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 23:06:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 15:06:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.170]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17574 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:05:59 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax29-211.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.191.211]) by mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB6N5tN23900 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:05:55 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:05:32 +1100 Message-ID: <000a01c29d7c$00ad2d10$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > One disappointing aspect of the 35-105mm zoom is that it is > the lens with the most horriblest (**) aperture ring of any > Zuiko. I got my mint sample via Ebay, but prior to that I > examined two others in a shop, and all three had this > horrible aperture ring. It feels as though the aperture ring > is full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. As > all three samples exhibited this characteristic, I surmise > that this is normal for the 35-105mm Zuiko. > Mine is ok (early version). ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9943 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 23:22:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 23:22:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 15:22:04 2002 -0800 Received: from vs.bgnett.no (vs.bgnett.no [194.54.96.159]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17600 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:22:02 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3) id gB6NEQ179297 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:14:26 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) Received: from svein (oppringt-252.ppp.uib.no [129.177.138.252]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3av) with SMTP id gB6NEO979290 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:14:24 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) From: =?windows-1252?Q?Svein=20Skj=F8tskift?= To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:21:18 +0100 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Organization: ess In-Reply-To: <00a201c29d56$4e2a52a0$b78fe00c@c2000524a> Message-Id: Subject: Re: RE:[OM] air postage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 X-Virus-Scanned: by vs.bgnett.no Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 06.12.2002 19:35:51, skreiv "Paul Laughlin" : > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Robert Gries" >To: >Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:42 AM >Subject: RE:[OM] air postage > > >> >how long usually does it take a first class post to reach Europe from >> USA? > >I ordered an item from Ireland a couple of weeks ago. It took approximately >a week by air mail. >Paul in Portland OR Hello Order from KEH to Norway took only 3 days, delivered on the door, by UPS Svein >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10196 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 23:23:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 23:23:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 15:23:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17604 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:23:53 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB6NGGIq005235 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:16:17 +0100 (MET) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:16:17 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? Message-Id: <20021207001617.18ccf54c.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> References: <200209280150.g8S1oPe22114@central.caverock.net.nz> <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:27:20 -0000 "CyberSimian" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > >Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:54:24 +1300 > >From: "Brian Swale" > >Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? > > >I know the question wasn't directed to me, but I am a strong > >supporter of this lens. > > One disappointing aspect of the 35-105mm zoom is that it is the > lens with the most horriblest (**) aperture ring of any Zuiko. I > got my mint sample via Ebay, but prior to that I examined two > others in a shop, and all three had this horrible aperture ring. Hmm...horrible, I dunno. It is not as smooth as my 24/2, but it is on the other hand much better than some brand-lenses for some-other-series-of-cameras, which the list admin will not let me talk about here.... :) I just tried mine, and it does not feel that bad, actually. I would be tempted to guess that you might have gotten less-than-perfect samples, except that you said that yours is mint? > It feels as though the aperture ring is > full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. Yeah, try that, and tell us how that works out...on second thought, perhaps you better not...:) > As all > three samples exhibited this characteristic, I surmise that this is > normal for the 35-105mm Zuiko. > I think that mine does not have this characteristic. However since I am in love with this lens, I may not be objective. Hey, if you are anywhere near London in the UK, then I'll bring it next time I go there such that you can try - deal? --thomas > -- from Cy in the UK > > (**) The grammarians among you will have noticed that "most > horriblest" is a double superlative, and therefore grammatically > incorrect. However, even Shakespeare used double superlatives on > occasion, for dramatic effect (see"Hamlet"). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10692 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 23:53:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 23:53:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 15:53:11 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h015.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.243]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA17651 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:53:09 -0800 Received: (cpmta 10065 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 15:52:07 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.243) with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 15:52:07 -0800 X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 23:52:07 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: Thomas Heide Clausen , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:52:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? Message-ID: <3DF0F1D3.29099.3B5601@localhost> In-reply-to: <20021207001617.18ccf54c.T.Clausen@computer.org> References: <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Saturday, December 07, 2002 at 0:16 Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: ... > > It feels as though the aperture ring is > > full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. > > Yeah, try that, and tell us how that works out...on second thought, > perhaps you better not...:) > > > As all > > three samples exhibited this characteristic, I surmise that this is > > normal for the 35-105mm Zuiko. > > > > I think that mine does not have this characteristic. However since I > am in love with this lens, I may not be objective. The lens is the objective. tOM ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11155 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 00:15:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 00:15:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 16:15:23 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA17667 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:15:20 -0800 Received: (qmail 22259 invoked by uid 706); 7 Dec 2002 00:14:18 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 00:14:16 -0000 Message-ID: <005d01c29d86$52d71100$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021206220104.MQYC4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 08:19:32 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for Grath, Jamie and your compliments, she must be very happy when hearing that :-) I think I'm a lucky man. She is very helpful in posting for lens testes, my two sons are getting old enough (the elder one being 15) and losing interest in posting for me now :-) For the 50mm shot, look carefully you will see the out focus image is breakdown, just like looking from an eye with astigmatic, the background of the zoom just like looking from an eye with short sight. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: > In <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net>, on 12/07/02 > at 12:25 AM, "C.H.Ling" said: > > >There is one comparison if you are interested. Same film, camera and > >scanner, no sharpening. One common point, both lenses are super sharp > >but the bokeh are different! > > I have long admired this stunning beauty, which I recognized as your > wife from your other posted photos. She is also very patient, since she > has posed for so many tests! Please give her my compliments. > > So far as the two photos are concerned, I left them both on screen and > switched back and forth between them to view the differences. Perhaps it > is because the Web doesn't allow fine enough discriminations, but I can > say that there is *no* discernible difference between them in sharpness > *or* in bokeh to my eye. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > llclark / edgewater, nj / usa > -------------------------------------------------------- > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11406 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 00:15:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 00:15:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 16:15:48 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17670 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:15:45 -0800 From: Pandionhalietius@aol.com Received: from Pandionhalietius@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.57.15810e15 (1320) for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:13:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <57.15810e15.2b22973c@aol.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:13:48 EST Subject: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_57.15810e15.2b22973c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_57.15810e15.2b22973c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have been trying to figure by going over old literature, what exactly is the case number for the older LIGHTER tan/brown camera (body w/lens) case that brings the big bucks? Anyone know? Thanks in advance John --part1_57.15810e15.2b22973c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have been trying to figure by going over old literature, what exactly is the case number for the older LIGHTER tan/brown camera (body w/lens) case that brings the big bucks? 
Anyone  know?
Thanks in advance
John --part1_57.15810e15.2b22973c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12258 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 01:27:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 01:27:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 17:27:53 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17748 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:27:50 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA53106 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:27:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021206172724.027b8250@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 17:28:18 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 In-Reply-To: <20021206185425.78857.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021206012947.10330.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:54 AM 12/6/2002 -0800, AG Schnozz wrote: >I figured it out. The bad bokeh is not the fault of the lens. >The camera had a 2-x series focus screen installed. > >Install a 1-4 in the camera and try again. Guaranteed to make >the final print much better. That F1.2 lens will be just fine. > Huh? Are you saying the picture is slightly out of focus or something because of the use of the 1-4 screen? Otherwise, how could a focusing screen makes a difference in the bokeh? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12899 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 02:19:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 02:19:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 18:19:52 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound02.telus.net [199.185.220.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17779 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:19:50 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021207021604.XYR9233.priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:16:04 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021206191515.04046120@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 19:16:03 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021206172724.027b8250@192.168.100.11> References: <20021206185425.78857.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> <20021206012947.10330.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 05:28 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, Richard F. Man (in reply to AG-Schnozz) wrote: >At 10:54 AM 12/6/2002 -0800, AG Schnozz wrote: >>I figured it out. The bad bokeh is not the fault of the lens. >>The camera had a 2-x series focus screen installed. >> >>Install a 1-4 in the camera and try again. Guaranteed to make >>the final print much better. That F1.2 lens will be just fine. > >Huh? Are you saying the picture is slightly out of focus or something because of the use of the 1-4 screen? Otherwise, how could a focusing screen makes a difference in the bokeh? I do believe he's pulling your(our) leg(s), Richard. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13218 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 02:27:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 02:27:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 18:27:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17793 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:27:00 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-131.datasync.com [209.205.138.139]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gB72QwI05395 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:26:58 -0600 Message-ID: <004e01c29d98$bfcd7c60$8b8acdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <20021206220104.MQYC4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:31:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 > In <01e701c29d44$42f848e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net>, on 12/07/02 > at 12:25 AM, "C.H.Ling" said: ... > So far as the two photos are concerned, I left them both on screen and > switched back and forth between them to view the differences. Perhaps it > is because the Web doesn't allow fine enough discriminations, but I can > say that there is *no* discernible difference between them in sharpness > *or* in bokeh to my eye. ... Make sure your browser isn't set to scale graphics to the window (newer IEs have that as default), so you can get the actual pixels. It's really obvious on my system. The 50 has what's called "bright-ring bokeh", in which an out-of- focus point is rendered as a dim disk with a much brighter edge, similar to the donuts of a mirror lens. This causes lines to be doubled and gives a real hashed-up look to backgrounds. It's often due to the rays from the outer zone of a lens, so it can be reduced by stopping down. The 35-70 might do the same thing if it could open up past 3.6! Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13647 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 02:47:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 02:47:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 18:47:28 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17815 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:47:25 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021207023446.TBCG4992.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 21:34:46 -0500 Message-ID: <001001c29d98$f95e6ca0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <20021206012947.10330.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <5.2.0.9.0.20021206172724.027b8250@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:33:05 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Fri, 6 Dec 2002 21:34:46 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Friday, 06 December, 2002 09:28 PM Subject: Re: [OM] shooting at f1.2 or f1.0 > At 10:54 AM 12/6/2002 -0800, AG Schnozz wrote: > >I figured it out. The bad bokeh is not the fault of the lens. > >The camera had a 2-x series focus screen installed. > > > >Install a 1-4 in the camera and try again. Guaranteed to make > >the final print much better. That F1.2 lens will be just fine. > > > > Huh? Are you saying the picture is slightly out of focus or something > because of the use of the 1-4 screen? Otherwise, how could a focusing > screen makes a difference in the bokeh? I think he was pulling your leg ! jh > > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14003 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 03:01:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 03:01:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 19:01:15 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17823 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:01:11 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.116.254]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021207025655.KQQE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:56:55 -0600 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 21:55:27 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <004e01c29d98$bfcd7c60$8b8acdd1@datasync.com> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.116.254] at Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:56:55 -0600 Message-Id: <20021207025655.KQQE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <004e01c29d98$bfcd7c60$8b8acdd1@datasync.com>, on 12/06/02 at 08:31 PM, "Paul D. Farrar" said: >Make sure your browser isn't set to scale graphics to the window (newer >IEs have that as default), so you can get the actual pixels. It's >really obvious on my system. Do you mean the option for "Enable automatic picture resizing"? It's not checked in my system. If not, where else might I find it? [IE 6] ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14305 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 03:09:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 03:09:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 19:09:23 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp21.singnet.com.sg (smtp21.singnet.com.sg [165.21.101.201]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17842 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:09:19 -0800 Received: from t1m3b5 (bb-203-125-18-239.singnet.com.sg [203.125.18.239]) by smtp21.singnet.com.sg (8.12.5/8.12.6) with SMTP id gB739CeT023411 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:09:13 +0800 Message-ID: <017201c29d9d$d66eb100$ef127dcb@t1m3b5> From: "TMLee" To: References: <01C29D46.D97796C0@ZIPPY> Subject: Re: [OM] Photo of the week is an OM shot Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:07:54 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Be warned folks - that's what you look like if you sell all your OM equipment > > Chris > Malvern ....and buy into the Leica system ?? Peace TMLee < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15065 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 04:20:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 04:20:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 20:20:59 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17884 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:20:53 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.73] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A615185024E; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:16:21 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021206224951.053873f0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:19:58 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? In-Reply-To: <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> References: <200209280150.g8S1oPe22114@central.caverock.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 17:27 12/6/02, Cy in the UK wrote: >----- Original Message ----- > >Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 21:54:24 +1300 > >From: "Brian Swale" > >Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? > > >I know the question wasn't directed to me, but I am a strong supporter of > >this lens. As am I. >One disappointing aspect of the 35-105mm zoom is that it is the lens with >the most horriblest (**) aperture ring of any Zuiko. I got my mint sample >via Ebay, but prior to that I examined two others in a shop, and all three >had this horrible aperture ring. It feels as though the aperture ring is >full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. As all three samples >exhibited this characteristic, I surmise that this is normal for the >35-105mm Zuiko. It must have something to do with being in the UK :-) Mine has very positive detents, perhaps a little more than necessary considering how closely they are spaced, but it certainly doesn't feel full of grit and turns smoothly. This isn't the only Zuiko I've handled that has aperture detents a bit more positive than I would like, but it's a minor nit and affects feel, not operation. The focus/zoom ring is exceptionally smooth with a nice drag resistance that gives it a very positive feel. Work the ring on a current Wunderbrick 28-80mm plasic barreled lens some time. The difference between the two is dramatic. My sole design complaint is the close-up helical ring being too close to the lens mounting flange. The lens mount release button is set down between it and the lens mount. It is more difficult to fully depress the release button when dismounting the lens compared to all the other Zuiko's I've handled. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15461 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 04:40:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 04:40:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 20:40:44 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17900 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:40:42 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.73] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id AABE2C6D011C; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:36:14 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021206233046.053888e0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:39:48 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 In-Reply-To: <004e01c29d98$bfcd7c60$8b8acdd1@datasync.com> References: <20021206220104.MQYC4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was wondering something similar. The background of the photo made using the 35-70 looks as if it isn't nearly out of focus as the background from the one made using the 50mm. It would be interesting to see how the 35-70/3.6 renders a more distant background that would be as out of focus as the one made using the 50/1.2, and a fourth photo from the 50/1.2 with closer background that isn't as out of focus to match the one made using the 35-70. -- John At 21:31 12/6/02, Paul D. Farrar wrote: >Make sure your browser isn't set to scale graphics to the window (newer >IEs have that as default), so you can get the actual pixels. It's really >obvious on my system. The 50 has what's called "bright-ring bokeh", in >which an out-of-focus point is rendered as a dim disk with a much brighter >edge, similar to the donuts of a mirror lens. This causes lines to be >doubled and gives a real hashed-up look to backgrounds. It's often due to >the rays from the outer zone of a lens, so it can be reduced by stopping >down. The 35-70 might do the same thing if it could open up past 3.6! > >Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15833 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 04:59:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 04:59:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 20:59:27 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17924 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:59:25 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.73] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id AF21B00014E; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:54:57 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021206234904.05388320@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:58:30 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: <010e01c29d3b$ed85dec0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:27 12/6/02, John Hudson wrote: >If Oskar Barnack's light box acquired its reputation by accident there are >and have been a lot of confused people out there, Robert Capa and >Cartier-Bresson among them!. > >jh Correction: Robert Capa's German RF was a Zeiss Ikon Contax II made in the 1930's. He carried it and a Rollei TLR during the D-Day invasion at Normandy, and used them both (somewhat ironic that both his cameras were German). The ZI Contax II was one of the two RF's around his neck when he was killed by a land mine in the early 1950's. The other was a Nikon S?? made during the early 1950's. Very similar to the Zeiss Ikon Contax in appearance, lens mount and operation except the Nikon has a horizontal cloth shutter (the ZI Contax II, III, IIa and IIIa all have vertical metal shutters). -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16854 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 06:29:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 06:29:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 22:29:13 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA18013 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:29:10 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <200212070628010520026vmve>; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:28:01 +0000 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 22:26:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: [OM] Interesting bokeh From: "R. Jackson" To: OM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you can overlook the strange scanning artifacts from the one-hour photo grocery store photo disc, I thought this shot displayed some interesting bokeh. I tried scanning it myself on my flatbed, but everything seems to be coming out almost black anymore for some reason. Anyway...my friend Brandon taken yesterday. OM-4T, Zuiko 28mm f2.8 wide open at 1/250. The film was Kodak Portra 160. http://home.attbi.com/~jackson.robert.r/brandon01.jpg -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17617 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 07:37:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 07:37:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 23:37:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18264 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:37:52 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.61] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6Q004LENSASS@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:36:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:37:21 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Re: What's your standard setup? In-reply-to: <001a01c29d76$b9fb6f80$2cdcfea9@Inwin> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/6/02 2:27 PM, CyberSimian at CyberSimian@BTinternet.com wrote: > One disappointing aspect of the 35-105mm zoom is that it is the lens with > the most horriblest (**) aperture ring of any Zuiko. I got my mint sample > via Ebay, but prior to that I examined two others in a shop, and all three > had this horrible aperture ring. It feels as though the aperture ring is > full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. As all three samples > exhibited this characteristic, I surmise that this is normal for the > 35-105mm Zuiko. > > -- from Cy in the UK Cy -- I've adventured inside a few Zuikos, and a little (stress on *little*) light, stable grease can improve the feel of the aperture ring and focusing ring on lenses where the original grease has dried out and/or picked up grit and dust from years of usage. This would best be addressed in your mint lens by sending it to a skilled professional repair person (I can think of two right off the bat...) If you feel adventurous, don't start with a zoom lens, practice on some 50/1.8's until you understand how the aperture ring mechanism works. A bit of dampening grease on the right surfaces, and immaculate cleanliness everywhere will result in a smooth aperture ring feel. My 35-105's all have smooth aperture rings... and I've not messed in any of them. -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18011 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 07:58:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 07:58:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 06 23:58:24 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18276 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:58:18 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 16:36:07 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF1A97C.7060502@achtung.com> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:55:40 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? References: <200212061823.KAA17239@fw.sls.bc.ca> In-Reply-To: <200212061823.KAA17239@fw.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I considered a Bronica, and did serious research on it; best bang for the buck. The lenses hold their own against the Hassys, but the one thing I will have to admit, the Hassys give good color balance, more so then te Mamiyas and Bronicas. But in terms of sharpness, I couldn't tell the difference. My friend's got a Hassy 500CM with a 80mm lens, and a 220 back and that's it. (All he can afford, sounds about right huh?) But it takes stunning pictures, but his pics are good in general, and so once again, I maintain that the equipment is a secondary to the photographer. Do you have a SERIOUSLY STURDY tripod?? If not, I can guarantee that Tripod + Bronica will be sharper then Hand + Hassy no contest. If you don't have a good tripod, buy the Bronica and a tripod, that then becomes a no-brainer... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18299 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 08:02:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 08:02:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 00:02:04 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18283 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:01:57 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 16:41:23 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF1AAB8.2000100@achtung.com> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 16:00:56 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> <3DF0CC53.8030006@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <3DF0CC53.8030006@comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ha ha! My girlfriend was telling me the story about how last time she went to visit her uncle, he had all the cameras on display on his shelf (again, he's a "see I have the most expensive camera on the block" first, before he is a photographer...) and so she commented on how many cameras he's got. His wife told my gf "well, why don't you ask him for one? Maybe he will give you one..." His face turned sour, as she picked up the Leica M3 and said, oh, the silver one's kind of cool. Needless to say, he'd sell his wife first before giving my gf an M3. I'm not annoyed at the Leica cult, I'm annoyed at the fact he preaches "Buy this camera and all your photographic troubles will go away." It just so happens that he has attached it to the Leica name. I have a Minolta friend of the same mind set... That's the annoying part. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18606 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 08:08:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 08:08:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 00:08:07 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18296 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:08:03 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021207080654053002l1nqe>; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 08:06:54 +0000 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:04:53 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DF1AAB8.2000100@achtung.com> Message-Id: <9162ECA3-09BA-11D7-B8BD-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I had a college art teacher who told us the first day of class, "Art is problem-solving. If you run out of problems to solve, you can probably stop trying to create art." If some wonder-gadget made all my problems go away I wonder if I'd have any need to press the shutter again? ;-) -Rob (whose oil paintings are even worse than his photographs, but hey...) On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 12:00 AM, Albert wrote: > "Buy this camera and all your photographic troubles will go away." It > just so happens that he has attached it to the Leica name. I have a > Minolta friend of the same mind set... That's the annoying part. > > Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19399 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 09:24:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 09:24:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 01:24:03 2002 -0800 Received: from shockwave.systems.pipex.net (shockwave.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.9]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18332 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 01:24:02 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by shockwave.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id B6AF4160010AC for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:23:54 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Is it me, or is this just a rediculous price .... Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:23:52 -0000 Message-ID: <000401c29dd2$5be19a80$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi guys, Was trawling the bay the other day and came across this. Is this insane ?! An anti-fang ? http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1941455152&rd=1 Oh, and thanks to everyone who gave advice on my 2 posts a couple of days ago. Decided against the reversed Zuiko attached to the slip-on filter ring of a plastic digital camera for the very good reasons given to me here. No real advantages, and a major strength issue ! Thanks a lot for the help. Regards the developers issue, I'm still considering that one. A push into more B&W would be fun, and I would like to shoot more slides if I had easier ways to view them (see, I'm talking myself into that scanner already !). I have even been considering upgrading from B&W darkroom stuff to colour darkroom stuff, but have been warned that it is a LOT more tricky to get right, and I consider B&W developing to be quite time-consuming as it is. Oh well, it'll all sort itself out in the end ! Regards, Jon < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19754 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 09:39:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 09:39:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 01:39:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.175]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18340 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 01:39:03 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax19-040.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.170.40]) by mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB79cxC27034 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 20:39:00 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 20:38:45 +1100 Message-ID: <001a01c29dd4$738a5b70$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <3DF1A97C.7060502@achtung.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > I considered a Bronica, and did serious research on it; best bang for > the buck. The lenses hold their own against the Hassys, but the one > thing I will have to admit, the Hassys give good color > balance, more so > then te Mamiyas and Bronicas. But in terms of sharpness, I couldn't Never heard that before. It's probably largely irrelevant too, considering the variation in film/processing/scanning. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20559 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 10:57:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 10:57:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 02:57:48 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA18395 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 02:57:47 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE2E15B298 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:56:57 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: Message from Albert of "Sat, 07 Dec 2002 16:00:56 +0800." <3DF1AAB8.2000100@achtung.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 21:56:57 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021207105657.BE2E15B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <3DF1AAB8.2000100@achtung.com>, Albert writes: >"Buy this camera and all your photographic troubles will go away." It >just so happens that he has attached it to the Leica name. I have a >Minolta friend of the same mind set... That's the annoying part. Yeah. When we all know that only OM automagically turns everyone into world's greatest photog! Saso Scraping wallpaper all day long makes Jack a dull boy. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21369 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 11:19:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 11:19:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 03:19:57 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18431 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 03:19:56 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021207110730.TCQN4718.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:07:30 -0500 Message-ID: <006801c29ddf$acb053e0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021205235425.0275cda0@192.168.100.11> <3DF05D61.7090504@achtung.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20021206234904.05388320@mail.spitfire.net> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:59:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:07:30 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "John A. Lind" To: Sent: Saturday, 07 December, 2002 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica > At 10:27 12/6/02, John Hudson wrote: > > >If Oskar Barnack's light box acquired its reputation by accident there are > >and have been a lot of confused people out there, Robert Capa and > >Cartier-Bresson among them!. > > > >jh > > Correction: > Robert Capa's German RF was a Zeiss Ikon Contax II made in the 1930's. He > carried it and a Rollei TLR during the D-Day invasion at Normandy, and used > them both (somewhat ironic that both his cameras were German). The ZI > Contax II was one of the two RF's around his neck when he was killed by a > land mine in the early 1950's. The other was a Nikon S?? made during the > early 1950's. Very similar to the Zeiss Ikon Contax in appearance, lens > mount and operation except the Nikon has a horizontal cloth shutter (the ZI > Contax II, III, IIa and IIIa all have vertical metal shutters). > > -- John What did Capa use for his famous shot "Death in Action" taken in the Spanish Civil War? jh > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21702 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 11:27:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 11:27:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 03:27:09 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18443 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 03:27:08 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021207111430.PZWQ4992.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:14:30 -0500 Message-ID: <006f01c29de0$ac353b00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 07:06:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:14:29 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: Sent: Saturday, 07 December, 2002 06:59 AM Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John A. Lind" > To: > Sent: Saturday, 07 December, 2002 12:58 AM > Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica > > > > At 10:27 12/6/02, John Hudson wrote: > > > > >If Oskar Barnack's light box acquired its reputation by accident there > are > > >and have been a lot of confused people out there, Robert Capa and > > >Cartier-Bresson among them!. > > > > > >jh > > > > Correction: > > Robert Capa's German RF was a Zeiss Ikon Contax II made in the 1930's. He > > carried it and a Rollei TLR during the D-Day invasion at Normandy, and > used > > them both (somewhat ironic that both his cameras were German). The ZI > > Contax II was one of the two RF's around his neck when he was killed by a > > land mine in the early 1950's. The other was a Nikon S?? made during the > > early 1950's. Very similar to the Zeiss Ikon Contax in appearance, lens > > mount and operation except the Nikon has a horizontal cloth shutter (the > ZI > > Contax II, III, IIa and IIIa all have vertical metal shutters). > > > > -- John > > > What did Capa use for his famous shot "Death in Action" taken in the Spanish > Civil War? Sorry for the misquote ... should be "muerte de un miliciano" [death of a loyalist soldier] jh > > jh > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22119 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 11:52:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 11:52:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 03:52:44 2002 -0800 Received: from firebird.planetinternet.be (brussels-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.34.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18451 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 03:52:43 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-190-128.adsl.pi.be [212.239.190.128]) by firebird.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7541FD3649 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:52:11 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:52:11 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001901c29d3a$4ecc96d0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 06-12-2002 16:15 schreef Robert Gries op rgg@gnrarch.com: > Just to clarify a few things, I wanted to review the intentions of the > exchanges. > > Required is an 8x10 print of photographic quality. This means that ink > jet prints are accepted (though not preferred) but must be of archival > quality. Also, a description of your working method, equipment, film, > subject, etc. should accompany the photograph. > That is 8*10 inches? is that about A4 size (210mm*297mm)? I was brought up in the Metric system and always get confused converting inches to metric... Iwert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23226 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 13:10:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 13:10:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 05:10:50 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.189]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18516 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 05:10:49 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.162] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18KejH-0005ac-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 14:10:47 +0100 Received: from [80.130.167.192] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18KejH-00018u-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 14:10:47 +0100 Message-ID: <3DF1F36C.3060007@doro-foto.de> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 14:11:08 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca iwert schrieb: > That is 8*10 inches? is that about A4 size (210mm*297mm)? I was brought up > in the Metric system and always get confused converting inches to metric... 1 inch = 2,54 cm cheers :Doro < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23520 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 13:16:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 13:16:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 05:16:19 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp001.nwlink.com (smtp001.nwlink.com [209.20.130.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18532 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 05:16:18 -0800 Received: from miracler64ly0o (ip240.focal.du.nwlink.com [209.20.135.240] (may be forged)) by smtp001.nwlink.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gB7DGGhI031201 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 05:16:16 -0800 Message-ID: <047c01c29df2$d2e7faa0$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Subject: [OM] "most horriblest" aperture ring Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 05:16:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Some years back, when I expanded my previously Zuiko-only collection with several Sigma lenses, I was surprised at just how awful the aperture rings were. They were stiff, rough, and hard to set exactly. I'd owned Vitovars for my Nikon that weren't anywhere nearly as bad. I complained to the president of Sigma. He replied, in shaky English, that such poor quality was not acceptable, that it was a blot on Sigma's escutcheon, and that they would soon re-engineer the aperture rings to be of higher quality. Naturally, nothing ever happened. I shipped off the three lenses to Sigma USA, and they loosened the rings. They're not quite so bad, but they're still very sub-par. For a country which claims to have such a refined aesthetic sense it's hard to understand how a company that is arguably their top independent lens maker doesn't seem to care. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24305 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 14:31:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:31:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 06:31:01 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA18601 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:30:59 -0800 Received: (qmail 19490 invoked by uid 706); 7 Dec 2002 14:29:56 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:29:54 -0000 Message-ID: <007c01c29dfd$db929a60$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021206220104.MQYC4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021206233046.053888e0@mail.spitfire.net> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 22:35:13 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Seems that many people want to defense for the 50/1.2, I will left it to someone who own both 50/1.4 and 50/1.2 to make some side to side comparison as I have sold the 1.2 two years ago. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "John A. Lind" > I was wondering something similar. The background of the photo made using > the 35-70 looks as if it isn't nearly out of focus as the background from > the one made using the 50mm. It would be interesting to see how the > 35-70/3.6 renders a more distant background that would be as out of focus > as the one made using the 50/1.2, and a fourth photo from the 50/1.2 with > closer background that isn't as out of focus to match the one made using > the 35-70. > > -- John > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24593 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 14:36:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:36:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 06:36:13 2002 -0800 Received: from firebird.planetinternet.be (brussels-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.34.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA18613 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:36:11 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-190-128.adsl.pi.be [212.239.190.128]) by firebird.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E23D39D5 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:35:40 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:35:21 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3DF1F36C.3060007@doro-foto.de> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > iwert schrieb: > >> That is 8*10 inches? is that about A4 size (210mm*297mm)? I was brought up >> in the Metric system and always get confused converting inches to metric... > > 1 inch = 2,54 cm > > cheers > :Doro > Also 20,32 cm * 25,40 cm... iwert in metric system again. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24846 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 14:36:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:36:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 06:36:33 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA18617 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:36:31 -0800 Received: (qmail 24419 invoked by uid 706); 7 Dec 2002 14:35:29 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:35:27 -0000 Message-ID: <00bc01c29dfe$a1efda60$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 22:40:46 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Can't agree on the wide open performance of Leica is better, I remember I have seen pop photo test report on Leica 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and 75/1.4 all perform poor than other SLR lenses at wide open and one stop down, the field curvature is higher than normal. Ok, stopping down more they are the best performers. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" > > As much as I love the Zuikos, I bet the Leica will win on the following > situations: > - Low shutter speeds. This would show up even on 4x6 prints, I bet > - Low light wide open shots. The Leicas are optimized for the wide apertures > - quiet shutter. Apparently, Tiger Woods' caddies just chuck an amateur > photog's gear down to a lake for making that clicking sound at the wrong > moment. A leica or any RF really, would be a big plus here. > - that "decisive" moment thing. With not much experience w/ using a RF, I > don't really know how that works. Certainly, I don't see much evidence of > this style of photography from the *amateurs* pics on the webs. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25102 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 14:38:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:38:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 06:38:38 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA18622 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:38:37 -0800 From: GFaulk7376@aol.com Received: from GFaulk7376@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.19d.d2c1f2d (3866) for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:36:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <19d.d2c1f2d.2b23617a@aol.com> Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:36:42 EST Subject: Re: [OM] "most horriblest" aperture ring To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 121 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/7/02 7:14:20 AM Central Standard Time, williams@nwlink.com writes: > Some years back, when I expanded my previously Zuiko-only collection with > several Sigma lenses, I was surprised at just how awful the aperture rings > were. They were stiff, rough, and hard to set exactly. I'd owned Vitovars > for my Nikon that weren't anywhere nearly as bad. I've had the same experience with Sigma lenses. I've got the 14mm and the 400mm Sigma's and while both lenses perform well and have proven to be reliable, the aperture rings are stiff and very hard to set. The most bestest aperture ring I've got is an old 135mm Vivitar Series 1 lens. The ring moves with uncanny smoothness and precision. The overall build quality of this lens is superb. No, I'm not getting ready to sell it either. The Vivitar takes nice pictures, too. Gary Faulkenberry with his once per year contribution to the list. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25124 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 14:38:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:38:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 06:38:41 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA18623 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:38:37 -0800 Received: (qmail 26414 invoked by uid 706); 7 Dec 2002 14:38:35 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 14:38:29 -0000 Message-ID: <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 22:43:49 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" > > What I would like to do is (hehehe) take some portrait shots outdoors of > his wife with my Tokina 90mm (sharpest in my bag, sharper then my > Zuiko's) with something like Reala, and let HIM develop it... And have > his wife comment on it... My Tokina is very sharp, even wide open. > Drop that background out, (it has great bokeh too) and pick out her > zits in the picture... I think you didn't have the 90/2, I have bought a mint (yes, true mint) Tokina 90/2.5 some months ago just for testing. Side by side compare with the 90/2 at F5.6, the Zuiko just perform better at both close and distance objects. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26138 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 15:42:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 15:42:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 07:42:33 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA18676 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 07:42:31 -0800 Received: (cpmta 1303 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 07:41:30 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 07:41:30 -0800 X-Sent: 7 Dec 2002 15:41:30 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 10:41:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] Cheap outfit in Germany Message-ID: <3DF1D057.19797.1DED0FF@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1943961588 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26475 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 15:51:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 15:51:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 07:51:51 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18684 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 07:51:49 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-68-1-17.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.68.1.17]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB7FpGDL082718 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:51:16 -0500 Message-ID: <001801c29e04$46b94540$11014441@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021207105754.20615.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Broni-blad Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:21:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "I considered a Bronica, and did serious research on it; best bang for the buck. " Probably, but my repairman, who does work on both, considers Bronicas to be much less reliable, and has mmany scare stories to back it up. "The lenses hold their own against the Hassys, but the one thing I will have to admit, the Hassys give good color balance, more so then te Mamiyas and Bronicas. But in terms of sharpness, I couldn't tell the difference." Probably accurate. I think that Bronica lenses tend to a noticably cool rendition, where the zeiss lenses tend to a warmer look. Certainly Bronica lenses are sharp. "My friend's got a Hassy 500CM with a 80mm lens, and a 220 back and that's it. (All he can afford, sounds about right huh?) But it takes stunning pictures, but his pics are good in general, and so once again, I maintain that the equipment is a secondary to the photographer." Absolutely correct. "Do you have a SERIOUSLY STURDY tripod?? If not, I can guarantee that Tripod + Bronica will be sharper then Hand + Hassy no contest. If you don't have a good tripod, buy the Bronica and a tripod, that then becomes a no-brainer... Albert" That's true, of course, but that statement is equally correct in the reverse (one could even say that the OM2000 with the crappy Cosina zoom is a better camera on a tripod than an OM4T with a 50/1.8 MIJ handheld, so you shouldn't buy the OM4 unless you are going to use it on a tripod). Many, many professional shooters, including myself, shoot handheld frequently, with results noticably better than 35. Any camera is sharper on a tripod, from 35 to 4x5. That's no reason to make a choice. I would suggest that a used 'blad will be a better long term imvestment that a used Bronica, as they are very repairable. On the other hand, a used Bronica, at a very good price, will get plenty of good pictures. I will say, as someone that has an excess 'blad for sale, that the prices of used Hasselblad equipment have been declining since 9/11(don't know if it's the economy or the tons of wedding shooters that are going digital). I'm hoping that they have flattened, as it looks like they have. If one is interested in a Hasselblad, this is a very good time to buy. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26955 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 16:15:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 16:15:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 08:15:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA18744 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 08:15:57 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-308.datasync.com [209.205.139.60]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gB7GFtr04763 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:15:55 -0600 Message-ID: <003001c29e0c$8d89a700$3c8bcdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <20021207025655.KQQE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:19:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 > In <004e01c29d98$bfcd7c60$8b8acdd1@datasync.com>, on 12/06/02 > at 08:31 PM, "Paul D. Farrar" said: > > >Make sure your browser isn't set to scale graphics to the window (newer > >IEs have that as default), so you can get the actual pixels. It's > >really obvious on my system. > > Do you mean the option for "Enable automatic picture resizing"? It's not > checked in my system. If not, where else might I find it? [IE 6] ... That's what was thinking of. It really makes a mess of some graphics. I'm not sure if there's something else. On my browser, if you look at the images of out-of-focus light points in 5070.jpg, like on the far left, they clearly show as dim discs with a bright edge. Branches are almost split into double images, and leaves have a streaky look. On 3570.jpg, the distant light points, such as from the water on the rocks, are more like blobs of light, and the background looks blurred, rather than streaky. Paul Farrar < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27474 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 16:53:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 16:53:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 08:53:27 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA18761 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 08:53:14 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021207164032.NTRU4594.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:40:32 -0500 Message-ID: <003e01c29e0f$74501aa0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <20021207105754.20615.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <001801c29e04$46b94540$11014441@swbell.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Broni-blad Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:41:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:40:32 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Pearce" To: Sent: Saturday, 07 December, 2002 11:21 AM Subject: [OM] Broni-blad > "I considered a Bronica, and did serious research on it; best bang for > the buck. " > Probably, but my repairman, who does work on both, considers Bronicas to be > much less reliable, and has mmany scare stories to back it up. What ........... buy a Tamron! I guess your repairman knows a thing or two :-)) jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27757 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 16:59:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 16:59:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 08:59:10 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA18765 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 08:58:47 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh73.interisland.net [12.17.134.73]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB7GtNs01190 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 08:55:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF228DC.FD81207A@interisland.net> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 08:59:08 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id IAA18765 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I have been trying to figure by going over old literature, what exactly= is > the case number for the older LIGHTER tan/brown camera (body w/lens) ca= se > that brings the big bucks? > Anyone know? > Thanks in advance > John > John, No numbers on the case or the box. Box only says, "Hard Case", that's all. I have no idea when this case was offered new. When I got a new case I had the option of black hard case and semi hard with pebble grain. Both with the bottom screw mount. I opted for the semi hard which is still on my OM1. The last and only time I bought a new case was in 1976 :>) Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28203 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 17:24:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 17:24:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 09:24:02 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18778 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:23:59 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 02:03:39 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 01:21:26 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> In-Reply-To: <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca While that might be true for your set of lenses, I happen to believe that it depends sometimes on which "batch" you get. The Tokina 90mmf2.5 is a serious performer, I put it up against everything, and it more then held it's own. I got this from the OM list archives... Take it for what it's worth.. Albert. At macro resolution (1:2) Olympus 90mm f2 Tokina 90mm f2.5 l/mm /(contrast% 30 l/mm) l/mm(contrast) f center corner f center corner 2 40/(30) 36/(25) 2.8 45/(47) 36/(30) 2.5 64/(55) 57/(49) 4 45/(69) 36/(43) 4 72/(67) 64/(54) 5.6 45/(68) 40/(45) 5.6 81/(68) 72/(59) 8 51/(60) 40/(50) 8 81/(62) 72/(60) 11 45/(54) 40/(42) 11 64/(62) 57/(55) 16 40/(48) 36/(40) 16 51/(52) 40/(52) 22 40/(33) 36/(27) 22 45/(45) 32/(42) 32 - - 32 36/(31) 29/(24) >I think you didn't have the 90/2, I have bought a mint (yes, true mint) >Tokina 90/2.5 some months ago just for testing. Side by side compare with >the 90/2 at F5.6, the Zuiko just perform better at both close and distance >objects. > >C.H.Ling > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28492 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 17:29:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 17:29:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 09:29:34 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18781 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:29:31 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 02:10:43 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF22FB9.50807@achtung.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 01:28:25 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Broni-blad References: <20021207105754.20615.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <001801c29e04$46b94540$11014441@swbell.net> In-Reply-To: <001801c29e04$46b94540$11014441@swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have to confess something, when I first took up photography as a hobby, I never owned a tripod. I shot everything, and thought it was fine. On a trip through Oregon with my friend, he brought his "GEAR" the works, and we loaded it up in the car. I bought an extra attachment plate, so I could use his tripod. Let me tell you, that was the first time I understood the benefits of a tripod. The waterfall shots, amazing. I needed to shoot it at 1/8th to give it that nice "Moss" effect, and without a tripod, not way to get that shot. Everything on a tripod is awesome. I'm not saying a Hassy's a bad camera, I'd love to own one if I could afford one; but I'm saying, sometimes, the image quality is not 100% dependent on the camera + lens only, but the photographer and tripod will play a pivotal roll. I recall giving some )&*(#%)*(&@ about how the Zuiko 28mm/f2.8 was a horrible performer, only to find that my UV filter was tweaked and a Heliopan filter solved that problem. The best glass in the world with a bad filter in front is as... bad as the filter. That's all. I will make a comment about the Hassey as far as reliability; the way my friend treats it, I have to believe Hassy's will generally survive the most severe conditions; I don't quite have that confidence level in Bronica's, but then again, you know if you are going to Antartica or not... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28812 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 17:35:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 17:35:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 09:35:33 2002 -0800 Received: from d12lmsgate-4.de.ibm.com (d12lmsgate-4.de.ibm.com [194.196.100.237]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18789 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:35:30 -0800 Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate-4.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gB7HXecX028726 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:33:41 +0100 Received: from d14ml005.italy.ibm.com (d14ml005.italy.ibm.com [9.87.60.141]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/NCO/VER6.4) with ESMTP id gB7HXeL6032026 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:33:40 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] WE 2002 - clarification To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Ralf Loi" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:32:48 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D14ML005/14/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 07/12/2002 18:33:39 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca << That is 8*10 inches? is that about A4 size (210mm*297mm)? I was brought up in the Metric system and always get confused converting inches to metric... >> For us in Europe that means a 20x25 or a 20x30 cm print. Ralf Loi < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29661 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 19:01:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 19:01:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 11:01:09 2002 -0800 Received: from web13709.mail.yahoo.com (web13709.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.251]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA18836 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:01:07 -0800 Message-ID: <20021207190053.44415.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.51.139.102] by web13709.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 11:00:53 PST Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:00:53 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] Local OLY Sighting To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021207105754.20615.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Couldn't believe my eyes. At a school Christmas play last night I was watching the "professional photographer" working. Myself, I had my trusty OM-2S with 35/2.8 and 100/2.8, no flash, just Delta 400 pushed to 800. Later, I ran into the guy doing all the photographing and pritner dropped my teeth. He was shooting with an OM-4. His setup was a little strange, though. It took me a minute to figure it out. He had the T32 velcroed to a flat metal plate mounted on the stroboframe. A while back, he had busted the foot off of the T32, so he stuck velcro on the bottom and made a matching plate that attached to the Stroboframe. He could easily and quickly pick the flash off of the frame and slap it back on pointing another direction. Great for bounce work. I talked with him briefly and found out that he does part-time "weekend warrier" work too. Cool. I was beginning to think that I was alone here in mid-Iowa. Anyway, one other thing of note: I looked around at all the other parents blasting away with yards of film. There were only a handful of digital cameras or even camcorders. The majority of cameras were SLRs. Some pretty nice ones too. Very few point-and-shoots. I almost felt like the poor cousin with my minimalistic setup--no flash even. It was refreshing to see, among my fellow parents, some semblence of film loyalty. Probably what it is, is that this is a private school and the tuition is high enough that most of us can't afford digital cameras and new computers. AG-soccerdad-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30964 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 21:21:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 21:21:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 13:21:14 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18909 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:21:12 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18KmNS-000NEW-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 16:20:46 -0500 Received: (qmail 20252 invoked by uid 89); 7 Dec 2002 21:20:58 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 21:20:58 -0000 Message-ID: <037301c29e36$8301a1a0$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: "Olympus List" Subject: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:20:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale before Christmas. Here's the list for now: Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for convenience. Zuiko 35 Shift Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose Zuiko 50/2 Macro Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) and pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. Happy holidays. Tom who has been a lurker recently. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31220 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 21:22:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 21:22:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 13:22:25 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA18913 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:22:23 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-27-72.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.27.72 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 21:21:36 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF2664B.3030205@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 13:21:15 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Is it me, or is this just a rediculous price .... References: <000401c29dd2$5be19a80$0800a8c0@reac.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Perfectly ridculous. That's one of the cheesy plastic cases, a definite Anti-Fang. Moose Jon Mitchell wrote: >Hi guys, > >Was trawling the bay the other day and came across this. Is this insane ?! >An anti-fang ? > >http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1941455152&rd=1 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31761 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 22:00:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 22:00:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 14:00:18 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18945 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:00:16 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (c-24-62-220-232.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.62.220.232]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002120721590700300cou04e>; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:59:07 +0000 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:59:07 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: [OM] Gemini Meteor Shower From: owl_luvr To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1B9C8E7C-0A2F-11D7-88BA-000A278AC2BA@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The Geminid meteor shower will peak December 14. http://www.msnbc.com/news/844095.asp?0cv=CB20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32186 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 22:28:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 22:28:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 14:28:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18950 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:28:11 -0800 Received: from asv9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (asv9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.30]) by mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6R008WXSKFBI@mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 17:17:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from optonline.net (ool-18bec8cc.dyn.optonline.net [24.190.200.204]) by asv9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB7MHLG22249 for ; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 17:17:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 17:19:51 -0500 From: Larry Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3DF27407.75B3FD65@optonline.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I agree. I borrowed a zuiko 90mm (never would buy one at those prices), for the same testing idea. I found my Tokina 90mm performed substantially better at close, macro, and far distances. Larry Albert wrote: > While that might be true for your set of lenses, I happen to believe > that it depends sometimes on which "batch" you get. The Tokina 90mmf2.5 > is a serious performer, I put it up against everything, and it more then > held it's own. > > I got this from the OM list archives... Take it for what it's worth.. > > Albert. > > At macro resolution (1:2) > Olympus 90mm f2 Tokina 90mm f2.5 > l/mm /(contrast% 30 l/mm) l/mm(contrast) > f center corner f center corner > 2 40/(30) 36/(25) > 2.8 45/(47) 36/(30) 2.5 64/(55) 57/(49) > 4 45/(69) 36/(43) 4 72/(67) 64/(54) > 5.6 45/(68) 40/(45) 5.6 81/(68) 72/(59) > 8 51/(60) 40/(50) 8 81/(62) 72/(60) > 11 45/(54) 40/(42) 11 64/(62) 57/(55) > 16 40/(48) 36/(40) 16 51/(52) 40/(52) > 22 40/(33) 36/(27) 22 45/(45) 32/(42) > 32 - - 32 36/(31) 29/(24) > > >I think you didn't have the 90/2, I have bought a mint (yes, true mint) > >Tokina 90/2.5 some months ago just for testing. Side by side compare with > >the 90/2 at F5.6, the Zuiko just perform better at both close and distance > >objects. > > > >C.H.Ling > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32689 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 23:04:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 23:04:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 15:04:30 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18971 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:04:27 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA62937 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:03:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207150428.018f68b0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:04:55 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: <3DF27407.75B3FD65@optonline.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 05:19 PM 12/7/2002 -0500, Larry wrote: >I agree. I borrowed a zuiko 90mm (never would buy one at those prices), >for the >same testing idea. I found my Tokina 90mm performed substantially better at >close, macro, and far distances. >.. But how about in "medium" distance :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 662 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 23:26:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 23:26:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 15:26:43 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18982 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:26:40 -0800 Received: from user-2inis1q.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.112.58] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18KoKq-0004zg-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:26:12 -0800 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:48:21 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <004e01c29d98$bfcd7c60$8b8acdd1@datasync.com> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > The 35-70 might do the > same > thing if it could open up past 3.6! > > Paul > But it can't open up past 3.6 which means it is well designed to its parameters. And the whole point of exotic glass and design is to allow you to get a decent image at wider apertures. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 998 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 23:39:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 23:39:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 15:39:48 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18996 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:39:45 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA71501 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:38:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207153816.018f7ee0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:40:19 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] predecessor of the 40/2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As many of us know, Maitani-san is rather fond of the 40/2 - BTW, an OM-4T w/ the 40/2 is my standard setup. Anyway, on this page, you can see what I believe to the predecessor of the 40/2, a compact 50/2! Note the interview date: 1976! http://www.geocities.com/maitani_fan/om_interview_3.html // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1385 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 23:52:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 23:52:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 15:52:56 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19000 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:52:54 -0800 Received: from matt.starmatt.com (h00045ad18176.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.218.145.169]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2002120723514505100jefife>; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 23:51:45 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021207185058.04283c90@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: m4880960/mail.starmatt.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 18:52:12 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Matt BenDaniel Subject: RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a message from Gary Reese that he asked me to forward to the list... >Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 06:46:17 -0800 >From: Gary Reese >RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? > >Using my Olympus OM Zuiko lens test setup, I've looked at a selection of Bronica MC and PE >lenses (including zooms) for the Bronica ETRSi against a pre T* 120mm f/5.6 Macro and a pair >of 80mm f/2.8 Planars, one T* and one pre T*. I've also looked at the lenses for the Bronica >RF645. In general: >* the Planars stopped down are far superior to most Bronica ETR series lenses, with the 75mm >f/2.8 PE being the only stellar performer so far. I think the macro for the Bronica would >test well, though. >* the 120mm for the Hasselblad has fantastic resolution! and fine contrast, too. >* the Bronica RF645 lenses offer top notch performance vs. cost - I was most pleasantly >surpised and would say they are a significant step better than the ETRSi series lenses, >although resolution lags some against stopped down Hasselblad (Zeiss) lenses. The latter >are no great shakes wide open (may I burn in hell). Especially nice in the RF645 lenses is >no distortion. The Bronica 45mm is a top notch performer, for reasons stated in the final >paragraph. >* the Bronica zooms are good enough to leave the primes behind, if one can get by with >distortion, greatly increased bulk and some reduction of focusing snap (due to not so >stellar wide open performance). >* there is lots of variation in on film performance from older, well used Hasselblad >equipment. I've done the Planar tests on various bodies and backs and have had quite a few >unacceptable shoots of my test subject. I've needed adjustments to the height of the >focusing screen in a 500C/M and flattening of the flange side of film magazines. Buyer >beware - your gear should be checked out by an experienced Hasselblad repairman, which most >major cities should have slaving away in close quarters. This probably accounts for why I >often encounter poor wide open performance. > >Why this question was posted to an OM System mailing list I'm not sure. There are Photo.net >message boards for this sort of question. But to try and tie them together, I'll say this: >medium format SLR wide angle lenses, like any 35mm SLR wide angle, have to be retrofocus >designs. That seems to severely limit their edge performance, even in a 50mm Distagon (an >incomplete test). I'm not at all sure that the Bronica ETRSi wide angles (at wide open to >f/8) plus 2.3X larger film size offer me better edge performance than a Zuiko lens shot on >35mm, so long as I've rated it an A grade at the aperture you use. Popular Photography's >lens test on the Bronica 50mm MC (I think) showed severe fall off in performance from 2/3 >out to the corner. I concur, eben for the latter PE. But the flip side is that medium >format *rangefinder* cameras don't require retrofocus design wide angles. They have a big >advantage and show it in image performance. I don't hesitate to use my Fuji GW690II (90mm) >instead of a 4x5 with a 135mm lens when I don't want to fuss. > >Please, no requests for the test data. It's not typed up and too full of confounding >factors to be "prime time" material. Thus the conclusion are IMHO . . . > >Gary Reese < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1833 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 00:09:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 00:09:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 16:09:31 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19009 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:09:29 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.46.32194f89 (24895) for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:07:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <46.32194f89.2b23e740@aol.com> Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:07:28 EST Subject: [OM] Tamron SP 400mm f4 on the bay To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_46.32194f89.2b23e740_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_46.32194f89.2b23e740_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I recently acquired one of these Tamron "Big Glass" lenses and am quite pleased with it. If anyone out there in Zuiko land is interested in some long/fast glass this is one worth considering. ebay # 1943392198. Comes with the 1.4X teleconverter. I also have the Zuiko 400mm f6.3 which can be hand held, while the Tamron really calls out for a tripod. I have no interest in this auction & it might escape notice as it is listed in the Canon lens section. Bill Barber --part1_46.32194f89.2b23e740_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I recently acquired one of these Tamron "Big Glass" lenses and am quite pleased with it.  If anyone out there in Zuiko land is interested in some long/fast glass this is one worth considering. ebay # 1943392198.  Comes with the 1.4X teleconverter.  I also have the Zuiko 400mm f6.3 which can be hand held, while the Tamron really calls out for a tripod.  I have no interest in this auction & it might escape notice as it is listed in the Canon lens section.  Bill Barber  --part1_46.32194f89.2b23e740_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2896 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 01:57:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 01:57:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 17:57:44 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19098 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 17:57:41 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA04389 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 17:56:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207175448.01cc8650@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 17:58:13 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Does anyone know what slide film is RVP-511? I just scanned this slide I took over 10 years ago: Judging from the age, I am almost certain that this was taken with the Tamron 90/2.5. Now I almost wish I didn't sell it after I bought the Zuiko 90/2! The grain on the RVP-511 is amazing, it looks to be at least as good as Provia 100F, if not better! I may have shot some Kodachrome 64 at that time, I don't know. I went to kodak.com and fujifilm.com but a quick search didn't come up with anything. Neither does google. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3255 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 02:12:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 02:12:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 18:12:21 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA19107 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:12:11 -0800 Received: (qmail 19263 invoked by uid 706); 8 Dec 2002 02:10:59 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 02:10:59 -0000 Message-ID: <005301c29e5f$cd19d860$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207175448.01cc8650@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:16:20 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I checked my Fuji Velvia slide, it marked RVP only but I think RVP-511 is just the same may be earlier version. The appearance of grain depends on the scene, the worse one being people's face. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: "oly" Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 9:58 AM Subject: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 > Does anyone know what slide film is RVP-511? I just scanned this slide I > took over 10 years ago: > Judging from the > age, I am almost certain that this was taken with the Tamron 90/2.5. Now I > almost wish I didn't sell it after I bought the Zuiko 90/2! The grain on > the RVP-511 is amazing, it looks to be at least as good as Provia 100F, if > not better! I may have shot some Kodachrome 64 at that time, I don't know. > I went to kodak.com and fujifilm.com but a quick search didn't come up with > anything. Neither does google. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3626 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 02:25:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 02:25:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 18:25:16 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19121 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:24:54 -0800 Received: from M2W077.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.77]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:24:22 -0500 Message-ID: <176730-22002120822422650@M2W077.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:24:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Dec 2002 02:24:22.0686 (UTC) FILETIME=[EB9E3BE0:01C29E60] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The 50/1=2E4 Summilux is a 1963 design and is definitly only a so-so performer wide open=2E The 75/1=2E4 Summilux is from the 70's and it too = isn't fabulous wide open, but it makes very nice images, if you can stomach it's= razor-thin DOF wide open=2E OTOH, the latest, 35/1=2E4 Summilux ASPH is one of the best Leica lenses there are=2E I'd put it up against any 35mm lens in the world=2E The old= 35/1=2E4 Summilux was nice and had very good imaging characteristics, but = was not the equal of the current lens in the resolution/contrast department=2E= =20 The older, pre-ASPH 35/2 and 35/1=2E4 definitely had curved fields=2E=20 Actually, I like the look of the photos produced by the 35/2, as I have one=2E In fact, most people have a soft spot for that lens=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: MKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZID Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 22:40:46 +0800 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs=2E Leica Can't agree on the wide open performance of Leica is better, I remember I have seen pop photo test report on Leica 35/1=2E4, 50/1=2E4 and 75/1=2E4 a= ll perform poor than other SLR lenses at wide open and one stop down, the fie= ld curvature is higher than normal=2E Ok, stopping down more they are the bes= t performers=2E C=2EH=2ELing ----- Original Message ----- Wrom: REXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEM > > As much as I love the Zuikos, I bet the Leica will win on the following > situations: > - Low shutter speeds=2E This would show up even on 4x6 prints, I bet > - Low light wide open shots=2E The Leicas are optimized for the wide apertures > - quiet shutter=2E Apparently, Tiger Woods' caddies just chuck an amateu= r > photog's gear down to a lake for making that clicking sound at the wrong= > moment=2E A leica or any RF really, would be a big plus here=2E > - that "decisive" moment thing=2E With not much experience w/ using a RF= , I > don't really know how that works=2E Certainly, I don't see much evidence= of > this style of photography from the *amateurs* pics on the webs=2E > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4024 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 02:43:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 02:43:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 18:43:50 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA19141 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:43:43 -0800 Received: (qmail 4152 invoked by uid 706); 8 Dec 2002 02:42:10 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 02:42:09 -0000 Message-ID: <00c201c29e64$279b42c0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <176730-22002120822422650@M2W077.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:47:28 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: > OTOH, the latest, 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH is one of the best Leica lenses > there are. I'd put it up against any 35mm lens in the world. The old > 35/1.4 Summilux was nice and had very good imaging characteristics, but was > not the equal of the current lens in the resolution/contrast department. > Yes, I think the ASPH must be much better than the old one technically, but on the other hand I know some people prefer the old one. I agree resolution is not everything, other image characteristics are very important too. C.H.Ling > The older, pre-ASPH 35/2 and 35/1.4 definitely had curved fields. > Actually, I like the look of the photos produced by the 35/2, as I have > one. In fact, most people have a soft spot for that lens. > > Skip > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4339 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 02:50:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 02:50:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 18:50:09 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19147 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:50:02 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB82kPGQ018717 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:46:26 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF2B33A.DADC63A1@dslextreme.com> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 18:49:32 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <176730-22002120822422650@M2W077.mail2web.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's been said the Olympus 35 SP, made in 1970, with it's 42mm f/1.7 lens, is fully the equal of, or surpasses the performance of, the equivalent Leica's lens. Don't believe me? Check it out! Interesting, eh what? keith whaley "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > > The 50/1.4 Summilux is a 1963 design and is definitly only a so-so > performer wide open. The 75/1.4 Summilux is from the 70's and it too isn't > fabulous wide open, but it makes very nice images, if you can stomach it's > razor-thin DOF wide open. > > OTOH, the latest, 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH is one of the best Leica lenses > there are. I'd put it up against any 35mm lens in the world. The old > 35/1.4 Summilux was nice and had very good imaging characteristics, but was > not the equal of the current lens in the resolution/contrast department. > > The older, pre-ASPH 35/2 and 35/1.4 definitely had curved fields. > Actually, I like the look of the photos produced by the 35/2, as I have > one. In fact, most people have a soft spot for that lens. > > Skip > > Original Message: > ----------------- > Wrom: MKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZID > Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 22:40:46 +0800 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica > > Can't agree on the wide open performance of Leica is better, I remember I > have seen pop photo test report on Leica 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and 75/1.4 all > perform poor than other SLR lenses at wide open and one stop down, the field > curvature is higher than normal. Ok, stopping down more they are the best > performers. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > Wrom: REXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEM > > > > > As much as I love the Zuikos, I bet the Leica will win on the following > > situations: > > - Low shutter speeds. This would show up even on 4x6 prints, I bet > > - Low light wide open shots. The Leicas are optimized for the wide > > - apertures quiet shutter. > > - Apparently, Tiger Woods' caddies just chuck an amateur > > _ photog's gear down to a lake for making that clicking sound at the wrong > > _ moment. A leica or any RF really, would be a big plus here. > > - that "decisive" moment thing. With not much experience w/ using a RF, I > > _ don't really know how that works. Certainly, I don't see much evidence of > > _ this style of photography from the *amateurs* pics on the webs. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4866 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 03:23:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 03:23:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 19:23:25 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19184 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:23:19 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA25648 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:22:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207192300.01dbeec0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 19:23:52 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 In-Reply-To: <005301c29e5f$cd19d860$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207175448.01cc8650@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, it's probably Velvia. I was playing with it at that time also. Thanks! At 10:16 AM 12/8/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: >I checked my Fuji Velvia slide, it marked RVP only but I think RVP-511 is >just the same may be earlier version. The appearance of grain depends on the >scene, the worse one being people's face. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5582 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 04:16:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 04:16:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 20:16:22 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA19253 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 20:16:18 -0800 Received: (qmail 23305 invoked by uid 706); 8 Dec 2002 04:15:16 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 04:15:14 -0000 Message-ID: <018f01c29e71$28e9cfe0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207153816.018f7ee0@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] predecessor of the 40/2 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:20:33 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From this article it shown that Maitani's favorite at that time was 24/2 and 75-150, I'm not really a Maitani's fan but he is really great in concepting the Pen and OM system. Before that I didn't know his favorite lenses but it is just a coincident that both lenses mentioned above are also my favorite. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" > As many of us know, Maitani-san is rather fond of the 40/2 - BTW, an OM-4T > w/ the 40/2 is my standard setup. Anyway, on this page, you can see what I > believe to the predecessor of the 40/2, a compact 50/2! Note the interview > date: 1976! > > http://www.geocities.com/maitani_fan/om_interview_3.html < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5912 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 04:28:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 04:28:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 20:28:40 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA19265 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 20:28:36 -0800 Received: (qmail 1447 invoked by uid 706); 8 Dec 2002 04:27:34 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 04:27:33 -0000 Message-ID: <01a501c29e72$e145bee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:32:47 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I admit that I have not tested them at 1:2, I only test them at 1m and a distant target. Anyway I think you and Larry's sample must be a special one :-) Photodo also report the Tokina is the best 90 but I really doubt, on the other hand I agree the Tokina also gives excellent result if you look at it alone. Following are two test slides if you anyone interested, you may see some different in OOF effect too: Film: Velvia, Camera: OM4 Tripod: Gitzo 1228 with Velbon 263 ball head Scanner: Nikon LS4000 at 3000dip Each file around 1.6MB, you should download them and view with your photo editing software. http://www.accura.com.hk/Z90-1.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/T90-1.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/Z90-3.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/Z90-3.jpg C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" > While that might be true for your set of lenses, I happen to believe > that it depends sometimes on which "batch" you get. The Tokina 90mmf2.5 > is a serious performer, I put it up against everything, and it more then > held it's own. > > I got this from the OM list archives... Take it for what it's worth.. > > Albert. > > > At macro resolution (1:2) > Olympus 90mm f2 Tokina 90mm f2.5 > l/mm /(contrast% 30 l/mm) l/mm(contrast) > f center corner f center corner > 2 40/(30) 36/(25) > 2.8 45/(47) 36/(30) 2.5 64/(55) 57/(49) > 4 45/(69) 36/(43) 4 72/(67) 64/(54) > 5.6 45/(68) 40/(45) 5.6 81/(68) 72/(59) > 8 51/(60) 40/(50) 8 81/(62) 72/(60) > 11 45/(54) 40/(42) 11 64/(62) 57/(55) > 16 40/(48) 36/(40) 16 51/(52) 40/(52) > 22 40/(33) 36/(27) 22 45/(45) 32/(42) > 32 - - 32 36/(31) 29/(24) > > > > >I think you didn't have the 90/2, I have bought a mint (yes, true mint) > >Tokina 90/2.5 some months ago just for testing. Side by side compare with > >the 90/2 at F5.6, the Zuiko just perform better at both close and distance > >objects. > > > >C.H.Ling > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6650 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 05:33:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 05:33:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 21:33:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19320 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:33:36 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.213]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6SDIV02.3DE for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:49:44 +0800 Message-ID: <002001c29e7a$d7728300$d55b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <037301c29e36$8301a1a0$9701a8c0@inspiron> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:29:54 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Where's the 28 F2? ...just missing one. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Scales" To: "Olympus List" Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:20 AM Subject: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer > right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale > before Christmas. > > Here's the list for now: > > Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for convenience. > > Zuiko 35 Shift > > Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose > > Zuiko 50/2 Macro > > Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) > > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) > > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 > > I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) and > pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully > tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. > > Happy holidays. > > Tom > who has been a lurker recently. > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7760 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 07:26:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 07:26:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 23:26:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA19417 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 23:26:46 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.66.56]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021208072554.LFMQ25490.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu>; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 02:25:54 -0500 Message-ID: <010501c29e8a$fefa7ee0$384244d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: Cc: "James N. McBride" , References: <3DEF792C.252E7B@suite224.net> Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 02:25:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hey, now. I'm getting ready to put up some auctions. Would you guys state clearly who the "bad guys" are rather than paint the whole state as villians? I live in Kentucky. Thanks, Jim L'Hommedieu (Lama) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8129 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 07:42:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 07:42:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 07 23:42:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA19434 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 23:42:47 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.158] by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6S009QDIL4KV@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 23:39:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 23:40:16 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 In-reply-to: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207175448.01cc8650@192.168.100.11> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/7/02 5:58 PM, Richard F. Man at richard@imagecraft.com wrote: > Does anyone know what slide film is RVP-511? I just scanned this slide I > took over 10 years ago: > Judging from the > age, I am almost certain that this was taken with the Tamron 90/2.5. Now I > almost wish I didn't sell it after I bought the Zuiko 90/2! The grain on > the RVP-511 is amazing, it looks to be at least as good as Provia 100F, if > not better! I may have shot some Kodachrome 64 at that time, I don't know. > I went to kodak.com and fujifilm.com but a quick search didn't come up with > anything. Neither does google. > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] That's a great picture, whatever the film. The bright blues and reds look like Ektachrome to me... -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8705 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 08:21:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 08:21:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 00:21:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA19462 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 00:21:13 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.66.56]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021208082021.LKSR25490.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 03:20:21 -0500 Message-ID: <011601c29e92$9a1cfcc0$384244d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <20021202153208.25885.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 03:19:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca AG-Schnozz asked: "If these are the "standard" multiplication factors regarding general "magnification" of 35mm cameras, then why is 3x 135mm and not 150mm?" Magnification is not linear. 3x is not half way between 2x and 4x. It's not at all like asking "what point on a meter stick is mid-way between 100cms and 200cms?" You initially asked what focal length is "half way between". My interpretation of the question was "what focal length produces a magnification that is the median magnification between 2x and 4x. Here's a visual metaphor. Imagine you're at a camera show. You've lined up exactly 24 OM-2n bodies, side-by-side. Mount a 50mm lens on an OM-4 and set the camera on a tripod , at a distance so you can just barely see all 24 bodies. When you switch to a 100mm lens, you'd see exactly 12 OM-2n bodies across the field of view, right? When you double your magnification, you reduce the field of view by a _factor_ of two. Would you agree that if we swapped in a 200mm (4x) lens, we'd see exactly 6 bodies? The 'half-way' question is "What focal length will show me exactly 9 OM-2n bodies across the field of view?" [9 is midway between 6 and 12, right?] By my math, 1x = 50 2x = 50 x2 4x = 50 x 2 x 2 8x = 50 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 400 16x = 50 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 800 Look closely at the sequence. The sequence is 50 x 2 ^n (where n is the power) 50 = 50 x (2 ^0) (two to the zero power = one.) 50 x 1 = 50 100 = twice the focal length is 50 x (2^1) (two to the power of one is just two.) 50 x 2 = 100 200 = twice the focal length again is 50 x (2^2) (two to the power of two is four.) 50 x 4 = 200 400 = twice the focal length again is 50 x (2^3) (two to the power of three is eight.) 50 x 8 = 400 800 = twice the focal length again is 50 x (2^4) (two to the power of four is sixteen.) 50 x 16 = 800 The sequence is about _doubling_. It's about multiplying by two. It takes a multiplication of 2 to get to the next step. To get half way there, then the other half of the way, you use "the square root of two" first, then "the square root of two" to get the rest of the way. Half way between 2x and 4x is = 50 x 2 x (square root of 2) Half way = 50 x 2 x (1.4142136) Half way = 50 x (2.8) Half way = 141 mm Still don't believe me? Let's check it. If we start at 141 mm, and multiply it by "the square root of two" again, we should get to 200, right? My method to get 'half way' was to multiply by 1.4 Let's see if that works: 141 x (1.4142136) = 200mm Check Or think about it this way. You already know it's not a linear relationship. The "focal length difference" between 1x and 2x is 50mm. So how come the "focal length difference" between 2x to 4x isn't also 50mm? How come "focal length difference" between 4x and 8x isn't also 50mm? Because the "focal length differences" are not linear. Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9573 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 09:53:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 09:53:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 01:53:52 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA19493 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 01:53:50 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA08366; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 01:53:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208014153.026f7600@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 01:54:24 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021207175448.01cc8650@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:40 PM 12/7/2002 -0800, Jim Brokaw wrote: >on 12/7/02 5:58 PM, Richard F. Man at richard@imagecraft.com wrote: > > > Does anyone know what slide film is RVP-511? I just scanned this slide I > > took over 10 years ago: > > Judging from the > > age, I am almost certain that this was taken with the Tamron 90/2.5. Now I > > almost wish I didn't sell it after I bought the Zuiko 90/2! The grain on > > the RVP-511 is amazing, it looks to be at least as good as Provia 100F, if >... >That's a great picture, whatever the film. The bright blues and reds look >like Ektachrome to me... >-.. Thanks. I think at that time I was also playing w/ Ektachrome, so who knows. Ling C.H.'s Velvia is RVP so I guess it could be that. I am slowly scanning the old pics / slides. I have always wanted to print some of the "Best of..." pictures and this is one of our favorites. I got a printer profile generator and finally I am getting some nice output from the 1280 w/ the colors the way I see them.... Yea... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10571 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 11:43:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 11:43:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 03:43:23 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19545 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 03:43:21 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:26:09 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF32FAB.2010806@achtung.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:40:27 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Tokina 90mm/f2.5 (was OM vs. Leica) References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> <01a501c29e72$e145bee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> In-Reply-To: <01a501c29e72$e145bee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hmm. It might be your Tokina.. I had a picture at the zoo of my gf, one was shot with my Zuiko 50mm,f1.8 and the other with the Tokina 90mm/f2.5, and basically the exact same shot, same place, and similar composition, Same roll of film, same place, same lighting, everything was as close to the same as possible. The Tokina was MUCH sharper, so sharp I could see the pores on my gf's face (she doesn't appreciate her zits being filmed like that) but it was that sharp. It was so much more noticably sharper that I had no problems picking out which ones were shot with the 50mm and which was shot with the Tokina. But again, most tell me the 28mm/f2.8 is a serious performer, and I've found mine to be only so so, and still wouldn't mind selling it for a Tokina 28mm, but from the advice on this board, and the cost of the Tokina 28mm (NIB), I'd probably just buy it and keep the Zuiko still. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11518 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 12:02:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 12:02:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 04:02:21 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19585 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 04:02:20 -0800 Received: from host62-6-74-130.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.6.74.130] helo=personalmyself) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18L05a-0000JP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:59:15 +0000 Message-ID: <001501c29eb1$3e5c6dc0$824a063e@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: References: <20021207105754.20615.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <001801c29e04$46b94540$11014441@swbell.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Broni-blad Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:59:20 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id EAA19585 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Pearce" To: Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 3:21 PM Subject: [OM] Broni-blad > "I considered a Bronica, and did serious research on it; best bang for > the buck. " Anyone considering a Bronica should look at the Robert White site....WWW.robertwhite.Co.UK. .........At present he has ETRSi for =A370= 5 with free 120 rfh ? Offers on present stock only. Does Worldwide mailorde= r. (less 17.5% VAT for overseas customers) No connection etc. Seems a good deal if you are in the market, regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11886 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 12:11:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 12:11:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 04:11:33 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA19614 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 04:11:32 -0800 Received: (qmail 11777 invoked by uid 706); 8 Dec 2002 12:10:30 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 12:10:20 -0000 Message-ID: <002001c29eb3$7f9067e0$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> <01a501c29e72$e145bee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF32FAB.2010806@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Tokina 90mm/f2.5 (was OM vs. Leica) Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 20:15:27 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" > Hmm. It might be your Tokina.. > > I had a picture at the zoo of my gf, one was shot with my Zuiko > 50mm,f1.8 and the other with the Tokina 90mm/f2.5, and basically the > exact same shot, same place, and similar composition, Same roll of film, > same place, same lighting, everything was as close to the same as > possible. The Tokina was MUCH sharper, so sharp I could see the pores > on my gf's face (she doesn't appreciate her zits being filmed like that) > but it was that sharp. It was so much more noticably sharper that I had > no problems picking out which ones were shot with the 50mm and which was > shot with the Tokina. > Mind you tell me what focusing aid you use for the 50mm and 90mm lens? Most people use spit image for shorter lens this may cause focusing error, for long lens if you witch to matte area focusing (since the matte area is easier to use for long lenses) the accurate may be higher. > But again, most tell me the 28mm/f2.8 is a serious performer, and I've > found mine to be only so so, and still wouldn't mind selling it for a > Tokina 28mm, but from the advice on this board, and the cost of the > Tokina 28mm (NIB), I'd probably just buy it and keep the Zuiko still. > > This one I won't argue with you, as many may remember, I never happy with the Zuiko 28/2.8. Basically, I don't think any Zuiko 28 is outstanding. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17436 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 12:36:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 12:36:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 04:36:05 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.hrnoc.net (relay2.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.242]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19630 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 04:36:03 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay2.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18L0eZ-000PUY-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 07:35:23 -0500 Received: (qmail 30576 invoked by uid 89); 8 Dec 2002 12:35:29 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 12:35:29 -0000 Message-ID: <015001c29eb6$43eb5d50$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: <037301c29e36$8301a1a0$9701a8c0@inspiron> <002001c29e7a$d7728300$d55b68cb@titoy> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:35:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry, it is on the keeper list 21-28-50. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clemente Colayco" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 12:29 AM Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > Where's the 28 F2? ...just missing one. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Scales" > To: "Olympus List" > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:20 AM > Subject: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > > > > I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer > > right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale > > before Christmas. > > > > Here's the list for now: > > > > Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for convenience. > > > > Zuiko 35 Shift > > > > Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose > > > > Zuiko 50/2 Macro > > > > Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) > > > > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) > > > > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 > > > > I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) and > > pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully > > tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. > > > > Happy holidays. > > > > Tom > > who has been a lurker recently. > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17987 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 13:18:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:18:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 05:18:57 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA19672 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 05:18:54 -0800 Received: (qmail 4436 invoked by uid 706); 8 Dec 2002 13:17:52 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:17:41 -0000 Message-ID: <005e01c29ebc$e48a3be0$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:22:02 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ok, just dig out some close distance test on 50mm lenses, I think you all will see a better comparison now. All tests were hand held and there were slightly different in the shooting angles. The file names give self explanation on what lenses and aperture were being used. Here below is for dial up connection, each file around 150KB. http://www.accura.com.hk/S21F2-F4.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S3570-F36.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5012-F12.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5012-F40.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5512-F12.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5512-F40.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5014MC-F14.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5014MC-F40.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/S5035MC-F35.jpg Here below is for boardband connection, each around 1.9MB http://www.accura.com.hk/21F2-F4.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/3570-F36.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5012-F12.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5012-F40.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5512-F12.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5512-F40.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5014MC-F14.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5014MC-F40.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/5035MC-F35.jpg Enjoy! C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" > > The 35-70 might do the > > same > > thing if it could open up past 3.6! > > > > Paul > > > > But it can't open up past 3.6 which means it is well designed to its > parameters. And the whole point of exotic glass and design is to allow > you to get a decent image at wider apertures. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18248 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 13:19:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:19:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 05:19:21 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19675 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 05:19:19 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB8DFhGQ013426 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 05:15:43 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF346B9.5D92C747@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 05:19:03 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] WTB Oly 35S [WAS: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas] References: <037301c29e36$8301a1a0$9701a8c0@inspiron> <002001c29e7a$d7728300$d55b68cb@titoy> <015001c29eb6$43eb5d50$9701a8c0@inspiron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Speaking of which, I am looking for an Olympus 35S or 35S II rangefinder. I sold mine a few years ago, as part of a swap deal, and have been sorry ever since! Who knows of one around, in great shape, that's for sale? Thanks, keith whaley, Los Angeles * * * * Tom Scales wrote: > > Sorry, it is on the keeper list 21-28-50. > > Tom > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Clemente Colayco" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 12:29 AM > Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > > > Where's the 28 F2? ...just missing one. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tom Scales" > > To: "Olympus List" > > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:20 AM > > Subject: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > > > > > > > I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer > > > right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale > > > before Christmas. > > > > > > Here's the list for now: > > > > > > Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for > convenience. > > > > > > Zuiko 35 Shift > > > > > > Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose > > > > > > Zuiko 50/2 Macro > > > > > > Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) > > > > > > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) > > > > > > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 > > > > > > I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) > and > > > pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully > > > tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. > > > > > > Happy holidays. > > > > > > Tom > > > who has been a lurker recently. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18532 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 13:21:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:21:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 05:21:00 2002 -0800 Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [208.44.199.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19679 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 05:20:59 -0800 Received: (qmail 30996 invoked by uid 554); 8 Dec 2002 13:20:52 -0000 Date: 8 Dec 2002 13:20:52 -0000 Message-ID: <20021208132052.30995.qmail@twinlark.arctic.org> From: "Alan" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS: 24F2.8 Sigma lens Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have for sale a 24F2.8 sigma lens in ln condition (includes box). This lens I feel has higher resolution and less vignetting than the zuiko 24f2.8. However, the build is clearly not as good. However, this lens is in newish condition and should last a long time. My primary reason for sale of the lens is I no longer use the olympus camera very often and when I do the 28 is used more often. I am asking $84. Thanks, Alan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18884 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 13:33:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:33:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 05:33:32 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19691 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 05:33:30 -0800 Received: from [217.216.178.29] (cliente-217216178029.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.178.29]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gB8DT3Q19288 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:29:03 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:21:24 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD, was Re: OM vs. Leica Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, everyone. >It's been said the Olympus 35 SP, made in 1970, with it's 42mm f/1.7 >lens, is fully the equal of, or surpasses the performance of, the >equivalent Leica's lens. Don't believe me? Check it out! How does the Olympus 35 RD's lens perform against the 35 SP? Thanks in advance, ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19168 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 13:39:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:39:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 05:39:05 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19695 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 05:39:03 -0800 Received: from [217.216.178.29] (cliente-217216178029.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.178.29]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gB8DYkQ21554 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:34:46 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:35:22 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello, again. I like my E.Zuiko 135/3.5 _very_ much; however, I think it's my only Zuiko SC which is seriously flare-prone. I'm afraid that there was _no_ multicoated version of this lens -- I've seen a 'Zuiko' one with reflections of _exactly_ the same colours. I've got also an MC 135/2.8, which performs great, but feels _much_ bigger and heavier than the 3.5. So I was thinking about an even smaller 100/2.8 (maybe MC). How does it compare against the 135? On the other hand, I like my silvernose 85/2 a lot. Does it make sense to get the 100/2.8 owning already an 85/2? The real-zuikoholic answer: 'SURE!!!' :-) Thanks again, ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19662 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 14:13:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 14:13:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 06:13:08 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19742 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:13:07 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB8E9VGQ015980 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:09:31 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 06:12:55 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD, was Re: OM vs. Leica References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have read of no tests, but the RD, released in 1970 had a 42mm f/2.8 lens, of 5 elements, in 4 groups. The SP's lens was manufactured with 7 elements in 5 groups. It's reasonable to assume the RD's lenses were not quite as good as the SP's were. keith whaley - still looking for a black SP! "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" wrote: > > Hi, everyone. > > >It's been said the Olympus 35 SP, made in 1970, with it's 42mm f/1.7 > >lens, is fully the equal of, or surpasses the performance of, the > >equivalent Leica's lens. Don't believe me? Check it out! > > How does the Olympus 35 RD's lens perform against the 35 SP? > > Thanks in advance, > > ... > > Carlos J. Santisteban > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19926 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 14:14:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 14:14:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 06:14:55 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19760 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:14:54 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.147] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 30805106 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 09:14:27 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF353CA.586F7B9F@suite224.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 09:14:34 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? References: <3DEF792C.252E7B@suite224.net> <010501c29e8a$fefa7ee0$384244d8@lhommedieu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jim, My bad experience was not with you(lamadau?). Sorry for the confusion. John Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > > Hey, now. I'm getting ready to put up some auctions. Would you guys state > clearly who the "bad guys" are rather than paint the whole state as > villians? I live in Kentucky. > > Thanks, > > Jim L'Hommedieu > (Lama) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20317 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 14:34:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 14:34:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 06:34:39 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA19940 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:34:33 -0800 Received: (qmail 29043 invoked by uid 104); 8 Dec 2002 14:32:17 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 14:32:15 -0000 Message-ID: <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD, was Re: OM vs. Leica Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:37:28 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No, 42/2.8 is the lens for RC, RD has a 40/1.7 Six element lens. I have all three but never compared their lens, anyway I'm very happy with their lens performance. As the topic of bokeh is hot, I can tell you the SP is exceptional good in this department. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley" > I have read of no tests, but the RD, released in 1970 had a 42mm f/2.8 > lens, of 5 elements, in 4 groups. > The SP's lens was manufactured with 7 elements in 5 groups. > It's reasonable to assume the RD's lenses were not quite as good as > the SP's were. > > keith whaley - still looking for a black SP! > > "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" wrote: > > > > Hi, everyone. > > > > >It's been said the Olympus 35 SP, made in 1970, with it's 42mm f/1.7 > > >lens, is fully the equal of, or surpasses the performance of, the > > >equivalent Leica's lens. Don't believe me? Check it out! > > > > How does the Olympus 35 RD's lens perform against the 35 SP? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > ... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21069 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 15:46:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 15:46:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 07:46:30 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19977 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:46:28 -0800 Received: from host213-122-26-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.26.183] helo=personalmyself) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18L3aP-0001vb-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:43:18 +0000 Message-ID: <002301c29ed0$8a8eb670$b71a7ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: Subject: Fw: [OM] Broni-blad Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:43:21 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id HAA19977 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This message seems to have been "lost"...to forever wander the airwaves.......strange.......so here goes again ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Duggan" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Broni-blad > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Pearce" > To: > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 3:21 PM > Subject: [OM] Broni-blad > > > > "I considered a Bronica, and did serious research on it; best bang fo= r > > the buck. " > Anyone considering a Bronica should look at the Robert White > site....WWW.robertwhite.Co.UK. .........At present he has ETRSi for =A3= 705 > with free 120 rfh ? Offers on present stock only. Does Worldwide mailorder. > (less 17.5% VAT for overseas customers) No connection etc. Seems a goo= d > deal if you are in the market, regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21423 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:03:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:03:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:03:15 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19981 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:03:14 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18L3tJ-000CCZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:02:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 50830 invoked by uid 89); 8 Dec 2002 16:02:58 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:02:58 -0000 Message-ID: <02b301c29ed3$40296d20$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: "Tom Scales" , "Olympus List" Subject: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:02:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OK, finally got my machine put back together. My wife's machine was having problems, so I put a spare hard drive in mine, rebuilt it for her and then put my hard drive back in. Unfortunately she wanted it triple (yes triple) boot, 98/Me/XP Home and I had a devil of a time with 98. Anyway, here are the things I think would be a little more popular with, I hope, quite fair pricing. Act quick if there is any chance of it making Christmas. Zuiko 85-250/5 - $230 Zuiko 35 Shift - $370 Zuiko 50/2 - $350 Zuiko 24/2.8 - $135 Tamron 80-200/2.8 with SP2X - $430 T28 Single - $150 OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 - $99 OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 - $115 40/2 is already gone. Everything is on my site at http://www.zuikoholic.com/members/members.htm with lower prices for list members. Most have pictures. All the things above are there and a few more. And, yes, once the domain expires (soon), www.zuikoholic.com will cease to exist. I just don't have the time or energy to keep it up since I am not actively trading anymore. I'll keep a nice healthy kit of things I do use (the 90/2 and 35-80/2.8 won't ever sell, for example), but not as much as I did before. I've been more of a lurker recently too. But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) the technology teacher at a local elementary school. Big change. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Scales" To: "Olympus List" Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 4:20 PM Subject: FS: OM Christmas ideas > I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer > right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale > before Christmas. > > Here's the list for now: > > Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for convenience. > > Zuiko 35 Shift > > Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose > > Zuiko 50/2 Macro > > Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) > > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) > > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 > > I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) and > pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully > tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. > > Happy holidays. > > Tom > who has been a lurker recently. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21693 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:05:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:05:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:05:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19986 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:05:03 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.90]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021208160411.NNGU25490.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:04:11 -0500 Message-ID: <000701c29ed3$655a4ce0$5a2d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <20021128213432.2169.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <4.3.2.7.2.20021202185515.0303f760@mail.spitfire.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:03:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wow. This is way more complex that my memory "stored" from physics class. I guess I distilled it too far and stripped out complexity. Thanks, John for setting me straight. Now I'll have some reading material for the week. Is this phenomenon of magnification varying with the distance from the lens' front node related to the focal length being different for a macro lens used at 1:1 as opposed to infinity, then? Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22080 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:21:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:21:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:21:46 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20002 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:21:43 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 01:05:27 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF370F3.3010005@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:18:59 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Tokina 90mm/f2.5 (was OM vs. Leica) References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021205232053.02748a30@192.168.100.11> <3DF0549F.5030409@achtung.com> <00c801c29dff$0e6de6a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF22E16.1020406@achtung.com> <01a501c29e72$e145bee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF32FAB.2010806@achtung.com> <002001c29eb3$7f9067e0$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> In-Reply-To: <002001c29eb3$7f9067e0$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I used the split screen for focusing. One of the things I did for that picture was I told her to stand right next to a red flower, I focused on the flower instead of her, also, in bright cloudy day, I remember too, F8 and 1/500th on Reala.. Hard to screw that up. It's one of my favorites... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22362 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:25:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:25:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:25:55 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20005 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:25:52 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 01:11:19 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF37254.3030904@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:24:52 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Day out with friends Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My gf, and two of her friends have very close birthdays (one this week, two next week) and so we all went out for lunch together. Of course, everybody and their mother at the table wanted a digital camera, and digital camera catalogs were all over the table. They discussed everything from what was cute, to what was useful. The men seemed to have mentioned things like memory storage type, lens quality, battery life etc.. and of course, the "which one is cuter" was covered by all the women. Those who bought one already started to snap away. The pictures sucked of course because they take it not with the viewfinder, but via the display screen, which is not very accurate. I took out my OM, and everybody who feared pictures got intimidated, and those who loved to be in the spotlight, all lit up. I had my Tokina 90mmf2.5 out, and I took quite a few portrait shots. I'll get them developed tomorrow and see how they turn out. But most said, "WOW, this thing is awesome, the viewfinder is large and bright, and it makes an actual click sound "like professional photographers"!!" hehehe, a few even considered buying one because the price was hard to beat. I think digital is a compliment, I had a roll of Ilford HP5/400 in there, and I'll bet the results are great. I'm happy that when it's all said and done, my OM holds it's own against anything, even the digital cameras. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22653 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:30:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:30:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:30:39 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20012 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:30:36 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 01:16:03 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF3736E.5070302@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:29:34 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] MF, Fuji RF or Hassey? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From my experience at the lunch party today, I have decided that every format and every camera has it's uses, and specific purposes. I have started a "budget" for a medium format camera. I probably won't get a digital one since my gf will be purchasing one. I have always wanted to take a medium format camera to go with my OM for vacations. Some things you just need to put on 120's to really get that effect... Two vacation cameras: The one I've been pining over, the Fuji GW690III, or the Hassey SWC903/905. What are your opinions? Also, I'd love to hear all your "subjective" feelings about both lenses. I have read from a few "glass geeks" that the glass on the 903 is the sharpest, period. End of story. I assume that Fuji's holds it's own (as far as I can tell from pictures) I don't think I'm going to get rid of my OM anytime soon, but I might want to start adding siblings to it. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22914 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:31:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:31:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:31:39 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20016 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:31:37 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-85-212.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.85.212]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB8GV5DL102516 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:31:05 -0500 Message-ID: <002801c29ed1$f969a900$d4554241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021208114329.10618.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] more 1.0/1.2 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:53:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Seems that many people want to defense for the 50/1.2" I'm not defending the lens, I have some questions about mine that remain unanswered, although basically I still like it. What I'm saying is this: I don't think it is possible to make informed judgements based on a 72dpi jpeg on a monitor screen. (I am in the process of downloading your Tokina samples, so that I can open them in PS on another computer with a decent monitor. Would like to do the same with the two fifties shots.) Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23173 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:31:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:31:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:31:56 2002 -0800 Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.122]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20020 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:31:55 -0800 Received: from pool0048.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.134.48] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18L4Kw-0002Ut-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 08:31:27 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:31:17 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >on 12/7/02 5:58 PM, Richard F. Man at richard@imagecraft.com wrote: > >> Does anyone know what slide film is RVP-511? I just scanned this slide I > > took over 10 years ago: -snip > >Jim Brokaw >OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... I believe that is Fuji Sensia II. Not five one one, but S roman number two. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23529 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:41:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:41:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:41:30 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20072 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:41:28 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh153.interisland.net [12.17.134.153]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB8Gc3s18650 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:38:03 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF37650.CA4A3C93@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 08:41:52 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id IAA20072 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > miliciano > =3D member of a militia -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23784 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:43:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:43:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:43:21 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20076 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:43:19 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.35] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A5946102C4; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:38:44 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021208112032.02d9e750@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:42:39 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Mind Bender (intermediate focal length?) In-Reply-To: <000701c29ed3$655a4ce0$5a2d44d8@lhommedieu> References: <20021128213432.2169.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <4.3.2.7.2.20021202185515.0303f760@mail.spitfire.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:03 12/8/02, you wrote: >Wow. This is way more complex that my memory "stored" from physics class. >I guess I distilled it too far and stripped out complexity. Thanks, John >for setting me straight. Now I'll have some reading material for the week. >Is this phenomenon of magnification varying with the distance from the lens' >front node related to the focal length being different for a macro lens used >at 1:1 as opposed to infinity, then? > >Lama Lama, It's related to image circle diameter increase. I don't know about specific macro lens designs which may have internal elements or other aspects of the design that compensate for this. With non-macro prime lenses that focus by moving the entire lens cell forward to get from infinity focus to something closer that, the image circle diameter increases. Think of making a cone taller by adding to its base. If the angle between side and axis is maintained, the base diameter must increase. At minimum focus distance the film gate is capturing less of the image circle. Another way of thinking about it is image circle "magnification" because its light is being spread over a larger area. This is a second order magnification in addition to the most noticeable first order magnification achieved by moving closer to the subject of interest. This is the reason exposure compensation is required at distances (from front lens node to subject) that require extension of the lens greater than about 1/7th the focal length from infinity focus. Look at the standard 50/1.8, 50/1.4 and 50/1.2 lenses and take a rough measurement of how much they are extended at minimum focus distance. It's about 7mm or so. I got curious about this one time, measured a 50/1.4 and then did the math on light loss for a 50mm lens at 7mm extension from infinity focus. IIRC, it was just under 1/3rd f-stop and the error is [usually] negligible. If you're using TTL metering for primes with extension tubes, the metering compensates. It's not a big deal except to be aware of it and that you might need more light to get a tighter aperture. However, if you're using a hand held meter, ambient or flash, it does matter and it requires compensaion. Been there, done that, using monolights, flash meter and chrome film which can dramatically demonstrate an exposure error. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24067 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:46:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:46:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:46:35 2002 -0800 Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [208.44.199.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20080 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:46:34 -0800 Received: (qmail 30721 invoked by uid 554); 8 Dec 2002 16:46:23 -0000 Date: 8 Dec 2002 16:46:23 -0000 Message-ID: <20021208164623.30720.qmail@twinlark.arctic.org> From: "Alan" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Voigtlander 125 APO Makro Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Has anyone used this lens -- any comments on how it compares to the Zuiko 90f2 or Tokina 90f2.5. Anyone know what the effective lenght of these lenses are at 1:2 ? Thanks, Alan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24404 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 16:57:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 16:57:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 08:57:30 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20092 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:57:28 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.45.90]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021208165636.NZTW25490.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:56:36 -0500 Message-ID: <012801c29eda$b71ebfa0$5a2d44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:56:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I can use both my 135/3.5 and 100/2.8 wide open. Can't say that for my (old) 50/1.4 SC, 50/3.5 macro, 28/3.5, 28/2, or 200/4. For the concert stuff I like to do, I wanted something around 85/90. I don't have any experience with the 85. I was thinking about buying one until I found the legendary Series1 90mm f/2.5 macro with 1:1 tube for 1/2 the money. On the other hand, I don't know if the 90 and 100 are different enough to keep both. I sure love to use that 100 so I may keep it cause it handles so nicely. I love the fit and finish of my Zuikos but the Series1 doesn't focus "backwards" so......... We'll see........ Lama From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" > I like my E.Zuiko 135/3.5 _very_ much; however, I think it's my only Zuiko > SC which is seriously flare-prone. I'm afraid that there was _no_ > multicoated version of this lens -- I've seen a 'Zuiko' one with > reflections of _exactly_ the same colours. I've got also an MC 135/2.8, > which performs great, but feels _much_ bigger and heavier than the 3.5. > > So I was thinking about an even smaller 100/2.8 (maybe MC). How does it > compare against the 135? > > On the other hand, I like my silvernose 85/2 a lot. Does it make sense to > get the 100/2.8 owning already an 85/2? The real-zuikoholic answer: > 'SURE!!!' :-) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24796 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 17:15:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 17:15:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 09:15:03 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (snake.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20108 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:15:01 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18L51A-0006HX-00 for ; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 10:15:00 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:14:12 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <3DF353CA.586F7B9F@suite224.net> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As always, when we paint with the broad brush we hit things we shouldn't. My first bad deal from Kentucky involved an F280 flash that supposedly had a chip on the shoe. It was actually broken completely off. Some parts were also not shipped that were supposed to be included. He basically told me to like it or lump it......and I was far too busy to deal with EBAY so I just bought the part and let him get away with it. I don't remember his name. The second mess was with Dan Sharon at Kentucky Camera Service (Dscmrep@aol.com). I bought a 50mm f-3.5 macro lens that had a ding in the filter thread and the aperture adjusting ring was a little stiff according to the write-up. The lens barrel was bent enough that the it took too hands to turn the aperture ring with the lens off the camera. He agreed to refund my money so I sent the lens back. He never sent the refund. I applied for the EBAY insurance but was one day past the 60-day limit. He had not answered my earlier emails so I sent him a nasty note and gave him negative feedback. I got an answer then, and an untrue retaliatory negative feedback. He later returned the lens to me rather than a refund. I'm not done with him. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John and Julie Ockman Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 7:15 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Jim, My bad experience was not with you(lamadau?). Sorry for the confusion. John Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > > Hey, now. I'm getting ready to put up some auctions. Would you guys state > clearly who the "bad guys" are rather than paint the whole state as > villians? I live in Kentucky. > > Thanks, > > Jim L'Hommedieu > (Lama) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25084 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 17:18:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 17:18:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 09:18:24 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20112 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:18:22 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh153.interisland.net [12.17.134.153]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB8HF1s19932 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:15:01 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF37EFA.E28E9854@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 09:18:50 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] printer profile generator (RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id JAA20112 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I got a printer profile generator and finally I am getting some nice ou= tput > from the 1280 w/ the colors the way I see them.... Yea... > Which one did you get? Details please. I'm going to be printing some things out for the holidays and this is my biggest problem. I'm even resigned to attacking the problem with $$$ but have no idea where to begin Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25447 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 17:27:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 17:27:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 09:27:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20116 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:27:53 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB8HKEIq016621 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:20:15 +0100 (MET) Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:20:14 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 Message-Id: <20021208182014.69132611.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id JAA20116 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Carlos, I have all the lenses you mention, and my usage patterns end up such that the 135/3.5 lives much of a shelf life, while the rest get lot of exercise. My main reason is, that I like the brighter viewfinder image of the /2.8 and /2 much more than that of the 3.5 - and that the 135/3.5 seems a little less contrasty than I prefer. Between the 100/2.8 and the 85/2, I probably use the 85 more than the 100 - I got the 85mm first, and have developed a preference for that focal length.=20 The difference betweem the 100 and 85 is not really that significant, and I think it would not make much sense to carry both. However having both would allow you to argue that you need two seperate kits....and thus justify another body, another wide angle, another winder etc :) --thomas On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:35:22 +0100 "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" wrote: > Hello, again. >=20 > I like my E.Zuiko 135/3.5 _very_ much; however, I think it's my > only Zuiko SC which is seriously flare-prone. I'm afraid that there > was _no_ multicoated version of this lens -- I've seen a 'Zuiko' > one with reflections of _exactly_ the same colours. I've got also > an MC 135/2.8, which performs great, but feels _much_ bigger and > heavier than the 3.5. >=20 > So I was thinking about an even smaller 100/2.8 (maybe MC). How > does it compare against the 135? >=20 > On the other hand, I like my silvernose 85/2 a lot. Does it make > sense to get the 100/2.8 owning already an 85/2? The > real-zuikoholic answer:'SURE!!!' :-) >=20 > Thanks again, >=20 > ... >=20 > Carlos J. Santisteban >=20 > > >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25802 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 17:39:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 17:39:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 09:39:55 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20131 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:39:53 -0800 Received: from cb135921a (12-248-234-181.client.attbi.com[12.248.234.181]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002120817384500300fcrs6e>; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:38:45 +0000 Message-ID: <001a01c29ef0$f5204e70$b5eaf80c@cb135921a> From: "Tim Chakravorty" To: References: <002301c29ed0$8a8eb670$b71a7ad5@personalmyself> Subject: Re: [OM] Broni-blad Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:35:25 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks to all for your responses. Gary wondered why this question has been posted on this list. I *have* looked at all the threads on photo.net but lately they have become very selective about what posts they put in their archives section, and in the 'temporary' section I stand no chance of receiving any reponses in the 3 days that it will be there. Just wondered if the list members had any experiences of their own with either of the systems. I don't plan on moving to MF just yet but I will do that sometime in the future. After looking at slides from both formats I believe there is simply no contest. Bronica by far gives better value for the money, but a bargain 500CM/501CM will always be tempting. And as I read somewhere," buy the best you can , and you will cry only once." A Bronica system can be built up relatively much quicker than the 'blad, but then will I wake up every morning and cry as to why I didn't get the blad :) ? This of course conflicts with what I said earlier about how I care more about image quality than joy of ownership. So these are just some thoughts going through my head. Just for starters I am also considering a bargain Rollieflex/cord with a Xenotar/Planar. Any thoughts on that ? Are their shutters reliable after years of use ? And finally the age old question..how do the Xenotar/Planar compare with the Xenar/Tessar ? -Tim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26230 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 18:01:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 18:01:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 10:01:01 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20158 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:01:00 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh166.interisland.net [12.17.134.166]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB8Hvds21615 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:57:40 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF388F8.9A610B8B@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 10:01:28 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] elusive mint OM3 + bevy of Zuikos spotted Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA20158 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just got back from a trip to Victoria BC. (Leahy concert at the Royal Theater) Of course I dropped by the usual places. Lens & Shutter still has that bellows for C$150, that's less than US$100. However the mother lode is at Camera-Traders. Andrew has a large collection on consignment. Best deals include a mint OM3 with 50/1.8 MIJ and saddle leather case, 55/1.2, 35/2 MC silvernose, telescoping tube and many more desirable lenses and assessors. Many come with case and box, filter etc., ask. Prices are all over the map, some good, some fair, some lousy. The consignee took care of his equipment and saved the boxes but obviously used it (except the OM3) so there may be some wear on the aperture rings and the OM4t has the usual wear and is missing the TTL cover. The descriptions on the web site are not complete or very accurate so check with Andrew. The person who wrote it up didn't know the rating system. Andrew knows this and is going to update the list when he gets a chance. I went over some of the stuff with Andrew but didn't have time to look at all of it. There is a 2-13 screen with a small mark on the edge, not identified as such on the web site, good deal @ C$20. The other screen listed has the tab cut off so beware. It could be a 2-4 cut to fit an OM1 but I didn't try it to see. Here's the web site: http://camera-traders.com/inventory.htm#15 The usual caveat emptor. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26554 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 18:13:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 18:13:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 10:13:04 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20171 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:13:03 -0800 Received: from vaio558 (12-235-158-203.client.attbi.com[12.235.158.203]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120818115400100pngnte>; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:11:55 +0000 From: "Dave Shupe" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:11:30 -0800 Message-ID: <001601c29ee5$3f258c80$1400a8c0@vaio558> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <200212061823.KAA17239@fw.sls.bc.ca> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I got into MF for $700 by going the Bronica route. That covered an S2A with 75mm F2.8 Nikkor, 150mm F3.5 Zenzanon, and a 200mm F4 Nikkor. This outfit takes WONDERFUL pictures. I've blown up prints to 16x20 & 30x40 that are Beautiful. One of my 16x20s sold at the Zoo Auction for $350. So at least two other people think they are wonderful too ;) If I would have waited until I could afford the Hassey (or even a newer Bronica) I'd still be waiting to see the great images possible with the 6x6 format. If you judge the cameras by the prints hanging on the wall (for me that is the ONLY point of photography) I really don't think anyone could pick the Bronica pictures from the Hasselblad pictures. My vote (I just love to spend other peoples money) is to add up the price of the Hassey gear you plan to buy over the next six months. Take all those dollars and buy more lenses with a Bronica outfit. Just be careful, cuz once you see those Big Bright Beautiful 6x6 slides (Fuji Provia) you just won't look at 35mm the same way again. Thanks - and let us know which way you take the 6x6 plunge. Dave Shupe Btw Olympus once made a 6x6. I think one of our list members has used it in the TOPE entries. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca] On Behalf Of suchismit@attbi.com Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:22 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? Some time in the future I would like to slowly get into MF. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26913 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 18:27:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 18:27:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 10:27:49 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20183 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:27:48 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB8IOBGQ003328 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:24:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 10:27:55 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi C.H. "C.H.Ling" wrote: > > No, 42/2.8 is the lens for RC, RD has a 40/1.7 Six element lens. You're absolutely right. I had the data sheets for both the RC and the RD open, and copied the wrong data down for my email. Sorry. I have used them, but never owned one. I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. That will complete my collection. Anyhow, I took all my date from this site: http://www.claus-marin.de/indexeng.htm In my bookmarks I label that the "Oly Rangefinder" site. It seems some of the data is out of date, or incorrect, or both. More in what they missed than have wrong. I know of no other site that covers Olympus rangefinders, so if any of you can help, it would be appreciated. Thanks for your comments, keith whaley Los Angeles > I have all > three but never compared their lens, anyway I'm very happy with their lens > performance. As the topic of bokeh is hot, I can tell you the SP is > exceptional good in this department. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Keith Whaley" > > > I have read of no tests, but the RD, released in 1970 had a 42mm f/2.8 > > lens, of 5 elements, in 4 groups. > > The SP's lens was manufactured with 7 elements in 5 groups. > > It's reasonable to assume the RD's lenses were not quite as good as > > the SP's were. > > > > keith whaley - still looking for a black SP! > > > > "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" wrote: > > > > > > Hi, everyone. > > > > > > > It's been said the Olympus 35 SP, made in 1970, with it's 42mm f/1.7 > > > > lens, is fully the equal of, or surpasses the performance of, the > > > > equivalent Leica's lens. Don't believe me? Check it out! > > > > > > How does the Olympus 35 RD's lens perform against the 35 SP? > > > > > > Thanks in advance, < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27173 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 18:29:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 18:29:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 10:29:38 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20191 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:29:37 -0800 Received: from vaio558 (12-235-158-203.client.attbi.com[12.235.158.203]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120818282900100pn3b3e>; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:28:29 +0000 From: "Dave Shupe" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT: Medium format RF question Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:28:05 -0800 Message-ID: <001701c29ee7$900a3fe0$1400a8c0@vaio558> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <3DF07600.6060405@achtung.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have a Bronica S2a (completely manual no meter) At some point I'll actually get a light meter to use with the Bronica, but for now, what I do, is meter with one of my Oly's and set the Bronica accordingly. This is far less cumbersome than it sounds. I hang the Oly around my neck and always use a tripod for the Bronica. Also gives me choices - If I think I'll need a spot meter then I take the OM3 or the Is-3. The Is-3 is particularly convenient since it is quick to zoom to match the angle of the lens on the Bronica. Thanks Dave Shupe -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca] On Behalf Of Albert I really like the Fuji; the only thing stopping me from getting it is the fact that it has no meter... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27517 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 18:37:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 18:37:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 10:37:35 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20210 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:37:34 -0800 Received: from user-2iniu5s.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.120.188] helo=earthlink.net) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18L6If-0006HN-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 10:37:10 -0800 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:37:02 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021207185058.04283c90@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-Id: <0ADE1790-0ADC-11D7-A99A-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It really is nice to see a new contribution from Gary Reese. Always intelligent and informative. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28307 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 19:46:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 19:46:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 11:46:19 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20261 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:46:16 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-555.datasync.com [209.205.140.51]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gB8JkEJ10179 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:46:14 -0600 Message-ID: <000a01c29ef3$19251f60$338ccdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:50:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 12:27 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] > Hi C.H. > > "C.H.Ling" wrote: > > > > No, 42/2.8 is the lens for RC, RD has a 40/1.7 Six element lens. > > You're absolutely right. I had the data sheets for both the RC and the > RD open, and copied the wrong data down for my email. > Sorry. > > I have used them, but never owned one. > I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. > I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. > That will complete my collection. > > Anyhow, I took all my date from this site: > > http://www.claus-marin.de/indexeng.htm > > In my bookmarks I label that the "Oly Rangefinder" site. It seems some > of the data is out of date, or incorrect, or both. > More in what they missed than have wrong. > I know of no other site that covers Olympus rangefinders, so if any of > you can help, it would be appreciated. > > Thanks for your comments, > > keith whaley > Los Angeles You've got the rare and elusive 35UC? Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:13 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28599 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 19:53:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 19:53:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 11:53:01 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20269 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:52:57 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.232.142]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021208194831.CAIZ1627.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:48:31 -0500 Message-ID: <000a01c29ef2$db72c000$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:48:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > You're absolutely right. I had the data sheets for both the RC and the > RD open, and copied the wrong data down for my email. > Sorry. > > I have used them, but never owned one. > I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. > I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. > keith whaley > Los Angeles Perhaps you can get through life without a Olympus 35RC, not sure how, but it might be possible. Just be careful not to criticize one in my hearing, okay :-) Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28932 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 20:02:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 20:02:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 12:02:12 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20280 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:02:09 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB8JwWGQ012297 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:58:32 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF3A523.580ED623@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 12:02:24 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> <000a01c29ef3$19251f60$338ccdd1@datasync.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Whoa, Paul! I misled you! I did not intend to imply I have a complete collection of the 35 series Olys, altho' I suppose what I said could be so construed. No, no. no! I have used the OM series for a long time as my primary kit, but today I want to get a fine example of the two cameras I mentioned, the 35S or SII, and the SP or SPn. It's _those_ two that would complete what I PLAN to be my "Olympus collection!" "Paul D. Farrar" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Keith Whaley" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 12:27 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] > > > Hi C.H. > > > > "C.H.Ling" wrote: > > > > > > No, 42/2.8 is the lens for RC, RD has a 40/1.7 Six element lens. > > > > You're absolutely right. I had the data sheets for both the RC and the > > RD open, and copied the wrong data down for my email. > > Sorry. > > > > I have used them, but never owned one. > > I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. > > I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. > > That will complete my collection. > > > > Anyhow, I took all my date from this site: > > > > http://www.claus-marin.de/indexeng.htm > > > > In my bookmarks I label that the "Oly Rangefinder" site. It seems some > > of the data is out of date, or incorrect, or both. > > More in what they missed than have wrong. > > I know of no other site that covers Olympus rangefinders, so if any of > > you can help, it would be appreciated. > > > > Thanks for your comments, > > > > keith whaley > > Los Angeles > > You've got the rare and elusive 35UC? > > Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29188 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 20:03:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 20:03:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 12:03:45 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20284 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:03:42 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB8K06GQ012497 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:00:06 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF3A581.E1735E24@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 12:03:58 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> <000a01c29ef2$db72c000$7212a20a@waynecul> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Gotcha, Wayne! Heck, I might even add one to my growning body of Oly bodies/cameras. keith whaley Wayne Culberson wrote: > > > You're absolutely right. I had the data sheets for both the RC and the > > RD open, and copied the wrong data down for my email. > > Sorry. > > > > I have used them, but never owned one. > > I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. > > I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. > > keith whaley > > Los Angeles > > Perhaps you can get through life without a Olympus 35RC, not sure how, but > it might be possible. Just be careful not to criticize one in my hearing, > okay :-) > Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29492 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 20:09:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 20:09:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 12:09:19 2002 -0800 Received: from protactinium (protactinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20293 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:09:15 -0800 Received: from host213-122-169-201.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.169.201] helo=personalmyself) by protactinium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18L7gm-0000G5-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:06:08 +0000 Message-ID: <002301c29ef5$4414b8a0$c9a97ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: Subject: [OM] test Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 20:06:15 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Test...things are going missing! John Duggan, Wales, UK. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30395 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 21:23:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 21:23:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 13:23:05 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20374 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:23:03 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA54234 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:22:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208132159.01d279d8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 13:23:19 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:31 AM 12/8/2002 -0800, Winsor wrote: >>on 12/7/02 5:58 PM, Richard F. Man at richard@imagecraft.com wrote: >> >>> Does anyone know what slide film is RVP-511? I just scanned this slide I >> > took over 10 years ago: >>...I believe that is Fuji Sensia II. Not five one one, but S roman number >>two. >... Don't think so. First of all, is Sensia even available 10 years ago? I don't think I heard of it until recently. Second, it looks definitely more like a 5. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30674 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 21:25:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 21:25:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 13:25:22 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA20378 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:25:20 -0800 Received: (cpmta 17277 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 13:24:18 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 13:24:18 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Dec 2002 21:24:18 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:24:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] Broni-blad Message-ID: <3DF37231.3994.34CCE5@localhost> In-reply-to: <001a01c29ef0$f5204e70$b5eaf80c@cb135921a> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sunday, December 08, 2002 at 11:35 Tim Chakravorty wrote: > I don't plan on moving to MF just yet but I will do that sometime in > the future. After looking at slides from both formats I believe there > is simply no contest. Bronica by far gives better value for the > money, but a bargain 500CM/501CM will always be tempting. And as I > read somewhere," buy the best you can , and you will cry only once." Nah, a Koni-Omega has much better bang for the buck. tOM ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30949 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 21:28:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 21:28:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 13:28:14 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20386 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:28:12 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA55508 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:27:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208132348.026f9ea0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 13:28:45 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] printer profile generator (RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5) In-Reply-To: <3DF37EFA.E28E9854@interisland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:18 AM 12/8/2002 -0800, Mike wrote: > > I got a printer profile generator and finally I am getting some nice output > > from the 1280 w/ the colors the way I see them.... Yea... > > >Which one did you get? Details please. I'm going to be printing some >things out for the holidays and this is my biggest problem. I'm even >resigned to attacking the problem with $$$ but have no idea where to >begin Yes, I feel your pain. I lost much hair because of "color management." I don't know why it has to be so complicated. First, make sure your monitor is calibrated. I use a Spyder with Proof It!. It is automated except there is a step where you have to make manual adjustment of the brightness. The printer profiler I got is called ProfilerPlus!. You need Photoshop and a flatbed scanner to use it. There is a trick that you should make sure your scanned calibration target has the right spread of histogram, this web page explains: http://www.computer-darkroom.com/epson_scan/epsonscan_1.htm. It's for an Epson scanner but I think the idea is the same regardless. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31583 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 22:18:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 22:18:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 14:18:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20434 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:18:14 -0800 Received: from h-69-3-218-9.chcgilgm.covad.net ([69.3.218.9] helo=10.0.1.2) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18L9k7-0007XS-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:17:43 -0500 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:17:45 -0600 From: Mark Thalman Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: <3DF37254.3030904@achtung.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mailsmith 1.5.4 (Blindsider) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert, I must disagree with you on this one. I have owned a digital camera since about 1999, an Olympus of course (C2020 Zoom), and with view finders the LCD on the back is much more accurate than the range finder. Especially when shooting macros and short range zooming. At the minimum focus distance (about 9") the view finder contains only the top 500f the subject that you can see in the view. For digital SLRs and cameras with Electronic View Finders this is of course not true. I think that the reason the pictures come out worse is it's harder to hold the camera steady when it's away from your body and not on a tripod. Albert wrote: > The pictures sucked > of course because they take it not with the viewfinder, but via the > display screen, which is not very accurate. -- Mark A. Thalman | mthalman@earthlink.net Stop That Debugging! We have to run a Build! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31980 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 22:33:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 22:33:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 14:33:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20458 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:33:13 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b115.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.115]) by mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gB8MX9i14418 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:33:10 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:30:30 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3DF1AAB8.2000100@achtung.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote on Saturday, December 07, 2002 7:01 PM I'm not annoyed at the Leica cult, I'm annoyed at the fact he preaches "Buy this camera and all your photographic troubles will go away." It just so happens that he has attached it to the Leica name. G'day Albert, On our last October long weekend my wife and I took some American friends down to Manly (Sydney ocean beach suburb and holiday resort) for the annual jazz festival. I needed to take a longish lens and, as the OM mount Vivitar 135 recently bought from the 'bay was in bits, I decided to give my M3 and f4.5 Hektor an outing. Using 100 neg colour film and the day being pretty dull I was hand-holding at 1/125 and 1/60. The 4X6 prints were tack sharp and yeah, had that Leica 'glow'. This Leica was bought by me forty years ago en route to a two year sojourn in the UK, is still silky smooth (was CLA'd around 1975) and you have to listen carefully to be sure the shutter has fired 'cos you sure can't feel it! With my recent (last eighteen month) attack of OM virus I've had a number of troubles in producing a succession of half-way decent results (I'm still plugging away in a sort of dogged fashion) so one can attest that it's indeed true that one's photographic problems just 'go away' when reverting to these lovely, lovely machines. And yes, Henri C-B is still my favourite photographer. John. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32590 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 23:15:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 23:15:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 15:15:32 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20505 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:15:30 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB8NECnh024800 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:14:12 +0100 Subject: re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:16:29 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 09-12-2002 00:16:30 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca About 15 months ago I bought an OM-1 (#9342xx), that had the light tan = hard case. The woman who sold it to me said that she bought it new with the = case in 1976, as far as I remember. It was a pretty good deal, as I also got= a 75-150 Zuiko zoom, and an unused third party 28mm, all for 100USD equivalent. She had hardly used the camera for the last twenty years. Roger Key, Denmark > I have been trying to figure by going over old literature, what exact= ly is > the case number for the older LIGHTER tan/brown camera (body w/lens) = case > that brings the big bucks? > Anyone know? > Thanks in advance > John > John, No numbers on the case or the box. Box only says, "Hard Case", that's all. I have no idea when this case was offered new. When I got a= new case I had the option of black hard case and semi hard with pebble grain. Both with the bottom screw mount. I opted for the semi hard whic= h is still on my OM1. The last and only time I bought a new case was in 1976 :>) Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West = < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 565 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2002 23:40:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 8 Dec 2002 23:40:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 15:40:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20525 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:40:39 -0800 Received: from webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.124]) by mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB8Nebm09051 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:40:37 +1100 Message-Id: <200212082340.gB8Nebm09051@mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 10:40:36 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Broni-blad Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > tOM Trottier wrote: > > On Sunday, December 08, 2002 at 11:35 > Tim Chakravorty wrote: > > > I don't plan on moving to MF just yet but I will do that sometime > in > > the future. After looking at slides from both formats I believe > there > > is simply no contest. Bronica by far gives better value for the > > money, but a bargain 500CM/501CM will always be tempting. And as I > > read somewhere," buy the best you can , and you will cry only > once." > > Nah, a Koni-Omega has much better bang for the buck. > Or a Mamiya Press, 6x9 back and 50mm lens. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1059 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 00:11:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 00:11:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 16:11:28 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20570 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:11:25 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-18.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.18] helo=earthlink.net) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LBVl-0004Z1-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:11:01 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF3E0FF.5060201@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:17:03 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Steve Gandy's Cameraquest site has good information on some of the Olympus Rangefinders. I think you will find the following links interesting: http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrc.htm http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrd.htm http://www.cameraquest.com/olysp.htm Jim Couch Keith Whaley wrote: >I have used them, but never owned one. >I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. >I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. >That will complete my collection. > >Anyhow, I took all my date from this site: > > http://www.claus-marin.de/indexeng.htm > >In my bookmarks I label that the "Oly Rangefinder" site. It seems some >of the data is out of date, or incorrect, or both. >More in what they missed than have wrong. >I know of no other site that covers Olympus rangefinders, so if any of >you can help, it would be appreciated. > >Thanks for your comments, > >keith whaley >Los Angeles > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1895 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 00:31:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 00:31:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 16:31:57 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20598 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:31:54 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.209]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6TUE401.4D1 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:51:40 +0800 Message-ID: <003601c29f1a$6742eac0$d15b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <037301c29e36$8301a1a0$9701a8c0@inspiron> <002001c29e7a$d7728300$d55b68cb@titoy> <015001c29eb6$43eb5d50$9701a8c0@inspiron> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:32:06 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca sigh.....one of those moments of regret. But stil hoping to get one at an attractive price. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Scales" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 8:35 PM Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > Sorry, it is on the keeper list 21-28-50. > > Tom > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Clemente Colayco" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 12:29 AM > Subject: Re: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > > > > Where's the 28 F2? ...just missing one. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tom Scales" > > To: "Olympus List" > > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:20 AM > > Subject: [OM] FS: OM Christmas ideas > > > > > > > I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer > > > right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale > > > before Christmas. > > > > > > Here's the list for now: > > > > > > Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for > convenience. > > > > > > Zuiko 35 Shift > > > > > > Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose > > > > > > Zuiko 50/2 Macro > > > > > > Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) > > > > > > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) > > > > > > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 > > > > > > I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) > and > > > pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully > > > tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. > > > > > > Happy holidays. > > > > > > Tom > > > who has been a lurker recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2198 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 00:40:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 00:40:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 16:40:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20606 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:39:57 -0800 Received: from pacbell.net ([63.203.206.164]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6T0095QTOGWP@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:36:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:33:04 -0800 From: Motor Sport Visions Photography Subject: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas To: "olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca" , tscales@zuikoholic.com Message-id: <3DF3E4BF.E491F7A9@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en,pdf Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/9/2002 Tom Scales writes: << But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) the technology teacher at a local elementary school. >> Wow, good luck and I hope you land it Tom! I don't imagine it will pay as well as software development, etc., but it should be secure and very rewarding. Big change is right, but a good one I have a feeling... BTW, nice to see you de-lurk. I was starting to wonder how you were doing... Good to hear from you! Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2506 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 00:45:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 00:45:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 16:45:46 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20615 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:45:43 -0800 Received: from pacbell.net ([63.203.206.164]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6T009ATTY3LA@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:42:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:38:51 -0800 From: Motor Sport Visions Photography Subject: [OM] Day out with friends To: "olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-id: <3DF3E61A.E0749E5E@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en,pdf Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/9/2002 Albert writes: << Of course, everybody and their mother at the table wanted a digital camera..."which one is cuter" >> The new Olympus C-50 is quite cute. If I had wads of excess cash to spend (I have zero) I would grab one for my wife for her next P&S (I gave her a Stylus Epic a while back which she loves, but doesn't get much use since we got the E-10 a year ago). Appears well made (all metal even), and I bet makes really nice images provided you have enough light. They had stacks of 'em at Costco for $569.00 when I was there last week. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2843 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 00:56:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 00:56:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 16:56:50 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20623 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:56:48 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA01463; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:56:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208165434.026f67c8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:57:21 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, tscales@zuikoholic.com From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas In-Reply-To: <3DF3E4BF.E491F7A9@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >In a message dated 12/9/2002 Tom Scales writes: > ><< But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) >the technology teacher at a local elementary school. >> Wow, I missed this part until Mike mentioned it! Good luck Tom. It's a big change but I bet you'll find it rewarding! Any offer to pick up zuikoholic.com yet? May be I'll do it and run it as an OM fan site. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3141 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:00:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:00:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:00:45 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20627 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:00:43 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (h0050ba483652.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.30.245.120]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002120900593500100pull2e>; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:59:35 +0000 Message-ID: <3DF3EAF7.8060500@attbi.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:59:35 -0500 From: Chuck Norcutt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en, pdf, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "C.H.Ling" , Olympus mail list Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca C.H. said: Ok, just dig out some close distance test on 50mm lenses, I think you all will see a better comparison now... etc, etc. -------------------------------------------------- Wow, C.H. Forget the lens comparison. I want to know what film and scanner you used to create those big jpg's. Compared to my Acer Scanwit efforts (2700 dpi) your images are virtually grainless and have to be greatly magnified to see any pixellation. Granted, the subject has low contrast and maybe that helps but do you have magic equipment or is it simply that I don't have the slightest idea about how to scan images yet? Thanks Chuck Norcutt Woburn, Massachusetts, USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3399 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:02:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:02:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:02:34 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20631 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:02:32 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA02586 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:01:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208165728.02706c90@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:03:06 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Voigtlander 125 APO Makro In-Reply-To: <20021208164623.30720.qmail@twinlark.arctic.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 04:46 PM 12/8/2002 +0000, Alan wrote: >Has anyone used this lens -- any comments on how it compares to the Zuiko 90f2 >or Tokina 90f2.5. Someone got a VL 40/2 on MT mount a few months ago, but my request for image comparisons went unanswered. There are very few (read: none that I know of) discussions on the VL lens on the web. Here's a pic taken with the 75/ // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3697 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:05:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:05:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:05:55 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20644 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:05:53 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA03138 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:05:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208170452.026eff10@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:06:27 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 In-Reply-To: <3DF3EAF7.8060500@attbi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 07:59 PM 12/8/2002 -0500, Chuck Norcutt wrote: >Wow, C.H. Forget the lens comparison. I want to know what film and >scanner you used to create those big jpg's. Compared to my Acer Scanwit >efforts (2700 dpi) your images are virtually grainless and have to be >greatly magnified to see any pixellation. Granted, the subject has low >contrast and maybe that helps but do you have magic equipment or is it >simply that I don't have the slightest idea about how to scan images yet? >.. I bet it's a 4000 scanner (I think C.H. has a LS-4000 also?) and an ASA64 or lower slide film. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3958 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:08:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:08:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:08:17 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20648 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:08:15 -0800 Received: from user-2inis0m.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.112.22] helo=earthlink.net) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LCOk-0001I5-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:07:50 -0800 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:07:43 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DF3E61A.E0749E5E@pacbell.net> Message-Id: <9EF243FE-0B12-11D7-9AE4-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sunday, December 8, 2002, at 04:38 PM, Motor Sport Visions Photography wrote: > In a message dated 12/9/2002 Albert writes: > > << Of course, everybody and their mother at the table wanted a digital > camera..."which one is cuter" >> > > The new Olympus C-50 is quite cute. If I had wads of excess cash to > spend (I have zero) I would grab one for my wife for her next P&S (I > gave her a Stylus Epic a while back which she loves, but doesn't get > much use since we got the E-10 a year ago). Appears well made (all > metal > even), and I bet makes really nice images provided you have enough > light. They had stacks of 'em at Costco for $569.00 when I was there > last week. > > Mike Veglia > Motor Sport Visions Photography > http://www.motorsportvisions.com > 30 bucks cheaper than B&H! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4245 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:11:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:11:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:11:09 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20652 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:11:07 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3375B298 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:10:20 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas In-Reply-To: Message from "Tom Scales" of "Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:02:45 CDT." <02b301c29ed3$40296d20$9701a8c0@inspiron> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:10:19 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021209011020.0F3375B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <02b301c29ed3$40296d20$9701a8c0@inspiron>, "Tom Scales" writes: >Anyway, here are the things I think would be a little more popular with, I >hope, quite fair pricing. Act quick if there is any chance of it making >Christmas. [Snipped ... so many great things, so little OMoney.] >And, yes, once the domain expires (soon), www.zuikoholic.com will cease to >exist. :-) Soon? Domain Name: ZUIKOHOLIC.COM Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC. Record last updated on 28-Feb-2002. Record expires on 17-Feb-2007. Record Created on 17-Feb-2000. You mean in a bit more than 4 years and a quarter. >But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) >the technology teacher at a local elementary school. Good luck with that. :-) I'm sure you're looking forward to an environment with no PHBs. :-) Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4501 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:12:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:12:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:12:13 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20656 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:12:11 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LCSA-000Kw8-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:11:22 -0500 Received: (qmail 99684 invoked by uid 89); 9 Dec 2002 01:11:19 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:11:19 -0000 Message-ID: <00e101c29f1f$d6c51d00$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: , "Richard F. Man" References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208165434.026f67c8@192.168.100.11> Subject: [OM] [OT] teaching Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 20:10:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll share a little bit of what I sent another list member privately: It is an interesting job. Our local school system has a technology magnet elementary school -- pretty unusual. I would be one of three technology teachers, teaching from K - 5 (all 700 or so kids in the school). The school is amazingly advanced. The 5th graders all have palm pilots to take home. There are multiple computers in every classroom. There is a complete studio for working with video. Just really cool. I interviewed for the job on Wednesday. The principal had a valid concern of my lack of teaching experience, so she asked me to come in for a 'tryout'. Thursday afternoon I helped out with a class. Friday I helped with one, co-taught one and taught 2nd graders by myself. In the middle of their computer exercises, the LAN and their computers went down and I had to recover from the crisis. Went pretty well :) So, early this week I'll find out if I get the job. I hope so. I also started school in the fall for my Masters in education. If I do something, I do it right.... I'm pretty excited! Tom P.S. Zuikoholic.com should come available in February or March. You're welcome to it. > > >In a message dated 12/9/2002 Tom Scales writes: > > > ><< But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) > >the technology teacher at a local elementary school. >> > > Wow, I missed this part until Mike mentioned it! Good luck Tom. It's a big > change but I bet you'll find it rewarding! > > Any offer to pick up zuikoholic.com yet? May be I'll do it and run it as an > OM fan site. > > // richard < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4801 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:16:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:16:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:16:06 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20664 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:16:01 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gB918C215474 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:08:12 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:14:44 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F561B@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:14:41 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Mike Veglia [mailto:msvphoto@pacbell.net] wrote: > The new Olympus C-50 is quite cute.... I've been tossing up between the 4 megapixel Canon G3 (which'll use my Canon 380EX flash with full E-TTL compatibility) and the 5 megapixel C-5050 for my first digital camera (the D60-suggestion causing my partner to laugh hysterically, vomit up their own stomach, and then bludgeon me with my own OM1, in repeating stages, until I retracted ;-) ) I finally decided that I like the size and unobtrusiveness of the the Olympus, and that, as the camera is to *supplement* my Canon EOS, Olympus OM1 (and little-used OMPC) and Olympus 35RC (Lovely camera! Buy one! Cheap as chips!), the extra megapixel and the fact that if I'm willing to carry around a big flash than I'm willing to carry around film and 50E in those circumstances (and the C-5050 has a built-in for "fill" as well), well....you can see where this is heading. I've decided pretty much to go with the C-5050 (are you there Wayne Culberson? It's probably not "perfect", but for me, having looked, it seems close enough). Having finally held that compact little body in my hands, and felt the "glove" effect (one I've only previously got from the 35RC), the heart may be overriding the mind in some areas. These views *may* change on use. I *have* seen a suggestion that the C-5050's lens is not as sharp as the G3's, but I'm wondering if the extra megapixel compensates. Still, what else is credit for? ;-) Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5111 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:24:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:24:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:24:50 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20680 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:24:47 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LCey-0000hL-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:24:36 -0500 Received: (qmail 30503 invoked by uid 89); 9 Dec 2002 01:24:40 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:24:40 -0000 Message-ID: <010a01c29f21$b45bfde0$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: <20021209011020.0F3375B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 20:24:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, no. My hosting contract expires in a few months. I'd pass the name along to a new 'owner'. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "VS" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 8:10 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas > In message <02b301c29ed3$40296d20$9701a8c0@inspiron>, "Tom Scales" writes: > > >Anyway, here are the things I think would be a little more popular with, I > >hope, quite fair pricing. Act quick if there is any chance of it making > >Christmas. > > [Snipped ... so many great things, so little OMoney.] > > >And, yes, once the domain expires (soon), www.zuikoholic.com will cease to > >exist. > > :-) Soon? > > Domain Name: ZUIKOHOLIC.COM > > Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC. > Record last updated on 28-Feb-2002. > Record expires on 17-Feb-2007. > Record Created on 17-Feb-2000. > > You mean in a bit more than 4 years and a quarter. > > >But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) > >the technology teacher at a local elementary school. > > Good luck with that. :-) > > I'm sure you're looking forward to an environment with no PHBs. :-) > > Cheers, > > Saso > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5392 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:26:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:26:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 17:26:31 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20684 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:26:28 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB91MoGQ010677 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:22:50 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF3F126.D8097E5@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:27:08 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> <3DF3E0FF.5060201@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm really turned off by the 1/250 sec max shutter speed! No lower than 1/15 and no higher than 1/250 sec is not my cuppa! I have cameras 15 to 20 years older than that, with higher speeds... Of course, they don't have a spot meter, or a .... Well, if I find a black one, maybe... In the meanwhile, I'll stay with my quest for a 35S or S II. I do thank you for the web site info, Jim. I"m gonna keep it anyhow! keith whaley Jim Couch wrote: > > Steve Gandy's Cameraquest site has good information on some of the > Olympus Rangefinders. I think you will find the following links interesting: > > http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrc.htm > http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrd.htm > http://www.cameraquest.com/olysp.htm > > Jim Couch > > Keith Whaley wrote: > > >I have used them, but never owned one. > >I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn. > >I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II. > >That will complete my collection. > > > >Anyhow, I took all my date from this site: > > > > http://www.claus-marin.de/indexeng.htm > > > >In my bookmarks I label that the "Oly Rangefinder" site. It seems some > >of the data is out of date, or incorrect, or both. > >More in what they missed than have wrong. > >I know of no other site that covers Olympus rangefinders, so if any of > >you can help, it would be appreciated. > > > >Thanks for your comments, > > > >keith whaley > >Los Angeles > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6020 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 02:15:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 02:15:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 18:15:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mailfilter1.uts.edu.au (mailfilter1.itd.uts.edu.au [138.25.22.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA20725 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:15:56 -0800 Received: from homer.itd.uts.edu.au(138.25.22.96) by mailfilter1.uts.edu.au via csmap id 6848; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 13:13:13 +1100 (EST) Received: from uts.edu.au (vbromfield.itd.uts.edu.au [138.25.32.39]) by mail.uts.edu.au (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6T00ETIY9ILK@mail.uts.edu.au> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 13:15:19 +1100 (EST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 13:15:20 +1100 From: Vaughan Bromfield Subject: Re: [OM] MF, Fuji RF or Hassey? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3DF3FCB8.DBD3FB5B@uts.edu.au> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en References: <20021209001134.1111.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote: > Two vacation cameras: The one I've been pining over, the Fuji GW690III, > or the Hassey SWC903/905. > > What are your opinions? I assume you mean "two cameras that are going to cost me the equivilent of a good vacation each year to buy and feed with film and processing." Sure, go ahead. But don't sell the OM stuff just yet: *that* you'll regret. Have you tried 4x5 yet... its quality makes roll film look like crap even more than roll film makes 35mm look like crap. Vaughan UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER ======================================================================== This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. ======================================================================== < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6312 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 02:21:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 02:21:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 18:21:57 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20729 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:21:54 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-18.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.18] helo=earthlink.net) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LDYN-0007AY-00; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 18:21:51 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF3FFB5.1040306@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 18:28:05 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca CC: Tom Scales Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas References: <02b301c29ed3$40296d20$9701a8c0@inspiron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Good luck with the potential job! Hopefully it will give you a bit more time for family and photography! Jim Couch Tom Scales wrote: >But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) >the technology teacher at a local elementary school. > >Big change. > >Tom > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6748 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 02:46:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 02:46:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 18:46:53 2002 -0800 Received: from xmxpita.excite.com (nn6.excitenetwork.com [207.159.120.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20741 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:46:50 -0800 Received: by xmxpita.excite.com (Postfix, from userid 110) id 558A23E02; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:43:15 -0500 (EST) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Printer Wanted Received: from [172.160.219.254] by xprdmailfe9.nwk.excite.com via HTTP; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 21:43:15 EST X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: ID = 39f89492af9b120e55c2d49cdc70502a From: "Boris Grigorov" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: alienspecimen@excite.com X-Mailer: PHP Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__90d33e9a7ecedf48915b95d44557f6d2"; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Message-Id: <20021209024315.558A23E02@xmxpita.excite.com> Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:43:15 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__90d33e9a7ecedf48915b95d44557f6d2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Zuiks and Zuikettes, It is this time of the year when the good boys and girls receive presents and wifey has allowed me to spend some $130-150 on a printer. Here are the things that are important to me. I would like to have the one that would give me the best quality possible for the little money. Since I admitted at the beginning that I am cheap, I want to tell you that the cost per print is also very, very important to me. I do not really care about the speed of the printing. USB port is important too. I do not have the capability to use Firewire. I would like to be able to use paper from different manufacturers. B&W is not important, it would be used for color only. Must have separate color and black cartriges. Within this range, so far I "matched" the Epson Stylus Photo 785 EPX, but have concerns about the image size and the life of the cartriges. So, what do you think? Am I going to get anything decent at this price? I also remember that at least an year ago, someone wrote to this list, praising an HP model and his exact words were " my friends thought that I used wet processing to develop my pictures". Thanks in advice. Boris _______________________________________________ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! --EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__90d33e9a7ecedf48915b95d44557f6d2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Zuiks and Zuikettes,
It is this time of the year when the good boys and girls receive presents and wifey has allowed me to spend some $130-150 on a printer. Here are the things that are important to me.
I would like to have the one that would give me the best quality possible for the little money. Since I admitted at the beginning that I am cheap, I want to tell you that the cost per print is also very, very important to me. I do not really care about the speed of the printing. USB port is important too. I do not have the capability to use Firewire. I would like to be able to use paper from different manufacturers. B&W is not important, it would be used for color only. Must have separate color and black cartriges.
Within this range, so far I "matched" the Epson Stylus Photo 785 EPX, but have concerns about the image size and the life of the cartriges.
So, what do you think? Am I going to get anything decent at this price? I also remember that at leas! t an year ago, someone wrote to this list, praising an HP model and his exact words were " my friends thought that I used wet processing to develop my pictures".
Thanks in advice.
Boris

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web! --EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__90d33e9a7ecedf48915b95d44557f6d2-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7006 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 02:48:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 02:48:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 18:48:14 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20745 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:48:12 -0800 Received: from 1cust33.tnt2.san-rafael.ca.da.uu.net ([68.128.54.33] helo=D35CRW11) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LDxT-0004IJ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 18:47:47 -0800 Message-ID: <002601c29f2d$5dddd900$21368044@D35CRW11> From: "William Latham" To: References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> <3DF3E0FF.5060201@earthlink.net> <3DF3F126.D8097E5@dslextreme.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:47:49 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Keith Are we still talking the 35 SP? Mine has shutter speeds from 1/500 to 1 second? My 35RC goes 1/15 to 1/500. Regards Bill Latham From: "Keith Whaley" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:27 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] > I'm really turned off by the 1/250 sec max shutter speed! > No lower than 1/15 and no higher than 1/250 sec is not my cuppa! keith whaley Los Angeles < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7347 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 02:57:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 02:57:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 18:57:27 2002 -0800 Received: from goose.mail.pas.earthlink.net (goose.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20757 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:57:25 -0800 Received: from user-38ldm5j.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.216.179] helo=earthlink.net) by goose.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LD1g-0002zC-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:48:05 -0800 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:46:14 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] RVP-511 and the Tamron 90/2.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208132159.01d279d8@192.168.100.11> Message-Id: <0094F6CD-0B18-11D7-9AE4-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sunday, December 8, 2002, at 01:23 PM, Richard F. Man wrote: > Don't think so. First of all, is Sensia even available 10 years ago? I > don't think I heard of it until recently. Second, it looks definitely > more like a 5. You are right. It is a puzzle. Velvia 50 is RVP. Sensia is listed in a B&H ad in a 1991 issue of Popular Photography I saved. It has been around longer than you are aware. Sensia II came out later, but its nomenclature was RAII for a while before settling on RA. A version of Provia was RDPII. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7655 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 03:03:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 03:03:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 19:03:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20772 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 19:03:24 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.9]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6U1EN00.JDT for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:23:11 +0800 Message-ID: <006901c29f2f$918e5a20$095b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <02b301c29ed3$40296d20$9701a8c0@inspiron> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:03:36 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Why can't I access the site? Is it down? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Scales" To: "Tom Scales" ; "Olympus List" Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 12:02 AM Subject: [OM] Re: OM Christmas ideas > OK, finally got my machine put back together. My wife's machine was having > problems, so I put a spare hard drive in mine, rebuilt it for her and then > put my hard drive back in. Unfortunately she wanted it triple (yes triple) > boot, 98/Me/XP Home and I had a devil of a time with 98. > > Anyway, here are the things I think would be a little more popular with, I > hope, quite fair pricing. Act quick if there is any chance of it making > Christmas. > > Zuiko 85-250/5 - $230 > Zuiko 35 Shift - $370 > Zuiko 50/2 - $350 > Zuiko 24/2.8 - $135 > Tamron 80-200/2.8 with SP2X - $430 > T28 Single - $150 > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 - $99 > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 - $115 > > 40/2 is already gone. > > Everything is on my site at http://www.zuikoholic.com/members/members.htm > with lower prices for list members. Most have pictures. All the things > above are there and a few more. > > And, yes, once the domain expires (soon), www.zuikoholic.com will cease to > exist. I just don't have the time or energy to keep it up since I am not > actively trading anymore. I'll keep a nice healthy kit of things I do use > (the 90/2 and 35-80/2.8 won't ever sell, for example), but not as much as I > did before. I've been more of a lurker recently too. > > But, if all goes well, I'll start a new job this week as (drum roll please) > the technology teacher at a local elementary school. > > Big change. > > Tom > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Scales" > To: "Olympus List" > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 4:20 PM > Subject: FS: OM Christmas ideas > > > > I'll post more later with the details -- can't get to the right computer > > right now -- but I thought I would mention I have a few things for sale > > before Christmas. > > > > Here's the list for now: > > > > Tamrom 80-200/2.8 with Tamron SP 2X. OL Adapters on both for convenience. > > > > Zuiko 35 Shift > > > > Zuiko 24/2.8 Silvernose > > > > Zuiko 50/2 Macro > > > > Zuiko 40/2 (close to mint) > > > > OM-1 Chrome with Shoe 1 (fix) > > > > OM-2n Chrome with Shoe 4 > > > > I'll put together more information on condition (all pretty darn good) and > > pricing (also pretty good, I hope) and get it back to the list hopefully > > tonight. Let me know, though, if you're interested. > > > > Happy holidays. > > > > Tom > > who has been a lurker recently. > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7944 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 03:06:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 03:06:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 19:06:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA20777 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 19:06:05 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-14.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039403099!278 Received: (qmail 14530 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 03:05:01 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-14.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 03:05:01 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB92eHD29667; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:40:17 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF408BE.ABE5E89D@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:06:38 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chuck Norcutt CC: Olympus mail list Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 References: <3DF3EAF7.8060500@attbi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The film is Fuji Provia F100 (RDP III). It is the least grain slide film currently. The scanner is Nikon LS4000ED scanned at 3000dpi. C.H.Ling Chuck Norcutt wrote: > > C.H. said: > Ok, just dig out some close distance test on 50mm lenses, I think you > all will see a better comparison now... etc, etc. > -------------------------------------------------- > Wow, C.H. Forget the lens comparison. I want to know what film and > scanner you used to create those big jpg's. Compared to my Acer Scanwit > efforts (2700 dpi) your images are virtually grainless and have to be > greatly magnified to see any pixellation. Granted, the subject has low > contrast and maybe that helps but do you have magic equipment or is it > simply that I don't have the slightest idea about how to scan images yet? > > Thanks > Chuck Norcutt > Woburn, Massachusetts, USA ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8426 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 03:36:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 03:36:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 19:36:53 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20807 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 19:36:50 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021209033304.UVZH1598.priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 20:33:04 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021208203238.00bcdc30@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:33:02 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 In-Reply-To: <3DF3EAF7.8060500@attbi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 07:59 PM 12/8/2002 -0500, you wrote: >C.H. said: >Ok, just dig out some close distance test on 50mm lenses, I think you all will see a better comparison now... etc, etc. >-------------------------------------------------- >Wow, C.H. Forget the lens comparison. I want to know what film and scanner you used to create those big jpg's. Compared to my Acer Scanwit efforts (2700 dpi) your images are virtually grainless and have to be greatly magnified to see any pixellation. Granted, the subject has low contrast and maybe that helps but do you have magic equipment or is it simply that I don't have the slightest idea about how to scan images yet? Polaroid Sprintscan 4000. Accept no substitutes. ;-) Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8686 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 03:39:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 03:39:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 19:39:07 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20811 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 19:39:01 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB93ZOGQ023908 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 19:35:24 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF41038.42072DA0@dslextreme.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:39:52 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> <3DF3E0FF.5060201@earthlink.net> <3DF3F126.D8097E5@dslextreme.com> <002601c29f2d$5dddd900$21368044@D35CRW11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca William Latham wrote: > > Hi Keith > > Are we still talking the 35 SP? Mine has shutter speeds from 1/500 to 1 > second? My 35RC goes 1/15 to 1/500. > > Regards > Bill Latham Hi Bill... Yes, the SP. This site, given me by some one here just recently, like early this AM, says the SP has useable shutter speeds from 1/15 to 1/250... I'll explain. See the site from which I gleaned the info. http://www.cameraquest.com/olysp.htm To be perfectly clear, see way at the bottom, under "The Negative", where it says the AE (automatic exposure) system hangs up with speed choices below 1/15 sec, and above 1/250 sec. All I know is what I read! Maybe he had a bad example? keith > From: "Keith Whaley" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:27 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] > > > I'm really turned off by the 1/250 sec max shutter speed! > > No lower than 1/15 and no higher than 1/250 sec is not my cuppa! > > keith whaley > Los Angeles > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9733 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 05:11:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 05:11:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 21:11:06 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20892 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:11:03 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-85-102.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.85.102]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gB95AVqV087194 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:10:31 -0500 Message-ID: <000d01c29f3b$84e3be80$66554241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021209001134.1111.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Having just come home from a xmas party, I many be too drunk... Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:29:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ...but I'll still respond, even this is really off topic. "Two vacation cameras: The one I've been pining over, the Fuji GW690III, or the Hassey SWC903/905." Wow, what a weird choice! Both are highly regarded, but remember, they're both really wide angle, so as a vacation camera may be limited. Once you have the bigger negative, you really understand the saying that racers use: there's no substitiute for horespower. A Leica just can't compete with a Yashica 124. I find that I use cameras as the job requires. I always go for the biggest negative, then move on. There are things where a 35 excells: macro, quick shooting, etc. There are things where a 6x6 does better, where the big negative is better, for lack of grain, and a smoothness of tone. MF and LF are siren songs, indeed. As I have said earlier, I am sadder but wiser, as 'blad prices are falling. The 905 uses a different lens, as the glass in the earlier lens used lead or some other problematic heavy metal, and Zeiss couldn't afford the special melt that would produce a ten year supply of lenses. 903's and earlier have lenses that are essentially identical, that is to say of the highest calibre. The 38mm lens of the superwide is indeed a legend. On the other hand, the Fuji "Texas Leicas" are also highly regarded. They lend themselves to more panoranmic shots, as they are not a square format (duh!), but that's usually the requirement. I'll leave the bokeh discussions to others in this case. If you were to buy a SWC, I would recommend one with a T* lens, as the multicoating is more vaulable with WA lenses. Then, you already have the back, a start on a Hasselblad system. If you are not interested in going to MF, then the Fuji is probably better. Of course, if you've never contact printed an 8x10 negative, you will probably stay with 35. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10019 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 05:15:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 05:15:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 21:15:27 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20896 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:15:24 -0800 From: DaEyeGuy@aol.com Received: from DaEyeGuy@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.127.1c759e17 (4238) for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:13:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <127.1c759e17.2b25807d@aol.com> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:13:33 EST Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] teaching To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_127.1c759e17.2b25807d_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10622 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_127.1c759e17.2b25807d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit wow Tom, methinks you have an extreme inner source of patience and goodness (LOL) I went back to teaching part-time a year ago at a local private college and have really enjoyed it..it does get the gray matter rumbling again! This is a small, technology and business-heavy college and I teach the general curriculum freshman and sophomore classes...block schedule, so each class only once a week (works well with my retail shops..can be back by noon). If you had asked me 10 years ago, when still riding high in the 'corporate world', if I'd ever do this agian, I'd have questioned your sanity. But, funny thing is, as you get a little older you get to understand that money isn't everything and that a creative input into others' lives is very rewarding. I wish you happiness! Susan Steele Central Virginia --part1_127.1c759e17.2b25807d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit wow Tom, methinks you have an extreme inner source of patience and goodness (LOL) I went back to teaching part-time a year ago at a local private college and have really enjoyed it..it does get the gray matter rumbling again! This is a small, technology and business-heavy college and I teach the general curriculum freshman and sophomore classes...block schedule, so each class only once a week (works well with my retail shops..can be back by noon).

If you had asked me 10 years ago, when still riding high in the 'corporate world', if I'd ever do this agian, I'd have questioned your sanity. But, funny thing is, as you get a little older you get to understand that money isn't everything and that a creative input into others' lives is very rewarding.

I wish you happiness!

Susan Steele
Central Virginia


 --part1_127.1c759e17.2b25807d_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10435 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 05:38:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 05:38:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 21:38:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20932 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:38:13 -0800 Received: (qmail 29418 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 05:38:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail16.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 9 Dec 2002 05:38:28 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF42FDD.40704@speakeasy.net> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 23:53:33 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus-digest Subject: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One of the things we did was door prizes, that had been donated by members of the Sunday School class. My donation was an 8x10 of whatever the winner wanted. Well, the winner wants a picture of her cats. Since both my daughter and I are allergic to cats, I don't have much experience with felines. What have I gotten myself into? I'm sure y'all are just full of ideas. Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa P.S. About the only thing I've read about pet photography are the mis-adventures of photographing cats in Lilian Jackson Braun's novels. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10890 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:04:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:04:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:04:40 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20963 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:04:35 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:50:51 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF431D9.4030609@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:02:01 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] MF, Fuji RF or Hassey? References: <20021209001134.1111.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <3DF3FCB8.DBD3FB5B@uts.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <3DF3FCB8.DBD3FB5B@uts.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nope, the OM is not getting sold. Nothing "replaces" my OM, only suppliments. We are talking about money which I don't have, and so now that we have taken the money part out of the equation; or let me preface: "I just won the lottery, which camera? Fuji 690III or Hassey SWC 903" if I'm going on a world-wind vacation tour?" Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11172 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:05:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:05:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:05:42 2002 -0800 Received: from web40601.mail.yahoo.com (web40601.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.78.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA20967 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:05:39 -0800 Message-ID: <20021209060454.61412.qmail@web40601.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.130.155.201] by web40601.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 22:04:54 PST Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:04:54 -0800 (PST) From: Andre Goforth Subject: [OM] WTS F280 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Zuiks, Please contact me off list if you interested in a F280 flash at andregoforth@yahoo.com. $75 + shipping. Two week return if it does not work to original specifications. Andre PS NOTE Please do reply directly to this email. I may not find it in all the stuff!!! __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11427 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:09:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:09:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:09:44 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20970 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:09:41 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:57:32 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF4336A.4020307@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:08:42 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ahh... But the problem is John, you are a photographer!! If you just took the average joe, who averages 2 rolls every new president; and hand him a camera, regardless of the camera; he will probably have cruddy pictures.. Yes, again, they are wonderful machines, in THE RIGHT HANDS.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11730 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:13:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:13:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:13:19 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20981 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:13:15 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:01:06 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF43440.5040607@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:12:16 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You might be right, most people take pictures with a digital camera away from the body, and that leads to serious handshakes..... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12063 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:22:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:22:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:22:31 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA20998 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:22:29 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-33.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039414365!494 Received: (qmail 22088 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:12:46 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-33.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:12:46 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB95uaD00326 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:56:37 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF436C2.6DF5714C@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:22:58 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica :::off-line:::] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca -------- Original Message -------- From: Gary Reese *************** When folks use Modern Photography data to compare lenses, they need to take into account: * Panatomic-X was discontinued well before MP folded and their lens tests ceased - so what film did they use in its place and what effect did it have on results? What tests are Panatomix-X based and what tests used the successor film? * What camera were generic lens tests done on? A vibration prone camera or a rock solid heavyweight? The odds are against them being done on an OM-1 with mirror lock-up. IMHO, those two confounding factors loom larger than sample to sample variability issues which are more frequently mentioned. ************** Gary ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12350 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:29:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:29:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:29:02 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21006 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:29:00 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.47.244]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021209062808.DUQI21757.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:28:08 -0500 Message-ID: <00a101c29f4c$1c867560$f42f44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] good BIN for OM-2S with zoom? Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:27:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, we ALWAYS paint with a broad brush. :) Ha! Gotcha again. Just kidding. Thanks for clearing up that not all sellers in Kentucky are bad guys. As soon as the CORRECT metal hood for the legendary Zuiko 28/2 comes in, I'm gonna be putting it up on ebuy (with the correct case). I need to raise some serious money so I apologize for not offering it to you guys first. Most listers have deep pockets anyway, right? :) That damn broad brush..... Lama From: "James N. McBride" > As always, when we paint with the broad brush we hit things we shouldn't. My > first bad deal from Kentucky involved an F280 flash that supposedly had a > chip on the shoe. It was actually broken completely off. > The second mess was with Dan Sharon > at Kentucky Camera Service (Dscmrep@aol.com). The lens barrel was bent enough that the it took two hands > to turn the aperture ring with the lens off the camera. > He agreed to refund my money so I sent the lens back. He never > sent the refund. I got an answer then, and an untrue > retaliatory negative feedback. > He later returned the lens to me rather than a refund. I'm not done with > him. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12691 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:39:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:39:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:39:41 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21022 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:39:36 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:25:57 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF43A07.6000907@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:36:55 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Retro focus? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm not a math genius, but from my understanding, the Hassy 903 was designed to not be an SLR because it then doesn't require retro focus on the back end, which is usually what makes a wide angle so big. Rangefinders in general don't have th requirement, and the rear element and the filmplane is so close, thus the lenses are generally smaller. Give this to be the case, shouldn't the Leica lenses beat pretty much all the other lenses, as it's technically easier to make a lens that's sharp for an RF vs an SLR? It would seem that way to me; and why the Mamiya 7 lenses are tack sharp, as is the Fuji Rangefinders, as is the Hassy 903 and the Leicas etc.. Or am I really off here?? I don't think I am.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12975 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:43:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:43:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 22:43:29 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21026 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:43:26 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002120906421800200dj4nte>; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:42:18 +0000 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:40:16 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica :::off-line:::] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DF436C2.6DF5714C@accura.com.hk> Message-Id: <13F05F69-0B41-11D7-807B-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wow. When did Pan-X go out of production? I used to shoot it from time to time. I hadn't even noticed that it wasn't around anymore. -Rob On Sunday, December 8, 2002, at 10:22 PM, C.H.Ling wrote: > * Panatomic-X was discontinued well before MP folded and their > lens tests ceased - so > what film did they use in its place and what effect did it have on > results? What tests are > Panatomix-X based and what tests used the successor film? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13421 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 07:05:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 07:05:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 23:05:18 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA21055 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:05:15 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-19.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039417430!656 Received: (qmail 12651 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 07:03:51 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-19.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 07:03:51 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB96dRD01290 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:39:28 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF440CE.78104968@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:05:50 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] 21/3.5 $250 BIN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Looks to be a very good BIN, no connection to the seller..etc. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1944351774&category=3344 C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13760 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 07:12:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 07:12:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 23:12:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA21075 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:12:34 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-21.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039417883!699 Received: (qmail 21340 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 07:11:24 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-21.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 07:11:24 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB96kjD01428 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:46:45 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF44284.CF273A8C@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:13:08 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Retro focus? References: <3DF43A07.6000907@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Also, may be due to the close film to rear lens distance, the edge fall off looks to be more serious than the SLR. Haven't pay with any range finder super wide, just impressed by some Leica 21mm slides and some C/V 15mm prints, the vignetting was very obvious. C.H.Ling Albert wrote: > > I'm not a math genius, but from my understanding, the Hassy 903 was > designed to not be an SLR because it then doesn't require retro focus on > the back end, which is usually what makes a wide angle so big. > Rangefinders in general don't have th requirement, and the rear element > and the filmplane is so close, thus the lenses are generally smaller. > > Give this to be the case, shouldn't the Leica lenses beat pretty much > all the other lenses, as it's technically easier to make a lens that's > sharp for an RF vs an SLR? > > It would seem that way to me; and why the Mamiya 7 lenses are tack > sharp, as is the Fuji Rangefinders, as is the Hassy 903 and the Leicas etc.. > > Or am I really off here?? I don't think I am.. > Albert ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14180 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 07:30:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 07:30:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 08 23:30:32 2002 -0800 Received: from vs.bgnett.no (vs.bgnett.no [194.54.96.159]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21096 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:30:26 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3) id gB97Mlb59196 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:22:47 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) Received: from svein (lppp200.bgnett.no [194.54.100.200]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3av) with SMTP id gB97Mj959189 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:22:45 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) From: =?windows-1252?Q?Svein=20Skj=F8tskift?= To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:29:23 +0100 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Organization: ess Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 X-Virus-Scanned: by vs.bgnett.no Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cats can look very nice in a window, take the shot from outside? Bring something to catch their curiosity, a toy bird? Svein 09.12.2002 06:53:33, skreiv Steve Goss : >One of the things we did was door prizes, that had been donated by >members of the Sunday School class. My donation was an 8x10 of whatever >the winner wanted. Well, the winner wants a picture of her cats. Since >both my daughter and I are allergic to cats, I don't have much >experience with felines. What have I gotten myself into? I'm sure y'all >are just full of ideas. > >Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa >P.S. About the only thing I've read about pet photography are the >mis-adventures of photographing cats in Lilian Jackson Braun's novels. > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14676 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 08:02:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 08:02:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 00:02:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21104 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:02:54 -0800 Received: from mckoy ([216.101.212.57]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6U00579E6P81@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 23:59:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:02:47 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 In-reply-to: <3DF408BE.ABE5E89D@accura.com.hk> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <20021209000247.143e1082.talrmr@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <3DF3EAF7.8060500@attbi.com> <3DF408BE.ABE5E89D@accura.com.hk> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:06:38 +0800 "C.H.Ling" wrote: > The film is Fuji Provia F100 (RDP III). It is the least grain slide > film currently. The scanner is Nikon LS4000ED scanned at 3000dpi. > > Any reason you prefer to scan at 3000dpi instead of 4000? Tal < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15275 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 08:58:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 08:58:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 00:58:27 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA21118 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:58:26 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-4.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039424229!1145 Received: (qmail 4983 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 08:57:10 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-4.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 08:57:10 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gB98WZD03552 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:32:35 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF45B50.BC836A0D@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 16:58:56 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 References: <3DF3EAF7.8060500@attbi.com> <3DF408BE.ABE5E89D@accura.com.hk> <20021209000247.143e1082.talrmr@pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One of the reason is the file will be more optimized for sharing in the net. At the mean time 3000dpi is good enough for most application, especially it is sample down from 4000dpi, the resolution is much better than my old 2700dpi scanner (LS2000). C.H.Ling Tal Lancaster wrote: > > On Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:06:38 +0800 > "C.H.Ling" wrote: > > > The film is Fuji Provia F100 (RDP III). It is the least grain slide > > film currently. The scanner is Nikon LS4000ED scanned at 3000dpi. > > > > > > Any reason you prefer to scan at 3000dpi instead of 4000? > > Tal ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16007 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 09:59:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 09:59:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 01:59:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA21169 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:59:05 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax18-249.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.169.249]) by mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gB99x1t14638 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:59:01 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Retro focus? Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:58:33 +1100 Message-ID: <000a01c29f69$93616010$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3DF44284.CF273A8C@accura.com.hk> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > Also, may be due to the close film to rear lens distance, the > edge fall off looks to be more serious than the SLR. Haven't > pay with any range finder super wide, just impressed by some > Leica 21mm slides and some C/V 15mm prints, the vignetting > was very obvious. > Yeah cos^4 fall off will be more severe for a non-retro focus design as the retro focus design puts the lens rear nodal point much further away from the film, so the angle between the lens axis and the edges of the frame is much less. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17642 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 12:40:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 12:40:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 04:40:08 2002 -0800 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA21277 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 04:40:07 -0800 From: cuthillmike@softhome.net Received: (qmail 9355 invoked by uid 417); 9 Dec 2002 12:40:01 -0000 Received: from slide-.softhome.net (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.2.21) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 12:40:01 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 417) by softhome.net with local; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 05:40:01 -0700 References: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> In-Reply-To: <000301c29c86$0460d200$0800a8c0@reac.local> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Re: Developers - AAAAARRRGGGHH ! Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 05:40:00 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sender: cuthillmike@softhome.net X-Originating-IP: [213.121.212.121] Message-ID: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jon Mitchell writes: > OK, so I've finally lost it with developers / processors........etc. I know how you feel, been there. I moved to slides for most work (but still use negs for family shots and the like). The slides I'd really like to hang on the wall I get printed. If you keep your eyes open there are often some deals going around (e.g. currently COLAB - no connection etc. - 2.50GBP for 15" X 10" from trannies). If I want digital I get a scan on CD at time of processing. I can get a fair number of prints, CDs for the price of a scanner/printer/consumeables etc. Mike Blayney, Devon, UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17934 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 12:49:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 12:49:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 04:49:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.alcatel.be (alc250.alcatel.be [195.207.101.250]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21285 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 04:49:45 -0800 From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be Received: from bemail04.net.alcatel.be (relay3 [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alcatel.be (8.11.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gB9CaQX29033 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:36:26 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] teaching To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:35:53 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL04/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 12/09/2002 13:36:26 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations Tom - hope it goes well! Please stay decloaked / unlurked - we appreciate your inputs! br jez < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18621 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 13:53:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 13:53:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 05:53:02 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21333 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 05:53:00 -0800 Received: from [62.64.214.95] (helo=[62.64.216.85]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LOH3-0001Z7-00; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 13:48:42 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <127.1c759e17.2b25807d@aol.com> References: <127.1c759e17.2b25807d@aol.com> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:46:58 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] teaching Cc: DaEyeGuy@aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I agree Susan. I did not have to take a drop in pay to take up teaching (I get paid less now as a Flight Lieutenant, but my Wing Commander's pension makes up the difference now that I am "retired"), so it was an easy move financially. But I did take a risk with my loss of rank and status in the regular RAF. And the ability to offer youngsters advice and your "creative input" (such as it is with flying) has significant potential rewards. Of course, I have to be patient now... Chris At 00:13 -0500 9/12/02, DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: >wow Tom, methinks you have an extreme inner source of patience and >goodness (LOL) I went back to teaching part-time a year ago at a >local private college and have really enjoyed it..it does get the >gray matter rumbling again! This is a small, technology and >business-heavy college and I teach the general curriculum freshman >and sophomore classes...block schedule, so each class only once a >week (works well with my retail shops..can be back by noon). > >If you had asked me 10 years ago, when still riding high in the >'corporate world', if I'd ever do this agian, I'd have questioned >your sanity. But, funny thing is, as you get a little older you get >to understand that money isn't everything and that a creative input >into others' lives is very rewarding. > >I wish you happiness! > >Susan Steele >Central Virginia -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19071 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 14:23:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 14:23:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 06:23:15 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA21350 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:23:14 -0800 Received: (cpmta 2321 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:22:11 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:22:11 -0800 X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 14:22:11 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE:[OM] WE-2002 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:19:25 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001101c29f8d$faaf1ae0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <20021207105754.20615.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't think that any one would object to getting MORE that what they expected! ;) Bob, I have in the past taken a little liberty in size, having sent a full frame printed on an 8X10 piece of paper. I find myself often tending to compose full frame. I will be taking some stuff to the processor on Monday to have some 10X15 prints made and anticipate likely sending that size print. Does that create a problem for the exchange? Bill Barber < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19328 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 14:24:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 14:24:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 06:24:58 2002 -0800 Received: from web13709.mail.yahoo.com (web13709.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.251]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA21358 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:24:55 -0800 Message-ID: <20021209142440.80219.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.200] by web13709.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 06:24:40 PST Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:24:40 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021209001134.1111.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >So I was thinking about an even smaller 100/2.8 (maybe MC). >How does it compare against the 135? One word: Bokeh. The 100/2.8 has much better bokeh than the 135/3.5. When seeking that 3D look, the 100/2.8 has it. Now, compare the 100/2.8 to the 85/2, I'd say that both are pretty close. Other than the extra reach that those 15mm get you, the two lenses are nearly identical. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19647 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 14:34:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 14:34:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 06:34:13 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA21370 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:34:12 -0800 Received: (cpmta 11247 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:33:11 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:33:11 -0800 X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 14:33:11 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] WE-2002 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:30:25 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001201c29f8f$838f1fd0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <20021208114329.10618.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, I forgot to mention, the euro equivalent - A4. Thanks! That is 8*10 inches? is that about A4 size (210mm*297mm)? I was brought up in the Metric system and always get confused converting inches to metric... Iwert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19937 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 14:37:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 14:37:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 06:37:45 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA21378 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:37:43 -0800 Received: (cpmta 3989 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 06:36:40 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 06:36:40 -0800 X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 14:36:40 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:33:53 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001301c29f90$005b0fb0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <20021208114329.10618.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I did this test not too long ago and have sent off the slides to Simon Evans for his edification. I'll ask if he feels inclined to scan them in, otherwise I'll scan them when I get them back. I didn't see much difference in the performance of these two lenses, and convinced myself out of a purchase. I maintain that a 50/3.5 is the best 50mm for your money. Seems that many people want to defense for the 50/1.2, I will left it to someone who own both 50/1.4 and 50/1.2 to make some side to side comparison as I have sold the 1.2 two years ago. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20469 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 15:12:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 15:12:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 07:12:56 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21411 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 07:12:53 -0800 Received: from 209-122-225-212.s212.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.225.212] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18LPZV-0002cr-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 10:11:50 -0500 Message-ID: <000201c29f95$4e76d7b0$d4e17ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <3DF35355.CE27F603@dslextreme.com> <001301c29ec7$5781cc80$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> <3DF38F06.F387FC6E@dslextreme.com> <3DF3E0FF.5060201@earthlink.net> <3DF3F126.D8097E5@dslextreme.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:57:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Most leaf shutters , though, top out at 1/350th at best (even when the dial says 1/500) Blades simply can't move that fast. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 8:27 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] > I'm really turned off by the 1/250 sec max shutter speed! > No lower than 1/15 and no higher than 1/250 sec is not my cuppa! > > I have cameras 15 to 20 years older than that, with higher speeds... > Of course, they don't have a spot meter, or a .... > > Well, if I find a black one, maybe... > > In the meanwhile, I'll stay with my quest for a 35S or S II. > > I do thank you for the web site info, Jim. > I"m gonna keep it anyhow! > > keith whaley > > Jim Couch wrote: > > > > Steve Gandy's Cameraquest site has good information on some of the > > Olympus Rangefinders. I think you will find the following links interesting: > > > > http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrc.htm > > http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrd.htm > > http://www.cameraquest.com/olysp.htm > > > > Jim Couch > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21643 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 16:10:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 16:10:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 08:10:18 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21478 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:10:16 -0800 Received: from M2W050.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.50]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:09:53 -0500 Message-ID: <123820-22002121916953262@M2W050.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:09:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Dec 2002 16:09:53.0296 (UTC) FILETIME=[68934900:01C29F9D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You forgot to mention the extra stop that the 85/2 has=2E That comes in handy inside at times=2E I'm not sure of the look of the two lenses at f/= 2 vs f/2=2E8 WRT boheh, etc; I sold my 100/2=2E8 because I didn't use it eno= ugh=2E I noticed that nobody mentioned the 135/2=2E8, one of my true favorites of= the Zuiko line=2E Having the 85/2 and the 135/2=2E8 was what made the 100= /2=2E8 superfluous for me=2E Oh, and I had the 135/3=2E5 for a while and it wasn't THAT much smaller or= ligher than the 135/2=2E8, and you lost 1/2 stop, AND I didn't like the photos from it as much as the 135/2=2E8, so it went away too=2E The disadvantage with the f2=2E8 is it uses 55mm filters=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: AG Schnozz agschnozz@yahoo=2Ecom Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:24:40 -0800 (PST) To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2=2E8 vs=2E Zuiko 135/3=2E5 The 100/2=2E8 has much better bokeh than the 135/3=2E5=2E When seeking that 3D look, the 100/2=2E8 has it=2E Now, compare the 100/2=2E8 to the 85/2, I'd say that both are pretty close=2E Other than the extra reach that those 15mm get you, the two lenses are nearly identical=2E AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful=2E Affordable=2E Sign up now=2E http://mailplus=2Eyahoo=2Ecom < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21908 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 16:13:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 16:13:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 08:13:47 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21486 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:13:45 -0800 Received: from user-38ldm7g.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.216.240] helo=earthlink.net) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LQX2-0002R5-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:13:21 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:13:20 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <000201c29f95$4e76d7b0$d4e17ad1@hppav> Message-Id: <2260E88D-0B91-11D7-BEEB-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 05:57 AM, John Hermanson wrote: > Most leaf shutters , though, top out at 1/350th at best (even when the > dial > says 1/500) Blades simply can't move that fast. > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > In addition, most, because of their design, will darken corners at the higher speeds. Part of the genius of the focal plane shutter was it evenness of illumination. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22183 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 16:15:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 16:15:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 08:15:09 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21494 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:15:07 -0800 Received: from M2W096.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.96]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:14:45 -0500 Message-ID: <244640-220021219161444881@M2W096.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:14:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Dec 2002 16:14:45.0136 (UTC) FILETIME=[16868900:01C29F9E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually they can move "that fast", as the new 1/800 sec Hassy H1 testifies=2E Alomst all the "normal" leaf shutters are limited to 1/500= , as John says=2E If you're smart, you consider them 1/250-sec-and-below cameras=2E I typically load my leaf-shuttered cameras with 100-speed or lower film for outdoors or use ND filters=2E But you have to live with the limitations o= f a leaf-shuttered camera if you're going to use one=2E They're VERY quiet, = and they synch flash all the way to their maximum speeds, which can be very nice for fill-in-flash in the daytime=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: John Hermanson omtech@erols=2Ecom Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:57:40 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs=2E Oly RD [was Re: OM vs=2E Leica] Most leaf shutters , though, top out at 1/350th at best (even when the dia= l says 1/500) Blades simply can't move that fast=2E _________________________________ John Hermanson www=2Ezuiko=2Ecom Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley" To: Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 8:27 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs=2E Oly RD [was Re: OM vs=2E Leica] > I'm really turned off by the 1/250 sec max shutter speed! > No lower than 1/15 and no higher than 1/250 sec is not my cuppa! > > I have cameras 15 to 20 years older than that, with higher speeds=2E=2E=2E= > Of course, they don't have a spot meter, or a =2E=2E=2E=2E > > Well, if I find a black one, maybe=2E=2E=2E > > In the meanwhile, I'll stay with my quest for a 35S or S II=2E > > I do thank you for the web site info, Jim=2E > I"m gonna keep it anyhow! > > keith whaley > > Jim Couch wrote: > > > > Steve Gandy's Cameraquest site has good information on some of the > > Olympus Rangefinders=2E I think you will find the following links interesting: > > > > http://www=2Ecameraquest=2Ecom/olyrc=2Ehtm > > http://www=2Ecameraquest=2Ecom/olyrd=2Ehtm > > http://www=2Ecameraquest=2Ecom/olysp=2Ehtm > > > > Jim Couch > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22560 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 16:29:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 16:29:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 08:29:12 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21518 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:29:10 -0800 Received: from user-38ldm7g.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.216.240] helo=earthlink.net) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LQmK-0000Hj-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:29:09 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:29:08 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <244640-220021219161444881@M2W096.mail2web.com> Message-Id: <576F9A68-0B93-11D7-BEEB-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 08:14 AM, om@skipwilliams.com wrote: > Actually they can move "that fast", as the new 1/800 sec Hassy H1 > testifies. Alomst all the "normal" leaf shutters are limited to > 1/500, > as John says. > > If you're smart, you consider them 1/250-sec-and-below cameras. I > typically load my leaf-shuttered cameras with 100-speed or lower film > for > outdoors or use ND filters. But you have to live with the limitations > of a > leaf-shuttered camera if you're going to use one. They're VERY > quiet, and > they synch flash all the way to their maximum speeds, which can be very > nice for fill-in-flash in the daytime. > > Skip > Or 1/1200 sec on the Contax T3, but it has been radically redesigned from a traditional one. Probably the physical size of the opening is a major factor too. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23536 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 17:35:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 17:35:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 09:35:40 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp001.nwlink.com (smtp001.nwlink.com [209.20.130.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA21619 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:35:38 -0800 Received: from miracler64ly0o (ip216.focal.du.nwlink.com [209.20.135.216] (may be forged)) by smtp001.nwlink.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gB9HZahI001308 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:35:36 -0800 Message-ID: <097601c29fa9$64eb0b10$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Subject: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:35:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You know that old joke about cars... the most-dangerous part is "the nut holding the wheel." You can draw a parallel with cameras -- the "quality" of the picture is far more dependent on the photographer than it is on the equipment. I belong to several clubs and take lots of pictures, both 35mm (IS-30) and Polaroid (SLR 680). People _love_ my pictures (which are rarely more than snapshots) because they don't know how to take good pictures. I sometimes see other members' photos, and as a rule, they're just plain awful. (If you don't own an SLR 680, _get one NOW_. It's the best way to learn how to (photographically) interact with people.) Other than owning a D-620L for casual shooting and eBay photos, I have not yet switched to digital because, as you all well know, I have no desire to replace my OM lenses. But I saw something Saturday that showed just how close digital is to literally wiping out color-print film. At the Mike & Key Christmas party, one of the members called me over to her table. "I want to show you something." She opened a thick folder with dozens of incredibly beautiful prints. The colors were rich and accurate, densities were dead-on, and the images reasonably sharp (though not quite up to what I expect from 35mm -- but still acceptable). I was particularly impressed with shots of a sunrise and a sunset that were perfectly printed. "Those are really beautiful prints. Who did the photofinishing?" She dropped the bombshell -- "Nobody. They're digital photos from our Kodak camera. They were printed by sticking the memory chip in an Epson printer and pushing the Print button." !!! So there's no question about it -- for those who can afford a digital camera and photo-quality printer, conventional color-print film will soon be "dead." By the way, this woman is a better-than-average photographer -- she knows how to take interesting pictures. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24176 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:15:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:15:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:15:01 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21657 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:14:58 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB9IBKGQ011902 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:11:20 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF4DD86.53D50DFC@dslextreme.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 10:14:33 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] References: <2260E88D-0B91-11D7-BEEB-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Winsor Crosby wrote: > > On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 05:57 AM, John Hermanson wrote: > > > Most leaf shutters , though, top out at 1/350th at best (even when the > > dial > > says 1/500) Blades simply can't move that fast. > > _________________________________ > > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > > > > In addition, most, because of their design, will darken corners at the > higher speeds. Modern shuter designs have mostly overcome that by their odd shapes, that almost instantly open up full radius as they begin opening. There are some marvelous shutter blade designs out there, undoubtedly prompted by the characteristic you mention. > Part of the genius of the focal plane shutter was it > evenness of illumination. For non-moving subjects... The faster the subject moves, the more odd shaped it becomes. But, it's evenly illuminated! keith whaley < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24493 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:19:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:19:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:19:30 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA21688 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:19:27 -0800 Received: (cpmta 20202 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 10:18:25 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 10:18:25 -0800 X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 18:18:25 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] In praise of the OM-4Ti Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:15:38 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <000001c29fae$fa4cfab0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm a guy whose pretty slow to change, and if I can do it the hard way, that is usually what I do. I have been using OM-1 bodies mostly for my architectural work as I know that I can rely on their performance in any weather, and I especially like the MLU. However, since I purchased my first -4Ti I have slowly been gaining an appreciation for the electronic shutter in conjunction with the spot meter and exposure times longer than 1 second which I sorely missed when I switched from a N*kon F3. in the past I was using a stop watch to time my exposures and would bracket at least 1-1/3 stops up and 2/3 stops down just to make sure I got the right exposure. Recently I have been testing out the OTF metering on the shift lenses. Thanks to this list, I discovered that Olympus' superior method of light measurement could guarantee almost perfect shots every time. In the past, I would use the manual metering which only worked when the lens wasn't shifted. In fact, now that I completely trust the meter to expose exactly (and sometimes even better than what I would have done) every shot is done with maybe 2/3 stops up and 1/3 stops down. One feature that is particularly useful when photographing stained glass is the spot meter and memory functions. In some pieces that vary in exposure and opacity, and whose surrounding area will appear black next to the window, I have been able to do one or two spots on the areas of interest, set the memory, and use the exp. compensation dial to bracket exposures. This may seem like old hat to some of you, but it had been a God send for me! ;) I also wanted to put a plug in for the 80-200/2.8 Tamron. All I have to say is WOW! Sharper than I would have ever imagined, and even with the 140F! They can be found pretty cheap as of late, and if this is your focal range I would encourage you to look into one. Anyway, enough of my mindless babble. I just wanted to express my thanks to the list for helping me use my equipment to its fullest potential! ;) Robert G. Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 E: rgg@gnrarch.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24806 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:23:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:23:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:23:06 2002 -0800 Received: from hestia.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21697 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:23:00 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by hestia.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gB9IJ8Su009436 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:19:12 -0500 Message-Id: <200212091819.gB9IJ8Su009436@hestia.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:19:32 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [OM][OT] TOPE idea, was Time out for a food... Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:38:01 -0800, siddiq wrote: > > >here's a TOPE topic... FOOD! or food from your background, or your fav food.. mmmmm Sounds like a great idea. I've done a couple of food shoots, and it's harder than you thing. Like portraiture, you really have to think your shots through and work on every detail. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25155 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:30:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:30:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:30:53 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21713 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:30:50 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18LSg4-0007TL-00 for ; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:30:48 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:30:00 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <097601c29fa9$64eb0b10$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know a couple that have each won numerous high-level photo competitions. They use basic 35mm cameras and lenses around 50mm. I don't know exactly why their images win, and I'm not sure that they do either. They have the ability to envision and capture images that appeal to the judges (who are kind of like people) even when they don't know them. Photography is an art form and the equipment is only part of the total picture. I hope to understand it better some day. The instant feedback of Digital and Polaroid imaging can be useful as a teaching tool. Snip>>> You know that old joke about cars... the most-dangerous part is "the nut holding the wheel." You can draw a parallel with cameras -- the "quality" of the picture is far more dependent on the photographer than it is on the equipment. I belong to several clubs and take lots of pictures, both 35mm (IS-30) and Polaroid (SLR 680). People _love_ my pictures (which are rarely more than snapshots) because they don't know how to take good pictures. I sometimes see other members' photos, and as a rule, they're just plain awful. (If you don't own an SLR 680, _get one NOW_. It's the best way to learn how to (photographically) interact with people.) big snip>>> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25455 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:35:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:35:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:35:29 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21735 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:35:27 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18LSkY-0007aF-00 for ; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:35:26 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM][OT] TOPE idea, was Time out for a food... Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:34:38 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200212091819.gB9IJ8Su009436@hestia.email.starband.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I like this idea. Food photography is a specialty of its own. Good food images are absolutely tantalizing and I suspect that is not easy to achieve. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Barry B. Bean Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 11:20 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM][OT] TOPE idea, was Time out for a food... On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 00:38:01 -0800, siddiq wrote: > > >here's a TOPE topic... FOOD! or food from your background, or your fav food.. mmmmm Sounds like a great idea. I've done a couple of food shoots, and it's harder than you thing. Like portraiture, you really have to think your shots through and work on every detail. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25817 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:48:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:48:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:48:38 2002 -0800 Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.122]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21747 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:48:36 -0800 Received: from user-2inis7l.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.112.245] helo=earthlink.net) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LSwo-000382-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 10:48:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:48:06 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] In praise of the OM-4Ti Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <000001c29fae$fa4cfab0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 10:15 AM, Robert Gries wrote: > I'm a guy whose pretty slow to change, and if I can do it the hard way, > that is usually what I do. I have been using OM-1 bodies mostly for my > architectural work as I know that I can rely on their performance in > any > weather, and I especially like the MLU. > > However, since I purchased my first -4Ti I have slowly been gaining an > appreciation for the electronic shutter in conjunction with the spot > meter and exposure times longer than 1 second which I sorely missed > when > I switched from a N*kon F3. in the past I was using a stop watch to > time my exposures and would bracket at least 1-1/3 stops up and 2/3 > stops down just to make sure I got the right exposure. Recently I have > been testing out the OTF metering on the shift lenses. Thanks to this > list, I discovered that Olympus' superior method of light measurement > could guarantee almost perfect shots every time. In the past, I would > use the manual metering which only worked when the lens wasn't shifted. > In fact, now that I completely trust the meter to expose exactly (and > sometimes even better than what I would have done) every shot is done > with maybe 2/3 stops up and 1/3 stops down. > > One feature that is particularly useful when photographing stained > glass > is the spot meter and memory functions. In some pieces that vary in > exposure and opacity, and whose surrounding area will appear black next > to the window, I have been able to do one or two spots on the areas of > interest, set the memory, and use the exp. compensation dial to bracket > exposures. This may seem like old hat to some of you, but it had been > a > God send for me! ;) > > -snip > > Robert G. Gries > Yep. I went from a Leica M3 to Canon F1 to the OM4T. The control is amazing and so easy. Much easier than a computer operated camera. It really is just about the perfect camera. Thanks for bringing it up. The siren song of the new makes you lose sight of what you have. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26112 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 18:53:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 18:53:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 10:53:37 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21751 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:53:34 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.66.234]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021209185242.BDDS11653.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:52:42 -0500 Message-ID: <006701c29fb4$1fe61fe0$ea4244d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <097601c29fa9$64eb0b10$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:52:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca WOW! I bought an Epson 785EPX months and months ago but haven't even begun to print. This post inspires me to get going! Thanks, William. Lama > I was particularly impressed with > shots of a sunrise and a sunset that were perfectly printed. "Those are > really beautiful prints. Who did the photofinishing?" > > She dropped the bombshell -- "Nobody. They're digital photos from our Kodak > camera. They were printed by sticking the memory chip in an Epson printer > and pushing the Print button." > > !!! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26474 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 19:05:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 19:05:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 11:05:14 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21775 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:05:12 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.116]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021209190056.KVTZ4233.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:00:56 -0600 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:00:45 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [151.198.121.116] at Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:00:56 -0600 Message-Id: <20021209190056.KVTZ4233.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA21775 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In , on 12/09/02=20 at 08:29 AM, Svein Skj=F8tskift said: >Cats can look very nice in a window, take the shot from outside? Bring >something to catch their curiosity, a toy bird? >Svein Now, that's *really* thinking "outside the box"! ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26872 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 19:21:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 19:21:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 11:21:00 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21786 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:20:58 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LTRo-0009S6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:20:08 -0500 Received: (qmail 17495 invoked by uid 89); 9 Dec 2002 19:20:20 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 19:20:20 -0000 Message-ID: <02fd01c29fb7$f6efd6e0$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: <000001c29fae$fa4cfab0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: Re: [OM] In praise of the OM-4Ti Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:19:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OK, I'll hijack your thread :) Don't forget I have one of these with the SP 2X for sale......in time for Christmas. Tom From: "Robert Gries" > I also wanted to put a plug in for the 80-200/2.8 Tamron. All I have to > say is WOW! Sharper than I would have ever imagined, and even with the > 140F! They can be found pretty cheap as of late, and if this is your > focal range I would encourage you to look into one. > > Anyway, enough of my mindless babble. I just wanted to express my thanks > to the list for helping me use my equipment to its fullest potential! ;) > > Robert G. Gries > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27367 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 19:45:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 19:45:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 11:45:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21810 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:45:48 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6V006LLATJXS@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:44:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:46:35 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <006901c29fbb$ae7689a0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/8/2002 Winsor Crosby writes: << 30 bucks cheaper than B&H! >> (Oly C-50) You don't miss a thing do you ;-) I actually tossed one in the cart to tease my wife, couldn't resist. Of course I had to yank it right out because we are broker than broke, thanks in no small part to my illustrious ex-wife turning Lena and I into full-time parents and costing us thousands in family court costs and atty. fees in the process right now :( I was just amazed to see stacks of them piled high in the aisle. How such an innocent looking little box could make a Costco grocery bill transform from $50-100 to over $600 kinda amazed me. I'm dangerous in that store... Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27730 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 19:56:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 19:56:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 11:56:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21841 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:56:38 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6V006MVBBK2W@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:54:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:57:24 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <006f01c29fbd$31af42c0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/9/2002 Marc Lawrence writes: << I've been tossing up between the 4 megapixel Canon G3 (which'll use my Canon 380EX flash with full E-TTL compatibility) and the 5 megapixel C-5050 for my first digital camera (the D60-suggestion causing my partner to laugh hysterically, vomit up their own stomach, and then bludgeon me with my own OM1, in repeating stages, until I retracted ;-) ) >> I would take a serious look at the C-50 also. Meanwhile, next time your partner isn't looking, the Fuji Finepix S2 looks sweet! Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28276 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 20:34:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 20:34:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 12:34:38 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts4.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21883 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:34:34 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([198.164.241.8]) by simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021209203013.RAXG1685.simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:30:13 -0500 Message-ID: <001f01c29fc1$d8b8f620$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F561B@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:30:40 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I finally decided that I like the size and unobtrusiveness > of the the Olympus, and that, as the camera is to *supplement* > my Canon EOS, Olympus OM1 (and little-used OMPC) and Olympus > 35RC (Lovely camera! Buy one! Cheap as chips!), the extra > megapixel and the fact that if I'm willing to carry around > a big flash than I'm willing to carry around film and > 50E in those circumstances (and the C-5050 has a built-in > for "fill" as well), well....you can see where this is > heading. > > I've decided pretty much to go with the C-5050 (are you > there Wayne Culberson? It's probably not "perfect", but for > me, having looked, it seems close enough). Having finally held > that compact little body in my hands, and felt the "glove" > effect (one I've only previously got from the 35RC), the > heart may be overriding the mind in some areas. > Marc > Sydney, Oz Marc I'm still not sure which way I'll go, as I'm having trouble justifying the extra dollars for the Oly C-5050 over the C-4000. I'm not sure what that extra megapixel will do for me for what I'll be mostly using it for, and some of the other extras don't mean a lot to me right now. But since digital is all new to me, go with your heart, not what I think. The lens difference is sort of a toss up. The C-5050 has a 35-105mm equivalent, starts at 1.8, but is at 2.6 when zoomed (and to f/10). The C-4000 has a 32-96mm equivalent, and is constant 2.8 throughout (and to f/11). I think I'd almost prefer the slightly wider of the C-4000, and the slightly faster lens on the C5050 is only at the wider settings. (Uhhhh, yes, don't sell your 35RC just yet.) Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28581 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 20:36:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 20:36:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 12:36:53 2002 -0800 Received: from co1.dslextreme.com (smtp.dslextreme.com [66.51.205.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21905 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:36:50 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by co1.dslextreme.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB9KXAGQ001850 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:33:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF4FEC5.32971DB@dslextreme.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:36:22 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos References: <097601c29fa9$64eb0b10$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> <006701c29fb4$1fe61fe0$ea4244d8@lhommedieu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just bought an early present for my little office...an Epson 820 printer. I'm going to be installed and printing by the next couple of days. My Epson digital camera (PhotoPC 750 Z) is supposed to connect directly to the printer, and print right from the camera, instead of having to go thru uploading etc... We'll see! keith whaley Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > > WOW! I bought an Epson 785EPX months and months ago but haven't even begun > to print. > > This post inspires me to get going! Thanks, William. > > Lama > > > I was particularly impressed with > > shots of a sunrise and a sunset that were perfectly printed. "Those are > > really beautiful prints. Who did the photofinishing?" > > > > She dropped the bombshell -- "Nobody. They're digital photos from our > > Kodak camera. > >They were printed by sticking the memory chip in an Epson printer > > and pushing the Print button." > > > > !!! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28945 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 20:45:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 20:45:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 12:45:23 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts7.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.165]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21915 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:45:20 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([198.164.241.8]) by simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021209204101.CUTV5140.simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:41:01 -0500 Message-ID: <002001c29fc3$5b4b5d20$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <123820-22002121916953262@M2W050.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:41:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I noticed that nobody mentioned the 135/2.8, one of my true >favorites of >the Zuiko line. Having the 85/2 and the 135/2.8 was what >made the 100/2.8 >superfluous for me. >Skip I've never had the 85/2, and not had the 100/2.8 that long, but I use the 100/2.8 at least 20 times more than I do the 135/2.8. Give me the 100/2.8, and a 28mm and 50mm, and I think I could happily get through the rest of my life (well, if I had to). Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29512 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 21:15:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 21:15:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 13:15:30 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21979 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:15:28 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LVEr-000GxR-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 16:14:53 -0500 Received: (qmail 88668 invoked by uid 89); 9 Dec 2002 21:15:07 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-232.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.232) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 21:15:07 -0000 Message-ID: <001301c29fc7$fffb6910$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: <123820-22002121916953262@M2W050.mail2web.com> <002001c29fc3$5b4b5d20$7212a20a@waynecul> Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko MC 100/2.8 vs. Zuiko 135/3.5 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:14:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, I have had the 85/2 and the 100/2.8. The 100/2.8 is a wonderful lens, but I found myself using the 85/2 twenty times more :) I like the slightly shorter focal length and the extra stop is great. I use it mostly for girls basketball and it is just the right length and inside that f-stop counts. Isn't that the beauty of the OM system? Something that is perfect for everyone. Tom > > >I noticed that nobody mentioned the 135/2.8, one of my true >favorites of > >the Zuiko line. Having the 85/2 and the 135/2.8 was what >made the 100/2.8 > >superfluous for me. > > > >Skip > > > I've never had the 85/2, and not had the 100/2.8 that long, but I use the > 100/2.8 at least 20 times more than I do the 135/2.8. Give me the 100/2.8, > and a 28mm and 50mm, and I think I could happily get through the rest of my > life (well, if I had to). > Wayne > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30203 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 22:02:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 22:02:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 14:02:45 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22040 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:02:42 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021209215006.UPCT4594.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:50:06 -0500 Message-ID: <040901c29fc2$83850580$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <3DF37650.CA4A3C93@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:35:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:50:06 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id OAA22040 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Sunday, 08 December, 2002 12:41 PM Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica > miliciano > =3D member of a militia There is respectable commentary on the web suggesting that Capa's famous photo, like that of the US Marines' flag raising on Iwo Jima, is posed an= d stage managed, shot during a lull in the fighting on the Republican front. The soldier in Capa's photo was a member of the Republican army that ultimately lost to Franco's Nationists. jh -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30482 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 22:05:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 22:05:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 14:05:22 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22045 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:05:18 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021209215250.ESDK4718.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:52:50 -0500 Message-ID: <041201c29fc2$d74b3fe0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:37:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:52:50 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id OAA22045 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Sunday, 08 December, 2002 12:41 PM Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica > miliciano > > =3D member of a militia There is respectable commentary on the web suggesting that Capa's famous photo, like that of the US Marines' flag raising on Iwo Jima, is posed an= d stage managed, shot during a lull in the fighting on the Republican front. The soldier in Capa's photo was a member of the Republican army that ultimately lost to Franco's Nationists. jh -- > Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31133 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 22:50:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 22:50:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 14:50:18 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22098 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:50:16 -0800 Received: from M2W044.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.44]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:49:53 -0500 Message-ID: <63340-220021219224953776@M2W044.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:49:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Dec 2002 22:49:53.0924 (UTC) FILETIME=[4A107C40:01C29FD5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've been a VERY HAPPY G2 user for a year, and I'd enthusiastically recommend the G3=2E Read Phil Asky's review on dpreview=2Ecom=2E I was initially underwhelmed by the G3, but after reading all the little goodies= and improvements that Canon has put into that camera, I'm sold=2E Many ar= e really user features, not extra specifications=2E Canon's really refined this camera since the G1 and except for infrared performance, has really hit the mark=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Mike Veglia msvphoto@pacbell=2Enet Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:57:24 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends In a message dated 12/9/2002 Marc Lawrence writes: << I've been tossing up between the 4 megapixel Canon G3 (which'll use my Canon 380EX flash with full E-TTL compatibility) and the 5 megapixel C-505= 0 for my first digital camera (the D60-suggestion causing my partner to laug= h hysterically, vomit up their own stomach, and then bludgeon me with my own= OM1, in repeating stages, until I retracted ;-) ) >> I would take a serious look at the C-50 also=2E Meanwhile, next time your partner isn't looking, the Fuji Finepix S2 looks sweet! Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www=2Emotorsportvisions=2Ecom < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31557 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 23:08:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 23:08:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 15:08:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22134 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:08:31 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.238]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6VL1000.UGH for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:24:36 +0800 Message-ID: <004301c29fd7$68dd16e0$ee5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <63340-220021219224953776@M2W044.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:05:03 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How would the G2 or 3 compare against the equivalent Olympus model? Would that be the 4040? or 5050? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 6:49 AM Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends I've been a VERY HAPPY G2 user for a year, and I'd enthusiastically recommend the G3. Read Phil Asky's review on dpreview.com. I was initially underwhelmed by the G3, but after reading all the little goodies and improvements that Canon has put into that camera, I'm sold. Many are really user features, not extra specifications. Canon's really refined this camera since the G1 and except for infrared performance, has really hit the mark. Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Mike Veglia msvphoto@pacbell.net Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:57:24 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends In a message dated 12/9/2002 Marc Lawrence writes: << I've been tossing up between the 4 megapixel Canon G3 (which'll use my Canon 380EX flash with full E-TTL compatibility) and the 5 megapixel C-5050 for my first digital camera (the D60-suggestion causing my partner to laugh hysterically, vomit up their own stomach, and then bludgeon me with my own OM1, in repeating stages, until I retracted ;-) ) >> I would take a serious look at the C-50 also. Meanwhile, next time your partner isn't looking, the Fuji Finepix S2 looks sweet! Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31806 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 23:08:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 23:08:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 15:08:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22138 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:08:48 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.238]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6VL7I03.OFJ for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:28:30 +0800 Message-ID: <005b01c29fd7$f57a1940$ee5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: "OlympusWebring" Subject: [OM] Looking for Clint Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:08:59 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi All Has anyone been in touch with Clint lately? We are finalizing a small transaction to order parts, and I have not heard from him since a week ago. Thanks Titoy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32338 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 23:43:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 23:43:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 15:43:10 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp011.mail.yahoo.com (smtp011.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.31]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA22172 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:43:08 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-27-153.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.27.153 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 23:42:21 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF52A3F.5090506@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:41:51 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] New e-mail address References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've finished (I hope!) switching from cable broadband service to DSL, so I have a new e-mail address for the list. I'm now olymoose@sbcglobal.net. Is it just me, or is tech support in general getting better? My last few encounters with 'phone support have been with competent, pleasant and helpful people. Bless them for making my life more pleasant. For Windoz users: I haven't been very active on the list 'cause I've been pretty busy, partly with the DSL install. It was much more long and painful than I expected. For one thing, you have to install filters to separate the voice and data parts of the signal. Of course I have an elderly and indestructable WE wall phone in the kitchen that's hardwired so I couldn't use the modular plug filters they sent. I can now inform you that it works to split the line only once, with all the voice only lines coming off one filter, rather than liberally spreading little filters around the house. Also, if you sign up with SBC/Yahoo, their setup installs a program called 'Connection Manager' to start up and monitor the DSL connection. This little gem was taking almost 5 minutes to start up!! A call to support got me a very nice old pro woman in Oklahoma who pointed out that this program isn't needed at all and how to bypass it. She also mentioned that it actually doesn't work at all under XP. Since I'm getting a new XP machine this week, that's valuable knowledge. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 460 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 00:18:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 00:18:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 16:18:02 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22209 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:17:57 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBA09c213399 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:09:38 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:16:12 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F5630@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:16:09 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Mike Veglia [mailto:msvphoto@pacbell.net] wrote: > I would take a serious look at the C-50 also. You're not helping ;-) I'm trying to narrow down the range! Seriously, I have looked fleetingly at the C-50, but thought that for a couple-hundred bucks extra (AUS$) I liked the marginally wider aperture available on the 5050, and, to be honest, the size and (apparent) handling of it. I zoomed over the C-50 giving it the (innacurate pre-) judgement of "just a point-and-shoot digital for those folks who want 5megapixel but don't want the "confusion" and size of the C-5050". I'll be a litte more thorough and do some more research (like finding out that the C-50 is quite a solid, little, metal camera!) > Meanwhile, next time your partner isn't looking, the Fuji > Finepix S2 looks sweet! Nah, I'm waiting for the EOS 1Ds for compatibility with my current lenses...oh, and according to said partner, I'm also waiting for hell to freeze over :-) > Wayne Culberson [mailto:waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca] wrote: > I'm still not sure which way I'll go, as I'm having trouble > justifying the extra dollars for the Oly C-5050 over the > C-4000. I'm not sure what that extra megapixel will do for me > for what I'll be mostly using it for, and some of the other > extras don't mean a lot to me right now. But since > digital is all new to me, go with your heart, not what I think. I admit to thinking the same. In the end though, I think I fall on the side of "more grunt" without actually knowing whether I need it, but knowing that I'll be disappointed if I don't get it. This extends to that feeling of having your technology superceded too soon, ignoring the "need" factor again. Stupid, arrogant heart! Bloody, weak-kneed mind! :-) I think if I went 4 megapixel, economic advantage (use of Canon 380EX flash) would force me to jump towards the Canon G3, and I know that camera wouldn't be a letdown (that bit's a reply to you, Skip! I've read the review at dpreview.com just after telling Wayne that they didn't have one!). Clemente, the G3 probably compares with the 4040 if you're comparing megapixels, but price (and even a review I read somewhere) puts it against the 5 megapixel cameras such as the 5050 as well. I'm just not sure if that megapixel makes a difference to the likely 10x8"s (A4's) I'm likely to print from it, and, if it does, if it compensates for the suggestion I read somewhere that the Canon G3 has sharper optics. So, my "final decision" is more a "bite the bullet" than a purely logical decision. ...and, to be honest, the C-5050 *looks* the best to me ;-) I'll definitely be keeping my 35RC, and also my OM1 and 50/1.4 babies if we're talking *real* low light :-) (oh, and my EOS 50E of course ;-) ) Cheers, and thanks to all for your helpful opinions and ideas, Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1342 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 01:39:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 01:39:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 17:39:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22253 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:39:24 -0800 Received: from webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail07.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.124]) by mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBA1dLF23931 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:39:21 +1100 Message-Id: <200212100139.gBA1dLF23931@mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:39:21 +1100 Subject: Re: RE: [OM] Day out with friends Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > om@skipwilliams.com wrote: > > really user features, not extra specifications. Canon's really > refined > this camera since the G1 and except for infrared performance, has > really > hit the mark. > I've seen quite a few digital IR images on the net and that is something I'd like to try when I get a digital camera. How do you determine what cameras are good for IR without having to test them first ? I haven't noticed this aspect mentioned in reviews that I've read. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1879 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 02:14:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 02:14:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 18:14:51 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22290 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 18:14:48 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA74828 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 18:14:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209180758.02821d30@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 18:15:22 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] OT: New e-mail address In-Reply-To: <3DF52A3F.5090506@sbcglobal.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:41 PM 12/9/2002 -0800, Moose wrote: >I've finished (I hope!) switching from cable broadband service to DSL, so >I have a new e-mail address for the list. >I'm now olymoose@sbcglobal.net. > >Is it just me, or is tech support in general getting better? My last few >encounters with 'phone support have been with competent, pleasant and >helpful people. Bless them for making my life more pleasant. >... Congratulation. The thought of Pacbell DSL brings up the memory of Pachell for me. Briefly, 3 summers ago, after apying for Pacbell DSL for over 2 years, we were in Orlando for the Junior Olympics and the conversations went on something like this: *** Us: "We've checked all possibilities, and it's definitely not a phone line or ISP problem. You seem to have somehow cut off our DSL service." PB: "I'm sorry, our computer shows there is no record of you having DSL service." Us: "But we can fax you 2 years of bills to prove we have DSL service!!! Please, can't you find someone who can help us restore it?" PB: "Sorry, I can't help you. ") **** An article illuminates the problems at that time: I hope and think they are better nowadays.... We have switched to business DSL from Covad since.... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2198 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 02:22:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 02:22:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 18:22:07 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22295 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 18:22:03 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:11:41 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF54F2A.8020700@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:19:22 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] MF search Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In my ever indecisivness to find a medium format camera that will make me as happy as my OM does... http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html I found this page. It lists the two cameras I'm considering; the Fuji 690III and the Hassy 903SWC. The Hassy is listed as much better in terms of optics. I'm wondering if any of you have seen pics from both (side by side) and can give me a subjective feel . Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2625 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 02:41:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 02:41:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 18:41:10 2002 -0800 Received: from web41306.mail.yahoo.com (web41306.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.93.55]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA22326 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 18:41:07 -0800 Message-ID: <20021210024023.90033.qmail@web41306.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [203.161.114.76] by web41306.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:40:23 EST Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:40:23 +1100 (EST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Damon=20Wood?= Subject: Re: [OM] In praise of the OM-4Ti To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <000001c29fae$fa4cfab0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-863733142-1039488023=:88186" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-863733142-1039488023=:88186 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dear OMer's, The KISS principle applies so well to photography and the OM system encourages that entirely (in due respect of the sophisticated technology-especially for their time). We are into a system that is so different to the others. The more I look into the latest technology (both film and digi SLR's), the more comfortable i feel with the system. I like the fact that I am taking the pictures - I like complete control (wherever possible) over the camera. I dont like a computer telling me what to do limiting technical and creative aptitude. THat doesnt mean I dont like digital. This process of imaging (photography is only part of the process when correction is needed via software) has benefits, particulary to commercial application where the product, via the notion of 'efficiency' reaches the end point with furious pace. Film simply does not compete in that respect. For me to switch to digital, OLYMPUS will firstly have to bring out an very high MPXL interchangable SLR. Furthermore, digital to me means 'goodbye film'. Therefore, high memory cards (1GB ~ 4 and higher) is when the cooky starts crumbling. Not changing memory cards for weeks, month etc and only downloading / deleting select data to me is what digi should and soon will become. For now, Ill use the OM system until film no longer exists. We have some time yet. Using the system and a digital would be great. The mix will also sharpen knowledge and various skills. Its exciting, but for now Im still a purist and a livid OMer. I ramble to much........., Merry Xmas everyone! Choi, Damon --------------------------------- Yahoo! Hint Dropper - Avoid getting hideous gifts this Christmas with Yahoo! Hint Dropper! --0-863733142-1039488023=:88186 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Dear OMer's,

The KISS principle applies so well to photography and the OM system encourages that entirely (in due respect of the sophisticated technology-especially for their time).

We are into a system that is so different to the others. The more I look into the latest technology (both film and digi SLR's), the more comfortable i feel with the system.

I like the fact that I am taking the pictures - I like complete control (wherever possible) over the camera. I dont like a computer telling me what to do limiting technical and creative aptitude.

THat doesnt mean I dont like digital. This process of imaging (photography is only part of the process when correction is needed via software) has benefits, particulary to commercial application where the product, via the notion of 'efficiency' reaches the end point with furious pace. Film simply does not compete in that respect.

For me to switch to digital, OLYMPUS will firstly have to bring out an very high MPXL interchangable SLR. Furthermore, digital to me means 'goodbye film'. Therefore, high memory cards (1GB ~ 4 and higher) is when the cooky starts crumbling. Not changing memory cards for weeks, month etc and only downloading / deleting select data to me is what digi should and soon will become.

For now, Ill use the OM system until film no longer exists. We have some time yet. Using the system and a digital would be great. The mix will also sharpen knowledge and various skills. Its exciting, but for now Im still a purist and a livid OMer.

I ramble to much........., Merry Xmas everyone!

Choi,

Damon

 


Yahoo! Hint Dropper
- Avoid getting hideous gifts this Christmas with Yahoo! Hint Dropper! --0-863733142-1039488023=:88186-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3082 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 03:04:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 03:04:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 19:04:57 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound02.telus.net [199.185.220.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22367 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:04:55 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021210030109.OQCI21798.priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:01:09 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021209195714.00a9edf0@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 20:01:05 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] OT: New e-mail address In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209180758.02821d30@192.168.100.11> References: <3DF52A3F.5090506@sbcglobal.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 06:15 PM 09/12/2002 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: [snip] >3 summers ago, after apying for Pacbell DSL for over 2 years, we were in >Orlando for the Junior Olympics and the conversations went on something >like this: >*** >Us: "We've checked all possibilities, and it's definitely not a phone line >or ISP problem. You seem to have somehow cut off our DSL service." > >PB: "I'm sorry, our computer shows there is no record of you having DSL >service." > >Us: "But we can fax you 2 years of bills to prove we have DSL service!!! >Please, can't you find someone who can help us restore it?" > >PB: "Sorry, I can't help you. ") >**** Astonishing. I used to man a service desk on a pinch-hitter basis back in the Elder Days when the glories of the Internet were just being introduced to the masses. Man, we'd do *anything* to help a customer. 'Course, back then, it was all "true believers" -- we really wanted people to get on the Internet, and we really wanted it to be a good (even life-changing) experience for them. Apparently, PacBell never went through that phase. That's a shame. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3525 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 03:26:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 03:26:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 19:26:15 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22395 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:26:12 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA97373 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:25:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209191713.02825e38@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 19:26:46 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OK, I need advice whether to spend the bucks or not. To recap, the problem to solve is that w/ the F280, I get too many flash burn pictures - typically the face is overexposed. The F280 is set to auto and the OM-4T aperture is usually set to F4. I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest tiny lightbox in the front of the F280 about 10 years weren't all that successful. Also, I do have a fairly portable set of Studio flash, so this is for walk around shooting, mainly inside hotels and convention centers, of informal portraits. The choice is either a used Metz 40-MZ3i which I can get from keh.com, or a new 54-MZ-5. The advantage of the new 54-MZ is that it is a "cobra" design, which AFAIK, put the flash higher position for less chance of red eye. Also, it supports High Speed Sync, for OTHER cameras such as the M7. The 40-MZ3 is smaller, and costs $100 less. On top of that, I will probably pick up the Stroboframe camera flip bracket, the Newton Camera one seems a bit too heavy and more expensive. This will allow vertical portraits w/o the annoying side shadows. So... given that I will get the Stroboframe, would it make a difference between the 54-MZ and the 40-MZ? Or should I just stay with the F280? I guess I will sell the F280 if I get the Metz's. Hope I don't lose money :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3875 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 03:38:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 03:38:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 19:38:28 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22403 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:38:24 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.155] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A09152B0014A; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 22:33:37 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 22:37:48 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: <041201c29fc2$d74b3fe0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 15:37 12/9/02, John Hudson wrote: > > miliciano > > > > = member of a militia > > There is respectable commentary on the web suggesting that Capa's famous >photo, like that of the US Marines' flag raising on Iwo Jima, is posed and >stage managed, shot during a lull in the fighting on the Republican front. >The soldier in Capa's photo was a member of the Republican army that >ultimately lost to Franco's Nationists. > > jh Still looking for the specific camera make/model used to make the photo that launched Capa into fame. I do know numerous photographs of Capa with a camera taken during WWII unquestionably show a Zeiss Ikon Contax II. As to both the Iwo Jima and Capa's photograph, neither were staged or otherwise faked. The True Iwo Jima Story: The U.S. Marine Corps has the orignal B&W negative of the Iwo Jima photograph, along with other stills made at the time from different angles, and a reel of color motion picture film, all of the same flag raising. It was, however, the SECOND flag raising on the summit. There are also still photographs of the first flag raising. When the admiral in command of the landing saw the small battle flag, he ordered it replaced with a larger one so it could be seen better. The famous photograph is of the second one. The motion picture film and other stills show clearly that it was not staged or faked. The photographer's positioning and timing were impeccable. The Navy released the now famous photograph after reviewing the stills done of both flag raisings. One look through the Navy's archive leaves little doubt as to why this particular photograph was chosen for release. It stands out among all of them. All the others look bland by comparison. BTW, the photographer of the second raising ended up working for the photographer of the first flag raising after the war. Capa's Spanish Republican Photograph: This was not staged or faked either. Some number of years later, the soldier was identified, his marked grave located and relatives of him confirmed he did indeed die on that day and in that battle. There are other controversies also, such as the Life Magazine cover photograph showing the sailor kissing the nurse on VE day. That was not staged either. Indeed, a Navy photographer also caught the same thing from a slightly different angle as the Life photographer and he worked their way down the street. Both had the presence of mind to go out hunting for photo op's when word of the street celebration reached them. Have photojournalists staged, faked or otherwise performed undue darkroom manipulation? Certainly. However, these are definitely *not* among the hoaxes. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4244 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 03:54:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 03:54:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 19:54:45 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m06.mx.aol.com (imo-m06.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.161]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22419 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:54:43 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.123.1b02e1b9 (657) for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:52:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <123.1b02e1b9.2b26bf12@aol.com> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:52:50 EST Subject: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_123.1b02e1b9.2b26bf12_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_123.1b02e1b9.2b26bf12_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This message is being sent about 35 minutes before the close of this auction and I am the high bidder, however I'm not bidding any higher. This is a classic which would make a nice addition to any collection. I have both this first addition and the second edition and bid on this one only because it looked to be a bit nicer condition than the one I own. If you search the out of print book places on the web, these will be priced at $250 to $600 or more. This should be an opportunity to get one at a more reasonable price and I'm not going to be a pig and chase this one to the end. The reserve has not been reached but I think he had a $99 BIN price when previously listed. ebay # 194348843. Bill Barber --part1_123.1b02e1b9.2b26bf12_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This message is being sent about 35 minutes before the close of this auction and I am the high bidder, however I'm not bidding any higher.  This is a classic which would make a nice addition to any collection.  I have both this first addition and the second edition and bid on this one only because it looked to be a bit nicer condition than the one I own.  If you search the out of print book places on the web, these will be priced at $250 to $600 or more.  This should be an opportunity to get one at a more reasonable price and I'm not going to be a pig and chase this one to the end.  The reserve has not been reached but I think he had a $99 BIN price when previously listed.  ebay # 194348843.  Bill Barber --part1_123.1b02e1b9.2b26bf12_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4990 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 04:53:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 04:53:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 20:53:33 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22512 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:53:27 -0800 Received: from slave ([24.96.4.117]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021210044909.GMER21770.out003.verizon.net@slave> for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:49:09 -0600 From: "Jim Caldwell" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:46:23 -0500 Message-ID: <007701c2a007$19d80d40$6401a8c0@slave> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3311 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209191713.02825e38@192.168.100.11> X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [24.96.4.117] at Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:49:09 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have the Metz 40-MZ3i and it is somewhat of a pain to use with the Lumiquest - I think the 54-Mz would be easier to use. I also use the stroboframe and it is a great way to keep the flash above the camera even when shooting vertically. BTW - the Metz flashes have a nice feature that allows a wireless master/slave relationship which I find very useful. I actually purchased 3 40-MZ models to take advantage of this capability. I use them with my OM cameras as well as my E-10. Jim Caldwell -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca] On Behalf Of Richard F. Man Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 10:27 PM To: oly Subject: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not OK, I need advice whether to spend the bucks or not. To recap, the problem to solve is that w/ the F280, I get too many flash burn pictures - typically the face is overexposed. The F280 is set to auto and the OM-4T aperture is usually set to F4. I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest tiny lightbox in the front of the F280 about 10 years weren't all that successful. Also, I do have a fairly portable set of Studio flash, so this is for walk around shooting, mainly inside hotels and convention centers, of informal portraits. The choice is either a used Metz 40-MZ3i which I can get from keh.com, or a new 54-MZ-5. The advantage of the new 54-MZ is that it is a "cobra" design, which AFAIK, put the flash higher position for less chance of red eye. Also, it supports High Speed Sync, for OTHER cameras such as the M7. The 40-MZ3 is smaller, and costs $100 less. On top of that, I will probably pick up the Stroboframe camera flip bracket, the Newton Camera one seems a bit too heavy and more expensive. This will allow vertical portraits w/o the annoying side shadows. So... given that I will get the Stroboframe, would it make a difference between the 54-MZ and the 40-MZ? Or should I just stay with the F280? I guess I will sell the F280 if I get the Metz's. Hope I don't lose money :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5942 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 05:23:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 05:23:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 21:23:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.160]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22563 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:23:44 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-a021.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.76.21]) by mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBA5Nds00737 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:23:39 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:20:57 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <3DF4336A.4020307@achtung.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote on Monday, December 09, 2002 5:09 PM Ahh... But the problem is John, you are a photographer!! Thanks, Albert. That's the nicest thing anyone's said to me for a long time! John (who's still trying to find the secret of producing good OM pics). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6270 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 05:32:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 05:32:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 21:32:51 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22567 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:32:48 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-18.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.18] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Ld0J-00046z-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 21:32:24 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF57DCC.5070206@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 21:38:21 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus Mailing list Subject: [OM] FS: Zuiko 35, Tamron 90, OM-2n, OM-2S Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Selling off a few items to raise some darkroom funds. (BTW will consider trades for a good quality enlarger) All items listed below are sold on a "you will be happy" basis and come with a 14 day inspection period. If you are not happy for any reason just let me know and we can do a return. Payment forms I accept from list members are personal check, PayPal to spknsprkt@earthlink.net, VISA, MC, Discover, or Amex. International buyers are welcome. Prices do not include shipping or insurance. Items available first OFF LIST reply served basis. Tamron 90mm f2.5 Macro $185.00 This well respected macro lens is in excellent optical condition. It is also in very good cosmetic condition with one VERY SMALL ding on the barrel. This in no way effects performance. This is the original version of this lens which accepts 49mm filters. Included is the OL Olympus OM mount which is safe for use with all OM cameras including the OM3/4 With just the lens you get a 1:2 magnification. I will also include a Tamron extension tube to take this macro lens to 1:1. Also included are front & rear lens caps. Zuiko 35mm f2.8 $75.00 This silver nosed beauty is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical shape. Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. OM-2n Chrome Body $200.00 In good shape mechanically and optically. Cosmetically in very good shape generally with very little brassing, some chips/scratches on back and hinge. There is a small ding in the bottom plate and some bright marks/scratches on the top plate. Body cap included, but no hot shoe. OM-2S body $175.00 This camera is in good shape. Some heavy brassing and a fair amount of paint missing from hinge and memo holder, but no dents or dings. Meter and exposure accurate in all modes. Camera works fine. I do need to mention that two of the meter LED segments are not working. This has not caused any problems for me in use, but it is a problem with the camera. Otherwise the camera functions perfectly. -- Jim Couch Tacoma, WA USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6623 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 05:45:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 05:45:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 21:45:27 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22578 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:45:21 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.155] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id AE56184F0256; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:40:38 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021210002713.054bac90@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:44:42 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209191713.02825e38@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 22:26 12/9/02, Richard F. Man wrote in part: >I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest tiny lightbox in the front of >the F280 about 10 years weren't all that successful. The smaller Lumiquest mini-softbox isn't much help. You need to use the larger Softbox if using one at all. Even then, at distances greater than about 20 feet even the larger one it doesn't make much difference unless it's in a small space where the diffused light bounces off of walls and ceiling. The larger one does make a clear difference when working in close at about 10 feet (or less). >The choice is either a used Metz 40-MZ3i which I can get from keh.com, or >a new 54-MZ-5. The advantage of the new 54-MZ is that it is a "cobra" >design, which AFAIK, put the flash higher position for less chance of red >eye. Also, it supports High Speed Sync, for OTHER cameras such as the M7. >The 40-MZ3 is smaller, and costs $100 less. Mostly it's a choice between the features you mention. I've used the 40 MZ in the hot shoe, just as I have a T-32 and never had a red-eye problem. That said, I've also put the flash on a bracket, either handle or camera rotator, under conditions of highest risk (wedding receptions are my #1 red-eye risk). >On top of that, I will probably pick up the Stroboframe camera flip >bracket, the Newton Camera one seems a bit too heavy and more expensive. >This will allow vertical portraits w/o the annoying side shadows. In the Grand Scheme of Things, the Newton 7000 is no heavier. It's made out of extremely light weight aircraft aluminum alloy and is very strong. Once you add camera body, lens, flash, film and put batteries in the flash, the difference in weight between the two is negligible. The Newton is more costly, but it's also a camera rotator with a hand grip, so I would expect it to be. It is lighter than the equivalent Stroboframe camera rotator, but the Grand Scheme of Things remark I already made applies to this difference too. >So... given that I will get the Stroboframe, would it make a difference >between the 54-MZ and the 40-MZ? Or should I just stay with the F280? I >guess I will sell the F280 if I get the Metz's. Hope I don't lose money :-) If you get a flip flash type bracket, get a cobra style flash for it. The ones I looked at and considered defy adjustment for a low profile flash to keep the flash tube directly above the lens in both position. Bottom line is making certain whatever you spend your hard earned $$$ on works well for you in weight, balance, and agility in handling the rig as a system. While I use a side mounted potato masher or camera rotator (depends on what I'm doing) and prefer these, I also know many others who use the flip style and it seems to work well for them. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7002 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 06:04:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 06:04:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 22:04:35 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22597 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:04:32 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA43068 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:03:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209220242.0283ea80@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 22:05:06 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021210002713.054bac90@mail.spitfire.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209191713.02825e38@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:44 AM 12/10/2002 -0500, John A. Lind wrote: >At 22:26 12/9/02, Richard F. Man wrote in part: >>I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest tiny lightbox in the front of >>the F280 about 10 years weren't all that successful. > >The smaller Lumiquest mini-softbox isn't much help. You need to use the >larger Softbox if using one at all. Even then, at distances greater than >about 20 feet even the larger one it doesn't make much difference unless >it's in a small space where the diffused light bounces off of walls and >ceiling. The larger one does make a clear difference when working in >close at about 10 feet (or less). Average distance would be about 6 to 8 feet. >>The choice is either a used Metz 40-MZ3i which I can get from keh.com, or >>a new 54-MZ-5. The advantage of the new 54-MZ is that it is a "cobra" >>design, which AFAIK, put the flash higher position for less chance of red >>eye. Also, it supports High Speed Sync, for OTHER cameras such as the M7. >>The 40-MZ3 is smaller, and costs $100 less. > >Mostly it's a choice between the features you mention. I've used the 40 >MZ in the hot shoe, just as I have a T-32 and never had a red-eye >problem. That said, I've also put the flash on a bracket, either handle >or camera rotator, under conditions of highest risk (wedding receptions >are my #1 red-eye risk). > >>On top of that, I will probably pick up the Stroboframe camera flip >>bracket, the Newton Camera one seems a bit too heavy and more expensive. >>This will allow vertical portraits w/o the annoying side shadows. > >In the Grand Scheme of Things, the Newton 7000 is no heavier. It's made >out of extremely light weight aircraft aluminum alloy and is very >strong. Once you add camera body, lens, flash, film and put batteries in >the flash, the difference in weight between the two is negligible. The >Newton is more costly, but it's also a camera rotator with a hand grip, so >I would expect it to be. It is lighter than the equivalent Stroboframe >camera rotator, but the Grand Scheme of Things remark I already made >applies to this difference too. OK, I didn't realize the Stroboframe camera rotator is heavier than the Newton 7000. I wish there are places where I can play with them! >>So... given that I will get the Stroboframe, would it make a difference >>between the 54-MZ and the 40-MZ? Or should I just stay with the F280? I >>guess I will sell the F280 if I get the Metz's. Hope I don't lose money :-) > >If you get a flip flash type bracket, get a cobra style flash for it. The >ones I looked at and considered defy adjustment for a low profile flash to >keep the flash tube directly above the lens in both position. > >Bottom line is making certain whatever you spend your hard earned $$$ on >works well for you in weight, balance, and agility in handling the rig as >a system. While I use a side mounted potato masher or camera rotator >(depends on what I'm doing) and prefer these, I also know many others who >use the flip style and it seems to work well for them. I would prefer a lightweight simple system overall. Thanks for the comments and recommendations! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7318 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 06:14:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 06:14:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 22:14:48 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22602 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:14:45 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.155] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A53E6D10010E; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 01:10:06 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021210010636.053edf00@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 01:14:06 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: RE: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: References: <3DF4336A.4020307@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 00:20 12/10/02, you wrote: >Albert wrote on Monday, December 09, 2002 5:09 PM > >Ahh... But the problem is John, you are a photographer!! > >Thanks, Albert. That's the nicest thing anyone's said to me for a long time! > >John (who's still trying to find the secret of producing good OM pics). Keep using the OM. Familiarity with the equipment and automatically correlating what you do with what you'll get will eventually occur. I suspect that's the case with your RF. One of the reasons I recommend never using new/unfamiliar pieces of equipment for critical work. I've violated this advice a few times when in a real bind (something familiar wouldn't do the job) and have been just plain lucky, but not without being bogged down by it and not without some angst awaiting film processing. I have several cameras I don't use that often and occasionally run a roll of film through them, or even dry fire them to stay familiar with the controls and handling. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7971 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 07:09:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 07:09:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 23:09:32 2002 -0800 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22649 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:09:29 -0800 Received: from [206.170.2.158] by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H6W00DZA6GZ73@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 23:07:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 23:09:02 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] In-reply-to: <000201c29f95$4e76d7b0$d4e17ad1@hppav> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca To follow up on John's observation, leaf shutters open from the middle and close the edges first... so at smaller than wide-open apertures the film will get 'full light exposure' longer than at wide-open apertures. So not only are the blades slower than marked, but the effective exposures vary (in a small way) due to the aperture/shutter effective opening changes. Note that Olympus solved all this with the Pen F series, which have the full-range X-sync of a leaf shutter with the true 1/500 of a focal-plane shutter (as well as cheaper and less complicated, less design-restricted lenses). -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... on 12/9/02 5:57 AM, John Hermanson at omtech@erols.com wrote: > Most leaf shutters , though, top out at 1/350th at best (even when the dial > says 1/500) Blades simply can't move that fast. > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > please call 1-800-221-3000 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8567 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 07:41:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 07:41:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 09 23:41:24 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (snake.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22699 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:41:22 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Lf17-0005zB-00 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:41:21 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: [FS][OM] New Stuff On My For-Sale List Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:40:33 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id XAA22699 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have some new things for sale that may be of interest to list members. Olympus Hand Straps, Have four new ones at $12 each. LowePro Omni Pro attach=E9 type camera bag, Like New $90 Olympus Grip Strap A, Have two new in box. $20 each. Fits IS-1 and IS-2 cameras. Tokina 17mm f-3.5 Lens, Ex, $185 I also have some items that I have recently agreed to buy and those are listed as "incoming" on the list which is at: http://www.onewest.net/~jnmcbr/eqforsale.htm Please contact me off-list if interested in any of these goodies. /jim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9147 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 08:33:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 08:33:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 00:33:00 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA22724 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:32:58 -0800 Received: (qmail 12362 invoked by uid 104); 10 Dec 2002 08:31:29 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 08:31:27 -0000 Message-ID: <004601c2a027$59cef7e0$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: Subject: [OM] FS: Lens caps and pouch Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:26:25 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, Just found some NEW original OM 49mm front caps, some rear lens caps and lens pouch 100N, the lens pouch has soft leatherette and never been used, great for lens size up to around 90mm height (with caps). http://www.accura.com.hk/49cap.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/rear.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/100N.jpg Price for the 49mm lens cap and lens pouch is $10 each, rear cap is $10 for two. Price already include shipping to USA, Europe and all other countries. Payment can be made by Paypal or cash, FCFS! C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9769 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 09:27:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 09:27:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 01:27:25 2002 -0800 Received: from lonn000936.uk.grp.intra (mail2.bnpparibas.com [155.140.128.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA22747 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 01:27:24 -0800 From: john.oregan@bnpparibas.com Received: from lonn000662.bnpparibas.com (unverified) by lonn000936.uk.grp.intra (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:19:49 +0000 Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:26:01 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on LONSMTP001/SERVERS/SMTP(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 10/12/2002 09:11:33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >>>>>>>> The reserve has not been reached but I think he had a $99 BIN price when previously listed. ebay # 194348843. Bill Barber >>>>>>> I hope you got your book, Bill. If not, you may have better luck on this side of the pond. There is one currently on UK Eb*Y sitting at GBP15 with over 5 days to go ; in September one went for GBP4.20; there has been a BIN at GBP6.99 (in May 2002), but there has been a maximum price of GBP105 in the middle of last year. ABEbooks have two listed at USD223 (in the UK) and USD500 (in USA), both 2nd editions. I bought my copy for USD15 from a German bookseller. So why is there this variation? Is one edition more valuable or rarer or more desirable in some other way than another? just curious JohnOR (ScuseTheSig) This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. --------------------------------------------- Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10140 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 09:44:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 09:44:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 01:44:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA22766 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 01:44:54 -0800 Received: from [62.64.172.144] (helo=[62.64.172.144]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18Lh0f-000PIX-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:49:01 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DF54F2A.8020700@achtung.com> References: <3DF54F2A.8020700@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:46:27 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] MF search Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In case it helps Albert, I have just looked at an old Amateur Photographer which tested 3 MF cameras, all rangefinders: the Mamiya 7II, the Fuji 670 and the Bronica RF645. The reviewer concluded that the Fuji was too big and primitive and expensive; that he would buy the M7 for its variety of lenses (and 35mm adaptor); but that the RF645 had to be his serious recommendation - convenience, number of shots on a roll and performance seemed to be his reasons. Since you are looking at 2 completely different cameras (their only common feature is the film that they use), I suggest that you decide which format (square or not, panoramic or not (the 617 would help you there), SLR or RF) you want and go from there. Chris At 10:19 +0800 10/12/02, Albert wrote: >In my ever indecisivness to find a medium format camera that will >make me as happy as my OM does... > >http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html > >I found this page. > >It lists the two cameras I'm considering; the Fuji 690III and the >Hassy 903SWC. The Hassy is listed as much better in terms of optics. > >I'm wondering if any of you have seen pics from both (side by side) >and can give me a subjective feel . > >Albert -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10505 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 10:00:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 10:00:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 02:00:28 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA22770 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 02:00:26 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBA9x8nh042950 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:59:08 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:01:26 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 10-12-2002 11:01:27 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I got mine by doing a Google search, and found a bookstore in Sheffield= (England) that had one for =A33, that was posted to me. It turned out t= o be in pretty good condition. Roger Key, Denmark >>>>>>>> The reserve has not been reached but I think he had a $99 BIN price when previously lis= ted. ebay # 194348843. Bill Barber >>>>>>> I hope you got your book, Bill. If not, you may have better luck on thi= s side of the pond. There is one currently on UK Eb*Y sitting at GBP15 wi= th over 5 days to go ; in September one went for GBP4.20; there has been a= BIN at GBP6.99 (in May 2002), but there has been a maximum price of GBP105 = in the middle of last year. ABEbooks have two listed at USD223 (in the UK)= and USD500 (in USA), both 2nd editions. I bought my copy for USD15 from a German bookseller. So why is there this variation? Is one edition more valuable or rarer or more desirable in some other way than another? just curious JohnOR (ScuseTheSig) = < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10824 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 10:14:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 10:14:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 02:14:00 2002 -0800 Received: from lonn000937.uk.grp.intra (mail1.bnpparibas.com [155.140.128.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA22779 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 02:13:55 -0800 From: john.oregan@bnpparibas.com Received: from lonn000662.bnpparibas.com (unverified) by lonn000937.uk.grp.intra (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:05:35 +0000 Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:12:47 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on LONSMTP001/SERVERS/SMTP(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 10/12/2002 09:58:25 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And this is the sort of price one would expect for a 25-year-old, un-scarce book. So why the USD223 and USD500 price tags - and I repeat the question - is there a scarcer, more valuable, more desirable edition? If so, I would imagine it would be the first edition and not the second one that is being offered at these prices. As an interesting sidenote - the chap who currently seems to run the Olympus Camera Club here in the UK is Ian Aston and he is given a translation credit in my English copy. JOhnOR >> I got mine by doing a Google search, and found a bookstore in Sheffield (England) that had one for =A33, that was posted to me. It turned out to be in pretty good condition. Roger Key, Denmark >>>>>>>> The reserve has not been reached but I think he had a $99 BIN price when previously listed. ebay # 194348843. Bill Barber >>>>>>> I hope you got your book, Bill. If not, you may have better luck on this side of the pond. There is one currently on UK Eb*Y sitting at GBP15 with over 5 days to go ; in September one went for GBP4.20; there has been a BIN at GBP6.99 (in May 2002), but there has been a maximum price of GBP105 in the middle of last year. ABEbooks have two listed at USD223 (in the UK) and USD500 (in USA), both 2nd editions. I bought my copy for USD15 from a German bookseller. So why is there this variation? Is one edition more valuable or rarer or more desirable in some other way than another? just curious JohnOR (ScuseTheSig) This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential.=20 If you receive this message in error, please delete it and=20 immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with=20 its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole=20 or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message.=20 BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not=20 therefore be liable for the message if modified.=20 --------------------------------------------- Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le=20 "message") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses=20 destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce=20 message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir=20 immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce=20 message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion=20 ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf=20 autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas=20 d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce=20 message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11326 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 10:51:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 10:51:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 02:51:05 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA22787 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 02:51:04 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1c0.2c3359d (4568) for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:49:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1c0.2c3359d.2b2720aa@aol.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:49:14 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c0.2c3359d.2b2720aa_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1c0.2c3359d.2b2720aa_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 3:27:45 AM Central Standard Time, john.oregan@bnpparibas.com writes: > Is one edition more > valuable or rarer or more desirable in some other way than another? > > just curious > I have no idea why the price difference. The one for sale on ebay was I think the first edition. The book, as you know, is an excellent reference and is, in my opinion, better than most. Mine also did not come at the dear price being asked by some book sellers. Bill Barber --part1_1c0.2c3359d.2b2720aa_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 3:27:45 AM Central Standard Time, john.oregan@bnpparibas.com writes:

Is one edition more
valuable or rarer or more desirable in some other way than another?

just curious


I have no idea why the price difference.  The one for sale on ebay was I think the first edition.  The book, as you know, is an excellent reference and is, in my opinion, better than most.  Mine also did not come at the dear price being asked by some book sellers.  Bill Barber --part1_1c0.2c3359d.2b2720aa_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11724 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 11:10:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 11:10:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 03:10:56 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA22796 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 03:10:55 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA20531 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 03:10:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210030928.025ac9f8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 03:11:29 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] the definitive OM book Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Since we are never going to get an OM-5 :-( What would people's ideal OM book be? May be just a condensation or best of the Olympus mailing list? :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12071 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 11:26:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 11:26:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 03:26:40 2002 -0800 Received: from conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (conn.mc.mpls.visi.com [208.42.156.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA22841 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 03:26:39 -0800 Received: from [209.98.173.185] (173-136.dynamic.visi.com [209.98.173.136]) by conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8A48117 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:22:52 -0600 (CST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sdropkin@pop.visi.com Message-Id: Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:23:29 -0600 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Steve Dropkin Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I don't have much experience with felines. What have I gotten myself >into? I'm sure y'all are just full of ideas. I can take just barely passable pictures of a friend's Bichon Frise (dog), so I guess I'm not the guy to answer that question, but Bill Barber sent me a hauntingly beautiful picture of his family's cat for last year's Winter Exchange; maybe he can weigh in with some tips. Steve < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12647 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 12:02:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 12:02:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 04:02:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.alcatel.be (alc239.alcatel.be [195.207.101.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA23032 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 04:02:03 -0800 From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be Received: from bemail04.net.alcatel.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alcatel.be (8.10.1/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBABwFc12810 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:58:15 +0100 (MET) Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:58:11 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL04/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 12/10/2002 12:58:14 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm pretty proud of this feline pic: http://users.pandora.be/cunninghams/photogallery/cats/pages/lily.htm Unfortunately she is with us no more... br jez < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13209 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 12:23:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 12:23:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 04:23:20 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA23047 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 04:23:18 -0800 Received: (qmail 20380 invoked by uid 706); 10 Dec 2002 12:22:12 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 12:21:57 -0000 Message-ID: <002a01c2a047$80895040$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: Subject: [OM] Re: Lens caps and pouch Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:26:10 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I also have some NEW AF lenses including 24/2.8, 50/2.8 Macro and 35-105 Zoom. The price is $50, $80, $80 respectively, shipping extra. Interested please email chling@accura.com.hk http://www.accura.com.hk/AF24.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/50M.jpg http://www.accura.com.hk/35105.jpg C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" > Hi all, > > Just found some NEW original OM 49mm front caps, some rear lens caps and > lens pouch 100N, the lens pouch has soft leatherette and never been used, > great for lens size up to around 90mm height (with caps). > > http://www.accura.com.hk/49cap.jpg > > http://www.accura.com.hk/rear.jpg > > http://www.accura.com.hk/100N.jpg > > Price for the 49mm lens cap and lens pouch is $10 each, rear cap is $10 for > two. Price already include shipping to USA, Europe and all other countries. > Payment can be made by Paypal or cash, FCFS! > > C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13591 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 12:40:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 12:40:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 04:40:57 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA23055 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 04:40:56 -0800 From: DaEyeGuy@aol.com Received: from DaEyeGuy@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.16e.1848dacf (1320) for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:38:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <16e.1848dacf.2b273a60@aol.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:38:56 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16e.1848dacf.2b273a60_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10622 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_16e.1848dacf.2b273a60_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got mine down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in the "Stars and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West Germany for $9.95. I've enjoyed it many times as it is well-written, and love the black cover, which has that "OM" look. Susan Steele Amherst, VA --part1_16e.1848dacf.2b273a60_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got mine down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in the "Stars and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West Germany for $9.95. I've enjoyed it many times as it is well-written, and love the black cover, which has that "OM" look.

Susan Steele
Amherst, VA



 --part1_16e.1848dacf.2b273a60_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13978 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 13:00:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 13:00:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 05:00:42 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m08.mx.aol.com (imo-m08.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.163]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23063 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:00:41 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.5f.3167781b (4568) for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:58:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <5f.3167781b.2b273f05@aol.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:58:45 EST Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_5f.3167781b.2b273f05_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_5f.3167781b.2b273f05_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 5:17:55 AM Central Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes: > What would people's ideal OM > book be? May be just a condensation or best of the Olympus mailing list? Three that I like are The OM System Lens Handbook, The Olympus OM Way by L.A. Mannheim and The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl. One that none should forget is the instruction booklet for your particular camera/piece of equipment. It is OK for us to use them, guys. Bill Barber --part1_5f.3167781b.2b273f05_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 5:17:55 AM Central Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes:

What would people's ideal OM
book be? May be just a condensation or best of the Olympus mailing list?


Three that I like are The OM System Lens Handbook, The Olympus OM Way by L.A. Mannheim and The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl.  One that none should forget is the instruction booklet for your particular camera/piece of equipment.  It is OK for us to use them, guys.  Bill Barber --part1_5f.3167781b.2b273f05_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14241 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 13:02:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 13:02:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 05:02:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23067 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:02:23 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBACsjIq009782 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:54:45 +0100 (MET) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:54:45 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl Message-Id: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <16e.1848dacf.2b273a60@aol.com> References: <16e.1848dacf.2b273a60@aol.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:38:56 EST DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: > The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got > mine down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in the > "Stars and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West Germany > for $9.95. I've enjoyed it many times as it is well-written, and > love the black cover, which has that "OM" look. > > Susan Steele > Amherst, VA > Hehe...I got mine in German, and took it as an opportunity to brush up on that language (I learned it in school, and understand it on TV, but reading is quite a different experience). Nice....now I know photorelated, line-long aggregate words in German :) It is a nice book, though, and well written. So if a german version is available for cheap, get a hold of it and take the language as a challenge :) --thomas < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14569 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 13:10:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 13:10:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 05:10:38 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23076 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:10:37 -0800 Received: from modem-1607.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.22.71] helo=skelly) by cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Lk9h-0003DU-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:10:34 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:10:36 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ah ha, Thomas, are you the person to ask for translations of these German Eb*y auctions then? My wife can handle some German but these very same aggregate words are not appreciated..... me, I just look at the photos and drool over some of the kit coming up :-( -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Thomas Heide Clausen Sent: 10 December 2002 12:55 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:38:56 EST DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: > The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got > mine down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in the > "Stars and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West Germany > for $9.95. I've enjoyed it many times as it is well-written, and > love the black cover, which has that "OM" look. > > Susan Steele > Amherst, VA > Hehe...I got mine in German, and took it as an opportunity to brush up on that language (I learned it in school, and understand it on TV, but reading is quite a different experience). Nice....now I know photorelated, line-long aggregate words in German :) It is a nice book, though, and well written. So if a german version is available for cheap, get a hold of it and take the language as a challenge :) --thomas < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14927 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 13:25:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 13:25:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 05:25:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23088 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:25:04 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBADHFIq012303 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:17:15 +0100 (MET) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:17:14 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl Message-Id: <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id FAA23088 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, I understand sufficiently to decipher the german E*ay auctions.....however seeing as so many of the E*ay auctions are "US only", I am not sure if I want to "increase the competition" for those few which are available for us europeans :) Seriously, if you are looking at a specific item, I may be able to help. Still, German is a 4th language to me, so.....I know that there are some native Germans on the list, who probably are even better language-aids than I ever will be. --thomas On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:10:36 -0000 "IanG" wrote: > Ah ha, Thomas, are you the person to ask for translations of these > German Eb*y auctions then? My wife can handle some German but these > very same aggregate words are not appreciated..... me, I just look > at the photos and drool over some of the kit coming up :-( >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Thomas Heide > Clausen Sent: 10 December 2002 12:55 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz > Pangerl >=20 >=20 > On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:38:56 EST > DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: >=20 > > The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got > > mine down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in > > the"Stars and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West > > Germany for $9.95. I've enjoyed it many times as it is > > well-written, and love the black cover, which has that "OM" look. > > > > Susan Steele > > Amherst, VA > > >=20 > Hehe...I got mine in German, and took it as an opportunity to brush > up on that language (I learned it in school, and understand it on > TV, but reading is quite a different experience). Nice....now I > know photorelated, line-long aggregate words in German :) >=20 > It is a nice book, though, and well written. So if a german version > is available for cheap, get a hold of it and take the language as a > challenge :) >=20 > --thomas >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15415 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 13:57:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 13:57:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 05:57:34 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23115 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:57:33 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.185.133871aa (3964); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:53:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <185.133871aa.2b274bc8@aol.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:53:12 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca CC: richard@imagecraft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_185.133871aa.2b274bc8_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_185.133871aa.2b274bc8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/9/2002 10:30:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes: "OK, I need advice whether to spend the bucks or not. To recap, the problem to solve is that w/ the F280, I get too many flash burn pictures - typically the face is overexposed. The F280 is set to auto and the OM-4T aperture is usually set to F4. I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest tiny lightbox in the front of the F280 about 10 years weren't all that successful. Also, I do have a fairly portable set of Studio flash, so this is for walk around shooting, mainly inside hotels and convention centers, of informal portraits." Richard, I'm not quite up to the knowledge of some of the experts on this list, but this doesn't sound like a problem with the F280. I think you'll see the same results with a Metz, or any other, flash. It sounds to me like you are getting overexposure because the background falls away too far and is always dark, so the camera, trying to get 18 0ray on the film, causes the central subject to be overexposed. If you are shooting negative film, you should be able to correct this in the print, although your backgrounds are likely to go completely black. Somewhere between 1 and 2 stops of exposure compensation might also be helpful. This has caused me to wonder: Does the OM-PC/OM-40 use ESP metering for flash? Paul Schings --part1_185.133871aa.2b274bc8_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/9/2002 10:30:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes:

"OK, I need advice whether to spend the bucks or not. To recap, the problem
to solve is that w/ the F280, I get too many flash burn pictures -
typically the face is overexposed. The F280 is set to auto and the OM-4T
aperture is usually set to F4. I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest
tiny lightbox in the front of the F280 about 10 years weren't all that
successful. Also, I do have a fairly portable set of Studio flash, so this
is for walk around shooting, mainly inside hotels and convention centers,
of informal portraits."


Richard,

I'm not quite up to the knowledge of some of the experts on this list, but this doesn't sound like a problem with the F280. I think you'll see the same results with a Metz, or any other, flash. It sounds to me like you are getting overexposure because the background falls away too far and is always dark, so the camera, trying to get 18 0ray on the film, causes the central subject to be overexposed. If you are shooting negative film, you should be able to correct this in the print, although your backgrounds are likely to go completely black. Somewhere between 1 and 2 stops of exposure compensation might also be helpful.

This has caused me to wonder: Does the OM-PC/OM-40 use ESP metering for flash?

Paul Schings --part1_185.133871aa.2b274bc8_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15704 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 14:00:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 14:00:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 06:00:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23119 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:00:54 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.231]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6WQIH03.QGQ for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:20:41 +0800 Message-ID: <007401c2a054$98ec1160$e75b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <004601c2a027$59cef7e0$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: Lens caps and pouch Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:01:11 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca HI CH: Do you have any 49 mm sky light or UV filters for sale? Or would you want to swap it with 55 mm filters? I have some extra 55 mm ones, but need more 49 mm filters. By the way, any news from Kingstone? Thanks Titoy ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 4:26 PM Subject: [OM] FS: Lens caps and pouch > Hi all, > > Just found some NEW original OM 49mm front caps, some rear lens caps and > lens pouch 100N, the lens pouch has soft leatherette and never been used, > great for lens size up to around 90mm height (with caps). > > http://www.accura.com.hk/49cap.jpg > > http://www.accura.com.hk/rear.jpg > > http://www.accura.com.hk/100N.jpg > > Price for the 49mm lens cap and lens pouch is $10 each, rear cap is $10 for > two. Price already include shipping to USA, Europe and all other countries. > Payment can be made by Paypal or cash, FCFS! > > C.H.Ling > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16024 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 14:08:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 14:08:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 06:08:42 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23132 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:08:40 -0800 Received: from modem-2806.alligator.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.10.246] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Ll3t-0006wH-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:08:38 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:08:32 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id GAA23132 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks, it has been my wife complaining about 'all those strange words th= ey don't teach in night school'. hmmmmm US listed auctions implies import would be from Europe and thus av= oid VAT and import duties..... a new source of all sorts kit has been opened = to me... now just where is that shopping list :-) Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Thomas Heide Clausen Sent: 10 December 2002 13:17 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl Well, I understand sufficiently to decipher the german E*ay auctions.....however seeing as so many of the E*ay auctions are "US only", I am not sure if I want to "increase the competition" for those few which are available for us europeans :) Seriously, if you are looking at a specific item, I may be able to help. Still, German is a 4th language to me, so.....I know that there are some native Germans on the list, who probably are even better language-aids than I ever will be. --thomas On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:10:36 -0000 "IanG" wrote: > Ah ha, Thomas, are you the person to ask for translations of these > German Eb*y auctions then? My wife can handle some German but these > very same aggregate words are not appreciated..... me, I just look > at the photos and drool over some of the kit coming up :-( > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Thomas Heide > Clausen Sent: 10 December 2002 12:55 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz > Pangerl > > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:38:56 EST > DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: > > > The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got > > mine down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in > > the"Stars and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West > > Germany for $9.95. I've enjoyed it many times as it is > > well-written, and love the black cover, which has that "OM" look. > > > > Susan Steele > > Amherst, VA > > > > Hehe...I got mine in German, and took it as an opportunity to brush > up on that language (I learned it in school, and understand it on > TV, but reading is quite a different experience). Nice....now I > know photorelated, line-long aggregate words in German :) > > It is a nice book, though, and well written. So if a german version > is available for cheap, get a hold of it and take the language as a > challenge :) > > --thomas > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > -- ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16757 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 15:03:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 15:03:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 07:03:20 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA23221 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:03:18 -0800 Received: (cpmta 7553 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 07:02:16 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 07:02:16 -0800 X-Sent: 10 Dec 2002 15:02:16 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:02:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] 110 BIN Vivitar Series I 35-85mm F2.8 Auto Variable Focusing Zoom, OM Mount Message-ID: <3DF5BBA7.28472.923BEFD@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1944626594 no connection! - but it's a bargain. Even has a hood. ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17940 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 16:45:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 16:45:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 08:45:55 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23415 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:45:54 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA10835 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:45:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210084411.028c4ce8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:46:28 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not In-Reply-To: <185.133871aa.2b274bc8@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:53 AM 12/10/2002 -0500, Pschings@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 12/9/2002 10:30:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, >richard@imagecraft.com writes: > >"OK, I need advice whether to spend the bucks or not. To recap, the problem >to solve is that w/ the F280, I get too many flash burn pictures - >typically the face is overexposed. The F280 is set to auto and the OM-4T >aperture is usually set to F4. I recall that my attempt to put a Lumiquest >tiny lightbox in the front of the F280 about 10 years weren't all that >successful. Also, I do have a fairly portable set of Studio flash, so this >is for walk around shooting, mainly inside hotels and convention centers, >of informal portraits." > > >Richard, > >I'm not quite up to the knowledge of some of the experts on this list, but >this doesn't sound like a problem with the F280. I think you'll see the >same results with a Metz, or any other, flash. It sounds to me like you >are getting overexposure because the background falls away too far and is >always dark, so the camera, trying to get 18 0ray on the film, causes the >central subject to be overexposed. If you are shooting negative film, you >should be able to correct this in the print, although your backgrounds are >likely to go completely black. Somewhere between 1 and 2 stops of exposure >compensation might also be helpful. I think you're right, as other thread has discussed the (non-)merit of the diffusers. Sigh, so we are stuck with a problem with no simple solution? >This has caused me to wonder: Does the OM-PC/OM-40 use ESP metering for flash? > >Paul Schings // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18193 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 16:49:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 16:49:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 08:49:20 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23419 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:49:17 -0800 Received: from M2W050.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.50]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:48:52 -0500 Message-ID: <168270-2200212210164852662@M2W050.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:48:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Dec 2002 16:48:52.0723 (UTC) FILETIME=[05654430:01C2A06C] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'd also add the eSIF (electronic Sales Information File), which has more raw data than any book ever done=2E Also worthwhile are the Vision Age magazines (19 in all), and the primary 8=2E5x11 brochures of the OM System, OM-x Bodies, Zuiko lenses, and the Groups: Motor Drive, Macro, & Flash=2E The small books that came with the= cameras on the Lens Group and the MacroPhotography Groups are also very good and more instructional than promotional=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: NSURIT@aol=2Ecom Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:58:45 EST To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book In a message dated 12/10/2002 5:17:55 AM Central Standard Time,=20 richard@imagecraft=2Ecom writes: > What would people's ideal OM=20 > book be? May be just a condensation or best of the Olympus mailing list?= Three that I like are The OM System Lens Handbook, The Olympus OM Way by L=2EA=2E=20 Mannheim and The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl=2E One that none should=20 forget is the instruction booklet for your particular camera/piece of=20 equipment=2E It is OK for us to use them, guys=2E Bill Barber=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18616 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 17:06:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 17:06:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 09:06:50 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23440 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:06:48 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.193.12091a09 (15862); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:04:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from aol.com (mow-d18.webmail.aol.com [205.188.139.134]) by air-id06.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILINID61-1210120448; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:04:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:04:47 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: richard@imagecraft.com Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <5C35D6AF.2A5F7FA4.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/10/2002 11:46:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes: > I think you're right, as other thread has discussed the (non-)merit of the > diffusers. Sigh, so we are stuck with a problem with no > simple solution? Well, I'm not sure that applying a little exposure compensation isn't a fairly simple solution. The trick is recognizing the circumstances where you need to apply it. Almost all of my flash work is done on negative film, so I'm fairly conservative with the compensation, figuring a little overexposure is better than underexposure it this situation. I'm also not afraid to ask my lab to reprint stuff that I think could be done better. Those minilabs do auto exposure, too, so they'll tend to overexpose the print if the background is too dark, as well. Hope this helps, Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19537 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 18:24:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 18:24:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 10:24:35 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA23539 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:24:33 -0800 Received: (cpmta 15358 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 10:23:29 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 10:23:29 -0800 X-Sent: 10 Dec 2002 18:23:29 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:23:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: US only? (was Re: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl) Message-ID: <3DF5EACF.11808.9DBF42C@localhost> In-reply-to: <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tuesday, December 10, 2002 at 14:17 Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: > Well, I understand sufficiently to decipher the german E*ay > auctions.....however seeing as so many of the E*ay auctions are "US > only", I am not sure if I want to "increase the competition" for those > few which are available for us europeans :) ... This is a default eBay setting. Most (not all) sellers are willing to export if asked. The two problems are $ and shipping. A US check is good (foreigners can legally set up accounts), or paypal or hyperwallet or billpoint or a credit card. Shipping is simplified with the post office. Rates are at http://ircalc.usps.gov/weight.asp?Contents=1 and the customs form is simple, but one copy has to be INSIDE the parcel. tOM (in Canada) ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19823 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 18:27:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 18:27:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 10:27:43 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h015.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.243]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA23543 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:27:41 -0800 Received: (cpmta 5187 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 10:26:40 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.243) with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 10:26:40 -0800 X-Sent: 10 Dec 2002 18:26:40 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:26:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [OM] Act quickly-The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl Message-ID: <3DF5EB8F.13454.9DEE0DE@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tuesday, December 10, 2002 at 13:10 IanG wrote: > Ah ha, Thomas, are you the person to ask for translations of these > German Eb*y auctions then? My wife can handle some German but these very > same aggregate words are not appreciated..... me, I just look at the > photos and drool over some of the kit coming up :-( I use http://babelfish.altavista.com/translate.dyn to translate. tOM ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20407 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 19:05:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 19:05:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 11:05:30 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23602 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:05:26 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBAJ49nh029938 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:04:09 +0100 Subject: re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:06:27 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 10-12-2002 20:06:28 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As a further comment, UK eBay currently has a mint light tan hard case = with the original box (looks like LNIB to me), price is up to =A382GBP (130U= SD !!), with 17 hours left http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1943294193 I have seen OM-1's with a good case selling for less than this! Roger Key About 15 months ago I bought an OM-1 (#9342xx), that had the light tan = hard case. The woman who sold it to me said that she bought it new with the = case in 1976, as far as I remember. It was a pretty good deal, as I also got= a 75-150 Zuiko zoom, and an unused third party 28mm, all for 100USD equivalent. She had hardly used the camera for the last twenty years. Roger Key, Denmark > I have been trying to figure by going over old literature, what exact= ly is > the case number for the older LIGHTER tan/brown camera (body w/lens) = case > that brings the big bucks? > Anyone know? > Thanks in advance > John > John, No numbers on the case or the box. Box only says, "Hard Case", that's all. I have no idea when this case was offered new. When I got a= new case I had the option of black hard case and semi hard with pebble grain. Both with the bottom screw mount. I opted for the semi hard whic= h is still on my OM1. The last and only time I bought a new case was in 1976 :>) Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West = < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20815 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 19:23:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 19:23:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 11:23:48 2002 -0800 Received: from vs.bgnett.no (vs.bgnett.no [194.54.96.159]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23629 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:23:45 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3) id gBAJGBl79847 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:16:11 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) Received: from svein (lppp72.bgnett.no [194.54.100.72]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3av) with SMTP id gBAJG9979840 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:16:09 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) From: =?windows-1252?Q?Svein=20Skj=F8tskift?= To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:23:14 +0100 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Organization: ess In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: Re: re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 X-Virus-Scanned: by vs.bgnett.no Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA23629 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca KEH has one at $21, bargain condition: http://www.keh.com/shop/product_la= stmin.cfm? bid=3DOM&cid=3D02&sid=3Dlastmin&crid=3D4193616 Svein 10.12.2002 20:06:27, skreiv "Roger D. Key" : > >As a further comment, UK eBay currently has a mint light tan hard case w= ith >the original box (looks like LNIB to me), price is up to =A382GBP (130US= D >!!), with 17 hours left > >http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1943294193 > > I have seen OM-1's with a good case selling for less than this! > >Roger Key > > > > >About 15 months ago I bought an OM-1 (#9342xx), that had the light tan h= ard >case. The woman who sold it to me said that she bought it new with the c= ase >in 1976, as far as I remember. It was a pretty good deal, as I also got = a >75-150 Zuiko zoom, and an unused third party 28mm, all for 100USD >equivalent. She had hardly used the camera for the last twenty years. > >Roger Key, Denmark > > > > >> I have been trying to figure by going over old literature, what exactl= y >is >> the case number for the older LIGHTER tan/brown camera (body w/lens) c= ase >> that brings the big bucks? >> Anyone know? >> Thanks in advance >> John >> >John, No numbers on the case or the box. Box only says, "Hard Case", >that's all. I have no idea when this case was offered new. When I got a >new case I had the option of black hard case and semi hard with pebble >grain. Both with the bottom screw mount. I opted for the semi hard which >is still on my OM1. The last and only time I bought a new case was in >1976 :>) > >Mike >-- >Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West > > > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21366 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 19:57:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 19:57:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 11:57:18 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23668 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:57:16 -0800 Received: from 209-122-223-125.s2331.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.223.125] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18LqUI-0006K3-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:56:15 -0500 Message-ID: <000301c2a086$3573f990$7ddf7ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <2260E88D-0B91-11D7-BEEB-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> <3DF4DD86.53D50DFC@dslextreme.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:35:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's probably right. I was limiting my comments to 70's era consumer grade rfs. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley" To: Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 1:14 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Oly SP vs. Oly RD [was Re: OM vs. Leica] > > > Winsor Crosby wrote: > > > > On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 05:57 AM, John Hermanson wrote: > > > > > Most leaf shutters , though, top out at 1/350th at best (even when the > > > dial > > > says 1/500) Blades simply can't move that fast. > > > _________________________________ > > > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > > > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > > > > > > > In addition, most, because of their design, will darken corners at the > > higher speeds. > > Modern shuter designs have mostly overcome that by their odd shapes, > that almost instantly open up full radius as they begin opening. There > are some marvelous shutter blade designs out there, undoubtedly > prompted by the characteristic you mention. > > > Part of the genius of the focal plane shutter was it > > evenness of illumination. > > For non-moving subjects... > The faster the subject moves, the more odd shaped it becomes. But, > it's evenly illuminated! > > keith whaley > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22004 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 19:58:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 19:58:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 11:58:32 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23672 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:58:30 -0800 Received: from 209-122-223-125.s2331.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.223.125] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18LqUn-0006K3-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:56:46 -0500 Message-ID: <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:52:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Anyone have a reliable source for the Kodak calibration slide noted above? I bought a Microtek 4000T, and because they had lowered the price on this model, Microtek decided to not include the target slide anymore. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22253 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 19:58:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 19:58:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 11:58:46 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23676 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:58:43 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LqVx-000ADU-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:57:57 -0500 Received: (qmail 45662 invoked by uid 89); 10 Dec 2002 19:58:10 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-5.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.5) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 19:58:10 -0000 Message-ID: <028f01c2a086$5ee76500$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:57:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA23676 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Gosh, I have a very nice one I'd let go for only $100.... :) Tom As a further comment, UK eBay currently has a mint light tan hard case wi= th the original box (looks like LNIB to me), price is up to =A382GBP (130USD !!), with 17 hours left http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1943294193 I have seen OM-1's with a good case selling for less than this! Roger Key < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22633 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 20:05:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 20:05:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 12:05:49 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp-server4.tampabay.rr.com (smtp-server4.tampabay.rr.com [65.32.1.43]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23701 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:05:47 -0800 Received: from p5x6v0 (dt061n34.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.15.52]) by smtp-server4.tampabay.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBAK5M85020606 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:05:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <01ad01c2a087$91582fa0$340f5c18@tampabay.rr.com> From: "Richard Hawkins" To: References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:06:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John, For IT-8 target slides can be purchased directly from Kodak at 1-800-847-8755, a friend recently made this purchase. Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hermanson" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:52 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide > Anyone have a reliable source for the Kodak calibration slide noted above? > I bought a Microtek 4000T, and because they had lowered the price on this > model, Microtek decided to not include the target slide anymore. > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > please call 1-800-221-3000 > _________________________________ > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22888 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 20:08:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 20:08:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 12:08:45 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23707 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:08:44 -0800 Received: from jjohnso4.attbi.com (c-66-56-1-50.atl.client2.attbi.com[66.56.1.50]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002121020073500200gd70fe>; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:07:35 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021210150446.00a9dec0@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: jjohnso4@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:07:10 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Johnny Johnson Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide In-Reply-To: <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 02:52 PM 12/10/02 -0500, John Hermanson wrote: >Anyone have a reliable source for the Kodak calibration slide noted above? >I bought a Microtek 4000T, and because they had lowered the price on this >model, Microtek decided to not include the target slide anymore. Hi John, If you're not in too big of a hurry you can pick up one at a reasonable cost here: If fact, let me know if you're interested and we might consider combining an order. Later, Johnny __________________________ Johnny Johnson Lilburn, GA mailto:jjohnso4@attbi.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23798 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 21:08:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 21:08:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 13:08:59 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23821 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:08:57 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24662 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:08:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210130434.028c4b30@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:09:26 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not In-Reply-To: <5C35D6AF.2A5F7FA4.0080BFFB@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:04 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, Pschings@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 12/10/2002 11:46:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, >richard@imagecraft.com writes: > > > I think you're right, as other thread has discussed the (non-)merit of the > > diffusers. Sigh, so we are stuck with a problem with no > > simple solution? > >Well, I'm not sure that applying a little exposure compensation isn't a >fairly simple solution. The trick is recognizing the circumstances where >you need to apply it. Almost all of my flash work is done on negative >film, so I'm fairly conservative with the compensation, figuring a little >overexposure is better than underexposure it this situation. I'm also not >afraid to ask my lab to reprint stuff that I think could be done better. >Those minilabs do auto exposure, too, so they'll tend to overexpose the >print if the background is too dark, as well. Paul, so in this case, I'd turn the exposure compensation to +1 or so? I am slow here, so let me think it through: since the face is burned-out, adding more exposure means that the shutter stays open longer, and let more ambient light in. How's that going to help to un-burn the face? Or does it work because the background is more exposed so the flash won't emit as much light? But I thought the flash is triggered at the beginning of the shutter movement so it can't possibly work this way either.... Arggggghhh.... :-) >Hope this helps, > >Paul // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24087 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 21:13:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 21:13:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 13:13:16 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23825 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:13:14 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-182.s436.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.182] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Lrfo-0000Im-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:12:12 -0500 Message-ID: <006e01c2a090$d88031d0$7ddf7ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> <01ad01c2a087$91582fa0$340f5c18@tampabay.rr.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:12:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thank you, I'll try this number again. I called it earlier today and was told I had to be a Kodak dealer to be able to order. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Hawkins" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 3:06 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide > John, > > For IT-8 target slides can be purchased directly from Kodak at > 1-800-847-8755, a friend recently made this purchase. > > Rich > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Hermanson" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide > > > > Anyone have a reliable source for the Kodak calibration slide noted above? > > I bought a Microtek 4000T, and because they had lowered the price on this > > model, Microtek decided to not include the target slide anymore. > > _________________________________ > > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > > please call 1-800-221-3000 > > _________________________________ > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24380 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 21:18:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 21:18:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 13:18:07 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23829 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:18:05 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-208-190-252-72.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [208.190.252.72]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBALHWMv017674 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:17:33 -0500 Message-ID: <000f01c2a089$c8048ba0$48fcbed0@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021210195723.21416.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:21:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Your quest for a MF travel camera is more and more complicated, thanks to all of us! Everyone that has pointed out the divergent nature of your two choices is quite right. Should you have steak or chicken? Buy a car or truck? The question involves the discussion of horses for tracks. Of all the cameras mentioned, only one is not a rangefinder, and all but one are compact, albeit to different standards. The Hasselblad is a scale focusing camera, unless you have the sometimes hard to find back adapter. To use this, you must take off the back, so tripod use is essential. To use the camera hand held, you use the accessory VF, which some consider only a vague reference, though with a lens this wide, may not be a problem. In any event, it is quite compact. This body and a 220 back could serve your need, but there are limitations, no meter for one. All the others are rangefinder focusing, and generally compact. The Fuji is large by OM standards, but not so big by F5 standards. There are several different formats. The Fuji, and M7 are rectangular, landscape orientation. The M6 is square, while the Bronica is 6x4.5, portrait orientation. I like the Bronica, and I have a friend that uses it professionally to good result. For most people, though, the orientation is a problem, as most photos are wide rather than tall. Both Mamiya's have well regarded lenses. Both are fairly compact. Both present some ergonomic challenges that the Bronica doesn't (It's really well thought out in regard to loading and lens changing). The Fuji has highly regarded lenses, but remember, you don't get that many shots to a roll. I would like to suggest that you reconsider. I was seriously thinking about a MF travel camera, and had narrowed it down to the M6, but then realized that I have sufficient camera systems, and don't want to carry that much gear. I now carry the OM4, Xpan, and a lens or two each. The Xpan gets a bigger pano neg, but is light and has small lenses. I think you should travel with the OM and one or two lenses (the 28-48 and 35-105 come to mind). This will allow you to more easily meet the goal of "f8 and be there." Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24676 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 21:22:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 21:22:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 13:22:21 2002 -0800 Received: from firebird.planetinternet.be (brussels-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.34.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23837 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:22:19 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-198-188.adsl.pi.be [212.239.198.188]) by firebird.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF01FD3522 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:21:46 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:21:46 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 10-12-2002 20:06 schreef Roger D. Key op rdk@dannet.com: >=20 > As a further comment, UK eBay currently has a mint light tan hard case wi= th > the original box (looks like LNIB to me), price is up to =A382GBP (130USD > !!), with 17 hours left >=20 > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1943294193 >=20 > I have seen OM-1's with a good case selling for less than this! >=20 > Roger Key >=20 On the other hand, you can maybe swap it for this 40f2 (antifangwise): it even comes without the original lenscap! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25230 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 21:55:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 21:55:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 13:55:25 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23853 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:55:21 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBALs3nh031012 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:54:03 +0100 Subject: Re: re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:56:22 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 10-12-2002 22:56:22 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca KEH's description seems to say "Hard Case 1.4N/Brown Leather" which I t= hink is probably the dark brown case (the tan leather case has no 1.4N indication). Good price if it is the light tan though..... Roger Key Svein Sk=F8tskift wrote: KEH has one at $21, bargain condition: http://www.keh.com/shop/product_lastmin.cfm? bid=3DOM&cid=3D02&sid=3Dlastmin&crid=3D4193616 Svein 10.12.2002 20:06:27, skreiv "Roger D. Key" : > >As a further comment, UK eBay currently has a mint light tan hard case= with >the original box (looks like LNIB to me), price is up to =A382GBP (130= USD >!!), with 17 hours left > >http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1943294193 > > I have seen OM-1's with a good case selling for less than this! > >Roger Key > > > > >About 15 months ago I bought an OM-1 (#9342xx), that had the light tan= hard >case. The woman who sold it to me said that she bought it new with the= case >in 1976, as far as I remember. It was a pretty good deal, as I also go= t a >75-150 Zuiko zoom, and an unused third party 28mm, all for 100USD >equivalent. She had hardly used the camera for the last twenty years. > >Roger Key, Denmark = < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26238 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 23:13:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 23:13:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 15:13:50 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23925 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:13:46 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBAN5wI10284 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:05:58 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:12:32 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F564A@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:12:31 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Steve Dropkin [mailto:steve@dropkin.net] wrote: > ... but Bill Barber sent me a hauntingly beautiful picture of > his family's cat for last year's Winter Exchange... ...which is here: http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/Asides/OM/bbar.htm and I agree with Steve's description. :-) Marc (with 3 furkids - 2 dogs and a cat) Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26723 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 23:35:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 23:35:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 15:35:50 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23968 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:35:48 -0800 Received: from apx1-08-138.pdx.du.teleport.com ([216.26.6.138] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18LtuN-0001Yz-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:35:24 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF67AB9.7050004@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:37:29 -0800 From: "Andrea V." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... References: <3DF42FDD.40704@speakeasy.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oddly enough, I was at a cat show this weekend, and snuck a look at the photographer taking pix of the "champions". He had several cat toys, some sparkly tinsel type and some with feathers, on very long sticks, which he waggled at the cats with one hand as he shot with the other. It was something I could never do, as I am not that steady, but for him it worked. Cats were on a table draped in some velvet type fabric, with the same fabric draped for a background. I have a cat, and its damn hard to get him to sit still for pictures. Maybe in a couple of years when he settles down (he's 2 now). - Andrea Steve Goss wrote: > One of the things we did was door prizes, that had been donated by > members of the Sunday School class. My donation was an 8x10 of > whatever the winner wanted. Well, the winner wants a picture of her > cats. Since both my daughter and I are allergic to cats, I don't have > much experience with felines. What have I gotten myself into? I'm sure > y'all are just full of ideas. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27149 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 23:54:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 23:54:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 15:53:53 2002 -0800 Received: from rly-ip05.mx.aol.com (rly-ip05.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.9]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23996 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:53:39 -0800 Received: from logs-wc.proxy.aol.com (logs-wc.proxy.aol.com [205.188.193.5]) by rly-ip05.mx.aol.com (v89.10) with ESMTP id RELAYIN10-1210184847; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:48:47 1900 Received: from Onovhxyos (AC818D55.ipt.aol.com [172.129.141.85]) by logs-wc.proxy.aol.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with SMTP id gBANQ1D393467 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:26:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:26:01 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200212102326.gBANQ1D393467@logs-wc.proxy.aol.com> From: DaEyeGuy To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Have a excite Christmas MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=YyY6720Snotql15oLAZ57tyww0i9 X-Apparently-From: CreekMerc@aol.com Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Network Associates WebShield SMTP V4.5 on proxy detected virus Exploit-MIME.gen.exe in attachment unknown from and it was Cleaned and Quarantined. . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27829 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 00:34:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 00:34:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 16:34:12 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24090 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:34:09 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA13723 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:33:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210163218.05753ea0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:34:43 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book In-Reply-To: <168270-2200212210164852662@M2W050.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, I was thinking more in the line of, if "we" were to write a definitive OM book (and we can more or less guarantee there are at least couple hundred buyers :-) ), what would "we" put it in? Camera specs etc. can be done w/ a e-SIF CD. How about personal stories (how my OM changed me from a dog-kicker to a sensitive new age guy), or photos? Best of OM photos on a CD? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28128 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 00:40:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 00:40:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 16:40:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24098 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:39:57 -0800 Received: (qmail 5406 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 00:40:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail11.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 11 Dec 2002 00:40:07 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF68C5F.7090609@speakeasy.net> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:52:47 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Looking for Clint References: <005b01c29fd7$f57a1940$ee5b68cb@titoy> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I called Photosphere today to find out, and talked to Clint. He's been a bit swamped lately. A bunch of people want their cameras fixed before Christmas, he's been under the weather, his wife is expecting, and plus he has to spend a bunch of time dealing with Olympus corporate. I said thanks for the update, and that I would tell the list so he could get back to work... Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx Clemente Colayco wrote: > Hi All > > Has anyone been in touch with Clint lately? We are finalizing a small > transaction to order parts, and I have not heard from him since a week ago. > > Thanks > > Titoy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28412 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 00:40:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 00:40:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 16:40:57 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24102 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:40:54 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA17358 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:40:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210163833.05768e98@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:41:27 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] solution to the flash problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I guess $2300 for a M7 which can go as low as 1/30 or even 1/15, plus $2600 for the Noct F1, and a good ASA100 or 400 film should take care of most needs for a flash. So anyone has $4000 to spare? :-) (the father of a kid's classmate just bought a M7 to go with his other M, his words: "damn the budget, full debt ahead!" ) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28670 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 00:41:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 00:41:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 16:41:57 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24113 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:41:53 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA17793 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:41:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210164137.028ddbb8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:42:25 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021210150446.00a9dec0@mail.attbi.com> References: <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:07 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, Johnny Johnson wrote: If you're not in too big of a hurry you can pick up one at a reasonable cost here: > >... What's the best way to use a scanner profile, say on something like a Nikon LS-4000? If I can use it, then I would be interested in getting one of these... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29036 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 00:55:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 00:55:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 16:55:26 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24121 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:55:24 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1c6.2dba233 (4196); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:53:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1c6.2dba233.2b27e68c@aol.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:53:32 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca CC: richard@imagecraft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c6.2dba233.2b27e68c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1c6.2dba233.2b27e68c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 6:56:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes: "Paul, so in this case, I'd turn the exposure compensation to +1 or so? I am slow here, so let me think it through: since the face is burned-out, adding more exposure means that the shutter stays open longer, and let more ambient light in. How's that going to help to un-burn the face? Or does it work because the background is more exposed so the flash won't emit as much light? But I thought the flash is triggered at the beginning of the shutter movement so it can't possibly work this way either....: No, you want to dial in -1, so the camera quenches the flash sooner and the face doesn't "burn out". Of course the background will be a stop darker as well. Paul Schings --part1_1c6.2dba233.2b27e68c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 6:56:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, richard@imagecraft.com writes:

"Paul, so in this case, I'd turn the exposure compensation to +1 or so?

I am slow here, so let me think it through: since the face is burned-out,
adding more exposure means that the shutter stays open longer, and let more
ambient light in. How's that going to help to un-burn the face?

Or does it work because the background is more exposed so the flash won't
emit as much light? But I thought the flash is triggered at the beginning
of the shutter movement so it can't possibly work this way either....:


No, you want to dial in -1, so the camera quenches the flash sooner and the face doesn't "burn out". Of course the background will be a stop darker as well.

Paul Schings --part1_1c6.2dba233.2b27e68c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29350 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:02:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:02:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:02:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24142 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:02:06 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.202]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H6XKYD00.7GU for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:18:13 +0800 Message-ID: <003a01c2a0b0$62c28a40$ca5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <005b01c29fd7$f57a1940$ee5b68cb@titoy> <3DF68C5F.7090609@speakeasy.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Looking for Clint Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:58:14 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca HI Steve Ok, glad to know he still exists. Can you pass on his tel no? I will then call him to finalize my little order. Thanks Titoy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Goss" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 8:52 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Looking for Clint > I called Photosphere today to find out, and talked to Clint. He's been a > bit swamped lately. A bunch of people want their cameras fixed before > Christmas, he's been under the weather, his wife is expecting, and plus > he has to spend a bunch of time dealing with Olympus corporate. > I said thanks for the update, and that I would tell the list so he could > get back to work... > > Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx > > Clemente Colayco wrote: > > > Hi All > > > > Has anyone been in touch with Clint lately? We are finalizing a small > > transaction to order parts, and I have not heard from him since a week ago. > > > > Thanks > > > > Titoy > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29627 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:05:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:05:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:05:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24151 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:04:56 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-b160.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.75.160]) by mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBB14im05882 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:04:44 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:59:39 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210163218.05753ea0@192.168.100.11> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How about a compilation of the more definitive answers, solutions etc that have appeared in the many posts from this OM list's community. We would of course require their permission but in the short eighteen months that I've been reading their contributions I've been astounded at the depth of knowledge about such a variety of OM stuff. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Richard F. Man Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:35 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Actually, I was thinking more in the line of, if "we" were to write a definitive OM book (and we can more or less guarantee there are at least couple hundred buyers :-) ), what would "we" put it in? Camera specs etc. can be done w/ a e-SIF CD. How about personal stories (how my OM changed me from a dog-kicker to a sensitive new age guy), or photos? Best of OM photos on a CD? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30005 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:12:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:12:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:12:05 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.hrnoc.net (relay3.hrnoc.net [66.192.46.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24159 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:11:59 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay3.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18LvPD-0002Qg-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:11:19 -0500 Received: (qmail 67256 invoked by uid 89); 11 Dec 2002 01:11:14 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-49-5.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.49.5) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:11:14 -0000 Message-ID: <01b001c2a0b2$19b72110$9701a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:10:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We all were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere since no one but Gary really put any effort in. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Wheeler" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:59 PM Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book > How about a compilation of the more definitive answers, solutions etc that > have appeared in the many posts from this OM list's community. We would of > course require their permission but in the short eighteen months that I've > been reading their contributions I've been astounded at the depth of > knowledge about such a variety of OM stuff. > John. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Richard F. Man > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:35 AM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > > > Actually, I was thinking more in the line of, if "we" were to write a > definitive OM book (and we can more or less guarantee there are at least > couple hundred buyers :-) ), what would "we" put it in? > > Camera specs etc. can be done w/ a e-SIF CD. How about personal stories > (how my OM changed me from a dog-kicker to a sensitive new age guy), or > photos? Best of OM photos on a CD? > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30290 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:16:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:16:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:16:09 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24163 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:16:04 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:09:32 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF6912E.50906@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:13:18 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... References: <20021210195723.21416.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000f01c2a089$c8048ba0$48fcbed0@swbell.net> In-Reply-To: <000f01c2a089$c8048ba0$48fcbed0@swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You know the discovery of this list is a curse right? You all at least will acknowledge that right? ;-) So I went to the "camera" district in taiwan yesterday, had a roll of Ilford to develop, and I had some time on my hands and so there you go; ideal hands is the way to blow money... So I'm there, looking for Acros.. I come up to a shop; the guy working there is very cool, shows me slides that are incredible. He shows me a slide, with a picture of traffic; and he takes out a microscope, and says try this; and I'm reading the licence plate from the cars.. But wait, there's more! He shows me a picture of a motorcycle, and we are reading the inscription on the engine block. Amazing I said! So what was it taken with?? A Pentax 645, with an adapter and a Schneider made Jenna lens...??? I held it, it was a monster, a 180mm f2.8, yes folks, that's an f2.8. you know... 12lbs... lens only. Taiwan, famous for the "chop and imitate, frankenstein" mentality, the guy says that's what most of them use for professional work. They all like Japanese bodies, but german lenses. I don't know what boat they snuck those lenses over from, but it was amazing. I'm still looking for Acros, and they suggest I take the "secret street" and see if anybody sells it there. Well... the secret street was definitely that. The main street for cameras, sold mostly digital stuff, and N* and C*. But the secret street... Ahhh... All Leica and Hasselblads only. All the shop owners comment "buy a camera, not a toy". So I'm walking down, and what do I see??? A used Hasselblad 903SWC. So of course I go in and play with it. My comments... First, the 903SWC is small; it's very small. It's not like the traditional 5 or 2 series. The viewfinder is iffy, but you know what? With 91degrees of coverage, it makes little difference. Second, no light meter, but then again, it's not any worse then the Fuji690III. Third, DOF is very very deep, and so it's perfect for travel. The price was $2370US which isn't bad, considering it comes with the viewfinder and a 120back (no 220's in taiwan). While some say 35mm is sufficient for 4x6, I agree. But if you go slide, nothing like a big slide. I saw one of the 6x45 slides blown up to 20x24, and the thing is so sharp, I could see the pores on the face. Amazing. One of the cameras that might now become a consideration is the Fuji 645 Autofocus. That has a built in meter, and is fairly compact (again, nothing's compact by OM standards, but by N* standards) but nobody sells medium format Fuji's here. Pentax, Rollei, Mamiya, Hasselblad. That's about it. Bronica is near impossible to find here, and so is Fuji. Don't know why. The only Bronica that I can find is the 645 system. So... Having seen some 645 slides, I am again reminded that I want a 120 based camera. But now, I'm more confused... Good thing I have my OM, I loved it when I was considering buying it, I loved it when I bought it, and I still love it now... But I have to say, to hold a Hasselblad 903SWC is to want one... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30547 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:18:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:18:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:18:18 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24166 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:18:02 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:13:06 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF69204.6@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:16:52 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Flash question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Can I use any flash on my Om1n, or does it have to be an olympus flash?? Any differences? Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30807 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:19:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:19:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:19:52 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24173 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:19:45 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:15:01 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF69277.1070905@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:18:47 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Tokina SZ-X 205, 28-105mm f3.8-4.8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Anybody have experience with this lens? 28-105mm seems to cover everything, 28mm for landscape, and 105mm for portrait (although I'd prefer a bit shallower then f4.8) but seems good. Anybody know the quality of the optics? It's fairly compact, and so something to consider for travel.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31144 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:28:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:28:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:28:35 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24177 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:28:12 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA38174; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:27:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172607.0575f048@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:28:37 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book In-Reply-To: <01b001c2a0b2$19b72110$9701a8c0@inspiron> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I see, how about if anyone that is interested in contributing in writing or photographs send me a private msg specifying what you may want to contribute to mailto:richard@imagecraft.com If it looks to be there is enough interest, I may pick up the task. Not quite sure how easily we can reproduce photographs in a limited run, but perhaps we can solve that by putting them on CDs. At 08:10 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, Tom Scales wrote: >This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We all >were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere since no >one but Gary really put any effort in. > >Tom >----- Original Message ----- >From: "John Wheeler" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:59 PM >Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book > > > > How about a compilation of the more definitive answers, solutions etc that > > have appeared in the many posts from this OM list's community. We would of > > course require their permission but in the short eighteen months that I've > > been reading their contributions I've been astounded at the depth of > > knowledge about such a variety of OM stuff. > > John. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Richard F. Man > > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:35 AM > > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > > > > > > Actually, I was thinking more in the line of, if "we" were to write a > > definitive OM book (and we can more or less guarantee there are at least > > couple hundred buyers :-) ), what would "we" put it in? > > > > Camera specs etc. can be done w/ a e-SIF CD. How about personal stories > > (how my OM changed me from a dog-kicker to a sensitive new age guy), or > > photos? Best of OM photos on a CD? >... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31396 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:29:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:29:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:29:08 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24181 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:29:04 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA38541 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:28:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172844.05755bd8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:29:34 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not In-Reply-To: <1c6.2dba233.2b27e68c@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 07:53 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, Pschings@aol.com wrote: >No, you want to dial in -1, so the camera quenches the flash sooner and >the face doesn't "burn out". Of course the background will be a stop >darker as well. > >Paul Schings OK, this makes much more sense. Duh..... Hmmm... so does the Nik*n wonderbrick w/ the Matrix 3D flash does a better job? Sigh.... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31652 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:30:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:30:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:30:02 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24185 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:29:45 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA38889 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:28:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172952.05755800@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:30:13 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Flash question In-Reply-To: <3DF69204.6@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:16 AM 12/11/2002 +0800, you wrote: >Can I use any flash on my Om1n, or does it have to be an olympus flash?? >Any differences? > >Albert >... Oh I know this one. The 1N is manual so you can use any manual capable flash! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31933 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:33:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:33:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:33:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24189 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:32:55 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-b160.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.75.160]) by mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBB1Wmi05221 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:32:48 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:27:38 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <01b001c2a0b2$19b72110$9701a8c0@inspiron> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The old 80/20 rule extended to 90/1! Well, I've got a folder with about 280 items from previous posts that I'd be happy to compile into appropriate sections and after that maybe some guys would care to add to it. Any thoughts? John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Tom Scales Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:10 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We all were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere since no one but Gary really put any effort in. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Wheeler" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:59 PM Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book > How about a compilation of the more definitive answers, solutions etc that > have appeared in the many posts from this OM list's community. We would of > course require their permission but in the short eighteen months that I've > been reading their contributions I've been astounded at the depth of > knowledge about such a variety of OM stuff. > John. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32338 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:47:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:47:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:47:21 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24215 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:47:17 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-134.s388.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.134] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Lvx1-0006Am-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:46:15 -0500 Message-ID: <000201c2a0b7$1f051000$86e27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> <01ad01c2a087$91582fa0$340f5c18@tampabay.rr.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:32:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Kodak tells me they no longer accept retail orders at that number. I ordered one through Calumet in Chicago. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Hawkins" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 3:06 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide > John, > > For IT-8 target slides can be purchased directly from Kodak at > 1-800-847-8755, a friend recently made this purchase. > > Rich > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Hermanson" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide > > > > Anyone have a reliable source for the Kodak calibration slide noted above? > > I bought a Microtek 4000T, and because they had lowered the price on this > > model, Microtek decided to not include the target slide anymore. > > _________________________________ > > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > > please call 1-800-221-3000 > > _________________________________ > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32678 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:56:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:56:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:56:47 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24223 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:56:44 -0800 Received: from M2W052.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.52]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:56:21 -0500 Message-ID: <99610-220021231115621804@M2W052.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] solution to the flash problem Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:56:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 01:56:21.0847 (UTC) FILETIME=[80FFCE70:01C2A0B8] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Or $500 for a beater M2, $250 for a used CV Nokton 50/1=2E5, and $40 for a= used Gossen or Sekonic meter Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Richard F=2E Man richard@imagecraft=2Ecom Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:41:27 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] solution to the flash problem I guess $2300 for a M7 which can go as low as 1/30 or even 1/15, plus $260= 0=20 for the Noct F1, and a good ASA100 or 400 film should take care of most=20= needs for a flash=2E So anyone has $4000 to spare? :-) (the father of a kid's classmate just=20= bought a M7 to go with his other M, his words: "damn the budget, full debt= =20 ahead!" ) // richard =20 On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site=2E [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previou= s=20 replies in your msgs=2E ]=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 471 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 01:58:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 01:58:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 17:58:48 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24227 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:58:45 -0800 Received: from M2W063.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.63]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:58:22 -0500 Message-ID: <48270-220021231115822490@M2W063.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Flash question Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:58:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 01:58:22.0758 (UTC) FILETIME=[C9115C60:01C2A0B8] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca With an OM-1, it doesn't make any difference who's flash you use; they all= work in their automatic modes, even Olympus'=2E In fact you can use any flash with any OM camera, but you'll need to use the aperture settings recommended by the flash on anything but Olympus TTL units=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Albert olympus@achtung=2Ecom Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:16:52 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Flash question Can I use any flash on my Om1n, or does it have to be an olympus flash??=20= Any differences? Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 968 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 02:26:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 02:26:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 18:26:41 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24250 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:26:39 -0800 Received: (qmail 19002 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 02:26:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail16.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 11 Dec 2002 02:26:51 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF6A506.4020600@speakeasy.net> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:37:58 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Looking for Clint References: <005b01c29fd7$f57a1940$ee5b68cb@titoy> <3DF68C5F.7090609@speakeasy.net> <003a01c2a0b0$62c28a40$ca5b68cb@titoy> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 214-352-8448 Clemente Colayco wrote: > HI Steve > > Ok, glad to know he still exists. Can you pass on his tel no? I will then > call him to finalize my little order. > > Thanks > > Titoy > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1219 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 02:28:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 02:28:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 18:28:41 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24254 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:28:38 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA61954 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:27:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210182813.05783dc0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:29:12 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] solution to the flash problem In-Reply-To: <99610-220021231115621804@M2W052.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The guy that got the M7 may need to sell his M6 to help pay for it :-) So who knows. I already have a Sekonic L138 too... At 08:56 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, you wrote: >Or $500 for a beater M2, $250 for a used CV Nokton 50/1.5, and $40 for a >used Gossen or Sekonic meter > >Skip > > >Original Message: >----------------- >From: Richard F. Man richard@imagecraft.com >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:41:27 -0800 >To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Subject: [OM] solution to the flash problem > > >I guess $2300 for a M7 which can go as low as 1/30 or even 1/15, plus $2600 >for the Noct F1, and a good ASA100 or 400 film should take care of most >needs for a flash. > >So anyone has $4000 to spare? :-) (the father of a kid's classmate just >bought a M7 to go with his other M, his words: "damn the budget, full debt >ahead!" ) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1566 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 02:38:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 02:38:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 18:38:07 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24266 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:38:04 -0800 Received: (qmail 2203 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 02:38:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail16.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 11 Dec 2002 02:38:15 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF6A7A5.4050203@speakeasy.net> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:49:09 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172607.0575f048@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Richard F. Man wrote: > I see, how about if anyone that is interested in contributing in writing > or photographs send me a private msg specifying what you may want to > contribute to mailto:richard@imagecraft.com If it looks to be there is > enough interest, I may pick up the task. Not quite sure how easily we > can reproduce photographs in a limited run, but perhaps we can solve > that by putting them on CDs. > > At 08:10 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, Tom Scales wrote: > >> This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We >> all >> were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere >> since no >> one but Gary really put any effort in. >> >> Tom ----------- Just to let y'all know how far we got last time, I was playing "keeper of the table of contents", and this was the latest revision. The next step after finalizing this was getting volunteers to write the chapters. The silence at that point was deafening. Just to let y'all know how far we got last time, I was playing "keeper of the table of contents", and this was the latest revision. The next step after finalizing this was getting volunteers to write the chapters. The silence at that point was deafening. Subject: Re: [OM-Book] Contents, 4/25/2001 From: Steve Goss Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:17:41 -0500 To: OM-Book@yahoogroups.com The floor is still open for revisions on placement. Added this time: more on collectability, and Jim Couch's offer of a hiking/biking chapter. I've tried to clean up the Technique and Using OM sections in the following manner: Technique- Neat pieces of Olympus gear, and wonderful things to do with them. Using OM- The pictures you want to take, and how the Olympus OM system can help. In other words, I've tried to make the Technique section more machine oriented, and the Using OM section more people oriented. OMnibus/Olympus cOMpedium/Olympus Bible Consolidated Content List Proposals for the OM Guide - updated 4/25/01 sdg ----------------------------- CONTENT ----------------------------- General history Suggested sidebars: The Olympus VIP Program: too little too late? Contents: Olympus Evolution Basic history of Olympus corporation Direct ancestors- Pen and FTL The original M-system & reasons for change to OM. (including regional anomalies) OM Achievements & landmarks Maitani Biography Photo of the master, taken with OM equipment (extra points for a picture taken with 9 T flashes connected by T cords) His thoughts about OM system What would he design today? Camera bodies Suggested sidebars: How to tell a real M from a converted OM. (by Jaap Korten, Mark Dapoz?) How the OM-10 cost cutting hurt Olympus. The relationship of the OM-PC to the Nikon FA - was it a knee-jerk marketing reaction or real innovation? Just how slow is an AF OM body compared to today's AF SLRs? Reliability and serial numbers - what serial numbers for bodies and lenses deserve a price premium? Which ones to avoid? Pentax M-series lens and compact bodies: were they really a threat to the Olympus OM System? The disadvantages to Zuiko petiteness (from comparative lens tests to other manufacturer's) Mechanical compromises from reduction of scale in Olympus OM bodies (contrasting repair technician's points of view) The OM-F's industry firsts, but no one really cared. Why? Diaphragm prefire: Standard with Nikon's, but why was it abandoned by other manufacturers (Minolta, Canon, Leica) and not incorporated till late (the OM-4 intro) by Olympus? Related subject: why mirror lock-up isn't the end all of vibration reduction. Feature shedding: what did Olympus leave off consumer models to keep them from competing with their higher end professional models? Did it really matter all that much? Plastics: what models and how much. Is titanium really worth it? What's the difference between an OM-4T and an OM-4Ti? Or, Hello gray market. A look back at OM-77AF and OM-88 equipment reviews: did they predict their failures in the marketplace? Shutter lag times (how long between shutter button press and shutter opening) Complete cross reference of gray market cameras- OM-3T = OM-3Ti, OM-4T = OM-4Ti, OM-F = OM-20, OM-G = OM-30, OM-PC = OM-40 Did Olympus drop the OM-2S so it would not cannibalize OM-4 sales? Did the resulting lack of a mid-priced body doom OM sales? Contents: Intro - what's available M1 through OM-4Ti through OM-88 special medical versions (RC35, etc.) How the cameras work Limitations of the system (OM-2000, 75-150) Film choices (?) Variations Accessories Suggested sidebars: The overly slow evolution of an "acute matte" (laser etched) type screen for the OM-2S to OM-4(Ti) family (cited by Keppler as the main reason Nikon handled better than Olympus in the OM-1/2 days). Ever wonder why everyone's 250 exposure backs and accessories look the same? Which focusing screen to use when Are the 2 series screens (and Beattie intense screens) that much better? How do you focus a 2 series screen? Contents: Motors, Winders & Backs Viewfinder (screens, varimagni) List with pictures of all screens Flash Third party flash Cases Lenses Suggested sidebars: Can Olympus Autofocus lenses be used on a manual focus body? Can Olympus manual focus lenses be used on an Autofocus body? Innovative lenses vs. those introduced to match a competitors offering. Who really won the manual focus performance war? Did Nikon and Olympus both win the war but lose the main battle (market share)? Not all multicoating is the same. Just how good is multicoating anyway? Which is better- single coated with hood, or multicoated without? What are all the 50mm 1.8 variations? Why should I care? 35-70 & 35-80 zooms- wave distortion @ 35: did anyone else do better? The S Zuiko line as a strategy to compete against generic lenses: what was actually lost in cost reduction? Did it work? The little S Zuiko that could: the 35-70mm f/3.5~4.5 and how nobody's competing model matched it for performance. The big mystery: did or didn't Olympus contract out some of their zoom lens designs? (Good as part of a 35-105mm Zuiko discussion). The unintended success of the 24mm Shift : mount conversions for use on other systems. Were the results from consumer magazine lens tests fair? How did they hurt/help the Olympus OM System? Did the delayed introduction of fast telephotos contribute to the decline of the OM System among professionals? Why you need a fast micro lens - diffraction in practice Contents: General Glass types Coating Variations Wide Angle Normal Telephoto Macro Hoods & Accessories Filters Non-OM Lenses OR Lenses in a historical context, by date of release. Complete list of M-system equipment. OR Consumer primes f2 'Pro' Zoom White lenses Macro - regular and bellows. The standard 'wide-to-long' sequence could be maintained with each section Lens addendum - adapters Telephoto adapters, 1.4 & 2x IS system adapters "Transgender" adapters (Pen to OM, OM on Canon, etc.) Technique Macro & Macro Flash Use of the Telescoping auto tube Use of the ring flashes Use of the twin flash What equipment will get what magnification Metering systems, and neat tricks to do with them Manual (OM-1, OM-1N, OM-2, OM-2N, OM-2S, 0M-3, OM-3T, OM-4, OM4-T, OM-2000, OM-10 w/manual adapter) Normal automatic (OM-2, OM-2N, OM-2S, OM-4, OM-4T, OM-10, OM-20, OM-30, OM-40, aperture priority, averaging meter) Center weighted automatic (Early OM-2's, and National Geographic OM-2's) Single spot meter (OM-2S, OM-2000) Multiple spot meter (OM-3, OM-3T, OM-4, OM-4T) Program (OM-2S, OM-40) ESP (OM-40) How to do fill flash Manual flash calculations Fill flash with TTL and OTF How to simulate rear curtain flash sync Medical- ring flash, macro lenses, endoscopes Photomicrography equipment, and when to use it Architectural- shift lenses Other Using OM The OM Way The OM Community (our list, and others) Traveling with OM (kits for landscapes, urban areas, flower/bird photography when hiking, biking, or going by suv...) Hiking and biking with OM equipment - Jim Couch Basic workings Scenics & still lifes (found objects?); use of light Portraiture Action photography Outside Inside, with flash Inside, with existing light News/event photography Fireworks Nature Available light Astrophotography (as a section by itself, or part of available light) macro photography micro photography Studio work controlling lights & backgrounds continuous light Photo Examples Literature Suggested sidebars: Olympus's successful advertising brochures: did they lead or follow the industry? Contents: Japanese language publications (as complete a list as possible) English language publications (with some notes on what they contain) French language publications (and a few pictures to identify similar publications) ______ language publications (As many lists as there are languages) Olympus advertisements Olympus citations in Photography & consumer magazines Care & Maintenance Suggested sidebars: Why vermiculite is a bad packing material, by John H. Storing an OM-4 with the shutter on "B" why, and what it does not do. Contents: Basic OM Instructions Troubleshooting Problem solving Typical problems, common solutions Do It Yourself section What never to do yourself section Storage Collecting OM Suggested sidebars: Why 1985 prices were the lowest ever and what equipment has appreciated over time since then (some items have skyrocketed). How badly have new equipment prices risen and why? How the OM-2000 is doomed to failure because marketing didn't supply an inexpensive 50mm lens combo for student needs in the USA. Why the OM-3 was a sales failure and the effect on its collectability. Did Olympus's final, world-class product releases insure its collectability? Or did they arise from corporate competition? or were their development a way to reward employee loyalty? The parallels in end game market strategy between the Pen F system and the OM System: can we predict what will happen after the OM System is retired? Anyone for investing? - the best bets in collectable OM System components. Does Olympus now a nostalgia item? (e.g., "I wanted it when I was younger and didn't have the money, so I'm going to get it now that I do!") Did Olympus have historic cutting edge technology? Did Olympus have an innovative (classic) design? Did Olympus have snob appeal? Did Olympus marketing create a positive image for collectability - for example Contax getting us to feel that (rather than objectively think!) Carl Zeiss lenses are world class. Are Olympus products in demand, which reduces supply and makes us think something is rare, thus resulting in hoarding by the "haves" vs. "have nots"? Did Olympus have high prices when last available? Was it by purpose or by default? Does Olympus have available information that drives collectors interests and desires, like rarer variations? Is there an active market for Olympus gear which facilitates trading up and makes it possible to liquidate without a heavy cost? Is there an appreciation in value, rather than depreciation over what it costs in the past? Is there an availability of parts/technicians to restore components? Are there evangelists who tout the collectability of Olympus equipment? Contents: Hunting (where to hunt, hunting strategies) Price (stratospheric, good, Doris Fang) Condition (how to asses condition, what difference condition makes on price, problem areas to look for) Photos of equipment in different conditions Appendices Tables SC vs. MC Serial Numbers Resources Olympus 800 number for manuals The list, other lists e-sif ebay prices page lens test page other web pages Bibliography books, magazine reviews, Olympus Om related publications (manuals, sales brochures, ads, etc.) Web based appendix product shots gallery teasers of upcoming information in the next volume of the book CD based appendix expanded versions of stuff on the web site items that did not fit in the book ---------------------------- Overall production values: Equipment pictures- lots of them. Either all obviously by the same photographer, or a mix of styles, but either way, they must all be consistently good pictures. Example pictures- to illustrate the strengths of the OM system. Definitely a mix of styles and tastes. Also must all be consistently good pictures. sidebars- consistent graphical style for each kind of sidebar. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2018 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 03:01:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 03:01:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 19:01:02 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24274 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:00:58 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 560945B298 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:00:11 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... In-Reply-To: Message from Steve Goss of "Sun, 08 Dec 2002 23:53:33 MDT." <3DF42FDD.40704@speakeasy.net> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:00:11 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021211030011.560945B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <3DF42FDD.40704@speakeasy.net>, Steve Goss writes: >One of the things we did was door prizes, that had been donated by >members of the Sunday School class. My donation was an 8x10 of whatever >the winner wanted. Well, the winner wants a picture of her cats. Since >both my daughter and I are allergic to cats, I don't have much >experience with felines. What have I gotten myself into? I'm sure y'all >are just full of ideas. Pets are pest to photograph, cats doubly so. :-) Your average cat's attention span is about half that of your average hyperactive kid[1], and their attitute towards being photographed and especially towards photographers is that of superior species. [2,3] Just like in any other portrait assignment, you'll need to get to know your subject quite well to produce good photos. In your case that might be a bit hard, since you're allergic to cats, but maybe you can get some info out of _the cat's_ human, i.e. owner. You'll need to bring some toys with you to get _the cat's_ attention, you'll most probably also need an assistant to animate _the cat_, but have no illusions, you will only have limited time to come up with some good shots, because the cat will see your plot through and stop playing and go away the moment you think you got her eating out of your hand, so to speak. At that moment, it'll go and relax somewhere next to a rather cluttered background and make a really cute face or lie in such a pose that will make her human all soft and she'll want you to take that photo, right there right then. Of course, by the time you get things ready - lights, camera, ac... - where did the cat go? One of the things that will keep your average cat interested for a long enough time to actually get some good shots is a box. It need not be huge box, just big enough for the cat to fit inside. Or at least some parts of the cat, you'll still want her face at least to stick out. In those rare few moments after the cat got new box and found that it was good, you'll have a chance to get some interesting photos, especially expressions on the face that will say 'finally a bearer of good gifts'. For those extra cute points, the box will need to be wrapped in a nice wrapping paper, with maybe a ribbon around it. A heavy duty archive box generally will do, sizewise. Other toys that will work: A soft rubbery ball on a piece of string, attached to a long stick. Imagine you're fishing. No, no hook needed. :-) Cat mint a.k.a. catnip a.k.a. catnep.[5] If you want to go for classic 'Aaaah' shots, you'll need to postion the supreme being close to a window or some other source of soft light. Just be aware that the cat most probably won't cooperate the way you want her to. The cat's human might be able to help you with this task, but don't count on it. Take a portrait lens and a wide angle lens with you. You won't need more than that. Oh, and if you can, take one of the OM's with AE mode. You'll need it. First and most of all, get to know the cat before you take photos of her. Really. No other way around it. For a few a bit different cat photos, have a look at http://fluffy.sauceforge.net/ (Taken with Olympus C990z.). In the first three photos you can also see how quickly a cat changes her mood, and facial expression. Cheers, Saso, caretaker of a persian prince [1] All kids are seemingly hyperactive nowadays, because adults aren't physically active enough. [2] All generalizations are false. [3] Describing Real Cat[4]. If you're not dealing with a Real Cat, please ignore most of the following text. :-) [4] For a good description of a Real Cat, read Terry Pratchett's "The Unadulterated Cat". [5] http://www.moggies.co.uk/catmint.html http://www.vet.purdue.edu/depts/addl/toxic/plant07.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2788 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 03:14:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 03:14:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 19:14:26 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24314 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:14:23 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA77083 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:13:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210191258.027d6e28@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:14:49 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] < $340 for a 4T w/ databack 2! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A very good price , no? I would have bid on it except that I'm not really into buying/selling: Very interesting too since an obvious automated snipe comes in at 2 seconds before it closes (I was manually clicking reload just to see how it ends). // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3072 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 03:18:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 03:18:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 19:18:22 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24318 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:18:20 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2002121103171105100jaci2e>; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 03:17:11 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: "Olympus List" Subject: [OM] gator shooting discussion in Chicago Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:19:15 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I met Bob Gries for lunch Saturday in cold, snowy downtown Chicago. As usual, a pleasant visit with a kindred soul, and he lets me fondle his Morgan Sparks leather-clad OM bodies! Bill, he showed me your pictures. As one Texas gator-shooter to another, my hat's off to you. It never occurred to me to chum with my big toe to draw the gator within Zuiko 16 mm range. . . Gary Edwards (still in possession of all ten original toes) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3402 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 03:24:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 03:24:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 19:24:05 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24326 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:24:01 -0800 Received: from jjohnso4.attbi.com (c-66-56-1-50.atl.client2.attbi.com[66.56.1.50]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002121103225105200158g4e>; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 03:22:52 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021210221200.00a7d920@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: jjohnso4@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:22:21 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Johnny Johnson Subject: Re: [OM] Kodak Q60 E3 Target slide In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210164137.028ddbb8@192.168.100.11> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20021210150446.00a9dec0@mail.attbi.com> <000e01c2a086$398d0440$7ddf7ad1@hppav> <20021210135445.1fce7e8e.T.Clausen@computer.org> <20021210141714.54a3dc4b.T.Clausen@computer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 04:42 PM 12/10/02 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: >What's the best way to use a scanner profile, say on something like a >Nikon LS-4000? If I can use it, then I would be interested in getting one >of these... Hi Richard, You guess that you know that you need special profiling software to generate the profile. My scanner was shipped with SilverFast scanning software that included a profiling module. When using SilverFast the profile is automatically applied to the image after the scan and before it is sent to Photoshop. With most other packages you generate a profile and then you assign that profile to the image after it's scanned into Photoshop. You might take a look at the following free profiling package. I haven't personally tried it yet but I understand from others that it works well for profiling scanners. Later, Johnny __________________________ Johnny Johnson Lilburn, GA mailto:jjohnso4@attbi.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3922 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 03:55:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 03:55:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 19:55:46 2002 -0800 Received: from cedar.petroglyph.crestline.ca.us ([209.185.214.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24351 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:55:40 -0800 Received: by CEDAR with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:55:24 -0800 Message-ID: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F1988@CEDAR> From: Scott Gomez To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:55:24 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear Saso, Not a bad attempt at a description--for a human. --- Jackie Chan Cat, owner/operator of Scott Gomez P.S. You forgot to capitalize "Supreme Being" when used in reference to Us. -----Original Message----- From: VS [mailto:VS@SauceForge.net] Subject: Re: [OM] I just came home from a Christmas party too... If you want to go for classic 'Aaaah' shots, you'll need to postion the supreme being close to a window or some other source of soft light. Just be aware that the cat most probably won't cooperate the way you want her to. The cat's human might be able to help you with this task, but don't count on it. Cheers, Saso, caretaker of a persian prince < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4774 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 05:07:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 05:07:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 21:07:47 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24418 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:07:40 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.ce.3134ebe7 (3699) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:05:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:05:18 EST Subject: Re: [OM] gator shooting discussion in Chicago To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_ce.3134ebe7.2b28218e_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_ce.3134ebe7.2b28218e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 9:18:30 PM Central Standard Time, garyetx@attbi.com writes: > Bill, he showed me your pictures. As one Texas gator-shooter to another, my > hat's off to you. It never occurred to me to chum with my big toe to draw > the gator within Zuiko 16 mm range. . . > This one really wasn't that big. I guess 6 or 7 feet long. The thing that made it interesting was that she was a momma gator with 7 or 8 little ones hanging around her. In fact what originally had me interested in her was a couple of the little ones that were sitting on her head sunning themselves. There are really some big ones in this park. This was not one of them. I know ours gators aren't as big as the crocks from down under, but they are all the same big dang lizards. If you ever get down this way let me know and we will take a run out there. I planning a trip for a bunch of Zuiko heads in 2004 and this is one of the places we will go. Bill Barber --part1_ce.3134ebe7.2b28218e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/10/2002 9:18:30 PM Central Standard Time, garyetx@attbi.com writes:

Bill, he showed me your pictures.  As one Texas gator-shooter to another, my
hat's off to you.  It never occurred to me to chum with my big toe to draw
the gator within Zuiko 16 mm range. . .


This one really wasn't that big. I guess 6 or 7 feet long.  The thing that made it interesting was that she was a momma gator with 7 or 8 little ones hanging around her. In fact what originally had me interested in her was a couple of the little ones that were sitting on her head sunning themselves.  There are really some big ones in this park.  This was not one of them.  I know ours gators aren't as big as the crocks from down under, but they are all the same big dang lizards.  If you ever get down this way let me know and we will take a run out there.  I planning a trip for a bunch of Zuiko heads in 2004 and this is one of the places we will go.  Bill Barber --part1_ce.3134ebe7.2b28218e_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5150 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 05:23:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 05:23:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 21:23:15 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA24431 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:23:11 -0800 Received: (cpmta 16946 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 21:22:08 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 21:22:08 -0800 X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 05:22:08 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:22:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] Irritating ad, but good price - OMPC $55 BIN Message-ID: <3DF6852F.18168.C36F8EE@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1944815468 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5507 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 05:37:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 05:37:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 21:37:14 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24441 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:36:47 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-208-190-253-232.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [208.190.253.232]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBB5ZqDL171216 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:35:52 -0500 Message-ID: <001201c2a0ce$fb61e840$e8fdbed0@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021211030107.2075.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Now you're really confused? Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:37:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "But I have to say, to hold a Hasselblad 903SWC is to want one... Albert" I never said I didn't want one. I do. After the 250 for the 'blad, it may be next. I'm glad you had a look at the little AF Fuji. I've been very interested in it, and have handled one. My repairman owns one, it was sold to him as non-working, and he made it work. He says, after opening it, that there are things that concern him in the inside, regarding longevity. It is, however, very compact, and falls to the hand well. I lost interest, due to the very small zoom range. since then, my wife got a Fuji DL Super Mini (a real nice P&S, and priced right), which has a lens that is a rough equivilent, 28-60. I've used it a couple of times, amd it wasn't as limiting as I suspected. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5881 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 05:45:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 05:45:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 21:45:29 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24470 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:45:24 -0800 Received: from KFrohling@netscape.net by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.ed.68e7b31 (16215) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:43:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from netscape.net (ac914c91.ipt.aol.com [172.145.76.145]) by air-in01.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILININ13-1211004332; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:43:32 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF6CFDD.3040600@netscape.net> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:40:45 -0800 From: Kerry Frohling User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] < $340 for a 4T w/ databack 2! References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210191258.027d6e28@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Richard F. Man wrote: > A very good price , no? I would have bid on it except that I'm not > really into buying/selling: > Very > interesting too since an obvious automated snipe comes in at 2 seconds > before it closes (I was manually clicking reload just to see how it ends). Yes, but the seller has "zero" feedback, or I would have bid a little higher ;-) Kerry Frohling Fullerton, CA USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6485 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 06:33:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 06:33:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 22:33:47 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24514 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:33:44 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-18.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.18] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18M0Qp-0001wh-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:33:20 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF6DDA9.5000903@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:39:37 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172607.0575f048@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually the idea of a CD instead of a paper book sounds really good. It would substaintially reduce production costs. I would be willing to do some work on this. I will contact you off list. Jim Couch Richard F. Man wrote: > I see, how about if anyone that is interested in contributing in > writing or photographs send me a private msg specifying what you may > want to contribute to mailto:richard@imagecraft.com If it looks to be > there is enough interest, I may pick up the task. Not quite sure how > easily we can reproduce photographs in a limited run, but perhaps we > can solve that by putting them on CDs. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6893 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 06:50:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 06:50:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 22:50:20 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24538 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:50:18 -0800 Received: from mckoy ([216.101.212.57]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6Y00I9605OP0@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:46:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:50:17 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster Subject: [OM] How to lock up mirror? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <20021210225017.37f6be36.talrmr@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have heard people refer to locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious can this be done on the OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does one do that? Tal < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7147 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 06:53:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 06:53:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 22:53:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24546 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:53:48 -0800 Received: from mckoy ([216.101.212.57]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6Y00FAU0EVSX@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:52:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:55:51 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster Subject: [OM] winder cable/remote? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <20021210225551.1cef0276.talrmr@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have always been curious about the jack, by the shutter release, on my Winder 2. Was this for some kind of cable or radio shutter release? Does anybody have more information on this? Tal -- talrmr@pacbell.net www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7505 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:07:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:07:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 23:07:15 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24563 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:07:12 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA56148 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:06:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210230650.057a9a08@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:07:46 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? In-Reply-To: <20021210225017.37f6be36.talrmr@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:50 PM 12/10/2002 -0800, Tal Lancaster wrote: >To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have heard people refer to >locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious can this be done on the >OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does one do that? On the 4T, and probably on the 2N, you use the timer to get the mirror to go up 12 secs before it fires the shutter. I believe the 1 was the only OM that has a true mirror lockup. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7925 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:31:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:31:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 23:31:43 2002 -0800 Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24577 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:31:40 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax18-211.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.169.211]) by mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBB7Vbt03036 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:31:37 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] How to lock up mirror? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:31:25 +1100 Message-ID: <000f01c2a0e7$53933100$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <20021210225017.37f6be36.talrmr@pacbell.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have heard > people refer to locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious > can this be done on the OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does > one do that? > Can't be done with the 2N, the self timer really just pushes the shutter release after 10 sec. delay. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8207 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:35:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:35:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 23:35:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA24589 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:35:14 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-30.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039591719!1680 Received: (qmail 19203 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:28:40 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-30.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:28:40 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBB78sD29044 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:08:55 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF6EAB3.EF4EE762@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:35:15 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210230650.057a9a08@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The 2n will not lock up the mirror when timer start, it only up during exposure. Only the OM10-40, OM4/4Ti and OM2sp will lock up the mirror in self timer mode. C.H.Ling "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > At 10:50 PM 12/10/2002 -0800, Tal Lancaster wrote: > >To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have heard people refer to > >locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious can this be done on the > >OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does one do that? > > On the 4T, and probably on the 2N, you use the timer to get the mirror to > go up 12 secs before it fires the shutter. I believe the 1 was the only OM > that has a true mirror lockup. > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8464 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:35:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:35:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 23:35:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24593 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:35:42 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax18-211.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.169.211]) by mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBB7ZdH32192 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:35:39 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] winder cable/remote? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:35:28 +1100 Message-ID: <001001c2a0e7$e424ed30$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <20021210225551.1cef0276.talrmr@pacbell.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > I have always been curious about the jack, by the shutter > release, on my Winder 2. Was this for some kind of cable or > radio shutter release? Does anybody have more information on this? > You can plug in a wired release (various lengths available, or make your own - 2.5mm plug, it just requires a contact closure), M Quartz Remote Controller (intervalometer) or M Grip Cord (uses the button on the BG-2 as a remote release). ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8746 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:40:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:40:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 10 23:40:54 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24598 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:40:51 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA66624 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:40:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210234045.0579acd8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:41:25 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] < $340 for a 4T w/ databack 2! In-Reply-To: <3DF6CFDD.3040600@netscape.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210191258.027d6e28@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >>A very good price , no? I would have bid on it except that I'm not really >>into buying/selling: >> Very >>interesting too since an obvious automated snipe comes in at 2 seconds >>before it closes (I was manually clicking reload just to see how it ends). > >Yes, but the seller has "zero" feedback, or I would have bid a little >higher ;-) > >Kerry Frohling >... I *knew* there's a reason I wasn't bidding :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9160 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:03:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:03:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 00:03:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24614 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:03:50 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax18-211.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.169.211]) by mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBB83kj01582 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:03:47 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] < $340 for a 4T w/ databack 2! Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:03:35 +1100 Message-ID: <001101c2a0eb$d1eaa610$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210234045.0579acd8@192.168.100.11> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Yes, but the seller has "zero" feedback, or I would have bid a little >higher ;-) > >Kerry Frohling >... I *knew* there's a reason I wasn't bidding :-) Yeah, well everyone who's trading started with zero feedback didn't they ? ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9492 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:11:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:11:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 00:11:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA24629 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:11:28 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039594180!1723 Received: (qmail 31690 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:09:41 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-5.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:09:41 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBB7iqD29885 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:44:52 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF6F322.254A64D8@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:11:14 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] < $340 for a 4T w/ databack 2! References: <001101c2a0eb$d1eaa610$49e09910@meo.dec.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wayne Harridge wrote: > > > > >Yes, but the seller has "zero" feedback, or I would have bid a little > >higher ;-) > > > >Kerry Frohling > >... > > I *knew* there's a reason I wasn't bidding :-) > > Yeah, well everyone who's trading started with zero feedback didn't they > ? > > ...Wayne They should sell some cheap items first, or even buy some items to get more feedback. Selling expensive items as a start will lost lots of money as the price may be up to 30 0.000000e+00ss than a reputable seller. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9742 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:12:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:12:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 00:11:59 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24633 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:11:58 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA75492 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:11:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211001111.0579de20@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:12:29 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] < $340 for a 4T w/ databack 2! In-Reply-To: <001101c2a0eb$d1eaa610$49e09910@meo.dec.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210234045.0579acd8@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 07:03 PM 12/11/2002 +1100, you wrote: > > > >Yes, but the seller has "zero" feedback, or I would have bid a little > >higher ;-) > > > >Kerry Frohling > >... > >I *knew* there's a reason I wasn't bidding :-) > > > >Yeah, well everyone who's trading started with zero feedback didn't they >? > >...Wayne >.. heh, I'm just not the gambling type I guess. I have no real bad experience w/ ebay or OM listers so far, so I like to keep the track record clean. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10026 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:15:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:15:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 00:15:50 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24641 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:15:48 -0800 Received: from [195.202.40.72] (mueasc-wan072.citykom.de [195.202.40.72]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA02204 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:15:00 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasc-wan072.citykom.de [195.202.40.72] claimed to be [195.202.40.72] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:15:09 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3DF6912E.50906@achtung.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Am 11.12.2002 02:13 Uhr schrieb "Albert" unter : > But I have to say, to hold a Hasselblad 903SWC is to want one... > > Albert Hi folks, maybe a Linhof Technika 6x9 would be perfect; within coupled rangefinder for three excellent lenses: ZEISS Biogon 53mm, Planar 100mm, Sonnar 180mm. Really good. with regards, Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10284 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:18:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:18:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 00:18:57 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24645 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:18:56 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA81696 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:18:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211001904.057afe50@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:19:30 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book In-Reply-To: References: <01b001c2a0b2$19b72110$9701a8c0@inspiron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Some stuff is taking shape off line. I will make a proposal to the list in a day or so. Thanks! At 12:27 PM 12/11/2002 +1100, you wrote: >The old 80/20 rule extended to 90/1! Well, I've got a folder with about 280 >items from previous posts that I'd be happy to compile into appropriate >sections and after that maybe some guys would care to add to it. Any >thoughts? > >John. > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >[mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Tom Scales >Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:10 PM >To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > > >This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We all >were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere since no >one but Gary really put any effort in. > >Tom >----- Original Message ----- >From: "John Wheeler" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:59 PM >Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book > > > > How about a compilation of the more definitive answers, solutions etc that > > have appeared in the many posts from this OM list's community. We would of > > course require their permission but in the short eighteen months that I've > > been reading their contributions I've been astounded at the depth of > > knowledge about such a variety of OM stuff. > > John. > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10819 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 08:54:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 08:54:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 00:54:18 2002 -0800 Received: from web20009.mail.yahoo.com (web20009.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA24692 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:54:17 -0800 Message-ID: <20021211085403.47870.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20009.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:54:03 PST Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:54:03 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021210225017.37f6be36.talrmr@pacbell.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The only OM bodies that can have mirror lock up are the OM-1 and 1n bodies. OM-4t however has an even better scheme of mirror and apeture prefire with the self timer. OM-2n unfortunatley cannot be locked up. Mark Lloyd --- Tal Lancaster wrote: > To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have > heard people refer to > locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious can > this be done on the > OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does one do that? > > > Tal __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11394 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 09:34:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 09:34:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 01:34:20 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA24738 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 01:34:19 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBB9QiN7009496 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:26:44 +0100 (MET) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:26:44 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Message-Id: <20021211102644.03d850a2.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: References: <01b001c2a0b2$19b72110$9701a8c0@inspiron> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id BAA24738 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I even think that Tom Scales put up a mailing list for the OM book project. It went as far as a bunch of people joining and some messages were exchanged....then it died a silent death. I'd be willing to contribute again, however.... --thomas On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:27:38 +1100 "John Wheeler" wrote: > The old 80/20 rule extended to 90/1! Well, I've got a folder with > about 280 items from previous posts that I'd be happy to compile > into appropriate sections and after that maybe some guys would care > to add to it. Any thoughts? >=20 > John. >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Tom Scales > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:10 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book >=20 >=20 > This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago.=20 > We all were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went > anywhere since no one but Gary really put any effort in. >=20 > Tom > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Wheeler" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:59 PM > Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book >=20 >=20 > > How about a compilation of the more definitive answers, solutions > > etc that have appeared in the many posts from this OM list's > > community. We would of course require their permission but in the > > short eighteen months that I've been reading their contributions > > I've been astounded at the depth of knowledge about such a > > variety of OM stuff. John. >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11703 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 09:37:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 09:37:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 01:37:42 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost2.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost2.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA24753 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 01:37:40 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost2.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18M3J0-000LJt-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:37:26 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:38:51 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6BE@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:38:49 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Tom Scales wrote: > This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We all > were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere since > no > one but Gary really put any effort in. > I volunteered for the macro section, and I am slowly accumulating material at: http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ Alan Wood < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13344 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 12:19:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 12:19:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 04:19:04 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA24881 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 04:19:02 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021211121754053002jk91e>; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:17:54 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] winder cable/remote? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:20:00 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20021210225551.1cef0276.talrmr@pacbell.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It is for a remote cable produced by Olympus, or you can make your own. All it consists of is an 1/8" plug, a cable, and a momentary SPST switch. Close the circuit and the winder (or MD) fires. I've used cables up to about 50 feet with no problem. Gary Edwards -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Tal Lancaster Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:56 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] winder cable/remote? I have always been curious about the jack, by the shutter release, on my Winder 2. Was this for some kind of cable or radio shutter release? Does anybody have more information on this? Tal -- talrmr@pacbell.net www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13886 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 12:58:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 12:58:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 04:58:57 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA24908 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 04:58:55 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18M6Rl-0003P6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:58:41 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:00:05 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6BF@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: [OM] Versions of the Auto Bellows Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:00:04 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca While the topic of an OM book is being discussed again, perhaps I could ask for some information to add to my OM macro Web site (and the book if it ever happens). According to some of the existing books, there are 2 versions of the lens mount board. One has on its inner surface, matt black, parallel grooves - I have this one. The other version is supposed to have a thread for a Series VII filter, which would allow a filter or shallow hood to be used when the lens mount is reversed - has anyone seen this version? Again according to existing books, there are 2 versions of the rail. One has x1 and x1.5 markings for 50mm and 80mm lenses - I have this one. The other version is supposed to also have "80mm AUTO" markings - has anyone seen this version? Thank you for any help you can provide. Alan Wood http://www.alanwood.net (Unicode, special characters, pesticide names) http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ (under construction) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14145 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 12:59:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 12:59:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 04:59:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA24912 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 04:59:51 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:56:04 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA06960 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:56:01 GMT Message-ID: <3DF735E1.4090403@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:56:01 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book References: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6BE@EXCHANGE> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think we probably discussed this last time but I think a web or CD based project would be a lot more realistic and achievable than a book, though it might lead to a published version in time. With a web-based project, it could start immediately, and a growing site would encourage all contributors to keep on contributing. It really is an excellent idea to collate all the knowledge there is on this list, especially now the OM system has been discontinued. All we need to do to get going is start using some web space and putting contributions for Steve Goss's various headings up there. Organisation and editing can come later. I would happily write a section on night-time photography of various sorts as that's my favourite kind of photography, and astrophotography was the reason I bought an OM-1 in the first place. Roger Alan Wood wrote: > Tom Scales wrote: > > >>This was a project that Gary Reese tried to start a few years ago. We all >>were going to contribute chapters or sections. Never went anywhere since >>no >>one but Gary really put any effort in. >> >> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14494 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 13:08:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 13:08:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 05:08:50 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24925 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:08:48 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.16e.1858d0bd (16484) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:06:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <16e.1858d0bd.2b28926a@aol.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:06:50 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Versions of the Auto Bellows To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16e.1858d0bd.2b28926a_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_16e.1858d0bd.2b28926a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 6:59:26 AM Central Standard Time, alan.wood@context.co.uk writes: > Again according to existing books, there are 2 versions of the rail. One > has x1 and x1.5 markings for 50mm and 80mm lenses - I have this one. The > other version is supposed to also have "80mm AUTO" markings - has anyone > seen this version? > Yes, mine has it and the markings for the 80mm Auto are in green. Bill Barber --part1_16e.1858d0bd.2b28926a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 6:59:26 AM Central Standard Time, alan.wood@context.co.uk writes:

Again according to existing books, there are 2 versions of the rail.  One
has x1 and x1.5 markings for 50mm and 80mm lenses - I have this one.  The
other version is supposed to also have "80mm AUTO" markings - has anyone
seen this version?


Yes, mine has it and the markings for the 80mm Auto are in green.  Bill Barber --part1_16e.1858d0bd.2b28926a_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14789 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 13:11:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 13:11:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 05:11:56 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24933 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:11:55 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.14b.18aca6bf (16484) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:09:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <14b.18aca6bf.2b289321@aol.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:09:53 EST Subject: Re: [OM] winder cable/remote? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_14b.18aca6bf.2b289321_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_14b.18aca6bf.2b289321_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 6:19:23 AM Central Standard Time, garyetx@attbi.com writes: > I've used cables up to about 50 > feet with no problem. > So that is how you have kept all your toes. The gators are you friends. :-) Bill Barber --part1_14b.18aca6bf.2b289321_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 6:19:23 AM Central Standard Time, garyetx@attbi.com writes:

I've used cables up to about 50
feet with no problem.


So that is how you have kept all your toes.  The gators are you friends.  :-)  Bill Barber --part1_14b.18aca6bf.2b289321_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15040 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 13:13:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 13:13:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 05:13:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24937 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:13:08 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBBD5VN7029865 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:05:32 +0100 (MET) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:05:31 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Versions of the Auto Bellows Message-Id: <20021211140531.755e6ba0.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6BF@EXCHANGE> References: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6BF@EXCHANGE> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id FAA24937 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:00:04 -0000 Alan Wood wrote: > While the topic of an OM book is being discussed again, perhaps I > could ask for some information to add to my OM macro Web site (and > the book if it ever happens). >=20 > According to some of the existing books, there are 2 versions of > the lens mount board. One has on its inner surface, matt black, > parallel grooves - I have this one. The other version is supposed > to have a thread for a Series VII filter, which would allow a > filter or shallow hood to be used when the lens mount is reversed - > has anyone seen this version? I have to check that when I come home....The bellows is, probably, my least used piece of OM equipment :( >=20 > Again according to existing books, there are 2 versions of the > rail. One has x1 and x1.5 markings for 50mm and 80mm lenses - I > have this one. The other version is supposed to also have "80mm > AUTO" markings - has anyone seen this version? >=20 I know for a fact that I have seen it, I think. I recall having two bellows for a little while, and noticed that theu were having different markings. I sold off one (off-list), but I was not paying attention to which since I did never use the markings for anything. Still, I can confirm that two different rails exist, although I cannot confirm what the markings are. > Thank you for any help you can provide. >=20 > Alan Wood > http://www.alanwood.net (Unicode, special characters, pesticide > names) http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ (under > construction) >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15321 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 13:16:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 13:16:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 05:16:20 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24941 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:16:18 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18M6ia-00067i-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:16:04 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:17:28 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6C1@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:17:28 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca While the topic of an OM book is being discussed again, perhaps I could ask for some more information to add to my OM macro Web site (and the book if it ever happens). I am trying to find the years in which some items were introduced. I have checked my own receipts, instructions leaflets, booklets and brochures and found the following dates: Auto extension tubes - 1981 Telescopic auto tube - 1981 50mm f/2 auto macro - 1985 90mm f/2 auto macro - 1991 20mm f/2 auto macro - 1984 38mm f/2.8 auto macro - 1984 80mm f/4 auto 1:1 macro - 1981 T10 ring flash + T Power control - 1981 T8 ring flash - 1984 T28 macro single flash - 1984 T28 macro twin flash - 1984 Can anyone confirm any earlier years? The month and year of printing are often present at the bottom of the instruction leaflets or on the back cover of the instruction manuals, shown as 4 numbers, e.g. 0781 is July 1981. Thank you for any help you can provide. Alan Wood http://www.alanwood.net (Unicode, special characters, pesticide names) http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ (under construction) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15829 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 13:47:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 13:47:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 05:47:15 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24958 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:47:13 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBBDjtnh029892 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:45:55 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Which Olympus body/lens case is the light brown one? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:48:13 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 11-12-2002 14:48:14 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Final price for the case: 117GBP =3D 181USD !!! Pretty expensive leather........ Roger Key op 10-12-2002 20:06 schreef Roger D. Key op rdk@dannet.com: > > As a further comment, UK eBay currently has a mint light tan hard cas= e with > the original box (looks like LNIB to me), price is up to =A382GBP (13= 0USD > !!), with 17 hours left > > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1943294193 > > I have seen OM-1's with a good case selling for less than this! > > Roger Key > On the other hand, you can maybe swap it for this 40f2 (antifangwise): it even comes without the original lenscap! iwert = < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16114 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 13:52:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 13:52:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 05:52:07 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24962 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:52:05 -0800 Received: from [217.216.178.29] (cliente-217216178029.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.178.29]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gBBDlhO04788 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:47:43 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:48:22 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: [OM] [FS] OM-1MD, 55/2.8, etc Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, everyone! I've got a few more things for sale... *OM-1 MD ($120): includes MD cover, body cover (Vivitar), Shoe-1 ("fix") and 1-13 screen. Meter calibrated for 1.35 v. New foam (CLA'd on July 2002). Some cosmetic wear. *Vivitar 2x-21 teleconverter ($18): average wear, clean optics. No caps, but comes with the original soft case. *A11 flash ($24): for XA-series. Near mint. *Vivitar 285 flash ($40): includes 28mm difusser (with a small crack), synchro cord and instruction manual. *Cambron slide duplicator ($30): T-mount. Will fit OM bodies with a suitable T-ring (NOT included). Comes with difusser sheet, an unknown T-ring (for a thread mount, but not M42 nor LTM) and instruction manual. The duplicator is in mint condition, but the box is worn. Other stuff still available: *Olympus AF 50mm F1.8 ($30) *Vivitar Macro 55mm F2.8 ($100) -- lower price. *CPC 75-200mm F4.5 ($35) You can see pics at . This URL will show what I have for sale, at any time. I will ship anywhere in the world at actual cost. For USA/Canada, airmail shipping should be around $24, or $30 if over 2 lb. Add 1 0.000000or insurance (recommended). As for payment method, PayPal is fine. Please contact me off-list if interested. Thanks a lot! ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16553 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 14:18:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 14:18:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 06:18:50 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA24979 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:18:49 -0800 Received: (cpmta 14475 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 06:17:48 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 06:17:48 -0800 X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 14:17:48 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] instruction sheets Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:14:54 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <000a01c2a11f$ad7aa7b0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Does anyone have the instruction sheet for the 16/3.5? It's not on the e-sif... Unless it is one the CD? Robert G. Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 E: rgg@gnrarch.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16849 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 14:23:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 14:23:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 06:23:10 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA24987 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:23:09 -0800 Received: from M2W087.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.87]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:22:42 -0500 Message-ID: <54360-2200212311142242283@M2W087.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:22:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 14:22:42.0417 (UTC) FILETIME=[C44C8610:01C2A120] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A paper book would be a monumental project, IMO=2E Just the compilation of data for a CD will be a large task=2E=20 Has anyone put together a Table of Contents for such an undertaking? I can't think of much that isn't already readily available=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Jim Couch JamesBCouch@earthlink=2Enet Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:39:37 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Actually the idea of a CD instead of a paper book sounds really good=2E It= =20 would substaintially reduce production costs=2E I would be willing to do=20= some work on this=2E I will contact you off list=2E Jim Couch Richard F=2E Man wrote: > I see, how about if anyone that is interested in contributing in=20 > writing or photographs send me a private msg specifying what you may=20 > want to contribute to mailto:richard@imagecraft=2Ecom If it looks to be=20= > there is enough interest, I may pick up the task=2E Not quite sure how=20= > easily we can reproduce photographs in a limited run, but perhaps we=20 > can solve that by putting them on CDs=2E > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17286 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 14:49:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 14:49:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 06:49:35 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25016 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:49:33 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA28071; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:49:32 -0600 From: "gries" To: , "'Richard F. Man'" Subject: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:46:35 -0600 Message-ID: <000e01c2a124$1c8be520$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <20021211030107.2075.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Richard: The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual guide numbers. However, if you are looking for acceptable results with any of the AUTO flash techniques, the best thing to do is to select an aperture that is just below your sync speed. On an OM-4 this means having the ability to select 1/3 stop below 1/60. although the meter in the camera may not be perfectly accurate as to the indications of the AUTO function (that is, whether or not the flash will fire as it may have enough ambient light) I have never had a problem. I would recommend shooting print film as it is usually a lot more forgiving on faces than any slide film. Some object to the occasional cool cast of the Fuji 4-layer films, but I have always been pleased. You can try any of the Kodak Portra films for guaranteed success. However, the best general lighting is always diffused. In indoor situations, I will bounce a T-32 off the ceiling, and have always been able to get f8 when shooting in the 200-400 ISO range. If you are out doors, then you can fashion a bounce card and it will work the same way. There is no need to spend any more money than you have already invested to get great shots. Also, if you wanted the slow sync that the M7 is touting, you can tape over the contacts as seen here: http://www.xs4all.nl/0.000000E+00wiskerke/artikelen/faqeng.html#flash Enjoy! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17570 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 14:51:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 14:51:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 06:51:15 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25020 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:51:14 -0800 Received: from M2W086.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.86]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:50:52 -0500 Message-ID: <184670-2200212311145052164@M2W086.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:50:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 14:50:52.0028 (UTC) FILETIME=[B362B3C0:01C2A124] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know that the Extension Tubes were available with the OM-1 in 1972? Wer= e they originally manual, stop-down-metering tubes? Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Alan Wood alan=2Ewood@context=2Eco=2Euk Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:17:28 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment While the topic of an OM book is being discussed again, perhaps I could as= k for some more information to add to my OM macro Web site (and the book if = it ever happens)=2E I am trying to find the years in which some items were introduced=2E I ha= ve checked my own receipts, instructions leaflets, booklets and brochures and= found the following dates: Auto extension tubes - 1981 Telescopic auto tube - 1981 50mm f/2 auto macro - 1985 90mm f/2 auto macro - 1991 20mm f/2 auto macro - 1984 38mm f/2=2E8 auto macro - 1984 80mm f/4 auto 1:1 macro - 1981 T10 ring flash + T Power control - 1981 T8 ring flash - 1984 T28 macro single flash - 1984 T28 macro twin flash - 1984 Can anyone confirm any earlier years? The month and year of printing are often present at the bottom of the instruction leaflets or on the back cover of the instruction manuals, show= n as 4 numbers, e=2Eg=2E 0781 is July 1981=2E Thank you for any help you can provide=2E Alan Wood http://www=2Ealanwood=2Enet (Unicode, special characters, pesticide names)= http://www=2Ealanwood=2Enet/photography/olympus/ (under construction) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17826 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 14:53:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 14:53:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 06:53:23 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25028 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:53:21 -0800 Received: from M2W061.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.61]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:52:59 -0500 Message-ID: <39020-2200212311145259937@M2W061.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] instruction sheets Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:52:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 14:52:59.0949 (UTC) FILETIME=[FFA1E5D0:01C2A124] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bob, 1=2E Mount the lens with the glassy end away from the camera body 2=2E Dial in filter 3=2E Focus 4=2E Set aperture 5=2E Aim=2E=2E=2E=2Eshoot=2E Do you need to know any more? ;-o Smart-ass-Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Robert Gries rgg@gnrarch=2Ecom Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:14:54 -0600 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] instruction sheets Does anyone have the instruction sheet for the 16/3=2E5? It's not on the e-sif=2E=2E=2E Unless it is one the CD? Robert G=2E Gries Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc=2E=20 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 T: 312=2E372=2E5353 F: 312=2E372=2E5367 E: rgg@gnrarch=2Ecom=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18183 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 15:00:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 15:00:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 07:00:30 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp-server4.tampabay.rr.com (smtp-server4.tampabay.rr.com [65.32.1.43]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25040 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:00:28 -0800 Received: from p5x6v0 (dt061n34.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.15.52]) by smtp-server4.tampabay.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBBF0385015958 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:00:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <005a01c2a126$159dfda0$340f5c18@tampabay.rr.com> From: "Richard Hawkins" To: References: <000a01c2a11f$ad7aa7b0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: Re: [OM] instruction sheets Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:00:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I checked and it is not on the esif CD. sorry Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gries" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 9:14 AM Subject: [OM] instruction sheets > Does anyone have the instruction sheet for the 16/3.5? It's not on the > e-sif... Unless it is one the CD? > > Robert G. Gries > > Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. > 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2418 > Chicago, Illinois 60606-3004 > T: 312.372.5353 F: 312.372.5367 > E: rgg@gnrarch.com > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18496 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 15:09:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 15:09:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 07:09:50 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost2.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost2.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25057 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:09:48 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost2.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18M8UQ-000Ika-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:09:34 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:10:58 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6C2@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:10:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Skip Williams wrote: > I know that the Extension Tubes were available with the OM-1 in 1972? > Were > they originally manual, stop-down-metering tubes? > Yes, the first OM tubes were manual, not automatic. I would like to find out when the automatic tubes were introduced. I would also be interested to know why Olympus produced manual extension tubes for the OM, when all of the lenses had automatic diaphragms (except the original 20, 38 and 80 mm bellows macro lenses, which were not likely to be used with extension tubes). Alan Wood < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18808 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 15:15:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 15:15:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 07:15:15 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25063 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:15:13 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBBFDunh043674 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:13:56 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] instruction sheets To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:16:15 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 11-12-2002 16:16:15 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Not on the CD either, unfortunately.... Roger Key "Robert Gries" To: Sent by: cc: owner-olympus@Zuik Subject: [OM] instruction sheets o.sls.bc.ca 11-12-02 15:14 Please respond to olympus Does anyone have the instruction sheet for the 16/3.5? It's not on the e-sif... Unless it is one the CD? Robert G. Gries < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19128 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 15:23:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 15:23:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 07:23:39 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25067 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:23:38 -0800 Received: from M2W057.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.57]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:23:16 -0500 Message-ID: <54470-2200212311152316555@M2W057.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:23:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 15:23:16.0552 (UTC) FILETIME=[3A698480:01C2A129] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It does seem strange to introduce manual tubes at that time=2E When I bou= ght my OM-1 in 1974, I bought aftermarket, automatic tubes that I still have=2E= =20 The Olympus tubes were about 2-3 times the generics, and they were manual=2E= =20 Here's a PDF page from a March 1974 Ponder & Best brochure with a blurb an= d picture of the manual tubes=2E They discuss both the 55/1=2E2 and 50/3=2E= 5 as candidates for the extension tubes=2E I don't think that the three manual= macro lenses (20, 35, 80) were considered candidates for extension tube us= e=2E http://www=2Eskipwilliams=2Eadahost=2Ecom/data/p16-from-om-system-p&b-0374= =2Epdf Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Alan Wood alan=2Ewood@context=2Eco=2Euk Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:10:57 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: RE: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Skip Williams wrote: > I know that the Extension Tubes were available with the OM-1 in 1972? > Were > they originally manual, stop-down-metering tubes? >=20 Yes, the first OM tubes were manual, not automatic=2E I would like to fin= d out when the automatic tubes were introduced=2E I would also be interested to know why Olympus produced manual extension tubes for the OM, when all of the lenses had automatic diaphragms (except the original 20, 38 and 80 mm bellows macro lenses, which were not likely = to be used with extension tubes)=2E Alan Wood < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19530 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 15:40:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 15:40:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 07:40:12 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA25079 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:40:10 -0800 Received: (cpmta 20491 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 07:39:09 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.241) with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 07:39:09 -0800 X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 15:39:09 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:39:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] (Fwd) New mailinglist for aviation slide collectors Message-ID: <3DF715CB.31241.E6BDB73@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know we have some "just plane" folks on our list... tOM ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Send reply to: "DAPPA (Iwan Bogels)" From: "DAPPA (Iwan Bogels)" To: "DAPPA" Subject: New mailinglist for aviation slide collectors Date sent: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:06:45 +0100 To all aviation slide collectors, Do you have a special series of slides to offer ? Are you looking for people to trade slides with ? Do you want to point people to your slide service ? Are you chasing after a special aircraft slide ? Do you want to announce your slide convention ? Then DAPPA has created two seperate aviations slide collector mailinglists just for you ! One for military slides / One for civil slides Military Aviation Slide Collectors To join this group, send an empty message to milavislidecol- subscribe@yahoogroups.com Civil Aviation Slide Collectors To join this group, send an empty message to civavislidecol- subscribe@yahoogroups.com Feel free to subscribe to these new lists and ask, offer, advertise and announce all about aviation slides. All text messages are welcome, as long as they are related to aviation slides or aviation photography. In order to stay safe on viruses we have decided to ban attachements. However, there is a file area where you can upload images, slide-lists, XLS-files or other items that you want make available to list members. We hope these two new lists will provide you with new means to meet fellow slide collectors all over the world ! Enjoy, Iwan Bogels http://www.dappa.nl ------- End of forwarded message -------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ottawa-photo-clubs http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus-Documentation http://www.CanadianCameraConference.ca 2003 Jun 28-30 tOM Trottier, ICQ:57647974 http://abacurial.com 758 Albert St, Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 N45.412 W75.714 "The moment one gives close attention to anything, even a blade of grass, it becomes a mysterious, awesome, indescribably magnificent world in itself -- Henry Miller, 1891-1980 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20361 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 16:48:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 16:48:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 08:48:42 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25163 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:48:40 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA31588; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:47:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211080057.057cefd0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:49:10 -0800 To: "gries" , oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces In-Reply-To: <000e01c2a124$1c8be520$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> References: <20021211030107.2075.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:46 AM 12/11/2002 -0600, you wrote: >Richard: > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual >guide numbers. However, if you are looking for acceptable results with >any of the AUTO flash techniques, the best thing to do is to select an >aperture that is just below your sync speed. On an OM-4 this means >having the ability to select 1/3 stop below 1/60. although the meter in >the camera may not be perfectly accurate as to the indications of the >AUTO function (that is, whether or not the flash will fire as it may >have enough ambient light) I have never had a problem. OK, so I'd simply set the F280 to Auto, and adjust the aperture on the OM-4 until the shutter speed is right below 1/60? But that checks the ambient light right? I bet I am confused again. I mean if I can set the shutter speed to right below 1/60 w/ the ambient light, I will probably not use the flash anyway :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20654 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 16:54:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 16:54:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 08:54:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.broadpark.no (mail.broadpark.no [217.13.4.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25172 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:54:42 -0800 Received: from paraply.org (199.80-202-105.nextgentel.com [80.202.105.199]) by mail.broadpark.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AC958083 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:49:51 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <3DF76CAC.1050808@paraply.org> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:49:48 +0100 From: lister User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl (FS?) References: <16e.1848dacf.2b273a60@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <16e.1848dacf.2b273a60@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: > The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got mine > down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in the "Stars > and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West Germany for $9.95. > I've enjoyed it many times as it is well-written, and love the black > cover, which has that "OM" look. Hi, I recently bought two(!) of the english edition from a local camera-shop. They were not cheap though, at approx. $120 each, but both were what I would call 'mint'. How do you know if it's the first or second edition? Mine doesn't say, it only says: 1st to 11th thousand 1975, is this the first edition? In one of the books the name of the prior owner are printed in small letters on the first page, and there are three pages with some scribblings in the margins (translations of 'difficult' words done by the prior owner from english to norwegian). I'm willing to part with this one, if anybody is interested. regards, Lister (BTW: Have had som problems with my ISP, lost some messages, think this is fixed now, but don't know for sure BTW2: The three 24mm I earlier posted about were all gone the next week.. :-( < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21462 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:06:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:06:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:06:48 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25216 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:06:47 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA14951 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:06:46 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] instruction sheets Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:03:49 -0600 Message-ID: <001b01c2a137$47e33120$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <20021211165449.20705.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How about on the "bonus" material? On the site it shows a page with the 8/2.8. As was mentioned, occasionally some useful information can be gleaned from these small leaflets... ;) I checked and it is not on the esif CD. sorry Rich < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21812 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:12:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:12:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:12:15 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25246 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:12:14 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.95] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 31167653 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:26 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF771BB.58E69DD4@suite224.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:23 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My fellow Zuikoholics After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. John The auction: < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22189 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:21:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:21:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:21:42 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25250 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:21:40 -0800 Received: from user220.net017.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.219.220] helo=oemcomputer) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MAXn-0005Nr-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:21:11 -0800 Message-ID: <000d01c2a139$d6e90b40$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <001b01c2a137$47e33120$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: [OM] OT Paper for B&W Contact Proofs Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:22:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I would like to make some contact proof sheets of some B&W negatives I have. In the Adams books, he refers to "contact" paper as differing from "enlargement" paper. Typically, all I find in the various ads and websites is termed enlargement paper. Is there a difference nowadays (in other words, does it matter)? Does anyone make/sell "contact" paper? I don't (at the moment) have access to an enlarger, but will soon. What are your experiences with the various B&W papers? Favorite makes, tips and techniques ... As usual, actual personal experience counts for more [friend-of-a-friend stuff isn't really THAT helpful ;-)] Thanks. Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22482 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:28:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:28:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:27:59 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25254 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:27:58 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA49318 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:27:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211090613.057d2ec8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:28:32 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] A proposal for the OM-Pedia project Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Zuikoholics - it does look like there are (still) quite a bit of interest in contributing toward a "definitive OM book." My original idea was really a book, but looking at the responses, it is probably too much of an undertaking. That leaves website as the main viable option. Of course a complex website can be turned be dumped on a CD at anytime so that option is open as well. So how do we manage the website? One model is the website maintainer receives web page submissions from different people and organize them. Depending on the skills of the maintainer and how much time he or she can spend, this should work reasonably well. Another model is the wiki-wiki model, where ANYONE can modify a website. This has the advantages that any expert can change the content and even reorganize it to whichever way they see fit. This model works well if there are at least some dedicated people who can really set the ball rolling to set up the initial pages (TOC, links etc.) There are also some learning curves on using wiki-wiki, as it is not strictly HTML. The guards against malicious hacking are simply that bad contents can be edited out, and outright trashing of data can be restored from backup. I can offer some webspace for either of these two options. Personally I would prefer the wiki-wiki approach, but I will leave it up for the people who want to contribute to decide. Regarding copyright etc. I'd think that the copyright of a particular article remains solely that of the writer, and that if CDs are ever offered, they must not be sold for more than $X where X is small, say, $5, plus S&H. [ ImageCraft does own robotic CD burner so burning multiple CDs is no problem ] So first thing to decide is whether people agree this is a worthwhile project. Second then is to decide whether to go with the traditional web model or the wiki-wiki model. To get an idea of what a wiki-wiki is, look at http://c2.com/cgi/wiki, to see an example running on ImageCraft local server, check out http://www.dragonsgate.net/taichi-pedia Let me know what you think. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22745 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:29:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:29:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:29:36 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25260 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:29:34 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-18.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.18] helo=earthlink.net) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MAfW-0002su-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:29:10 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF7777B.5070603@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:35:55 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS: Zuiko Lenses References: <3DF57DCC.5070206@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The Tamron lens has been sold. The camera bodies are still available, (see prev post) and I have added a couple more Zuikos to the list. Anything not spoken for by the end of the week will most likely head of to eBay. Selling off a few items to raise some darkroom funds. (BTW will consider trades for a good quality enlarger) All items listed below are sold on a "you will be happy" basis and come with a 14 day inspection period. If you are not happy for any reason just let me know and we can do a return. Payment forms I accept from list members are personal check, PayPal to spknsprkt@earthlink.net, VISA, MC, Discover, or Amex. International buyers are welcome. Prices do not include shipping or insurance. Items available first OFF LIST reply served basis. Zuiko 24mm f2.8 $175.00 This wonderful lens is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical shape with only a slight amount of aperture ring 'brassing.' Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. Zuiko 35mm f2.8 $75.00 This silver nosed beauty is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical shape. Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. Zuiko 35-70 f3.4~4.5 $150.00 Very versatile lens covers moderate wide angle and moderate telephoto and has a built-in close focusing capability. This is a light and compact lens, and makes a great alternative to a 'normal' 50mm lens for a compact OM outfit. The particular lens offered for sale is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical condition. Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. -- Jim Couch Tacoma, WA USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23029 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:30:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:30:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:30:44 2002 -0800 Received: from carbon.btinternet.com (carbon.btinternet.com [194.73.73.92]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25264 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:30:42 -0800 Received: from host213-122-169-52.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.169.52] helo=oemcomputer) by carbon.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18MAe0-00024x-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:27:37 +0000 Message-ID: <002a01c2a13a$03b40620$34a97ad5@oemcomputer> From: "Julian Davies" To: References: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6C2@EXCHANGE> Subject: Re: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:23:03 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca All the macro gear except the 50/3.5 was originally manual. While you're wondering, how about "why does the bellows have 1) a stop down lever and 2) provision for the DCR when it was designed primarily for use with manual lenses? Particularly given that the extension tubes were manual at the time, and targeted at the only macro lens with auto diaphragm! I guess the tubes were originally manual to save cost. The auto tubes are quite nicely engineered, and I guess the margins must have been smaller when they went to auto. Third party auto tubes I have seen have been nowhere near as nicely made, but I haven't tried using them, and frankly, it's not a large sample.. I'm sure someone else can say whether the oly tubes are better - performing. Julian Cambs, UK The above statements are inaccurate (at best) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Wood" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 3:10 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment > Skip Williams wrote: > > > I know that the Extension Tubes were available with the OM-1 in 1972? > > Were > > they originally manual, stop-down-metering tubes? > > > Yes, the first OM tubes were manual, not automatic. I would like to find > out when the automatic tubes were introduced. > > I would also be interested to know why Olympus produced manual extension > tubes for the OM, when all of the lenses had automatic diaphragms (except > the original 20, 38 and 80 mm bellows macro lenses, which were not likely to > be used with extension tubes). > > Alan Wood > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23286 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:31:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:31:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:31:53 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25269 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:31:51 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA51248 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:31:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211093112.024a7738@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:32:22 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again In-Reply-To: <3DF771BB.58E69DD4@suite224.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:11 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, you wrote: >My fellow Zuikoholics > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. >Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the >lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. >John >The auction: > > Not that I can afford it, but a new F1.0 Noctilux is "only" $2600 from B&H. Why pay more for a slow lens :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23538 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:32:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:32:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:32:09 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25272 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:32:07 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021211171938.XWU148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:19:38 -0500 Message-ID: <002001c2a139$9aba3ea0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <3DF771BB.58E69DD4@suite224.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:20:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:19:38 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "John and Julie Ockman" To: "Olympus List" Sent: Wednesday, 11 December, 2002 01:11 PM Subject: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again > My fellow Zuikoholics > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. > Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. > John > The auction: > US$5,000 reserve! A buyer at that price has to be nuts! and it is only an f1.2! wow ........ > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23790 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:32:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:32:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:32:23 2002 -0800 Received: from front2.chartermi.net (24.213.60.124.up.mi.chartermi.net [24.213.60.124]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25276 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:32:21 -0800 Received: from [24.247.58.58] (HELO jakeway) by front2.chartermi.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9a) with SMTP id 95707850 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:28:34 -0500 Message-ID: <003901c2a13a$d6c5d660$9600a8c0@jakeway> From: "Jodi Jakeway" To: References: <001b01c2a137$47e33120$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> <000d01c2a139$d6e90b40$010000c0@oemcomputer> Subject: Re: [OM] OT Paper for B&W Contact Proofs Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:29:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Jamie, Enlargement papers vary significantly. I have never had any luck with K*dak brands...they tend to print muddy. My standard enlargement paper is Ilford Multigrade Fiber , and my favorite for crisp blacks and true whites is Oriental. You can get these online at Calumet or B&H photo for a good price. Never heard of using a 'contact' paper....just contact print onto regular enlargement paper. Good luck with your darkroom printing! Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. Jodi Jakeway jjakeway@chartermi.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24054 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:34:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:34:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:34:06 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25280 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:34:04 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:38:43 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:33:40 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] FS: Zuiko Lenses Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:37:04 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 17:38:43.0468 (UTC) FILETIME=[266E7CC0:01C2A13C] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca yeah, nice snag on that 28/2 you BINd from the evil one.... -----Original Message----- From: Jim Couch [mailto:JamesBCouch@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 9:36 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS: Zuiko Lenses The Tamron lens has been sold. The camera bodies are still available, (see prev post) and I have added a couple more Zuikos to the list. Anything not spoken for by the end of the week will most likely head of to eBay. Selling off a few items to raise some darkroom funds. (BTW will consider trades for a good quality enlarger) All items listed below are sold on a "you will be happy" basis and come with a 14 day inspection period. If you are not happy for any reason just let me know and we can do a return. Payment forms I accept from list members are personal check, PayPal to spknsprkt@earthlink.net, VISA, MC, Discover, or Amex. International buyers are welcome. Prices do not include shipping or insurance. Items available first OFF LIST reply served basis. Zuiko 24mm f2.8 $175.00 This wonderful lens is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical shape with only a slight amount of aperture ring 'brassing.' Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. Zuiko 35mm f2.8 $75.00 This silver nosed beauty is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical shape. Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. Zuiko 35-70 f3.4~4.5 $150.00 Very versatile lens covers moderate wide angle and moderate telephoto and has a built-in close focusing capability. This is a light and compact lens, and makes a great alternative to a 'normal' 50mm lens for a compact OM outfit. The particular lens offered for sale is in excellent cosmetic, optical, and mechanical condition. Front & rear lens caps (not original Olympus) included. -- Jim Couch Tacoma, WA USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24528 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:49:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:49:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:48:59 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m08.mx.aol.com (imo-m08.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.163]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25297 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:48:57 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.70.2785c103 (25508) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:45:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <70.2785c103.2b28d3c6@aol.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:45:42 EST Subject: Re: [OM] The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl (FS?) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_70.2785c103.2b28d3c6_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_70.2785c103.2b28d3c6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/02 10:55:05 AM Central Standard Time, lister@paraply.org writes: > How do you know if it's the first or second edition? Mine doesn't say, > it only says: 1st to 11th thousand 1975, is this the first edition? > The second edition has "Second Edition" printed on the front cover of the book and the covers are a little different. Bill Barber --part1_70.2785c103.2b28d3c6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/02 10:55:05 AM Central Standard Time, lister@paraply.org writes:


How do you know if it's the first or second edition? Mine doesn't say,
it only says: 1st to 11th thousand 1975, is this the first edition?


The second edition has "Second Edition" printed on the front cover of the book and the covers are a little different.  Bill Barber --part1_70.2785c103.2b28d3c6_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24783 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:49:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:49:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:49:18 2002 -0800 Received: from d12lmsgate.de.ibm.com (d12lmsgate.de.ibm.com [194.196.100.234]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25300 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:49:16 -0800 Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBBHlRVk108534 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:47:27 +0100 Received: from d14ml005.italy.ibm.com (d14ml005.italy.ibm.com [9.87.60.141]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/NCO/VER6.4) with ESMTP id gBBHlQu5051456 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:47:26 +0100 Subject: [OM] zoom and focus problem To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Ralf Loi" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:46:35 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D14ML005/14/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 11/12/2002 18:47:26 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, I have a zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 that is very nice but when zoomed it does not retain the focus, and infinity is somewhere between the 10m and infinity marks. Both problems are very minimal, but I'd like to solve them. I heard that this lens is not too difficult to adjust, but I need advice on how to perform these tasks. Any help is welcome. Thanks in advance. Ralf Loi < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25129 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 17:56:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 17:56:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 09:56:18 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25319 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:56:16 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.95] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 31171952 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:55:32 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF77C12.282DA096@suite224.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:55:30 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT Paper for B&W Contact Proofs References: <001b01c2a137$47e33120$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> <000d01c2a139$d6e90b40$010000c0@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jamie, The only true contact printing paper that I know of that is still available is AZO, by Kodak, and if I remember right it is only available in Grade 3. Contact paper is slower paper. Do a google search of the newsgroups, and you will find a lot of questions and answers about it just like yours. If you want to really waste your time even more that you do with this list :-), try getting the newsgroup:rec.photo.darkroom. You can waste some serious time there. I used to read it, but this is the only equipment list I read anymore. As for papers, " how much money you want to spend son?", 'cause to me that is what is all about. Get out there buy some paper, and try it. Take a couple of your favorite prints, and do them yourself in different papers,grades, surfaces.Do you like cold or warmtones? Or are you one who likes it all. See what works. You can narrow some down a little bit by reading the manufactures descriptions, but you have to see to understand. And no sigle paper ever made me happy for both cold and warmtone. Fifteen years ago, I used to spend hours, and days unending in the darkroom. If my wife thinks my problems of spending too much time on the internet are bad, wait until I finish my darkroom in January. And my budget for paper is going do go crazy. I have been buying some Kodak, but I am deciding on the Ilford, and Orientals I want . And there are others out there too. Regards, John Jamie Costello wrote: > > I would like to make some contact proof sheets of some B&W negatives I have. > In the Adams books, he refers to "contact" paper as differing from > "enlargement" paper. Typically, all I find in the various ads and websites > is termed enlargement paper. Is there a difference nowadays (in other > words, does it matter)? Does anyone make/sell "contact" paper? I don't > (at the moment) have access to an enlarger, but will soon. > > What are your experiences with the various B&W papers? Favorite makes, > tips and techniques ... As usual, actual personal experience counts for more > [friend-of-a-friend stuff isn't really THAT helpful ;-)] Thanks. > > Jamie > Fort Myers, FL > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25490 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:02:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:02:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:02:18 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25331 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:02:17 -0800 Received: from M2W052.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.52]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:01:55 -0500 Message-ID: <293580-22002123111815565@M2W052.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:01:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 18:01:55.0095 (UTC) FILETIME=[63E7EA70:01C2A13F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The lens in the auction is a 6-element 50/1=2E2 Noctilux, not the current formulation lens=2E The f/1=2E2 was introduced in 1968 and needed aspheri= cal surfaces to accomplish it's speed and quality=2E Back then, making aspher= ic surfaces was pretty costly vs=2E spherical ones, so the lens was very expensive and a low volume item=2E It was made until 1976 at low producti= on numbers until the current 7-element f/1=2E0 version was introduced in 1976= =2E=20 The f/1=2E0 lens has no aspheric surfaces, which reduced it's manufacturin= g costs=2E It uses newer glasses and "air-lenses" to replace the need for aspheric surfaces=2E The formulation has remained unchanged for 24 years,= although I'm sure that underlying glass making, coating technology, and manufacturing precision has improved=2E The lenses were designed and are = all still made in Canada at Elcan's Midland, Ontario plant=2E FYI, the f/1=2E2 lens doesn't perform as well as the f/1=2E0 version and i= s typically left to the collectors=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: John and Julie Ockman jrockman@suite224=2Enet Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:23 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again My fellow Zuikoholics After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better=2E Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it=2E John The auction: < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25764 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:03:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:03:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:03:10 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25339 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:03:08 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.95] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 31172524 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:02:24 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF77DAE.576DF6FB@suite224.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:02:22 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211093112.024a7738@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Richardand John, I had been seeing that lens sitting there with $5,000 BIN since it started, I was surprised to see anyone bid. It must be a collector thing. It was only after I posted my original email, that I took a closer look at the pictures to see it was "only" a 1.2. :-) I knew the original discussion was of the "fast" 1.0 one. John "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > At 12:11 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, you wrote: > >My fellow Zuikoholics > > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. > >Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > >lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. > >John > >The auction: > > > > > > Not that I can afford it, but a new F1.0 Noctilux is "only" $2600 from B&H. > Why pay more for a slow lens :-) > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26028 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:05:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:05:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:05:01 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25344 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:04:59 -0800 Received: from M2W038.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.38]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:04:37 -0500 Message-ID: <301890-220021231118437804@M2W038.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:04:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 18:04:37.0846 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4E9BF60:01C2A13F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My aftermarket auto-extension tubes have worked flawlessly since they were= bought in the mid 70's=2E They don't have any makers marks on them=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Julian Davies julian_davies@btinternet=2Ecom Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:23:03 -0000 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment All the macro gear except the 50/3=2E5 was originally manual=2E While you'= re wondering, how about "why does the bellows have 1) a stop down lever and 2= ) provision for the DCR when it was designed primarily for use with manual lenses? Particularly given that the extension tubes were manual at the tim= e, and targeted at the only macro lens with auto diaphragm! I guess the tubes were originally manual to save cost=2E The auto tubes ar= e quite nicely engineered, and I guess the margins must have been smaller wh= en they went to auto=2E Third party auto tubes I have seen have been nowhere = near as nicely made, but I haven't tried using them, and frankly, it's not a large sample=2E=2E I'm sure someone else can say whether the oly tubes are= better - performing=2E Julian Cambs, UK -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26312 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:05:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:05:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:05:37 2002 -0800 Received: from cedar.petroglyph.crestline.ca.us ([209.185.214.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25348 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:05:35 -0800 Received: by CEDAR with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:05:19 -0800 Message-ID: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F198B@CEDAR> From: Scott Gomez To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: [OM] Color Profiles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:05:18 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was looking for some color profile info and came upon these sites that may be of interest: 1. Dry Creek Photo - is building a database of custom profiles for digital minilabs and lists lab locations: http://www.drycreekphoto.com/ 2. Popular Photography - Has downloadable base profiles for Fuji Crystal Archive and Kodak Royal papers on the Fuji Frontier, as well as some printers and digital cameras, including the Olympus E20n. http://www.popularphotography.com/HowTo/ArticleDisplay.asp?ArticleID=174 3. I've downloaded various color profile info for the Frontier. You can contact me if you'd like them emailed, and I will try and get them added to one of my web pages sometime soon. Note that most labs are stating (paraphrased): Color profile information for the Frontier is useful only for proofing on your monitor. The Frontier uses the sRGB color space in a closed loop mode and does not read color profile information embedded in files at all. Files converted to the color space provided with ICC profiles for the Frontier may result in more saturated images. 4. The Frontier can read TIFF, JPEG and BMP images. TIFF must be uncompressed. All image formats must be "flat". --- Scott Gomez < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26656 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:10:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:10:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:10:45 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25356 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:10:43 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.95] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 31173149 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:09:55 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF77F70.856DE640@suite224.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:09:52 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again References: <293580-22002123111815565@M2W052.mail2web.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Skip, Thanks for the info. I have never been in to owning Leica very much. I have had a few II's and III's pass through my hands, but the tiny viewfinders are not for me. I have messed with a couple M6's at shows, but just can not justify the costs. I have been looking at the older Canon LTM's and may try to get one to use with L**ca glass. Thanks again, John "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > > The lens in the auction is a 6-element 50/1.2 Noctilux, not the current > formulation lens. The f/1.2 was introduced in 1968 and needed aspherical > surfaces to accomplish it's speed and quality. Back then, making aspheric > surfaces was pretty costly vs. spherical ones, so the lens was very > expensive and a low volume item. It was made until 1976 at low production > numbers until the current 7-element f/1.0 version was introduced in 1976. > The f/1.0 lens has no aspheric surfaces, which reduced it's manufacturing > costs. It uses newer glasses and "air-lenses" to replace the need for > aspheric surfaces. The formulation has remained unchanged for 24 years, > although I'm sure that underlying glass making, coating technology, and > manufacturing precision has improved. The lenses were designed and are all > still made in Canada at Elcan's Midland, Ontario plant. > > FYI, the f/1.2 lens doesn't perform as well as the f/1.0 version and is > typically left to the collectors. > > Skip > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: John and Julie Ockman jrockman@suite224.net > Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:23 -0500 > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again > > My fellow Zuikoholics > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. > Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. > John > The auction: > 3> > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27055 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:20:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:20:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:20:21 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25371 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:20:20 -0800 Received: (qmail 6600 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:20:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail11.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 11 Dec 2002 18:20:23 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF7858D.6050906@speakeasy.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:35:57 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus-digest Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca An update from Gary Reese- Gary was one of the main persons behind the previous book attempt. Hi Steve: Good job posting the table of contents! Since I can't contribute to the list until a bug is worked out, would you mind posting this? **************** Anyone undertaking a book project needs to review what we accomplished at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OM-Book/ One of the moderators of this dormant "group" will be happy to approve you if you ask for member rights. Do ask yourself if there is enough interest to justify the effort and enough funding/time to execute it. The way I see it, there isn't because too much regarding the Olympus OM System is already available for free on the Web. If I had any doubts, I proved myself right when I posted the price data for the Zuiko lens and had no takers for buying price data on anything I didn't post: bodies, accessories, generic lenses, literature, ephemera, . . . My lens test data is already committed to a book in progress. It's already available on the web for free, so I gave away the rights to publish it. Therefore, a book is already in the works, folks. Don't ask for for additional information, because I don't have it to give, other than to say it's being written in the UK. There is privately held data on virtually anything folks ever ponder over here on the List. Production runs, serial number vs. coating type sequences, OM related publication lists in all major languages, etc. . . Folks are becoming less altruistic in the face of web content raiders, so they don't freely give up what they have. If you find something like these subjects on the web, it's got significant errors and is untrustworthy data - in the face of what has been compiled. But most folks don't seem to care if the data is untrustworthy. It free, so that is all that seems to matter to most end users . . . Gary Reese < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27323 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:23:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:23:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:23:01 2002 -0800 Received: from meredith.dementia.org (root@MEREDITH.DEMENTIA.ORG [128.2.120.216]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25375 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:22:59 -0800 Received: from alycia.dementia.org (ALYCIA.DEMENTIA.ORG [128.2.12.45]) by meredith.dementia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBBIMmx04239 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:22:48 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:22:48 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Dapoz To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment In-Reply-To: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6C1@EXCHANGE> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, USER_AGENT_PINE version=2.43 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I am trying to find the years in which some items were introduced. I have > checked my own receipts, instructions leaflets, booklets and brochures and > found the following dates: > > Auto extension tubes - 1981 Autumn 1980 > Telescopic auto tube - 1981 Autumn 1980 > 80mm f/4 auto 1:1 macro - 1981 Autumn 1980 > T10 ring flash + T Power control - 1981 Autumn 1980 > Can anyone confirm any earlier years? > > The month and year of printing are often present at the bottom of the > instruction leaflets or on the back cover of the instruction manuals, shown > as 4 numbers, e.g. 0781 is July 1981. All these units plus the 135/4.5 macro, 80mm close up lens, ring cross POL filter, 6V power pack 2, and AC adapter 3 were introduced at the same time. They were introduced in the brochure C86E-380D (New Units, Macro). I may have dates for the other equipment, I'll have to dig through my pile of documentation and see if there's anything. -mark < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27741 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:36:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:36:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:36:28 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f52.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.52]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25384 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:36:26 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:30:55 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:30:54 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] A proposal for the OM-Pedia project Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:30:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 18:30:55.0255 (UTC) FILETIME=[711F4270:01C2A143] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Richard F. Man wrote: >> So how do we manage the website? One model is the website maintainer receives web page submissions from different people and organize them. Depending on the skills of the maintainer and how much time he >or she can spend, this should work reasonably well. Another model is the wiki-wiki model, where ANYONE can modify a website. This has the advantages that any expert can change the content and even reorganize it to whichever way they see fit. << Whichever model you decide upon, may I suggest that appropriate web security be implemented in the beginning? There are people who attempt to copy a site, then attempt to sell what they copied in other arenas. I think the eSif site was subjected to this not too long ago. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28091 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:48:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:48:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:48:49 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25395 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:48:47 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-190-25.adsl.pi.be [212.239.190.25]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4B2A3711C for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:48:14 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:48:17 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3DF771BB.58E69DD4@suite224.net> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 11-12-2002 18:11 schreef John and Julie Ockman op jrockman@suite224.net: > My fellow Zuikoholics > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. > Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. > John > The auction: > > But it comes with a tan coloured case, that's what defines the price! iwert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28387 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 18:52:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 18:52:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 10:52:36 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25408 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:52:34 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:52:11 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:51:18 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:55:35 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 18:52:11.0220 (UTC) FILETIME=[69A81140:01C2A146] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Should be a 24kt. gold filigree case full of truffles at that price. -----Original Message----- From: iwert But it comes with a tan coloured case, that's what defines the price! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28730 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:03:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:03:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 11:03:04 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25422 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:03:02 -0800 Received: from pool0748.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.178.238] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MC7y-0006aq-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:02:38 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <39020-2200212311145259937@M2W061.mail2web.com> References: <39020-2200212311145259937@M2W061.mail2web.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:02:36 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] instruction sheets Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Bob, > >1. Mount the lens with the glassy end away from the camera body >2. Dial in filter >3. Focus >4. Set aperture >5. Aim....shoot. > >Do you need to know any more? > >;-o > >Smart-ass-Skip > > Which glassy end is that? :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28987 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:04:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:04:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 11:04:44 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25427 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:04:42 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:09:21 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:03:26 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] instruction sheets Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:07:42 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 19:09:21.0906 (UTC) FILETIME=[CFFE4520:01C2A148] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That should have been 'smart-glass' Skip. -----Original Message----- From: Winsor Crosby > >Smart-ass-Skip > > Which glassy end is that? :-) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29363 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:16:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:16:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 11:16:35 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA25435 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:16:34 -0800 Received: (cpmta 17989 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 11:15:32 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 11:15:32 -0800 X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 19:15:32 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:15:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Message-ID: <3DF74882.30368.F31F3E6@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <3DF771BB.58E69DD4@suite224.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Geez, why settle for 1.2 when you can get the Noctilux f/1.0? http://www.photoslave.com/misc/noctilux/noct.html tOM On Wednesday, December 11, 2002 at 19:48 iwert wrote: > op 11-12-2002 18:11 schreef John and Julie Ockman op jrockman@suite224.net: > > > My fellow Zuikoholics > > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. > > Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > > lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. > > John > > The auction: > > > > > But it comes with a tan coloured case, that's what defines the price! ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29866 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:39:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:39:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 11:39:56 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com (smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com [65.32.1.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25457 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:39:54 -0800 Received: from p5x6v0 (dt061n34.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.15.52]) by smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBBJdSTd018114 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:39:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004501c2a14d$1d7732e0$340f5c18@tampabay.rr.com> From: "Richard Hawkins" To: References: <39020-2200212311145259937@M2W061.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] instruction sheets Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:40:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hmmmm.....Is that a smart ass with a glassy end? Or is it a amart end to a glassy ass? ;-) Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 2:02 PM Subject: RE: [OM] instruction sheets > >Bob, > > > >1. Mount the lens with the glassy end away from the camera body > >2. Dial in filter > >3. Focus > >4. Set aperture > >5. Aim....shoot. > > > >Do you need to know any more? > > > >;-o > > > >Smart-ass-Skip > > > > > > Which glassy end is that? :-) > -- > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30354 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 20:03:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 20:03:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 12:03:02 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25481 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:03:00 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:59:13 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA15654 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:59:09 GMT Message-ID: <3DF7990D.2000405@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:59:09 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] A proposal for the OM-Pedia project References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211090613.057d2ec8@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I certainly think it would be an interesting and valuable thing to do, and distributed among lots of people the work involved would not have to be huge. Looking at the proposed list of contents implies to me that there would be a lot more to it than what is already available on the web. The wiki-wiki thing looks very interesting, and I suggest that the best way of proceeding would be to set up such a site, with the contents list as it is as the frame work, and then invite contributions. Hopefully that would not take too much time. Then, the project viability will become clear if and when sections get filled in. Done this way, the project would not need a managing editor at this stage, and would be quite simple to get going. If it turns out that enough material is generated to make it worth pursuing more seriously, then management decisions would have to be taken. I might suggest that we set up another list to discuss and organise this, or resuscitate the old one, as not everyone is interested in this project. I'm not sure how to go about that though. Roger Richard F. Man wrote: > Hi Zuikoholics - it does look like there are (still) quite a bit of > interest in contributing toward a "definitive OM book." My original idea > was really a book, but looking at the responses, it is probably too much > of an undertaking. That leaves website as the main viable option. Of > course a complex website can be turned be dumped on a CD at anytime so > that option is open as well. > > So how do we manage the website? One model is the website maintainer > receives web page submissions from different people and organize them. > Depending on the skills of the maintainer and how much time he or she > can spend, this should work reasonably well. > > Another model is the wiki-wiki model, where ANYONE can modify a website. > This has the advantages that any expert can change the content and even > reorganize it to whichever way they see fit. This model works well if > there are at least some dedicated people who can really set the ball > rolling to set up the initial pages (TOC, links etc.) There are also > some learning curves on using wiki-wiki, as it is not strictly HTML. The > guards against malicious hacking are simply that bad contents can be > edited out, and outright trashing of data can be restored from backup. > > I can offer some webspace for either of these two options. Personally I > would prefer the wiki-wiki approach, but I will leave it up for the > people who want to contribute to decide. Regarding copyright etc. I'd > think that the copyright of a particular article remains solely that of > the writer, and that if CDs are ever offered, they must not be sold for > more than $X where X is small, say, $5, plus S&H. [ ImageCraft does own > robotic CD burner so burning multiple CDs is no problem ] > > So first thing to decide is whether people agree this is a worthwhile > project. Second then is to decide whether to go with the traditional web > model or the wiki-wiki model. To get an idea of what a wiki-wiki is, > look at http://c2.com/cgi/wiki, to see an example running on ImageCraft > local server, check out http://www.dragonsgate.net/taichi-pedia > > Let me know what you think. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30645 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 20:06:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 20:06:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 12:06:17 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25493 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:06:16 -0800 Received: from M2W069.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.69]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:05:54 -0500 Message-ID: <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:05:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2002 20:05:54.0023 (UTC) FILETIME=[B5DA3F70:01C2A150] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's actually the most interesting review that I've read=2E The three comments at the bottom were the most interesting where he told why he sold= the lens: 1=2E Too heavy (I agree) 2=2E Not THAT much faster than a f/1=2E4 (I also agree, push your film ano= ther stop) 3=2E The DOF at f/1=2E0 isn't that easy to manage, so why try=2E This guy also seems to be into praising something, then selling it=2E I looked at his reviews of the Contax G2, Noctilux, Leica M6, CV 21/4, and other CV gear=2E He's sold them all after less than 18 months in favor of= a Mamiya M7II=2E I think that he needs to take more pictures and deal with less gear=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: tOM Trottier Tom@Abacurial=2Ecom Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:15:30 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Geez, why settle for 1=2E2 when you can get the Noctilux f/1=2E0? http://www=2Ephotoslave=2Ecom/misc/noctilux/noct=2Ehtml tOM On Wednesday, December 11, 2002 at 19:48 iwert wrote: > op 11-12-2002 18:11 schreef John and Julie Ockman op jrockman@suite224=2Enet: >=20 > > My fellow Zuikoholics > > After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better=2E > > Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > > lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it=2E > > John > > The auction: > > > >=20 > But it comes with a tan coloured case, that's what defines the price! ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@=09tOM A=2E Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<,=09=09758 Albert St=2E,Ottawa ON Canada=20 K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*)=09=09ICQ:57647974 N45=2E412 W75=2E714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a=20 little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor=20 safety=2E" -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31344 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 20:58:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 20:58:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 12:58:57 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25549 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:58:54 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-190-25.adsl.pi.be [212.239.190.25]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id C941837859 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:58:22 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:58:23 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 11-12-2002 21:05 schreef om@skipwilliams.com op om@skipwilliams.com: > That's actually the most interesting review that I've read. The three > comments at the bottom were the most interesting where he told why he sold > the lens: > > 1. Too heavy (I agree) > 2. Not THAT much faster than a f/1.4 (I also agree, push your film another > stop) > 3. The DOF at f/1.0 isn't that easy to manage, so why try. > > This guy also seems to be into praising something, then selling it. I > looked at his reviews of the Contax G2, Noctilux, Leica M6, CV 21/4, and > other CV gear. He's sold them all after less than 18 months in favor of a > Mamiya M7II. I think that he needs to take more pictures and deal with > less gear. > > Skip > Correct, we have a saying in Dutch that 'exercise bares craftmanship' and 'the best tools don't grant for succes'. A good photographer can take OK pictures with 'bad tools', but the best tools are no highway to succes. We see the same in architecture nowadays. Students and professionals are taken by the possibilities of three dimensional drawing and architectural CAD packages, with all their whistles and bells. However a pencil and some paper is still the basic tool in my eyes... iwert. (and now it is time to sleep on this side of the big water... I could write for hours on this topic.) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31632 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 21:01:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 21:01:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 13:01:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mta01ps.bigpond.com (mta01ps.bigpond.com [144.135.25.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25555 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:01:31 -0800 Received: from adsl ([144.135.25.69]) by mta01ps.bigpond.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 mta01ps Jul 16 2002 22:47:55) with SMTP id H6Z3NI00.8BE for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:59:42 +1000 Received: from CPE-144-137-98-113.nsw.bigpond.net.au ([144.137.98.113]) by PSMAM01.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V3.0n 71/1626501); 12 Dec 2002 06:59:42 Message-ID: <002801c2a158$67ad4d80$4e61fea9@adsl> From: "Michael" To: References: <16e.1848dacf.2b273a60@aol.com> <3DF76CAC.1050808@paraply.org> Subject: Re: [OM] The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl (FS?) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:00:58 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: lister To: Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 3:49 AM Subject: Re: [OM] The World of OM-Systems by Franz Pangerl (FS?) > DaEyeGuy@aol.com wrote: > > The English editions are usually the ones going high. I just got mine > > down to look thru and noticed I bought it in June, 1976 in the "Stars > > and Stripes" US Army bookstore in Furth, (then) West Germany for $9.95. > > I've enjoyed it many times as it is well-written, and love the black > > cover, which has that "OM" look. > > Hi, I recently bought two(!) of the english edition from a local > camera-shop. They were not cheap though, at approx. $120 each, but both > were what I would call 'mint'. > > How do you know if it's the first or second edition? Mine doesn't say, > it only says: 1st to 11th thousand 1975, is this the first edition? > > In one of the books the name of the prior owner are printed in small > letters on the first page, and there are three pages with some > scribblings in the margins (translations of 'difficult' words done by > the prior owner from english to norwegian). > > I'm willing to part with this one, if anybody is interested. > > regards, > Lister > > (BTW: Have had som problems with my ISP, lost some messages, think this > is fixed now, but don't know for sure > > BTW2: The three 24mm I earlier posted about were all gone the next > week.. :-( > The first edition cover is all black with a picture of an OM1 and OM2 (the 2 is without lens). The second edition cover has the top one third a light grey colour with the rest being black. The pictures of the OM1 and 2 are in the top lighter area and the OM2 is shown fitted with a 250 back. The second edition also states on the front cover "2. Edition" Michael. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31963 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 21:08:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 21:08:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 13:08:52 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25574 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:08:50 -0800 Received: from host62-6-64-106.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.6.64.106] helo=personalmyself) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18ME36-0004Wg-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:05:45 +0000 Message-ID: <000701c2a159$1bc76990$6a40063e@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: Subject: [OM] Amateur Photographer Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:05:59 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Could any AP readers give me the dates of the mags containing articles on ..Home made Macro flash, and Infra red flash trigger. Both were published earlier this year. During a pre christmas "spring clean" ? I have managed to throw out both articles :-( I am looking for a christmas project. Thanks John Duggan, Wales, UK. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32609 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 21:45:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 21:45:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 13:45:28 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25602 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:45:26 -0800 Received: from user220.net017.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.219.220] helo=oemcomputer) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MEew-0005rO-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:45:02 -0800 Message-ID: <005301c2a15e$a8d00cc0$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] zoom and focus problem Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:45:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Ralf Loi" > > Hi all, > I have a zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 that is very nice but ... infinity is somewhere between the 10m and infinity > marks. Mine is somewhat similar: infinity focus is "past" the infinity mark. I had thought of sending it off to John H. or Clint. Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 714 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 22:19:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 22:19:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 14:19:04 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25642 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:19:02 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-66-136-247-183.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [66.136.247.183]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBBMIUMv274368 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:18:30 -0500 Message-ID: <002201c2a15a$2dcf8ae0$b7f78842@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021211165449.20705.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] tubes Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:13:40 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "I know that the Extension Tubes were available with the OM-1 in 1972? Wer= e they originally manual, stop-down-metering tubes? Skip" Funny thing, Skip, the manual tubes, expensive new, are really cheap used. and yes, they are a real pain in the ass to use! Oh, and good advice on the 16. When I borrowed Bob's, I wasn't sure at first which end attaches to the camera. Tried both. As best I know, Bob hasn't noticed yet. I think I'm in the clear! Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1001 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 22:22:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 22:22:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 14:22:36 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25656 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:22:34 -0800 Received: from modem-14.south-dakota.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.137.92.14] helo=freelance) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18MFFP-0001ph-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:22:31 +0000 Message-ID: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> From: "David Sharp" To: Subject: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:14:53 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2A162.BABB4FE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2A162.BABB4FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I'm new to the list. I came across this list on the internet, looking = got info on things Olympus - I've owned an OM2-SP for several years now. = Its a great camera.=20 I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can run two = different speed films at once. I'm doing an increasing amount of = photography of ancient monuments / archaeological sites / archaeological = artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and find myself one minute in = broad daylight and the next minute in the corner of a dark trench..and = having to take accurate exposures quickly). I've been very happy with the OM2-SP (apart from the fact that you can = only use Spot metering in Manual mode...but I can cope with that). I could just buy another OM2SP body. But I'd like to hear people's = opinions on other OM bodies. Are there any people who can compare their = experiences of the OM2SP with, for instance, the OM2n and OM4? Or, = perhaps there are people who work in similar fields who still insist on = using a manual OM1/OM3? Are some OM bodies more reliable than others? Is = the metering more accurate on particular models? Are some tougher than = others? Are some easier to use? Do the batteries run out quickly on = some? Is the OM2000 really a piece of rubbish? If I don't need = 'shadow/highlight' should I get another OM2SP rather than an OM4, or = does the OM4 have some extra advantages? many thanks for any replies -- David Sharp, London, UK. david.sharp@manetho.net Tel: (+44) (0)208 291 0978 Mobile: 07811 407 635 ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2A162.BABB4FE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
 
I'm new to the list. I came across this = list on the=20 internet, looking got info on things Olympus - I've owned an OM2-SP for = several=20 years now. Its a great camera.
 
I'd like some advice... I want to = buy a second=20 OM body, so I can run two different speed films at once. I'm doing an = increasing=20 amount of photography of ancient monuments / archaeological sites / = archaeological artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and find myself = one=20 minute in broad daylight and the next minute in the corner of a dark = trench..and=20 having to take accurate exposures quickly).
 
I've been very happy with the OM2-SP = (apart from=20 the fact that you can only use Spot metering in Manual mode...but I can = cope=20 with that).
 
I could just buy another OM2SP body. = But I'd like=20 to hear people's opinions on other OM bodies. Are there any people who = can=20 compare their experiences of the  OM2SP with, for instance, the = OM2n and=20 OM4? Or, perhaps there are people who work in similar fields who still = insist on=20 using a manual OM1/OM3? Are some OM = bodies more=20 reliable than others? Is the metering more accurate on particular = models? Are=20 some tougher than others? Are some easier to use? Do the batteries run = out=20 quickly on some? Is the OM2000 really a piece of rubbish? If I don't = need=20 'shadow/highlight' should I get another OM2SP rather than an OM4, or = does the=20 OM4 have some extra advantages?
 
many thanks for any = replies
--
David Sharp, London, = UK.
 
david.sharp@manetho.net
 
Tel:       (+44)=20 (0)208 291 0978
Mobile:  07811 407 = 635
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2A162.BABB4FE0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1339 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 22:30:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 22:30:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 14:30:42 2002 -0800 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com (gadolinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.111]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25660 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:30:40 -0800 Received: from host213-122-38-86.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.38.86] helo=oemcomputer) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18MFKI-0003zv-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:27:34 +0000 Message-ID: <001001c2a164$771101c0$56267ad5@oemcomputer> From: "Julian Davies" To: References: Subject: [OT] L*I*A - Was [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:26:17 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One could say two out of three for some of the Zuiko options.... Rant... Let's face it L*i*a either grabs you or it doesn't. From my point of view it's like several other German products. Nice enough. Arguably, but not decisively, the best, and priced to show how well - heeled the owner is, not to reflect any marginal quality gain. Of course, German products aren't alone in this, but where else are Dusseldorf taxis made alongside aspirational autos? The thing I find amusing about it is the hype about the M7 and its new shutter. Actually removing the shutter and all other functional elements would actually be more appropriate for the use to which the MAJORITY of these will be put (with apologies to anyone out there who wants one to actually use - you're in the minority of potential owners) L*i*a would look more truthful if they listed the real reasons for the M7: 1) First real reason not to buy a battered old M3 instead. Not better, but at least a real change! 2) Electronic shutters are SOOO much cheaper to make these days than decent mech ones. 3) Opportunity to increase the surface area available for polishing, gold plating and inscribing with those cute memorial notices, just so this one can be even more special,, and even less likely to leave the box. 4) it must be months since the last "must have everything" owners bought an M6-TTL-0.72-GTI-ALLIGATORSKIN-RHODIUMFINISH with the slightly different knob which does nothing but makes it more collectable. Must keep the faithful supplied with objects of desire! And if "I'm missing the point", it's because it doesn't grab me, not because L*i*a is the one true path and I am a mistaken fool. I may be a mistaken fool for other reasons, but not this one. Maitani is the one true path. Anyone can see that! etc etc etc. Rant over The points he makes about the noctilux are pretty much inherent in all large aperture lenses. I wonder what he thouht he was getting (as opposed to what he wrote in its favour) BTW is it this one which obscures a fair portion of the viewfinder field - of - view? Julian Cambs, UK The above statements are inaccurate (at best) ----- Original Message ----- > > 1. Too heavy (I agree) > > 2. Not THAT much faster than a f/1.4 (I also agree, push your film another > > stop) > > 3. The DOF at f/1.0 isn't that easy to manage, so why try. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1596 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 22:33:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 22:33:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 14:33:58 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25664 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:33:56 -0800 Received: from user220.net017.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([64.45.219.220] helo=oemcomputer) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MFQR-0003us-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:33:55 -0800 Message-ID: <006701c2a165$86077640$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:34:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0064_01C2A13B.9A79A140" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0064_01C2A13B.9A79A140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Sharp=20 I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can ...=20 - David Sharp, London, UK. David, welcome to the list. I was given an OM-1MD ... thought it was = the best camera in the world ... didn't need another. Needed flash: = on a whim, bought OM-2n and T32 ... now, I REALLY don't any other = cameras ... just my OM-1MD for B&W/outdoors and the OM-2n for color and = flash. But, you know, spot metering would be really useful ... bought = OM-4t (Champagne, thank yew) ... don't need any other cameras ... just = my OM-1MD, OM-2n and OM-4t ... and ... how'd I end up with this OM-1n? You get the picture. You NEED all of them. As one list member = first told me a long time ago: "I can stop ... really ... anytime I want = ... really". Jamie Fort Myers, FL ------=_NextPart_000_0064_01C2A13B.9A79A140 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 David=20 Sharp
  <snip>
I'd like some advice... I want to buy a = second OM body,=20 so I can ...
 
<snip>
-
David Sharp, London, = UK.
 
 
David, welcome to the list.  I = was given an=20 OM-1MD ... thought it was the best camera in the world ... didn't need = another.    Needed flash: on a whim, bought OM-2n and = T32 ...=20 now, I REALLY don't any other cameras ... just my OM-1MD for = B&W/outdoors=20 and the OM-2n for color and flash.   But, you know, spot metering would be really useful ... bought = OM-4t=20 (Champagne, thank yew) ... don't need any other cameras ... just my = OM-1MD,=20 OM-2n and OM-4t ... and  ... how'd I end up with this = OM-1n?
 
You get the picture.   You = NEED all of=20 them.   As one list member first told me a long time ago: "I = can=20 stop ... really ... anytime I want ... really".
 
Jamie
Fort Myers,=20 FL
------=_NextPart_000_0064_01C2A13B.9A79A140-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2462 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 22:52:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 22:52:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 14:52:38 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25706 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:52:35 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.98.101]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021211224819.VXTU21770.out003.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:48:19 -0600 Message-ID: <00ab01c2a167$667b3850$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> <006701c2a165$86077640$010000c0@oemcomputer> Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:48:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C2A13D.7D2E0480" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [141.157.98.101] at Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:48:18 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C2A13D.7D2E0480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David, Benefit of the OM4 would be the spot meter in auto mode. Press the spot = button, recompose and press the shutter release. You can also freeze the = exposure for follow on shots. You can use multiple spots averaged (up to = 8) or spot a highlight or shadow and press the highlight or shadow = button to provide the proper compensation. It might be simpler just to = aquire another OM-2S so there is no learning curve between the bodies. = You would definitely benefit from an OM-4(T)(i) model and probably want = 2 of them.... oh, it's what we zuikoholics do. The more we have, the = betterer it is! Mickey ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Sharp=20 I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can ... = - David Sharp, London, UK. David, welcome to the list. I was given an OM-1MD ... thought it = was the best camera in the world ... didn't need another. Needed = flash: on a whim, bought OM-2n and T32 ... now, I REALLY don't any other = cameras ... just my OM-1MD for B&W/outdoors and the OM-2n for color and = flash. But, you know, spot metering would be really useful ... bought = OM-4t (Champagne, thank yew) ... don't need any other cameras ... just = my OM-1MD, OM-2n and OM-4t ... and ... how'd I end up with this OM-1n? You get the picture. You NEED all of them. As one list member = first told me a long time ago: "I can stop ... really ... anytime I want = ... really". Jamie Fort Myers, FL ------=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C2A13D.7D2E0480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
David,
Benefit of the OM4 would be the spot = meter in auto=20 mode. Press the spot button, recompose and press the shutter release. = You can=20 also freeze the exposure for follow on shots. You can use multiple spots = averaged (up to 8) or spot a highlight or shadow and press the = highlight or=20 shadow button to provide the proper compensation. It might be = simpler just=20 to aquire another OM-2S so there is no learning curve between the = bodies. You=20 would definitely benefit from an OM-4(T)(i) model and probably want 2 of = them.... oh, it's what we zuikoholics do. The more we have, the betterer = it=20 is!
 
Mickey
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 David=20 Sharp   <snip>
I'd like some advice... I want to buy a = second OM=20 body, so I can ...
 
<snip>
-
David Sharp, London, = UK.
 
 
David, welcome to the list.  I = was given=20 an OM-1MD ... thought it was the best camera in the world ... didn't = need=20 another.    Needed flash: on a whim, bought OM-2n and = T32 ...=20 now, I REALLY don't any other cameras ... just my OM-1MD for=20 B&W/outdoors and the OM-2n for color and flash.   But, = you know, spot metering would be = really=20 useful ... bought OM-4t (Champagne, thank yew) ... don't need any = other=20 cameras ... just my OM-1MD, OM-2n and OM-4t ... and  ... how'd = I end up=20 with this OM-1n?
 
You get the picture.   = You NEED all=20 of them.   As one list member first told me a long time = ago: "I=20 can stop ... really ... anytime I want ... really".
 
Jamie
Fort Myers,=20 FL
------=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C2A13D.7D2E0480-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3019 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 23:19:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 23:19:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 15:19:35 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25764 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:19:32 -0800 Received: from pool0235.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.210.235] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MG8A-0007gE-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:19:07 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> References: <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:19:03 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >That's actually the most interesting review that I've read. The three >comments at the bottom were the most interesting where he told why he sold >the lens: > >1. Too heavy (I agree) >2. Not THAT much faster than a f/1.4 (I also agree, push your film another >stop) >3. The DOF at f/1.0 isn't that easy to manage, so why try. > >This guy also seems to be into praising something, then selling it. I >looked at his reviews of the Contax G2, Noctilux, Leica M6, CV 21/4, and >other CV gear. He's sold them all after less than 18 months in favor of a >Mamiya M7II. I think that he needs to take more pictures and deal with >less gear. > >Skip As someone once said you can spend $4000 on a new Leica and lens and get a small improvement in your pictures or you can spend $4000 on a medium format camera and get a HUGE improvement in your pictures. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3371 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 23:28:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 23:28:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 15:28:50 2002 -0800 Received: from rhenium (rhenium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.93]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25778 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:28:46 -0800 Received: from host213-122-38-86.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.38.86] helo=oemcomputer) by rhenium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18MGET-0002uC-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:25:38 +0000 Message-ID: <001e01c2a16c$935a3e20$56267ad5@oemcomputer> From: "Julian Davies" To: References: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:25:09 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001B_01C2A16C.8C0D0A80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C2A16C.8C0D0A80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi David - welcome to the list. You sure picked a biggie for your first post! This question seems to = come up quite a lot, and there are as many answers as OM bodies! The = important thing is to be clear on what you expect from your second body = which is different from the OM2sp. You say being stuck with spot = metering only in manual is not ideal for you. If you don't want it at = all, an OM2n will be just as good (and at least as robust). If you want = it sometimes, or in auto, then you have to go OM4 but in either case you = lose program mode (do you use this at all). Alternatively, you could = look at an OM40 (OMPC), which has the ESP function of two - zone = metering, and the same functions as the 2sp. Opinions vary about long = term reliability, but they're cheap(er). If you use the camera mainly in = manual, then it's OM1(n) / OM3 as possibilities. One point about a second OM2sp. These all look the same (no black / = chrome option), and when you're in a hurry... A different model body = would make it easier to tell which is which quickly If you use the right batteries (original 357s SR44s ONLY) you shouldn't = have worse drain issues with any of them than you have with the OM2SP. You also will need to be clear and disciplined about what you are = prepared to spend. The prices (retail with guarantee) in this discussion = have a range of about GBP100 for a reasonable OM40 body through 120 - = 140 for an OM1, 160 - 200 for an OM2n 175 - 250 for an OM2sp. A decent = OM4 will cost upwards of 250. An OM3 (if you can find one) would be 400+ = easily All I've seen in the UK in the last couple of years is a really = ropy one in Jssops at 500 and two LNIB at 600+ . OM4Ti around 500. OM3Ti = - forget it, the collectors are in there big time, so you probably = wouldn't want to use it if you found one! If price is important, Cash converters had a pile of very good OM10s a = little while ago. There seemed to be one in every store I went into. All = VGC and priced around 60 with case, strap and 50/1.8. Worth a look! Then there are other options: with recent gains in film quality, load = fast film and take a neutral density filter or two along with you?=20 Of course, however, Jamie is correct. You need them all. At least one of each. In each finish Then you will need a 250 exposure back. Because Olympus made one I can stop.... I can stop.... Julian Cambs, UK The above statements are inaccurate (at best) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Sharp=20 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca=20 Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:14 PM Subject: [OM] Which OM body? Hello, I'm new to the list. I came across this list on the internet, looking = got info on things Olympus - I've owned an OM2-SP for several years now. = Its a great camera.=20 I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can run = two different speed films at once. I'm doing an increasing amount of = photography of ancient monuments / archaeological sites / archaeological = artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and find myself one minute in = broad daylight and the next minute in the corner of a dark trench..and = having to take accurate exposures quickly). I've been very happy with the OM2-SP (apart from the fact that you can = only use Spot metering in Manual mode...but I can cope with that). I could just buy another OM2SP body. But I'd like to hear people's = opinions on other OM bodies. Are there any people who can compare their = experiences of the OM2SP with, for instance, the OM2n and OM4? Or, = perhaps there are people who work in similar fields who still insist on = using a manual OM1/OM3? Are some OM bodies more reliable than others? Is = the metering more accurate on particular models? Are some tougher than = others? Are some easier to use? Do the batteries run out quickly on = some? Is the OM2000 really a piece of rubbish? If I don't need = 'shadow/highlight' should I get another OM2SP rather than an OM4, or = does the OM4 have some extra advantages? many thanks for any replies -- David Sharp, London, UK. david.sharp@manetho.net Tel: (+44) (0)208 291 0978 Mobile: 07811 407 635 ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C2A16C.8C0D0A80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi David - welcome to the = list.
 
You sure picked a biggie for your first = post! This=20 question seems to come up quite a lot, and there are as many answers as = OM=20 bodies! The important thing is to be clear on what you expect from your = second=20 body which is different from the OM2sp. You say being stuck with spot = metering=20 only in manual is not ideal for you. If you don't want it at all, an = OM2n will=20 be just as good (and at least as robust). If you want it sometimes, or = in auto,=20 then you have to go OM4 but in either case you lose program = mode (do=20 you use this at all). Alternatively, you could look at an OM40 (OMPC), = which has=20 the ESP function of two - zone metering, and the same functions as = the 2sp.=20 Opinions vary about long term reliability, but they're cheap(er). If you = use the=20 camera mainly in manual, then it's OM1(n) / OM3 as = possibilities.
One point about a second OM2sp. These = all look the=20 same (no black / chrome option), and when you're in a hurry... A = different=20 model body would make it easier to tell which is which = quickly
If you use the right batteries = (original 357s SR44s=20 ONLY) you shouldn't have worse drain issues with any of them than = you have=20 with the OM2SP.
You also will need to be clear and = disciplined=20 about what you are prepared to spend. The prices (retail with = guarantee) in=20 this discussion have a range of about GBP100 for a reasonable OM40 body = through=20 120 - 140 for an OM1, 160 - 200 for an OM2n 175 - 250 for an OM2sp. = A=20 decent OM4 will cost upwards of 250. An OM3 (if you can find one) would = be 400+=20 easily All I've seen in the UK in the last couple of years is a really = ropy one=20 in Jssops at 500 and two LNIB at 600+ . OM4Ti around 500. = OM3Ti -=20 forget it, the collectors are in there big time, so you probably = wouldn't want=20 to use it if you found one!
If price is important, Cash converters = had a pile=20 of very good OM10s a little while ago. There seemed to be one in every = store I=20 went into. All VGC and priced around 60 with case, strap and 50/1.8. = Worth a=20 look!
Then there are other options: with = recent gains in=20 film quality,  load fast film and take a neutral density filter or = two=20 along with you?
 
 
Of course, however,  Jamie is = correct. You=20 need them all.
At least one of each.
In each finish
 
Then you will need a 250 exposure=20 back.
Because Olympus made one
 
I can stop.... I can = stop....
 
Julian
Cambs, UK
 
The above statements are inaccurate (at best)
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 David=20 Sharp
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, = 2002 10:14=20 PM
Subject: [OM] Which OM = body?

Hello,
 
I'm new to the list. I came across = this list on=20 the internet, looking got info on things Olympus - I've owned an = OM2-SP for=20 several years now. Its a great camera.
 
I'd like some advice... I want = to buy a=20 second OM body, so I can run two different speed films at once. I'm = doing an=20 increasing amount of photography of ancient monuments / = archaeological=20 sites / archaeological artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and = find myself=20 one minute in broad daylight and the next minute in the corner of a = dark=20 trench..and having to take accurate = exposures quickly).
 
I've been very happy with the OM2-SP = (apart from=20 the fact that you can only use Spot metering in Manual mode...but I = can cope=20 with that).
 
I could just buy another OM2SP body. = But I'd like=20 to hear people's opinions on other OM bodies. Are there any people who = can=20 compare their experiences of the  OM2SP with, for instance, the = OM2n and=20 OM4? Or, perhaps there are people who work in similar fields who still = insist=20 on using a manual OM1/OM3? Are some = OM bodies=20 more reliable than others? Is the metering more accurate on particular = models?=20 Are some tougher than others? Are some easier to use? Do the batteries = run out=20 quickly on some? Is the OM2000 really a piece of rubbish? If I don't = need=20 'shadow/highlight' should I get another OM2SP rather than an OM4, or = does the=20 OM4 have some extra advantages?
 
many thanks for any = replies
--
David Sharp, London, = UK.
 
david.sharp@manetho.net
 
Tel:       (+44)=20 (0)208 291 0978
Mobile:  07811 407=20 635
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C2A16C.8C0D0A80-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4355 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 00:51:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 00:51:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 16:51:28 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25847 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:51:25 -0800 Received: from pool1061.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.41] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MHZ1-00076E-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:50:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:50:44 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Kodak Emulsion Juggling Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Apparently Supra and Royal Gold are being replaced by Royal Supra with 200 ISO as the slow speed. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4639 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 00:56:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 00:56:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 16:56:35 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25855 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:56:30 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.17e.135624eb (657) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:54:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <17e.135624eb.2b293846@aol.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:54:30 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_17e.135624eb.2b293846_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_17e.135624eb.2b293846_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 4:20:37 PM Central Standard Time, david.sharp@manetho.net writes: > should I get another OM2SP Yes, if you are getting good results and are familiar with it, I would stick with it. Actually that is exactly what I've done. The fellow who does my processing has on more than one occasion commented on my exposures being accurate and consistent compared to most of what he has to process and print. My weapon of choice is the OM 2S. Bill Barber --part1_17e.135624eb.2b293846_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 4:20:37 PM Central Standard Time, david.sharp@manetho.net writes:

should I get another OM2SP


Yes, if you are getting good results and are familiar with it, I would stick with it.  Actually that is exactly what I've done.  The fellow who does my processing has on more than one occasion commented on my exposures being accurate and consistent compared to most of what he has to process and print.  My weapon of choice is the OM 2S.  Bill Barber --part1_17e.135624eb.2b293846_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5045 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:13:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:13:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:13:25 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25886 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:13:19 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-43.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.43]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBC19qG01085; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:09:52 +1300 Message-Id: <200212120109.gBC19qG01085@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: CyberSimian@BTinternet.com, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:11:22 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Folks, I've been absent for nearly a week due to an ailing computer. Like VERY sick. Several hundred dollars later I'm back in business . ( I don't know whether to go ;-> or |:-( ) Probably the latter. I certainly hadn't planned on that not-so-little adventure. And it's not over yet. >I know the question wasn't directed to me, but I am a strong supporter of >this lens. Cy wrote >One disappointing aspect of the 35-105mm zoom is that it is the lens with >the most horriblest (**) aperture ring of any Zuiko. I got my mint sample >via Ebay, but prior to that I examined two others in a shop, and all three >had this horrible aperture ring. It feels as though the aperture ring is >full of grit and in need of a generous squirt of WD40. As all three samples >exhibited this characteristic, I surmise that this is normal for the >35-105mm Zuiko. - -- from Cy in the UK I just checked some of mine. The 35-105 is rather stiffer than most Zuikos, the detent ball must fit in to larger slots. But not gritty. I suggest that if it feels gritty and possibly sand- contaminated it probably is, and a service-person should look at it. I bought a much-used Tokina recently and got quite an amount of sand from under the aperture ring. And this lens came from the UK. The 35-105 aperture ring operation is not as smooth as for my 35-70 3.6, or a 100/2 that I have BUT, if you want to hear a loud empty clacking sound accompanied by a rather coarse-feeling operation, try a Zuiko 50/1.8 MIJ. Both of mine have this feature. They still take good photos though. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5347 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:18:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:18:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:18:31 2002 -0800 Received: from hestia.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25898 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:18:26 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by hestia.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gBC1EOSu023981 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:14:32 -0500 Message-Id: <200212120114.gBC1EOSu023981@hestia.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:14:43 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <000701c2a159$1bc76990$6a40063e@personalmyself> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This past weekend, I attended a gallery opening that featured a work by my wife. When we were leaving, Gallery Owner (GO): Barry, I understand you do some photography. Me: Yes. GO: Do you work in black and white? Me: Yes, I do. I have a small darkroom and do my own work. GO: So, do you shoot any, you know, art pictures? With a mighty effort, I fought off the first thing that came to mind (No, I mostly shoot crap, why do you ask?), and instead indicated that I did, and he asked to see some of my work. I'll be taking him a small portfolio next week. So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with faint praise (Wow, your camera sure takes some nice pictures!)? -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5352 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:18:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:18:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:18:31 2002 -0800 Received: from hestia.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25899 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:18:26 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by hestia.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gBC1EeSu024000 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:14:44 -0500 Message-Id: <200212120114.gBC1EeSu024000@hestia.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:14:43 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <000701c2a159$1bc76990$6a40063e@personalmyself> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This past weekend, I attended a gallery opening that featured a work by my wife. When we were leaving, Gallery Owner (GO): Barry, I understand you do some photography. Me: Yes. GO: Do you work in black and white? Me: Yes, I do. I have a small darkroom and do my own work. GO: So, do you shoot any, you know, art pictures? With a mighty effort, I fought off the first thing that came to mind (No, I mostly shoot crap, why do you ask?), and instead indicated that I did, and he asked to see some of my work. I'll be taking him a small portfolio next week. So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with faint praise (Wow, your camera sure takes some nice pictures!)? -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5932 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:25:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:25:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:25:48 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25912 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:25:43 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA52309 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:24:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211163155.0254fe18@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:26:15 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again In-Reply-To: References: <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> <265000-22002123112055419@M2W069.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:19 PM 12/11/2002 -0800, Winsor wrote: >As someone once said you can spend $4000 on a new Leica and lens and get a >small improvement in your pictures or you can spend $4000 on a medium >format camera and get a HUGE improvement in your pictures. >-- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California >... That's a good rule of thumb, but not ironclad. For example, MF is heavier and less convenient to use. I rented a Mamiya M7II just to see how it handles, and I can never be as comfortable with it on the type of shooting I do, than with the OM or possibly a Leica. Of course if I get a MF, my shooting style will probably change too. So different tools for different needs! The way I see it, if you are already shooting a SLR, the Leica buys you quieter and faster shutter (decisive moment), lower hand held shutter speeds, and possibly better performance on big enlargements or wide open apertures. If none of these interest you, then there's the snob appeal and the Leica glow. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6293 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:36:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:36:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:36:19 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25934 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:34:19 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 581115B298 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:33:10 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? In-Reply-To: Message from "Barry B. Bean" of "Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:14:43 MDT." <200212120114.gBC1EeSu024000@hestia.email.starband.net> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:33:10 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021212013310.581115B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <200212120114.gBC1EeSu024000@hestia.email.starband.net>, "Barry B. Bean" writes: >So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with faint praise >(Wow, your camera sure takes some nice pictures!)? With a smile and "Thanks. The true master knows what tool to use". :-) And by art pictures, he might have meant glamour photos. :-) IMO. Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6544 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:37:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:37:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:37:04 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25940 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:36:55 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.120.155]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021212013051.QSMF4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:30:51 -0600 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:30:25 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [151.198.120.155] at Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:30:51 -0600 Message-Id: <20021212013051.QSMF4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In , on 12/11/02 at 09:15 AM, Christoph said: >maybe a Linhof Technika 6x9 would be perfect; within coupled >rangefinder for three excellent lenses: ZEISS Biogon 53mm, Planar >100mm, Sonnar 180mm. My Linhof with the Schneider set is no slouch, either, and a lot cheaper. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6851 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:42:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:42:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:42:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25954 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:42:01 -0800 From: bsandyman@att.net Received: from mtiwebc21 ([204.127.135.60]) by mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021212014047.OJZI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:40:47 +0000 Received: from [12.83.16.143] by mtiwebc21; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:40:47 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT World of Words Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:40:47 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 25 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: YnNhbmR5bWFuQGF0dC5uZXQ= Message-Id: <20021212014047.OJZI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Has anybody heard of this outfit? The contest is called World of Words. It is supposedly being run by Universal Talent 4000 SE 82nd Ave 1000-219 Portland, Or. 97266 This is where you send your pics. Up to 10 with a $5 reistration fee for each one. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7194 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 01:55:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 01:55:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 17:55:05 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25958 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:55:02 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP id <2002121201535000200n4k3ce>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:53:50 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:53:47 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. At 4:54 PM +0000 12/11/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:46:35 -0600 >From: "gries" >Subject: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces > >Richard: > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual >guide numbers. [snip] Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. I have been using an old Quantum Calcu-Flash II for many years with no problems. >I would recommend shooting print film as it is usually a lot more >forgiving on faces than any slide film. Some object to the occasional >cool cast of the Fuji 4-layer films, but I have always been pleased. >You can try any of the Kodak Portra films for guaranteed success. >However, the best general lighting is always diffused. In indoor >situations, I will bounce a T-32 off the ceiling, and have always been >able to get f8 when shooting in the 200-400 ISO range. If you are out >doors, then you can fashion a bounce card and it will work the same way. To get the best results, set things up so the light illuminating from one side is about three times brighter than from the other side, to fit the illumination range seen on the subject into the relatively limited dynamic range of the film. Three to one works fine for slide film, and negative film may benefit from a larger ratio. Experiments are in order. The flashmeter is invaluable for setting this up; the eye isn't good at this at all. A scene properly illuminated for color photography will look a bit flat to the eye, because the eye has far greater dynamic range than film, even negative film. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7603 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 02:12:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 02:12:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 18:12:59 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA25988 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:12:56 -0800 Received: from M2W051.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.51]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:12:34 -0500 Message-ID: <57050-220021241221234433@M2W051.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:12:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Dec 2002 02:12:34.0589 (UTC) FILETIME=[EF3634D0:01C2A183] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, I think that my Leica usage had helped my people photography immeasurably, as it lets met connect with my subject better=2E I couldn't= do that by moving to MF=2E OTOH, if I was a landscape guy, it would be the other way around=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Winsor Crosby wincros@earthlink=2Enet Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:19:03 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again As someone once said you can spend $4000 on a new Leica and lens and=20 get a small improvement in your pictures or you can spend $4000 on a=20 medium format camera and get a HUGE improvement in your pictures=2E --=20 Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7903 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 02:19:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 02:19:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 18:19:31 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26004 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:19:28 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (h0050ba483652.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.30.245.120]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <200212120218200520019r09e>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:18:20 +0000 Message-ID: <3DF7F1EB.7090209@attbi.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:18:19 -0500 From: Chuck Norcutt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en, pdf, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Sharp , Olympus mail list Subject: [OM] Which OM body? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca David said: ... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can run two different speed films at once. I'm doing an increasing amount of photography of ancient monuments / archaeological sites / archaeological artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and find myself one minute in broad daylight and the next minute in the corner of a dark trench..and having to take _accurate exposures quickly_). --------------------------------------- Hi, David. Many will probably extoll the virtues of their favorite body but since you have to take accurate exposures quickly there is probably a great deal to be said for having the second body be identical... no matter which body it is. When you're under time pressure it's easy to make mistakes and a second camera with exactly the same handling and usage characteristics as the first will minimize the chance for errors. Chuck Norcutt Woburn, Massachusetts, USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8242 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 02:27:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 02:27:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 18:27:56 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26012 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:27:54 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA73295 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:27:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:28:27 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:53 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, Joe Gwinn wrote: > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual > >guide numbers. [snip] > >Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a >flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, >and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be >fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. OK, so how would I fire a on camera flash like the F280 and trigger the light meter? I understand how to do this with Studio flash but not shoe mount flash! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8604 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 02:41:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 02:41:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 18:41:02 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26024 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:41:00 -0800 Received: from M2W087.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.87]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:40:38 -0500 Message-ID: <323910-220021241224038566@M2W087.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OT] L*I*A - Was [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:40:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Dec 2002 02:40:38.0498 (UTC) FILETIME=[DAE65420:01C2A187] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is my last Leica word in this thread (unless poked with a sharp stick= )=2E Yes, the Noctilux blocks a lot of the VF, I'd estimate about 30%=2E It's = the price you pay=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E I know many of M7 users who actually USE their cameras=2E=2E=2E=2EA LOT=2E= It's fabulous tool for the dedicated M rangefinder shooter to be freed from constant recalculation of exposure in changing lighting conditions=2E Yea= , it's the same basic technology that was used in the OM-2 back in 1978=2E = So Leica's 24 years behind, what else is new? =20 I have an M3 too, which is a great tool, but it's not an M7, nor is an M7 an M3=2E =20 I'm ashamed that the Leica community has become the pervue of the radical,= stuck-up, cultish, old-snobby-men, clubby people that now poke their head out=2E And it's a shame that Leica has decided that it has to survive by prostituting themselves, creating whatever special edition of their products someone is willing to pay for=2E OTOH, they still make a superio= r product that is superbly designed for a small number of photographic tasks= =2E And they still make some of the best lenses in the world=2E And the dedicated photographers who use M cameras still find them very effective tools and unlike anything else=2E So I decided to invest in the Leica M system and it works well for me=2E = I also decided in 1974 to invest in the fledgling Olympus OM-1 and it's innovative OM-System=2E Both systems serve me well for different purposes= =2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Julian Davies julian_davies@btinternet=2Ecom Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:26:17 -0000 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OT] L*I*A - Was [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again The points he makes about the noctilux are pretty much inherent in all lar= ge aperture lenses=2E I wonder what he thouht he was getting (as opposed to w= hat he wrote in its favour) BTW is it this one which obscures a fair portion of the viewfinder field -= of - view? Julian Cambs, UK The above statements are inaccurate (at best) -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8971 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 02:56:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 02:56:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 18:56:48 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26032 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:56:45 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.130] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A9CD551D0138; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:51:57 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021211213423.02f7b7c0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:56:21 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? In-Reply-To: <200212120114.gBC1EeSu024000@hestia.email.starband.net> References: <000701c2a159$1bc76990$6a40063e@personalmyself> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 20:14 12/11/02, Barry B. Bean wrote: >With a mighty effort, I fought off the first thing that came to mind (No, >I mostly shoot crap, why do you ask?), and instead indicated that I did, >and he asked to >see some of my work. I'll be taking him a small portfolio next week. > >So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with faint >praise (Wow, your camera sure takes some nice pictures!)? "Thank You for your time and attention." If it's insulted or damned, ask if he was expecting something different . . . as in subject material, etc. If the answer is yes, then do a quick mental review of your archives and if you have something he might be interested in, then offer to return with that. Better yet, ask before you pull together a portfolio if he is interested in anything in particular: project - photographs related to each other in some manner potpouri - variety of different types of subject material specific - specific subject matter or types, even if they aren't related If he doesn't like your work for technical or artistic reasons, then gracefully bow out. You should be able to sniff out what the rejection is for, if it occurs, with the above question(s). However, think positively. I've seen some of your works. You *can* do this. Successful artists do three things very well: marketing themselves (includes mixing well with other artists, gallery directors and patrons), preparing their their works for "gallery presentation," and the content of the artwork itself (what's inside the frame). I'm presuming you already understand "gallery presentation" requirements and probably the quantity he would be interested in. I did a rather small exhibit of about fifteen works; Kodochromes/Ektachromes on Ilfochrome. It was expensive and time consuming to prepare, but still very worthwhile. Learned a lot about the marketing and presentation end of things. Also got my foot in the door for a possible B&W project next year. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9452 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 03:28:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 03:28:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 19:28:43 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26046 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:28:38 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021212032728053002jksre>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:27:28 +0000 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:25:33 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DF7F1EB.7090209@attbi.com> Message-Id: <5FA0C5BC-0D81-11D7-B387-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm of the opinion that the great OM backup body would have to be an OM-1n. It has mirror lockup ability, it's extremely power-efficient, cost-effective and seems impervious to most changes in temperature or humidity. -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9703 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 03:29:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 03:29:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 19:29:35 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26050 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:29:31 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2002121203281905100pu14ke>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:28:19 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] winder cable/remote? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:30:29 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003C_01C2A15C.870A0840" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <14b.18aca6bf.2b289321@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C2A15C.870A0840 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nope - gators I do in person. Rockets, certain women; now that's a different story. Gary Edwards -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 7:10 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] winder cable/remote? In a message dated 12/11/2002 6:19:23 AM Central Standard Time, garyetx@attbi.com writes: I've used cables up to about 50 feet with no problem. So that is how you have kept all your toes. The gators are you friends. :-) Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C2A15C.870A0840 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nope -=20 gators I do in person.  Rockets, certain women; now that's a = different=20 story.
 
Gary=20 Edwards
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, = 2002 7:10=20 AM
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: [OM] = winder=20 cable/remote?

In a message dated 12/11/2002 = 6:19:23 AM=20 Central Standard Time, garyetx@attbi.com writes:

I've used cables up to about 50
feet with no=20 problem.


So that is how you have kept all your = toes.  The gators are you friends.  :-)  Bill = Barber=20 ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C2A15C.870A0840-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9983 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 03:33:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 03:33:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 19:33:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mail04.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail04.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA26054 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:33:49 -0800 From: ReinholdLetschert@eircom.net Received: (qmail 91700 messnum 1111039 invoked from network[159.134.207.134/p134.as3.athlone1.eircom.net]); 12 Dec 2002 03:33:04 -0000 Received: from p134.as3.athlone1.eircom.net (HELO ?) (159.134.207.134) by mail04.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 91700) with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 03:33:04 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:33:13 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OT] L*I*A - Was [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Message-ID: <3DF80379.7293.17C0D84@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Julian Davies wrote on Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:26:17 -0000 >snip >Must keep the faithful supplied with objects of desire! >And if "I'm missing the point", it's because it doesn't grab me, not >because L*i*a is the one true path and I am a mistaken fool >snip but where else are Dusseldorf taxis made alongside aspirational autos? >snip Leitz, at some stage, produced some of the best workhorses in photography. One probably could add here most of the once world famous German camera industry. They (ie a lot them) rested on their laurels and drove against the wall. Just after the Japanese camera industry got really going in the late 1960s/early 1970s with new designs and good quality. When Leitz was in severe financial problems they got taken over by the Swiss microscope manufacturer Wild. Now somebody had a brilliant marketing strategy: not primarily the useability, the most advanced design etc was needed but a NAME and an image to become an object of desire. Yes, it obviously did work. Make it dearer and some will buy it just because of that. Sell exclusiveness. What always startles me is only the sort of envy or misgivings it continues to produce within this OM group whose users chose this system because of its useability and functional design or value for money - primarily. Just keep looking around - things get bought all the time just for showing off. Mobile phones, HiFi systems, cars, Notebook computers ... the list is sheer endless. There are always some "must haves". Why bother?! And, btw, its not only (not even mostly) "them Germs" who is doing that. As early as in the late 1960s C*n*n brought out a RF with a f0.7 lens, some of the most "must have" mobiles come from Finland, even a British car manufacturer springs to mind... :-) 100seability, 90% vanity --- Reinhold (PS: I have been in Dusseldorf umpteen times but never found anything special about their taxis?) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10289 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 03:38:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 03:38:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 19:38:13 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26058 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:38:10 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021212033701053003ptvoe>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:37:01 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: "Olympus List" Subject: [OM] OT astronomy recomendation request Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:39:11 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'd like to get a book on astronomy this Christmas for my 12-year old nephew (6th grader). He's a pretty smart kid. Can some of you OM astrophotographers suggest a title for him, offline, please, to garyetx@attbi.com? Thanks, Gary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10661 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 03:54:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 03:54:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 19:54:07 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26062 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:54:04 -0800 Received: (qmail 5729 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 03:54:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail11.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 12 Dec 2002 03:54:16 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF80BCA.2090909@speakeasy.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:08:42 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again References: <3DF771BB.58E69DD4@suite224.net> <002001c2a139$9aba3ea0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca $5000? Whats the big deal? Just a couple of years ago a N*kon rangefinder lens hood (just the hood, mind you) went for $5,500. Just stirring some jalepenos into the pot... Steve Goss John Hudson wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John and Julie Ockman" > >>My fellow Zuikoholics >> After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. >>Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the >>lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. >>John >>The auction: >> >> > 3> > > > US$5,000 reserve! A buyer at that price has to be nuts! and it is only an > f1.2! > > wow ........ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11124 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 04:16:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 04:16:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 20:16:07 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26082 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:16:03 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.4d.28b860dd (4214) for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:10:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4d.28b860dd.2b29661c@aol.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:10:04 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_4d.28b860dd.2b29661c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_4d.28b860dd.2b29661c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 7:19:15 PM Central Standard Time, bbbean@beancotton.com writes: > So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with faint > praise When the GO asked if you take any art pictures I might be inclined to say, "You know I'm glad you asked that because I really think I do and I'd like to get your opinion on the work I'm doing. Could I drop a small portfolio off later this week or would one day next week work better for you?" Then I'd shut up and see what he/she has to say. If it is the clod that married your sister that says your camera sure takes good pictures, you might say, "Has nothing to do with the camera and everything do with the guy behind the camera. Now will you get your damn sweaty beer can off my coffee table." Bill Barber --part1_4d.28b860dd.2b29661c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/11/2002 7:19:15 PM Central Standard Time, bbbean@beancotton.com writes:

So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with faint praise


When the GO asked if you take any art pictures I might be inclined to say, "You know I'm glad you asked that because I really think I do and I'd like to get your opinion on the work I'm doing.  Could I drop a small portfolio off later this week or would one day next week work better for you?"  Then I'd shut up and see what he/she has to say.

If it is the clod that married your sister that says your camera sure takes good pictures, you might say, "Has nothing to do with the camera and everything do with the guy behind the camera.  Now will you get your damn sweaty beer can off my coffee table."

Bill Barber --part1_4d.28b860dd.2b29661c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11858 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:06:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:06:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:06:40 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26147 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:06:36 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.130] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A83C2CF0320; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:01:48 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021211215707.02db5580@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:06:04 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? In-Reply-To: <200212120109.gBC19qG01085@central.caverock.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 20:11 12/11/02, Brain Swale wrote: >Hi Folks, > >I've been absent for nearly a week due to an ailing computer. Like VERY >sick. Several hundred dollars later I'm back in business . >( I don't know whether to go ;-> or |:-( ) Probably the latter. > >I certainly hadn't planned on that not-so-little adventure. And it's not >over yet. ROFLMAO: I have just launched into this adventure with the better half's computer. Its OS is Windoze 3.1 running on a 90 MHz Pentium (I) with 32 MB of EDO RAM and a hard drive with under 1.2 GB. Don't ask me why I've allowed her to stay in the Stone Age, it wasn't my doing. She insisted on being a Luddite. She recently bought a new 15" flat panel monitor to replace a 13" VGA and a bubble jet printer to replace a dot matrix while I was gone on The Great Road Trip. Getting the monitor installed wasn't that bad. Put in a spare Stealth 64 laying on a shelf and conigured it (had the old Windoze drivers for it). The printer was another story, but fortunately Canon hasn't changed its raster bubble jet data protocols much. An old Canon raster printer driver for a discontinued model worked. Went through an extensive search of some archive sites to find it though and then found about a half dozen to choose from. Brute Force and Ignorance found one that worked. The straw that broke the camel's back was sudden failure of Trumpet's WinSock to log in to our ISP dialup. There are a host of issues with Windoze 3.1 with current high speed 16550 serial port UART's and 56k modem hardware. (Windoze 3.X only supports the original 8250 UART to 9600 bps.) Drew up a roadmap to get from a 90 Mhz Pentium, 1.2 GB hard drive and Windoze 3.1 to a high speed K6-2, 13 GB hard drive and Windoze 98. Found a pair of Super Socket 7 mainboards, a pair of 500 MHz K6-2 micros, 256 MB SDRAM, and a 40 GB hard drive to replace the 13 GB drive on my machine (it'll take her eons to fill a 13 GB drive). Went shopping agressively for rebates and fortunately, the cost on all this stuff wasn't that steep. She's about to make a quantum leap in system performance. One of the mainboards and 500 MHz K-2's will replace my 350 MHz K6-2 (which is running as if it's a 333 MHz K6 on a plain Socket 7 board. Total budget: $250 USD and I haven't busted it yet. With some of the rebates, there may be enough left over to get a decent CD-ROM burner. There may be an additional expense for some software to make replacing hard drives easier. Doing so under Windoze 95/98[SE] isn't as straightforward as it was under Windoze 3.1 or the simplicity of MS-DOS (long file names and FAT32 complicates things). I feel at least some of your pain, -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12111 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:09:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:09:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:09:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26156 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:09:45 -0800 Received: from apx1-09-177.pdx.du.teleport.com ([216.26.7.177] helo=earthlink.net) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MLb0-0003MX-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:09:14 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF81A73.2030303@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:11:15 -0800 From: "Andrea V." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT World of Words References: <20021212014047.OJZI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I live in Portland and have never heard of them. Its not in a good neighborhood, though, if that makes any difference. The address might be a Mailbox, Etc. type deal - mailboxes for rent, that sort of thing. HTH, Andrea bsandyman@att.net wrote: >Has anybody heard of this outfit? > >The contest is called World of Words. > >It is supposedly being run by > >Universal Talent >4000 SE 82nd Ave 1000-219 >Portland, Or. 97266 > >This is where you send your pics. Up to 10 with a $5 reistration fee for each one. > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12391 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:10:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:10:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:10:26 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26159 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:10:18 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:08:57 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF8199F.9010006@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:07:43 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... References: <20021212013051.QSMF4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> In-Reply-To: <20021212013051.QSMF4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Do you all think a medium format camera is a good idea for travel?? The mental list I have compiled so far: Pro: Medium Format, larger negative, on slide film, unbeatable. It makes me slow down and think about the shots more, thus better shots. BIG BIG BIG film real estate Tripod needed, so every shot will be clear and sharp. Con: Bulky Probaby will require an external light meter Tripod requirements, lugging around a tripod. Film might be hard to find in other countries and tourist locations vs. 35mm which is everywhere. Anything else to add? Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12656 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:14:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:14:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:14:37 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26168 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:14:34 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.116.1bc8398f (4214) for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:10:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <116.1bc8398f.2b297436@aol.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:10:14 EST Subject: [OM] Batteries To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_116.1bc8398f.2b297436_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_116.1bc8398f.2b297436_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It is about time for me to place another order for batteries. What I'll be ordering is Energizer 357 high drain silver oxide batteries from cheapbatteries.com where they are 55 cents a piece in lots of 100 or more. Would anyone on the list be interested in buying any in lots of 20 at 75 cents a piece. Figure I will have to pay postage to get them to me, buy a bubble envelope and postage to you which will add about 20 cents a battery to the cost. If interested or if you know of a better place to get them, contact me off list. I've bought from these people before and found them to be reliable. Bill Barber --part1_116.1bc8398f.2b297436_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It is about time for me to place another order for batteries.  What I'll be ordering is Energizer 357 high drain silver oxide batteries from cheapbatteries.com where they are 55 cents a piece in lots of 100 or more.  Would anyone on the list be interested in buying any in lots of 20 at 75 cents a piece.  Figure I will have to pay postage to get them to me, buy a bubble envelope and postage to you which will add about 20 cents a battery to the cost.  If interested or if you know of a better place to get them, contact me off list.  I've bought from these people before and found them to be reliable. Bill Barber --part1_116.1bc8398f.2b297436_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12948 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:16:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:16:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:16:31 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26172 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:16:27 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.17c.135a7a5e (4214) for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:14:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <17c.135a7a5e.2b297537@aol.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:14:31 EST Subject: [OM] Matt board To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_17c.135a7a5e.2b297537_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_17c.135a7a5e.2b297537_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've recently had a number of color prints made from my Olympus OM material and now want to frame them. I'll order my framing stuff from American Frames. Does anyone have any suggestions about color of matt and frames to best show off your color prints. I've use a pewter colored frame with a white matt, however I'm not convinced that a colored matt might not be better. Ideas? Bill Barber --part1_17c.135a7a5e.2b297537_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've recently had a number of color prints made from my Olympus OM material and now want to frame them.  I'll order my framing stuff from American Frames.  Does anyone have any suggestions about color of matt and frames to best show off your color prints.  I've use a pewter colored frame with a white matt, however I'm not convinced that a colored matt might not be better.  Ideas?  Bill Barber --part1_17c.135a7a5e.2b297537_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13231 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:18:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:18:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:18:26 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26179 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:18:23 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:18:41 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF81BE6.9000802@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:17:26 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Anticipation!! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am going to pick up a roll of Illford Delta I took last week of my gf's high school reunion. I can't wait! One of the things I do love about film, is the "surprise" element that I don't get from digital. harder to learn from, but I think has it's "night before xmas" element to it. I'll post when I get them... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13482 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:19:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:19:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:19:57 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26182 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:19:53 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:20:12 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF81C40.7010009@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:18:56 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? References: <5FA0C5BC-0D81-11D7-B387-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> In-Reply-To: <5FA0C5BC-0D81-11D7-B387-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My Om1n died in Thailand. Distressing to take off the lens and pour out the WATER... But I still took pics with it. One of the beauties of a mechanical camera... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14207 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:24:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:24:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:24:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.149]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26214 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:24:20 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBC5OHL08238 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:24:17 +1100 Message-Id: <200212120524.gBC5OHL08238@mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:24:17 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Matt board Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > NSURIT@aol.com wrote: > > I've recently had a number of color prints made from my Olympus OM > material > and now want to frame them. I'll order my framing stuff from > American > Frames. Does anyone have any suggestions about color of matt and > frames to > best show off your color prints. I've use a pewter colored frame > with a > white matt, however I'm not convinced that a colored matt might not > be > better. Ideas? Bill Barber My preference is for a white matt for B&W and a black matt for colour. I'd rather keep things consistent like that than trying to colour match the matt to the image content. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14500 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:27:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:27:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:27:11 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26226 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:27:08 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1a9.d7f8256 (4539) for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:25:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd@aol.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:25:17 EST Subject: [OM] Fake *Bay Scam To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Courtesy of Fool.com: "A fake website imitating *Bay has been shut down. Scam artists apparently sent emails asking victims to log on to *bayupdates.com and re-enter credit card information. No word on how much info the credit thieves collected, if any." I received one of those emails... beware. Rich --part1_1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Courtesy of Fool.com:  "A fake website imitating *Bay has been shut down. Scam artists apparently sent emails asking victims to log on to *bayupdates.com and re-enter credit card information. No word on how much info the credit thieves collected, if any."

I received one of those emails... beware.

Rich







 --part1_1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14836 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:31:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:31:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:31:31 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26230 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:31:28 -0800 Received: from kirk ([216.101.212.57]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6Z00GGCR9NN9@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:29:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:29:46 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster Subject: Re: [OM] winder cable/remote? In-reply-to: To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <20021211212946.607ca802.talrmr@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <20021210225551.1cef0276.talrmr@pacbell.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:20:00 -0600 "Gary L. Edwards" wrote: > It is for a remote cable produced by Olympus, or you can make your > own. All it consists of is an 1/8" plug, a cable, and a momentary > SPST switch. Close the circuit and the winder (or MD) fires. I've > used cables up to about 50 feet with no problem. Cool, thanks. I will have to give that a try. I presumed it was going to be much more complicated. Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15263 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:47:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:47:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:47:38 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26246 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:47:33 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-123-119-49.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.123.119.49]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBC5l1Mv643888 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:47:01 -0500 Message-ID: <001201c2a198$6b43c6a0$31777b40@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021211223403.1643.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] contact prints Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:39:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jaime, Here's where we really show our age. Whe most of us speak of contact printing today, what we really mean are proof sheets, a whole roll printed at actual size on a sheet. When I started in photography, even then we did proof sheets on enlarging paper. The speed isn't a problem, most everyone uses their enlarger as a light source, so just stop down the lens, and make a short exposure. Most people I know use RC paper for proof sheets, usually the cheapest possible. Then, there are real contact prints. These are usually made from 8x10 negatives. Kodak has managed to keep Azo in their line, freeing the smaller European manufacturers from making a substitute, in the manner of Super XX. If you haven't seen one of these, you're really missing something. There are two current uses for contact printing. First, there are large numbers of prints of a single image, as are sent out with press releases, and to newspapers and magazines for advertising. Obviously, this market is going digital in a big way. One good, still existing sample are the 8x10 glossies that actors and models send out. these are contact printed from a large copy negative, and things like type can be easily added. Again, this market is on its last legs. Another use is Fine Art Photography. There are still some who contact print from original 8x10 or larger negatives, but the real deal today are digitally created negatives. This allows the photographer to shoot a great shot, clean things up in Photoshop, and create a negative that would be impossible before digital. These can be made at a service bureau, giving a silver film negative just like printers use (there's a steep learning curve in getting a file that makes a good neg), or with an Epson printer. That's right, spray black ink on a sheet of clear film, just like for overheads! There's a book out on this, danburkholder.com I think. Don't know what paper he uses, but these digital negatives can be massaged to print on #3 paper, and Azo is highly regarded in the fine art field. On a slightly depressing note, see the latest Lenswork. There is a series of black and white photos taken from a coffetable book, originally shot with a Nikon D1. Doesn't say how, if at all, he gets photo prints. There are some available from lenswork, but they use digital negs for contact printing anyway. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15577 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 05:51:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 05:51:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 21:51:18 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26250 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:51:08 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.104.130] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A2AA8270014A; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:46:18 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021212004936.02dd1220@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:50:32 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: [OM] winder cable/remote? In-Reply-To: <20021211212946.607ca802.talrmr@pacbell.net> References: <20021210225551.1cef0276.talrmr@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 00:29 12/12/02, you wrote: >On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:20:00 -0600 >"Gary L. Edwards" wrote: > > > It is for a remote cable produced by Olympus, or you can make your > > own. All it consists of is an 1/8" plug, a cable, and a momentary > > SPST switch. Close the circuit and the winder (or MD) fires. I've > > used cables up to about 50 feet with no problem. > >Cool, thanks. I will have to give that a try. I presumed it was going >to be much more complicated. IIRC, the plug is also call a sub-mini phone plug. Ensure it's a **mono** version. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15929 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:00:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:00:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:00:47 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26254 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:00:44 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-123-119-49.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.123.119.49]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBC60BMv578760 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:00:12 -0500 Message-ID: <002101c2a19a$3fd8bf00$31777b40@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021212052005.13535.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Albert, you're killin' me! Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:52:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Where, exactly, did this idea that a tripod is required for a MF camera? I would think that it is even more necessary with 35, and the smaller negative. for the cameras you have considered, you can hand hold as easily and effectively as your OM's It's all relative, a M6, a RF645, the little Fuji AF zoom, isn't any bigger, and perhaps lighter than a wonderbrick. Film can definitely be a problem. Although I agree completely with Winsor, I think you need to do nothing. That is, stay with your OM system. Like the song, Travelin' Light! Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16182 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:01:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:01:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:01:04 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26258 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:01:01 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA30712 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:00:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211220003.02595398@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:01:28 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] My mug shot.... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca FWIW: http://www.dragonsgate.net/richard/gallery/tn/richard-self-portrait.jpg.html // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16439 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:03:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:03:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:03:31 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26262 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:03:23 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-123-119-49.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.123.119.49]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBC62lMv028624 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:02:48 -0500 Message-ID: <002501c2a19a$9c5d7040$31777b40@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021212052005.13535.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Barry, art, and the GO Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:54:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What's all this about fine art photography needing to be B&W only? Isn't that a little like the petit bourgoise that think that, in order to be good, a painting must be executed in oil? Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16864 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:20:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:20:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:20:31 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26271 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:20:23 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.135] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 31239377 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:20:05 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF82A94.79CF110A@suite224.net> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:20:04 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] My mug shot.... References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211220003.02595398@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I enjoyed the picture of the princess much more :-). John "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > FWIW: > http://www.dragonsgate.net/richard/gallery/tn/richard-self-portrait.jpg.html > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17122 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:24:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:24:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:24:28 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26275 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:24:10 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA36782 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:23:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211222412.02583df8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:24:36 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] My mug shot.... In-Reply-To: <3DF82A94.79CF110A@suite224.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211220003.02595398@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Me too :-) At 01:20 AM 12/12/2002 -0500, you wrote: >I enjoyed the picture of the princess much more :-). >John > >"Richard F. Man" wrote: > > > > FWIW: > > > http://www.dragonsgate.net/richard/gallery/tn/richard-self-portrait.jpg.html >... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17478 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:32:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:32:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:32:31 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26289 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:32:24 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:31:23 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF82CE2.2000004@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:29:54 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, you're killin' me! References: <20021212052005.13535.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <002101c2a19a$3fd8bf00$31777b40@swbell.net> In-Reply-To: <002101c2a19a$3fd8bf00$31777b40@swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Do nothing?? I'm good at that! Don't believe me?? ask my gf!! ;-) I've done nothing... I still have my OM and I still love it. Just wondering if the OM needs a big brother... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17773 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:35:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:35:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 22:35:35 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (snake.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26300 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:35:32 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18MMwU-0008UE-00 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:35:30 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:34:42 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021211215707.02db5580@mail.spitfire.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John, Now add in your time at $80 per hour to get your "normal people" cost impact. That's the part that hurts. Especially if the kid doing the work is getting minimum wage. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John A. Lind Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:06 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? At 20:11 12/11/02, Brain Swale wrote: >Hi Folks, > >I've been absent for nearly a week due to an ailing computer. Like VERY >sick. Several hundred dollars later I'm back in business . >( I don't know whether to go ;-> or |:-( ) Probably the latter. > >I certainly hadn't planned on that not-so-little adventure. And it's not >over yet. ROFLMAO: I have just launched into this adventure with the better half's computer. Its OS is Windoze 3.1 running on a 90 MHz Pentium (I) with 32 MB of EDO RAM and a hard drive with under 1.2 GB. Don't ask me why I've allowed her to stay in the Stone Age, it wasn't my doing. She insisted on being a Luddite. She recently bought a new 15" flat panel monitor to replace a 13" VGA and a bubble jet printer to replace a dot matrix while I was gone on The Great Road Trip. Getting the monitor installed wasn't that bad. Put in a spare Stealth 64 laying on a shelf and conigured it (had the old Windoze drivers for it). The printer was another story, but fortunately Canon hasn't changed its raster bubble jet data protocols much. An old Canon raster printer driver for a discontinued model worked. Went through an extensive search of some archive sites to find it though and then found about a half dozen to choose from. Brute Force and Ignorance found one that worked. The straw that broke the camel's back was sudden failure of Trumpet's WinSock to log in to our ISP dialup. There are a host of issues with Windoze 3.1 with current high speed 16550 serial port UART's and 56k modem hardware. (Windoze 3.X only supports the original 8250 UART to 9600 bps.) Drew up a roadmap to get from a 90 Mhz Pentium, 1.2 GB hard drive and Windoze 3.1 to a high speed K6-2, 13 GB hard drive and Windoze 98. Found a pair of Super Socket 7 mainboards, a pair of 500 MHz K6-2 micros, 256 MB SDRAM, and a 40 GB hard drive to replace the 13 GB drive on my machine (it'll take her eons to fill a 13 GB drive). Went shopping agressively for rebates and fortunately, the cost on all this stuff wasn't that steep. She's about to make a quantum leap in system performance. One of the mainboards and 500 MHz K-2's will replace my 350 MHz K6-2 (which is running as if it's a 333 MHz K6 on a plain Socket 7 board. Total budget: $250 USD and I haven't busted it yet. With some of the rebates, there may be enough left over to get a decent CD-ROM burner. There may be an additional expense for some software to make replacing hard drives easier. Doing so under Windoze 95/98[SE] isn't as straightforward as it was under Windoze 3.1 or the simplicity of MS-DOS (long file names and FAT32 complicates things). I feel at least some of your pain, -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18493 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 07:32:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 07:32:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 23:32:59 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26351 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:32:56 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021212072026.IKRQ148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:20:26 -0500 Message-ID: <01ab01c2a1ae$50719e40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <4d.28b860dd.2b29661c@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:15:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01A8_01C2A18C.C902EA20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:20:26 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01A8_01C2A18C.C902EA20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: NSURIT@aol.com=20 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca=20 Sent: Thursday, 12 December, 2002 12:10 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? In a message dated 12/11/2002 7:19:15 PM Central Standard Time, = bbbean@beancotton.com writes: So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with = faint praise=20 When the GO asked if you take any art pictures I might be inclined to = say, "You know I'm glad you asked that because I really think I do and = I'd like to get your opinion on the work I'm doing. Could I drop a = small portfolio off later this week or would one day next week work = better for you?" Then I'd shut up and see what he/she has to say. Sounds just like the strategy employed by Andre Friedmann and girl = fried Gerda Taro when they cooked up the persona of Robert Capa! jh ------=_NextPart_000_01A8_01C2A18C.C902EA20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 12 December, = 2002 12:10=20 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with = faint=20 praise?

In a message dated 12/11/2002 7:19:15 PM Central = Standard=20 Time, bbbean@beancotton.com=20 writes:

So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or = damned with=20 faint praise


When the GO asked if you take any art pictures I might be = inclined to say, "You know I'm glad you asked that because I really = think I do=20 and I'd like to get your opinion on the work I'm doing.  Could I = drop a=20 small portfolio off later this week or would one day next week work = better for=20 you?"  Then I'd shut up and see what he/she has to say.
Sounds just like the strategy = employed=20 by Andre Friedmann and girl fried Gerda Taro when they cooked up = the=20 persona of Robert Capa!
 
jh
------=_NextPart_000_01A8_01C2A18C.C902EA20-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18798 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 07:39:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 07:39:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 23:39:59 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26363 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:39:56 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021212072719.DRAT513731.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:27:19 -0500 Message-ID: <01b901c2a1af$49acb800$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:22:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:27:19 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Wednesday, 11 December, 2002 10:28 PM Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces > At 08:53 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, Joe Gwinn wrote: > > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual > > >guide numbers. [snip] > > > >Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a > >flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, > >and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be > >fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. > > OK, so how would I fire a on camera flash like the F280 and trigger the > light meter? I understand how to do this with Studio flash but not shoe > mount flash! The flash meter route pre-supposes that one can control the power output of the flash gun. In the case of the F280 it is basically a point and shoot flash with no manual over ride on power output. An on-camera flash gun with manual over ride is the Vivitar 285HV and with this flash the flash meter route takes on a whole new meaning. Other than for point and shoot convenience my F280 is a major disappointment considering the excellence of the camera for which it is designed. jh > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19219 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 07:55:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 07:55:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 23:55:43 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp017.mail.yahoo.com (smtp017.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.114]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA26388 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:55:39 -0800 Received: from adsl-216-100-137-219.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.137.219 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 07:53:30 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:53:22 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There is a documentary on the Iwo Jima photo that I saw relatively recently on TV. It included a revisiting of the island by participants and interviews with the photographer(s?) involved. As I recall, it told essentially the story John tells with lots of visuals.It includes both the movie and the series of stills. Moose > The True Iwo Jima Story: > The U.S. Marine Corps has the orignal B&W negative of the Iwo Jima > photograph, along with other stills made at the time from different > angles, and a reel of color motion picture film, all of the same flag > raising. It was, however, the SECOND flag raising on the summit. > There are also still photographs of the first flag raising. When the > admiral in command of the landing saw the small battle flag, he > ordered it replaced with a larger one so it could be seen better. > The famous photograph is of the second one. The motion picture film > and other stills show clearly that it was not staged or faked. The > photographer's positioning and timing were impeccable. The Navy > released the now famous photograph after reviewing the stills done of > both flag raisings. One look through the Navy's archive leaves little > doubt as to why this particular photograph was chosen for release. It > stands out among all of them. All the others look bland by > comparison. BTW, the photographer of the second raising ended up > working for the photographer of the first flag raising after the war. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19472 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 07:58:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 07:58:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 11 23:58:33 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26392 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:58:30 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA61554 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:57:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211235128.02590078@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:59:00 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces In-Reply-To: <01b901c2a1af$49acb800$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:22 AM 12/12/2002 -0400, John Hudson wrote: > > > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual > > > >guide numbers. [snip] > > > > > >Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a > > >flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, > > >and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be > > >fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. > > > > OK, so how would I fire a on camera flash like the F280 and trigger the > > light meter? I understand how to do this with Studio flash but not shoe > > mount flash! > >The flash meter route pre-supposes that one can control the power output of >the flash gun. In the case of the F280 it is basically a point and shoot >flash with no manual over ride on power output. An on-camera flash gun with >manual over ride is the Vivitar 285HV and with this flash the flash meter >route takes on a whole new meaning. Other than for point and shoot >convenience my F280 is a major disappointment considering the excellence of >the camera for which it is designed. I feel like playing the game "Twenty Questions :-)" and going around in circles. OK, may be I am asking the Qs the wrong way, lets start again... first of all, this is not about fill flash, but situations that plain need flash... Lets say my goal is to be able to get reasonable looking flash pictures, w/o the frontal burnout, sounds like A) I should back off a bit and use a longer lens (e.g. 85mm), or B) If the background is deep, dial in a -0.5 to -1.5 compensation. This tells the camera not to overexpose the front. OK So far? Now in the quest of Flash Heaven, AND I already own a flash meter, AND I don't mind getting another flash, say, the Metz 54-MZ3. I can then: A) Put a reflector/diffuser and bounce away, or B) Use the manual GN and calculate distance, aperture and shutter, or C) Use the Flash meter to do what? How do I meter what the Metz-54 output? Is there a trigger outlet on the Metz? Or do I just press the Test Button? I feel like a blind man trying to understand what an elephant looks like from different sighted persons describing different parts of the elephant :-O // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20008 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 08:32:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 08:32:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 00:32:45 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26413 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:32:44 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021212082007.FYTV513731.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:20:07 -0500 Message-ID: <01d201c2a1b6$8dc34660$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 04:14:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:20:06 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Moose" To: Sent: Thursday, 12 December, 2002 03:53 AM Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica > There is a documentary on the Iwo Jima photo that I saw relatively > recently on TV. It included a revisiting of the island by participants > and interviews with the photographer(s?) involved. As I recall, it told > essentially the story John tells with lots of visuals.It includes both > the movie and the series of stills. > > Moose > > > The True Iwo Jima Story: > > The U.S. Marine Corps has the orignal B&W negative of the Iwo Jima > > photograph, along with other stills made at the time from different > > angles, and a reel of color motion picture film, all of the same flag > > raising. It was, however, the SECOND flag raising on the summit. > > There are also still photographs of the first flag raising. When the > > admiral in command of the landing saw the small battle flag, he > > ordered it replaced with a larger one so it could be seen better. > > The famous photograph is of the second one. As I said originally the "famous" photo is a staged event! The admiral didn't like what he saw first so he arranged for another photo shoot and the second time around he got what he liked. This in contrast to those famous photos from a later era which were taken at the spur of the moment and were not re-run to satisfy the whims of the local admiral; coming to mind are the shots of the south Vietnamese policeman shooting the vietcong person in the head with a pistol at point blank range, the young girl running naked down the road after a naphalm bomb attack, and the one of the girl haunched over an injured person after the National Guard turkey shoot at Kent State University. In contrast to these three images, the Iwo Jimo flag raising photo is most certainly a re-run on the original. If it is not, perhaps that terrified young girl could have been asked to do a second run down the road or for the policemen to have rounded up another miscreant for another pot shot to improve the composition of the photo. jh The motion picture film > > and other stills show clearly that it was not staged or faked. The > > photographer's positioning and timing were impeccable. The Navy > > released the now famous photograph after reviewing the stills done of > > both flag raisings. One look through the Navy's archive leaves little > > doubt as to why this particular photograph was chosen for release. It > > stands out among all of them. All the others look bland by > > comparison. BTW, the photographer of the second raising ended up > > working for the photographer of the first flag raising after the war. > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20350 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 08:41:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 08:41:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 00:41:02 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp016.mail.yahoo.com (smtp016.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.113]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA26417 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:41:01 -0800 Received: from adsl-216-100-137-219.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.137.219 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 08:25:15 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF847E7.6050802@sbcglobal.net> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:25:11 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210230650.057a9a08@192.168.100.11> <3DF6EAB3.EF4EE762@accura.com.hk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The lock-up action on the OM-40(PC) is like the OM-4x bodies where the mirror goes up completely (and aperture is closed down) when the self timer is started. The OM10 & 20 move the mirror about 2/3 of the way up when the self timer starts and the last bit happens when the shutter actually fires. I'm not sure it makes any practical difference, but it is a distincty different action. Moose C.H.Ling wrote: >The 2n will not lock up the mirror when timer start, it only up during >exposure. Only the OM10-40, OM4/4Ti and OM2sp will lock up the mirror >in self timer mode. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20877 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 09:13:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 09:13:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 01:13:11 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp011.mail.yahoo.com (smtp011.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.31]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA26436 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:13:09 -0800 Received: from adsl-216-100-137-219.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.137.219 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 08:57:08 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF84F5C.3000801@sbcglobal.net> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:57:00 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] My mug shot.... References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211220003.02595398@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Flash exposure looks good on this one! Moose Richard F. Man wrote: > FWIW: > http://www.dragonsgate.net/richard/gallery/tn/richard-self-portrait.jpg.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21382 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 09:38:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 09:38:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 01:38:19 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26457 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:38:18 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA85893 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:37:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021212011615.025988d8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:26:16 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] My mug shot.... In-Reply-To: <3DF84F5C.3000801@sbcglobal.net> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211220003.02595398@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Heh, it's actually really lousy with the flash overpowering everything, which is what I expected. I was just wasting a frame. I rescued the picture with Photoshop. I cheated by using Applied Science Fiction's SHO plugin, but it is mainly a matter of opening up the shadow, adjust contrast etc. Then I converted it to B&W to hide the noise generated by the manipulation. Although it is one of the few pictures of me. The sad life of the photographers - never show up on the pictures :-) At 12:57 AM 12/12/2002 -0800, you wrote: >Flash exposure looks good on this one! > >Moose > >Richard F. Man wrote: > >>FWIW: >>http://www.dragonsgate.net/richard/gallery/tn/richard-self-portrait.jpg.html >... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21805 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 09:55:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 09:55:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 01:55:11 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26465 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:55:09 -0800 Received: from [62.64.228.93] (helo=[62.64.228.93]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MPzm-000N4D-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:51:06 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000d01c2a139$d6e90b40$010000c0@oemcomputer> References: <001b01c2a137$47e33120$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> <000d01c2a139$d6e90b40$010000c0@oemcomputer> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:15:48 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] OT Paper for B&W Contact Proofs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Normal paper works fine for me. You merely have to set an average exposure and if it is wrong, try a new one. Chris At 12:22 -0500 11/12/02, Jamie Costello wrote: >I would like to make some contact proof sheets of some B&W negatives I have= =2E >In the Adams books, he refers to "contact" paper as differing from >"enlargement" paper. Typically, all I find in the various ads and websites >is termed enlargement paper. Is there a difference nowadays (in other >words, does it matter)? Does anyone make/sell "contact" paper? I don't >(at the moment) have access to an enlarger, but will soon. > >What are your experiences with the various B&W papers? Favorite makes, >tips and techniques ... As usual, actual personal experience counts for mor= e >[friend-of-a-friend stuff isn't really THAT helpful ;-)] Thanks. > >Jamie >Fort Myers, FL -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22132 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 10:02:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 10:02:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 02:02:00 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26473 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:01:58 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA91887 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:01:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021212015501.057feec0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:02:30 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] plethora of digi-news... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As I continue to await news of the Olympus 4/3 systems, here are some interesting digi-news: - Kod*k DC-14n shipping is delayed until Jan 2003. Hmmm... are they going to pull a Contax Digital - Nik*n announces new short lens specifically made for the smaller sensor size! Hmm... Olympus has a point after all? - Olympus announces delay of 256 MB xD cards until Jan... 2003 is going to be interesting. Lets hope Olympus still has some genius left in them and produce a digital system worthy of the OM heritage! BTW, in the local camera shop that I hang out, there's this pro guy that has been shooting all digital since couple years ago using the Kod*k 6000 or something like that. His output on the large printer (20x30 or up?) are amazing. 6MP is definitely good enough if you know how to use it! I talk to him quite a bit and he said he doesn't even use the tripod all that much. He's one of those that will be disappointed if the DC-14n is delayed too long... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22435 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 10:07:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 10:07:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 02:07:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26479 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:07:24 -0800 Received: from [62.64.219.94] (helo=[62.64.228.93]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MQBV-000P0v-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:03:13 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000701c2a159$1bc76990$6a40063e@personalmyself> References: <000701c2a159$1bc76990$6a40063e@personalmyself> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:59:59 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Amateur Photographer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll have a look through mine John. I have just started weeding 4 years' worth of APs. Not that I am expecting any huge pressies to take up the space... ;-) Chris At 21:05 +0000 11/12/02, John Duggan wrote: >Could any AP readers give me the dates of the mags containing articles on >..Home made Macro flash, and Infra red flash trigger. Both were published >earlier this year. During a pre christmas "spring clean" ? I have managed t= o >throw out both articles :-( I am looking for a christmas project. Thanks >John Duggan, Wales, UK. -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22440 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 10:07:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 10:07:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 02:07:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26480 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:07:26 -0800 Received: from [62.64.219.94] (helo=[62.64.228.93]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MQBW-000P0v-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:03:14 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> References: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:05:14 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca David I was talked into buying an OM4Ti recently, so I sold my OM2SP to finance it (partly at least). I had an OM4 I could have sold, but I prefer the flexibility of the 4 over the 2SP. I use it mainly in Auto with the Spot/Multispot functions. The OM4Ti is really the one to go for, as new as possible, but that will cost you over =A3500 sterling (my mint version cost me =A3600 with a 100/2.8 and a 35/2.8). But a decent, loved OM4 will work just as well, as long as you get one which does not eat batteries. the later ones with the modified circuits seem to be the ones to go for. But I also use my OM1N, and that works fine as long as I meter carefully. Chris At 22:14 +0000 11/12/02, David Sharp wrote: >Hello, > >I'm new to the list. I came across this list on the internet, >looking got info on things Olympus - I've owned an OM2-SP for >several years now. Its a great camera. > >I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can run >two different speed films at once. I'm doing an increasing amount >of photography of ancient monuments / archaeological sites / >archaeological artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and find >myself one minute in broad daylight and the next minute in the >corner of a dark trench..and having to take accurate >exposures quickly). > >I've been very happy with the OM2-SP (apart from the fact that you >can only use Spot metering in Manual mode...but I can cope with >that). > >I could just buy another OM2SP body. But I'd like to hear people's >opinions on other OM bodies. Are there any people who can compare >their experiences of the OM2SP with, for instance, the OM2n and >OM4? Or, perhaps there are people who work in similar fields who >still insist on using a manual OM1/OM3? Are some OM bodies more >reliable than others? Is the metering more accurate on particular >models? Are some tougher than others? Are some easier to use? Do the >batteries run out quickly on some? Is the OM2000 really a piece of >rubbish? If I don't need 'shadow/highlight' should I get another >OM2SP rather than an OM4, or does the OM4 have some extra advantages? > >many thanks for any replies >-- >David Sharp, London, UK. > >david.sharp@manetho.net > >Tel: (+44) (0)208 291 0978 >Mobile: 07811 407 635 -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23106 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 10:16:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 10:16:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 02:16:32 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26486 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:16:30 -0800 Received: from [195.202.34.134] (mueasa-wan134.citykom.de [195.202.34.134]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA11630 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:15:42 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasa-wan134.citykom.de [195.202.34.134] claimed to be [195.202.34.134] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:15:52 +0100 Subject: Re: [OT] L*I*A - Was [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <323910-220021241224038566@M2W087.mail2web.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Am 12.12.2002 03:40 Uhr schrieb "om@skipwilliams.com" unter : > So I decided to invest in the Leica M system and it works well for me. I > also decided in 1974 to invest in the fledgling Olympus OM-1 and it's > innovative OM-System. Indeed - so isn=B4t it not a shame that OLYMPUS will end the OM-System??!! > I'm ashamed that the Leica community has become the pervue of the radical= , > stuck-up, cultish, old-snobby-men, clubby people that now poke their head > out. Maybe THATS a part of the horrible prize of a M7 - the guarantee, that Leit= z lives forever "young" ? with regards, Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23570 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 10:33:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 10:33:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 02:33:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26494 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:32:59 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:29:11 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA00928 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:29:07 GMT Message-ID: <3DF864F2.10200@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:29:06 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] My mug shot.... References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211220003.02595398@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021212011615.025988d8@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Although it is one of the few pictures of me. The sad life of the > photographers - never show up on the pictures :-) > Except in TOPE 1! http://www.millennics.com/cgi-bin/tope_index_page.cgi?event=1 Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24239 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 11:05:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 11:05:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 03:05:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.alcatel.be (alc250.alcatel.be [195.207.101.250]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26523 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:05:32 -0800 From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be Received: from bemail04.net.alcatel.be (relay3 [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alcatel.be (8.11.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBCAqHv23284 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:52:18 +0100 Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:52:08 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL04/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 12/12/2002 11:52:17 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I would be 100ure that was what he meant... >> And by art pictures, he might have meant glamour photos. :-) IMO. >> Cheers, >> Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24605 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 11:13:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 11:13:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 03:13:49 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26531 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:13:48 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA08699 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:13:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021212030745.0270e0f8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:14:22 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] scanner/printer vs. Pro Lab print from slide Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Remember the baby in backpack pic: ? We made an enlargement via a Pro Lab many years ago. Chris just found that print, and.... my scanned then printed output is sharper! :-) I don't remember whether it is a cibachrome print or done by using an internegative though. Taken with an OM of course. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25319 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 11:54:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 11:54:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 03:54:25 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26561 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:54:23 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MRur-000DjA-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:54:09 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:55:27 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6C9@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] A proposal for the OM-Pedia project Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:55:26 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Richard Man wrote: > So how do we manage the website? One model is the website maintainer > receives web page submissions from different people and organize them. > Depending on the skills of the maintainer and how much time he or she can > spend, this should work reasonably well. > > Another model is the wiki-wiki model, where ANYONE can modify a website. > This has the advantages that any expert can change the content and even > reorganize it to whichever way they see fit. This model works well if > there > are at least some dedicated people who can really set the ball rolling to > set up the initial pages (TOC, links etc.) There are also some learning > curves on using wiki-wiki, as it is not strictly HTML. The guards against > malicious hacking are simply that bad contents can be edited out, and > outright trashing of data can be restored from backup. > I would prefer proper HTML, not wiki-wiki. I know what I am doing with HTML, and it is an accepted standard. I definitely don't like the idea that anyone can edit a wiki-wiki page. Major malicious changes would be spotted easily, but minor ones would be hard to find. Also, doesn't wiki-wiki depend on a server? Doesn't this means that the cOMpendium could not be run from a CD-ROM? A central contents page with links to other Web sites containing material from contributors appeals to me. I can probably host a few sections. Alan Wood http://www.alanwood.net (Unicode, special characters, pesticide names) http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ (under construction) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26826 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 13:06:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 13:06:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 05:06:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26642 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:06:38 -0800 Received: from 209-122-237-122.s630.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.237.122] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18MT1z-0004Vd-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:05:36 -0500 Message-ID: <000301c2a1df$34376620$7aed7ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021210225017.37f6be36.talrmr@pacbell.net> Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:30:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca MLU in the 2/2N/4 is not practical without major modification. Not good with a plain 2 as holding the mirror up, automatically turns the circuit on, running batteries down. Factory service included removal of the switch that was activated by the mirror, but the real problem would be installing the mechanical device needed to raise the mirror. I don't do it. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tal Lancaster" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 1:50 AM Subject: [OM] How to lock up mirror? > To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have heard people refer to > locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious can this be done on the > OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does one do that? > > > Tal > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26847 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 13:06:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 13:06:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 05:06:42 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26646 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:06:41 -0800 Received: from 209-122-237-122.s630.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.237.122] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18MT22-0004Vd-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:05:38 -0500 Message-ID: <000401c2a1df$349df020$7aed7ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210230650.057a9a08@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:31:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Unfortunately, the 2/2n does not have mirror pre-fire. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 2:07 AM Subject: Re: [OM] How to lock up mirror? > At 10:50 PM 12/10/2002 -0800, Tal Lancaster wrote: > >To try to maximize sharpness for pictures, I have heard people refer to > >locking up the mirror in SLRs. I am curious can this be done on the > >OM2n and OM4T bodies? If so how does one do that? > > On the 4T, and probably on the 2N, you use the timer to get the mirror to > go up 12 secs before it fires the shutter. I believe the 1 was the only OM > that has a true mirror lockup. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27557 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 13:28:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 13:28:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 05:28:22 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp001.nwlink.com (smtp001.nwlink.com [209.20.130.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26675 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:28:21 -0800 Received: from miracler64ly0o (ip009.skt-d4.nwlink.com [209.20.226.9]) by smtp001.nwlink.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBCDSIhI025187 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:28:19 -0800 Message-ID: <129401c2a1e2$5c05ccc0$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Subject: [OM] MF for travel Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:28:28 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1291_01C2A19F.4CDBA410" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1291_01C2A19F.4CDBA410 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Obviously, only the photographer can decide whether the improved image = quality of MF outweighs all the obvious disadvantages of a larger = format. (Don't forget that National Geographic's photographic reputation = was built on a base of 35mm Kodachrome.) Consider this... You don't go on vacation to do "serious" photography. = If taking great pictures _is_ the whole point of your travel, then MF = makes sense. If not, stick with 35mm. If there were a pocket-sized 645 RF camera, I'd recommend buying one and = using it for shots that justify or require the larger negative. But I = don't know of one. ------=_NextPart_000_1291_01C2A19F.4CDBA410 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Obviously, only the photographer can decide whether = the=20 improved image quality of MF outweighs all the obvious disadvantages of = a larger=20 format. (Don't forget that National Geographic's photographic reputation = was=20 built on a base of 35mm Kodachrome.)
 
Consider this... You don't go on vacation to do = "serious"=20 photography. If taking great pictures _is_ the whole point of your = travel, then=20 MF makes sense. If not, stick with 35mm.
 
If there were a pocket-sized 645 RF camera, I'd = recommend=20 buying one and using it for shots that justify or require the larger = negative.=20 But I don't know of one.
------=_NextPart_000_1291_01C2A19F.4CDBA410-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27811 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 13:29:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 13:29:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 05:29:10 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26683 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:29:09 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-217.s471.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.217] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18MTOl-0000WV-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:29:08 -0500 Message-ID: <000201c2a1e2$7f746310$d9e27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <5FA0C5BC-0D81-11D7-B387-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> <3DF81C40.7010009@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:23:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca But don't get an OM-1/1N thinking you can do that and get away with it on a regular basis. ;-) _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" To: Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:18 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? > My Om1n died in Thailand. Distressing to take off the lens and pour out > the WATER... But I still took pics with it. One of the beauties of a > mechanical camera... > > Albert > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28274 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 13:41:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 13:41:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 05:41:13 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26706 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:41:07 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:41:19 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF89157.8030407@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:38:31 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Disappointing photos Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I got my photos back today.. They were disappointing; I used Ilford HP5, at 400ISO, I see no grain, so it's a great film. The processing was done by hand, and was very consistant, and looked good. A few things; one, Everything is dark, I am new to the film and so I'm not too familiar with the characteristics of it. Now that I know, I will compensate a bit for it. Two, the processing was excellent but the development sucked. The negatives were consistant but the development was not. I wish I had the space to develop it myself; I might just do that; because the results COULD have been great but aren't.. Good film though.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28739 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 13:58:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 13:58:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 05:58:15 2002 -0800 Received: from mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.117]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26731 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:58:13 -0800 From: bsandyman@att.net Received: from mtiwebc08 ([204.127.135.29]) by mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021212135700.YEOX20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc08>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:57:00 +0000 Received: from [199.181.237.2] by mtiwebc08; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:57:00 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:57:00 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 25 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: YnNhbmR5bWFuQGF0dC5uZXQ= Message-Id: <20021212135700.YEOX20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc08> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Occasionally I come across a manager in some business that is wholly inept at dealing with some portion of his audience. I know this manager of a small engineering company that I swear to you hates engineers. At least this is the conclusion I have come to over years of watching him flounder at his job. I would suggest that you cut this guy some slack. I doubt he really meant to offend, it's just that he doesn't know how to handle the sensibilities of an artist. The downside to this is that the GO will strike again. They can't help it. If you can be diplomatic (i.e. be the adult) it may be very rewarding. Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:14:43 -0600 From: "Barry B. Bean" Subject: [OM] Damned with faint praise? This past weekend, I attended a gallery opening that featured a work by my wife. When we were leaving, SNIP < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29384 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 14:21:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 14:21:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 06:21:45 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA26795 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:21:43 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021212141756.CIZT13269.priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:17:56 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021212071405.00b2f340@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:17:56 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Fake *Bay Scam In-Reply-To: <1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:25 AM 12/12/2002 -0500, Rich wrote: >Courtesy of Fool.com: "A fake website imitating *Bay has been shut down. >Scam artists apparently sent emails asking victims to log on to >*bayupdates.com and re-enter credit card information. No word on how much >info the credit thieves collected, if any." > >I received one of those emails... beware. Actually, I received one, too, but *not* from "*bayupdates.com"; rather, from a domain registered in the Christmas Islands. This was last night. I've shipped a copy of the offending e-mail off to ePay itself. (Bloody inconvenient -- you can't contact 'em by e-mail anymore, but have to go spelunking through craploads of Web pages until you find the right one...). I just checked the site for the fraudulent page, and it's still up and running. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29702 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 14:28:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 14:28:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 06:28:25 2002 -0800 Received: from web80009.mail.yahoo.com (web80009.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.168.139]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA26816 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:28:23 -0800 Message-ID: <20021212142810.16926.qmail@web80009.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [199.135.24.113] by web80009.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:28:10 PST Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:28:10 -0800 (PST) From: "Garry D. Lewis" Subject: Re: [OM] OT Paper for B&W Contact Proofs To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021211223403.1643.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca about the only "contact paper" I have seen lately is AZO. It is mostly used ,these days, for large format photography. Goto-- http://www.michaelandpaula.com/index_skip.html if you are really seriously interested in contacting paper. yours with contacts, Garry D. Lewis < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30033 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 14:33:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 14:33:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 06:33:54 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA26824 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:33:52 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <20021212143240053006t4ese>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:32:44 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:32:38 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 5:20 AM +0000 12/12/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:28:27 -0800 >From: "Richard F. Man" >Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces > >At 08:53 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, Joe Gwinn wrote: > > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual > > >guide numbers. [snip] > > > >Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a > >flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, > >and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be > >fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. > >OK, so how would I fire a on camera flash like the F280 and trigger the >light meter? I understand how to do this with Studio flash but not shoe >mount flash! I don't have a F280, but I assume it has a nice red "test" button that will fire the flash when pressed? If not, then find a different flash. The flash must also have a manual mode, where the ordered flash is always produced, regardless of how much light is reflected back to the flash. If yes to both, then set the flashmeter up for incident-light metering (white dome in place), arm it, and place it at or very near the subject with the dome pointed towards the camera. Or have the subject hold the meter. Then, go to the camera, set the flash to manual operation and fire off a test flash, and run back to the meter and get the reading. (The meter must have a recall function, or a long display time.) If you are using multiple flashes, do this one flash at a time, with the others turned off, so you can measure the ratio of illumination on the various sides of the subject. The dome always points to the camera, and not to the flash units, regardless of where the flash units are. I most often put a tiny manual flash on the camera, with the larger real flashes distributed around the subject to taste. The pipsqueak flash on the camera triggers the real flashes when the picture is taken. The lack of wires is a real help, and flash triggers are cheaper than radio triggers. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30346 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 14:38:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 14:38:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 06:38:50 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA26832 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:38:48 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021212142618.RHIJ148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:26:18 -0500 Message-ID: <023f01c2a1e9$1d034280$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021211235128.02590078@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:16:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:26:17 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Thursday, 12 December, 2002 03:59 AM Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces > At 03:22 AM 12/12/2002 -0400, John Hudson wrote: > > > > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual > > > > >guide numbers. [snip] > > > > > > > >Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a > > > >flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, > > > >and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be > > > >fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. > > > > > > OK, so how would I fire a on camera flash like the F280 and trigger the > > > light meter? I understand how to do this with Studio flash but not shoe > > > mount flash! > > > >The flash meter route pre-supposes that one can control the power output of > >the flash gun. In the case of the F280 it is basically a point and shoot > >flash with no manual over ride on power output. An on-camera flash gun with > >manual over ride is the Vivitar 285HV and with this flash the flash meter > >route takes on a whole new meaning. Other than for point and shoot > >convenience my F280 is a major disappointment considering the excellence of > >the camera for which it is designed. > > I feel like playing the game "Twenty Questions :-)" and going around in > circles. OK, may be I am asking the Qs the wrong way, lets start again... > first of all, this is not about fill flash, but situations that plain need > flash... > > Lets say my goal is to be able to get reasonable looking flash pictures, > w/o the frontal burnout, sounds like > A) I should back off a bit and use a longer lens (e.g. 85mm), or > B) If the background is deep, dial in a -0.5 to -1.5 compensation. This > tells the camera not to overexpose the front. > > OK So far? Now in the quest of Flash Heaven, AND I already own a flash > meter, AND I don't mind getting another flash, say, the Metz 54-MZ3. I can > then: > A) Put a reflector/diffuser and bounce away, or > B) Use the manual GN and calculate distance, aperture and shutter, or > C) Use the Flash meter to do what? How do I meter what the Metz-54 output? > Is there a trigger outlet on the Metz? Or do I just press the Test Button? In response to C) Put the flash meter of a tripod [or have someone hold it] with the invercone facing the flash [NOT, the camera] and as close as possible to the subject being metered, and then connect the meter to the flash gun by means of a cable or one of those "magic eyes". Fire the flash and then take a reading from the flash meter. The meter will read the f stop for the intensity of the flash. The only three variables in the determination of that f stop reading will be: 1. flash to meter distance, 2. the ISO rating dialled into the meter, and 3. the inherent power of the flash gun itself as indicated by its guide number for 100 ISO. By setting the camera at sync speed, setting the lens aperture at whatever the meter read, recharging the flash and then taking the picture you will have a perfectly illuminated subject where the flash comprises 1000f the light source. Any ambient light has been factored out of the calculations altogether. By maintaining the same syn speed and aperture on camera BUT moving the flash away from the subject you will dimish the flash lighting effect and increase the impact of any ambient lighting. The Metz-54 has a "trigger outlet" .......... it is the flash to camera cord. HTH jh > > I feel like a blind man trying to understand what an elephant looks like > from different sighted persons describing different parts of the elephant :-O > > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31346 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 14:59:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 14:59:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 06:59:03 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA26864 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:59:01 -0800 Received: (cpmta 17917 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 06:57:59 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.239) with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 06:57:59 -0800 X-Sent: 12 Dec 2002 14:57:59 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: RE: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:55:01 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <000001c2a1ee$72d05720$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021212052005.13535.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I certainly agree that a flash meter would work just as well. My crappy Sekonic (and most others) will read the flash light as it fires. If one is using on camera flash like the F280, you would have the subject hold the meter while you go back to the camera and hit the "test" button. The only problem is making sure the subject holds the meter correctly.... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31666 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 15:03:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 15:03:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 07:03:53 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com ([194.201.127.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26876 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:03:51 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [OM] Big mouth = Neck on the block; head in the noose; ***'s in the mincer Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:02:56 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Big mouth = Neck on the block; head in the noose; ***'s in the mincer Thread-Index: AcKh74xZDxCL4ZhSQkakvEm0SX26Rg== From: "Sam Shiell" To: "olympus@zuiko. sls. bc. ca \(E-mail\)" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Guys Well, set myself up for a fall again. I mentioned a while ago that one = of the things my company does is to organise corporate events. Well the = Events manager's just asked me to give a quote for being the official = photographer at a forthcoming event. None of that "well, it's a shame = that one didn't come out but it's not important" this time! A few months ago I took a couple of days holiday from work and did a = freebie for them at one event. This was an event for the top 200 = "performers" of a national bank, a day and night in a golfing hotel in = Wales. Started at 11:30, but as I live 200 miles away on the wrong side of = London I left home at 6:00 am and got there with only 30 mins to spare. First couple of shots were people getting off the coach (easy), then = booking in, and this is where the 1st problem occurred. The rooms in the = hotel were HUGE and I was shooting with my zoom at it's 210 end and my = T32 ran out of power... not much I could do about that. Then they moved onto the activities. They were taken out to a field and = let loose in Landrovers; quad bikes; clay-pigeon shooting; archery and = all that stuff. Loads of opportunity to get some really good shots here. = In fact in my opinion some of these are the best pictures I've done. Then stage 2.... aromatherapy/ cocktail mixing / tai chi.... how the = hell do you do an interesting photograph of people sitting in rows = listening to a lecture? A looong gap where I had a sleep in the car, then onto drinks, meal and = dance. The drink bit was the boring cocktail party shots (I hate doing = them), and didn't bother with people eating, but saved a couple of shots = for the band. The room and lighting were done really excellently so once = again a couple of good shots of dancing and the band, even accounting = for the weakness of the T32 again.... Got a free meal out of it, then left at 11:30 and got home at 02:00 am = the next day, absolutely exhausted. .... And then the really bad news. My quote " favourite" lab screwed up. = Hopelessly underexposed about 700f the shots and did something with = the negs... not sure what but they've got marks on and a couple of = hot-spots. Dam dam dam dam!! Because of the time I couldn't get them = reprinted, but managed to salvage about 30 usable prints, which is = actually just about the right number to give a good feel of the event = without being boring. As I've said the Flash was a problem, possible due to me using a smaller = aperture (eyesight going, so I don't have faith in my quick focusing any = more), but sorry to say I've now bought (using the petrol money = expenses) a Metz 45 which I'll use from now on with these big places and = keep the T32 for more modest does. So, all in all a really good and thoroughly enjoyable day for me. The = Events Manager was, I think very impressed with the outdoor shots, but = less so with the indoor "people-standing-around-drinking" ones, which I = have to admit are a bit flat. But the downside is the next one is for real.... Help Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32077 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 15:11:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 15:11:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 07:11:44 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26891 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:11:43 -0800 Received: from M2W074.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.74]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:09:39 -0500 Message-ID: <269620-220021241215939202@M2W074.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:09:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Dec 2002 15:09:39.0210 (UTC) FILETIME=[7DA6C6A0:01C2A1F0] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The hood in question was an ULTRA, ULTRA rare 21mm Nikon RF hood, of which= there are probably less than 50 known, maybe less=2E Most users didn't bu= y the hood, and those that did typically=2E=2E=2E=2E=2Ehorrors of horrors=2E= =2E=2E=2E=2Eused it and it got dinged up=2E =20 The one that sold was in very nice condition and a couple of rabid, wealth= y Japanese collectors both decided that they had to have it, so the auction fever set in=2E Nikon RF gear has become ridiculously collectable over th= e past 5-10 years, especially in Japan=2E This isn't unheard-of behavior in the auction market, when unique or hard-to-locate items appear and two or more committed buyers are in the fray=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Steve Goss stevegoss@speakeasy=2Enet Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:08:42 -0600 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again $5000? Whats the big deal? Just a couple of years ago a N*kon=20 rangefinder lens hood (just the hood, mind you) went for $5,500=2E Just stirring some jalepenos into the pot=2E=2E=2E Steve Goss John Hudson wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John and Julie Ockman" >=20 >>My fellow Zuikoholics >> After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better=2E >>Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the >>lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it=2E >>John >>The auction: >> >> > 3> >=20 >=20 > US$5,000 reserve! A buyer at that price has to be nuts! and it is only a= n > f1=2E2! >=20 > wow =2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32399 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 15:19:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 15:19:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 07:19:37 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26899 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:19:34 -0800 Received: from [209.176.66.1] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 31282603 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:18:50 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF8A8DA.28129CB4@suite224.net> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:18:50 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again References: <269620-220021241215939202@M2W074.mail2web.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Japan is where they buy and sell rare cameras still in the unopened box, and do x-rays to confirm they are there. I got this little tidbit when I used to read the IDCC list. Just how true it is I am not sure, but $5,500 lenshoods make me believe it is possible. Hey, someone paid over $3,000 for the box of a Nikon S too. John "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > Nikon RF gear has become ridiculously collectable over the > past 5-10 years, especially in Japan. > > This isn't unheard-of behavior in the auction market, when unique or > hard-to-locate items appear and two or more committed buyers are in the > fray. > > Skip > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Steve Goss stevegoss@speakeasy.net > Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:08:42 -0600 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again > > $5000? Whats the big deal? Just a couple of years ago a N*kon > rangefinder lens hood (just the hood, mind you) went for $5,500. > > Just stirring some jalepenos into the pot... > > Steve Goss > > John Hudson wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John and Julie Ockman" > > > >>My fellow Zuikoholics > >> After seeing this auction, I have no doubt the Zuiko is better. > >>Afterall, if you can not afford to buy the camera after you buy the > >>lens, all you have is a tube with some glass in it. > >>John > >>The auction: > >> > >> > > > > 3> > > > > > > US$5,000 reserve! A buyer at that price has to be nuts! and it is only an > > f1.2! > > > > wow ........ > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 760 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 15:54:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 15:54:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 07:54:25 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26942 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:54:24 -0800 Received: from pool0623.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.212.113] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MVex-0002kU-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:54:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DF8199F.9010006@achtung.com> References: <20021212013051.QSMF4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> <3DF8199F.9010006@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:53:55 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Do you all think a medium format camera is a good idea for travel?? > >The mental list I have compiled so far: > >Pro: >Medium Format, larger negative, on slide film, unbeatable. >It makes me slow down and think about the shots more, thus better shots. >BIG BIG BIG film real estate >Tripod needed, so every shot will be clear and sharp. > >Con: >Bulky >Probaby will require an external light meter >Tripod requirements, lugging around a tripod. >Film might be hard to find in other countries and tourist locations >vs. 35mm which is everywhere. > >Anything else to add? > >Albert Most modern MF cameras have built in meters. A Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses is actually lighter and in a smaller kit than my Oly stuff. It is lighter than a Canon EOS and easily hand held. Tripods are required for 35 mm sharpness too. People are just used to soft pictures because they are hand held. If you don't use a good tripod regularly do that first. You may find you do not need MF. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1218 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 16:04:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 16:04:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 08:04:22 2002 -0800 Received: from d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com (d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com [194.196.100.235]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26962 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:04:19 -0800 Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBCG2ROZ051600 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:02:27 +0100 Received: from d14ml005.italy.ibm.com (d14ml005.italy.ibm.com [9.87.60.141]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/NCO/VER6.4) with ESMTP id gBCG2Rij027640 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:02:27 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] zoom and focus problem To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Ralf Loi" Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:01:35 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D14ML005/14/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 12/12/2002 17:02:26 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca << From: "Ralf Loi" > > Hi all, > I have a zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 that is very nice but ... infinity is somewhere between the 10m and infinity > marks. Mine is somewhat similar: infinity focus is "past" the infinity mark. I had thought of sending it off to John H. or Clint. Jamie >> Living in Italy, it's not easy to send a lens to the States for repair... Ralf Loi < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2142 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 16:49:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 16:49:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 08:49:13 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27031 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:49:08 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7000248MJQXB@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:45:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:47:59 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Matt board To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <006c01c2a1fe$3b02ce80$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Much like I believe in selecting white fixtures to remodel a kitchen or bath (adding color in other ways) I tend to opt for a not-so-bright white mat for enlargements. In fact, the framing shop I use has a standard spec. for my mounting order so all I have to do is drop the print off and have them input into their order entry system. In most cases, it seems to work out well. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3071 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 17:35:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 17:35:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 09:35:33 2002 -0800 Received: from hestia.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27098 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:35:26 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by hestia.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gBCHVaSu011183 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:31:41 -0500 Message-Id: <200212121731.gBCHVaSu011183@hestia.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:31:52 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <20021212135700.YEOX20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc08> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:57:00 +0000, bsandyman@att.net wrote: >I would suggest that you cut this guy some slack. I doubt he really meant to >offend, it's just that he doesn't know how to handle the sensibilities of an artist. Given that he's the chairman of the art department at the local University and an artist himself, I doubt that's the case. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3328 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 17:38:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 17:38:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 09:38:09 2002 -0800 Received: from hestia.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27102 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:37:55 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by hestia.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gBCHY6Su011445 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:34:09 -0500 Message-Id: <200212121734.gBCHY6Su011445@hestia.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:34:19 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <3DF89157.8030407@achtung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [OM] Disappointing photos Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:38:31 +0800, Albert wrote: >I wish I had the space to develop it myself; I might just do that; If you have enough room to sit down and eat dinner, you have enough space to develop film yourself. A changing bag, small tank (smaller than a coffee can), and a sink is all you need. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3837 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 18:00:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 18:00:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 10:00:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27119 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:00:52 -0800 Received: from panix.com (brillig.panix.com [166.84.1.76]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EE0981E7 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:59:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (vt-montpelier1a-442.bur.adelphia.net [24.48.165.186]) by panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369AFB9D87 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:59:34 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: pw@brillig.panix.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212121731.gBCHVaSu011183@hestia.email.starband.net> References: <200212121731.gBCHVaSu011183@hestia.email.starband.net> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:59:34 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Paul Wallich Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:31 AM -0600 12/12/02, Barry B. Bean wrote: >On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:57:00 +0000, bsandyman@att.net wrote: > >>I would suggest that you cut this guy some slack. I doubt he really meant to >>offend, it's just that he doesn't know how to handle the >>sensibilities of an artist. > >Given that he's the chairman of the art department at the local >University and an artist himself, I doubt that's the case. Idunno. That would be pretty much confirming evidence for me. I've generally found artists among the most clueless about how to behave toward unfamiliar artists. paul -- Paul Wallich pw@panix.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4244 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 18:19:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 18:19:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 10:19:41 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27134 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:19:39 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.47] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A2168BF90152; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:14:46 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021212125045.05666570@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:19:29 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica In-Reply-To: <01d201c2a1b6$8dc34660$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:14 12/12/02, John Hudson wrote: >As I said originally the "famous" photo is a staged event! The admiral >didn't like what he saw first so he arranged for another photo shoot and the >second time around he got what he liked. Not true. You misinterpreted what I wrote and I don't believe you have an understanding of military combat operations. The first flag was raised on orders from a ground commmander on the island. The fighting was quite intense and the U.S. invasion force had by no means gained the upper hand yet. Indeed, it was very early on in the battle for the island. Its sole purpose was to inspire the U.S. ground forces and demoralize the Japanese defenders. When the admiral was informed by his staff a U.S. flag had been raised, he went to look for himself from the watch post on his flagship. The flag was a small "storm" or "battle" flag. It was then that he ordered a larger flag raised, and it was done within a matter of hours. The ***sole*** purpose of raising a larger one was _so_it_could_be_seen_better_ by ground forces on the island, and by those aboard ship offshore providing fire support. Those that raised the second flag were exposed to fire nearly the entire time they went up to replace the first one. IIRC, there was one quick shot of the men who raised the second flag standing around the base of the pole after it was raised. Then everyone got the hell off the top of the mountain. They were out in the open and most certainly a target of very easy opportunity. The battle for the island was still, by no means, decided and raged on for days after the flags were raised. The second flag raising had absolutely ***nothing*** to do with making photographs or film footage. At that point in the battle, it would have outraged those sent to do it. It had ***everything*** to do with a very legitimate goal directed at winning the battle for the island: inspiring one's men and demoralizing the enemy. Those that raised both flags understood this fully and the effect it would have, not for the war effort in general, but there, that day, at that time, and on that island. Battles can be decided by very simple things that have deep meaning. -- John > This in contrast to those famous >photos from a later era which were taken at the spur of the moment and were >not re-run to satisfy the whims of the local admiral; coming to mind are >the shots of the south Vietnamese policeman shooting the vietcong person in >the head with a pistol at point blank range, the young girl running naked >down the road after a naphalm bomb attack, and the one of the girl haunched >over an injured person after the National Guard turkey shoot at Kent State >University. In contrast to these three images, the Iwo Jimo flag raising >photo is most certainly a re-run on the original. If it is not, perhaps that >terrified young girl could have been asked to do a second run down the road >or for the policemen to have rounded up another miscreant for another pot >shot to improve the composition of the photo. > >jh > > > > > > The motion picture film > > > and other stills show clearly that it was not staged or faked. The > > > photographer's positioning and timing were impeccable. The Navy > > > released the now famous photograph after reviewing the stills done of > > > both flag raisings. One look through the Navy's archive leaves little > > > doubt as to why this particular photograph was chosen for release. It > > > stands out among all of them. All the others look bland by > > > comparison. BTW, the photographer of the second raising ended up > > > working for the photographer of the first flag raising after the war. > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4857 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 18:49:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 18:49:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 10:49:14 2002 -0800 Received: from va1.dslextreme.com (adsl-66-218-48-12.dslextreme.com [66.218.48.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27156 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:49:10 -0800 Received: from dslextreme.com (adsl-66.51.218.51.dslextreme.com [66.51.218.51]) by va1.dslextreme.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBCIqHwv029178 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:52:17 -0800 Message-ID: <3DF8DA0D.A8DA18EB@dslextreme.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:49:14 -0800 From: Keith Whaley X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021212125045.05666570@mail.spitfire.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well said, John! keith whaley "John A. Lind" wrote: > > At 03:14 12/12/02, John Hudson wrote: > > >As I said originally the "famous" photo is a staged event! The admiral > >didn't like what he saw first so he arranged for another photo shoot and the > >second time around he got what he liked. > > Not true. You misinterpreted what I wrote and I don't believe you have an > understanding of military combat operations. The first flag was raised on > orders from a ground commmander on the island. The fighting was quite > intense and the U.S. invasion force had by no means gained the upper hand > yet. Indeed, it was very early on in the battle for the island. Its sole > purpose was to inspire the U.S. ground forces and demoralize the Japanese > defenders. > > When the admiral was informed by his staff a U.S. flag had been raised, he > went to look for himself from the watch post on his flagship. The flag was > a small "storm" or "battle" flag. It was then that he ordered a larger > flag raised, and it was done within a matter of hours. The ***sole*** > purpose of raising a larger one was _so_it_could_be_seen_better_ by ground > forces on the island, and by those aboard ship offshore providing fire support. > > Those that raised the second flag were exposed to fire nearly the entire > time they went up to replace the first one. IIRC, there was one quick shot > of the men who raised the second flag standing around the base of the pole > after it was raised. Then everyone got the hell off the top of the > mountain. They were out in the open and most certainly a target of very > easy opportunity. The battle for the island was still, by no means, > decided and raged on for days after the flags were raised. > > The second flag raising had absolutely ***nothing*** to do with making > photographs or film footage. At that point in the battle, it would have > outraged those sent to do it. It had ***everything*** to do with a very > legitimate goal directed at winning the battle for the island: inspiring > one's men and demoralizing the enemy. Those that raised both flags > understood this fully and the effect it would have, not for the war effort > in general, but there, that day, at that time, and on that island. Battles > can be decided by very simple things that have deep meaning. > > -- John > > > This in contrast to those famous > >photos from a later era which were taken at the spur of the moment and were > >not re-run to satisfy the whims of the local admiral; coming to mind are > >the shots of the south Vietnamese policeman shooting the vietcong person in > >the head with a pistol at point blank range, the young girl running naked > >down the road after a naphalm bomb attack, and the one of the girl haunched > >over an injured person after the National Guard turkey shoot at Kent State > >University. In contrast to these three images, the Iwo Jimo flag raising > >photo is most certainly a re-run on the original. If it is not, perhaps that > >terrified young girl could have been asked to do a second run down the road > >or for the policemen to have rounded up another miscreant for another pot > >shot to improve the composition of the photo. > > > >jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5151 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 18:51:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 18:51:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 10:51:24 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27163 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:51:22 -0800 Received: from pool0254.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.176.254] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MYQC-00026d-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:50:57 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01b901c2a1af$49acb800$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> <01b901c2a1af$49acb800$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:50:51 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Richard F. Man" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, 11 December, 2002 10:28 PM >Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces > > >> At 08:53 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, Joe Gwinn wrote: >> > >The ONLY way to get exact exposure with flash is by using the manual >> > >guide numbers. [snip] >> > >> >Actually, there is an even better way, although it too is manual: Use a >> >flashmeter to meter incident (not reflected) light right at the subject, >> >and set the camera accordingly. This is *very* reliable, and cannot be >> >fooled by bright faces or dark backgrounds. >> >> OK, so how would I fire a on camera flash like the F280 and trigger the >> light meter? I understand how to do this with Studio flash but not shoe >> mount flash! > >The flash meter route pre-supposes that one can control the power output of >the flash gun. In the case of the F280 it is basically a point and shoot >flash with no manual over ride on power output. An on-camera flash gun with >manual over ride is the Vivitar 285HV and with this flash the flash meter >route takes on a whole new meaning. Other than for point and shoot >convenience my F280 is a major disappointment considering the excellence of >the camera for which it is designed. > >jh > I would think that it would be more accurate to say that the F280 was designed for the OM77AF for a basically point and shoot operation. It will automatically switch between regular automatic flash and FP mode depending on the shutter speed of that camera. The reason for the big red window on the front is an infra red light source to supplement the focus system on the OM77. The ability to use it was added to the OM4T almost as an afterthought. But perhaps a more pro model was in the planning stage that would use the same foot, and never got into production. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5467 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 18:59:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 18:59:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 10:59:36 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com (imo-d04.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.36]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27167 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:59:34 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.18d.12bf88f3 (15887) for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:55:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from aol.com (mow-m04.webmail.aol.com [64.12.184.132]) by air-id08.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILINID82-1212135506; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:55:06 -0500 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:54:54 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <600605C1.656F4317.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/12/2002 1:19:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, jlind@spitfire.net writes: > , there was one quick shot > of the men who raised the second flag standing around the > base of the pole after it was raised. This is my understanding as well. What I have read is that after the film was processed,and before the photographer saw the images, he was asked "Was the photo posed?" The person asking the question was referring to the photo we are so familiar with, but the photographer thought he was referring to the posed shot, which he thought was the "money" shot. The photographer answered, "Yes, it was" And presumably that's why word was spread that the famous photo was posed. Paul Schings < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5991 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 19:21:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 19:21:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 11:21:22 2002 -0800 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27196 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:21:19 -0800 Received: from pool0351.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.135.96] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MYtC-0000W7-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:20:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <323910-220021241224038566@M2W087.mail2web.com> References: <323910-220021241224038566@M2W087.mail2web.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:13:31 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OT] L*I*A - Was [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >This is my last Leica word in this thread (unless poked with a sharp stick). > >Yes, the Noctilux blocks a lot of the VF, I'd estimate about 30%. It's the >price you pay..... > >I know many of M7 users who actually USE their cameras....A LOT. It's >fabulous tool for the dedicated M rangefinder shooter to be freed from >constant recalculation of exposure in changing lighting conditions. Yea, >it's the same basic technology that was used in the OM-2 back in 1978. So >Leica's 24 years behind, what else is new? > >I have an M3 too, which is a great tool, but it's not an M7, nor is an M7 >an M3. > >I'm ashamed that the Leica community has become the pervue of the radical, >stuck-up, cultish, old-snobby-men, clubby people that now poke their head >out. And it's a shame that Leica has decided that it has to survive by >prostituting themselves, creating whatever special edition of their >products someone is willing to pay for. OTOH, they still make a superior >product that is superbly designed for a small number of photographic tasks. >And they still make some of the best lenses in the world. And the >dedicated photographers who use M cameras still find them very effective >tools and unlike anything else. > >So I decided to invest in the Leica M system and it works well for me. I >also decided in 1974 to invest in the fledgling Olympus OM-1 and it's >innovative OM-System. Both systems serve me well for different purposes. > >Skip Well said, Skip. As wonderful as my OM4T is to use with its spot meter and aperture preferred automatic and its quiet refinement and size compared to other SLRs, there was no more solid, refined, instinctive, easy to use camera than my old M3 with clip on MR meter, if you did not mind being limited to a focal length that fit on it. The M7 just makes it more so. Parenthetically, the Visoflex was certainly not up to the rest of the camera. More like a piece of college lab equipment than something you would want to use in the field. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6006 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 19:21:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 19:21:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 11:21:25 2002 -0800 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27200 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:21:23 -0800 Received: from pool0351.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.135.96] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MYtE-0000W7-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:20:56 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <129401c2a1e2$5c05ccc0$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> References: <129401c2a1e2$5c05ccc0$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:20:49 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] MF for travel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Obviously, only the photographer can decide whether the improved >image quality of MF outweighs all the obvious disadvantages of a >larger format. (Don't forget that National Geographic's photographic >reputation was built on a base of 35mm Kodachrome.) > >Consider this... You don't go on vacation to do "serious" >photography. If taking great pictures _is_ the whole point of your >travel, then MF makes sense. If not, stick with 35mm. > >If there were a pocket-sized 645 RF camera, I'd recommend buying one >and using it for shots that justify or require the larger negative. >But I don't know of one. Of course National Geo is a small format magazine. It would have been wonderful to see what Maitani could have done with miniaturizing a 645. Of course to be small it would have to be slower and you would need to carry that tripod. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6730 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 19:42:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 19:42:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 11:42:47 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA27211 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:42:45 -0800 Received: (cpmta 474 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 11:41:41 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 11:41:41 -0800 X-Sent: 12 Dec 2002 19:41:41 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:41:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] Rare but pricey....600/6.5 Message-ID: <3DF8A023.17992.51238C@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1945183478 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231- 6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7405 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 20:24:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 20:24:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 12:24:58 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA27274 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:24:56 -0800 Received: (cpmta 40 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 12:23:47 -0800 Received: from 216.146.80.97 (HELO rgg) by smtp.gnrarch.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 12:23:47 -0800 X-Sent: 12 Dec 2002 20:23:47 GMT From: "Robert Gries" To: Subject: [OM] Christmas is coming... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:20:47 -0600 Organization: Grund & Riesterer Architects, Inc. Message-ID: <001301c2a21b$f53827b0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Does anyone want to buy me the 8/2.8 on KEH right now? I promise I've been a good boy this year! ;) Its interesting that there is also one on the 'bay... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7909 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 20:49:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 20:49:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 12:49:01 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA27282 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:48:58 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021212204512.CUFI6027.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:45:12 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021212134256.00a9ef30@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:45:11 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Christmas is coming... In-Reply-To: <001301c2a21b$f53827b0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 02:20 PM 12/12/2002 -0600, you wrote: >Does anyone want to buy me the 8/2.8 on KEH right now? I promise I've >been a good boy this year! ;) > >Its interesting that there is also one on the 'bay... What's really interesting is that the KEH one is listed as "Excellent Plus" for $1,219.00 U.S. while the one on ePay has a "Buy it Now" of **$1,800.00** for a supposedly "Like New" specimen. Considering the grading inflation that occurs on the 'Bay, and the relatively conservative grading which KEH is famous for, the KEH one is probably a much better deal... Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8223 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 20:54:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 20:54:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 12:54:08 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA27305 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:54:05 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:58:45 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:53:40 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Christmas is coming... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:57:04 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Dec 2002 20:58:45.0281 (UTC) FILETIME=[427B9110:01C2A221] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'd be quite happy with that 600 that tOM pointed out on Deutsche Eye Buy. Not as pricey as the thousand. Looks like it's in great condition. I've been nice, really I have.... -----Original Message----- From: Garth Wood < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8751 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:19:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:19:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:19:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27327 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:19:12 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7000I5SZ1VVO@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:15:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:18:04 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: [OM] 4/3 stuff...anyone here speak French? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00e501c2a223$f58cddc0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://www.photim.com/Infos/UneInfo.asp?N=732 Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9040 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:23:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:23:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:23:00 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27343 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:22:57 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18ManI-0007Z2-00 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:22:56 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Christmas is coming... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:22:07 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <001301c2a21b$f53827b0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sure Bob, I want to. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Robert Gries Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 1:21 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Christmas is coming... Does anyone want to buy me the 8/2.8 on KEH right now? I promise I've been a good boy this year! ;) Its interesting that there is also one on the 'bay... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9409 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:30:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:30:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:30:38 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27367 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:30:36 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Maug-0007k0-00 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:30:34 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] 4/3 stuff...anyone here speak French? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:29:45 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <00e501c2a223$f58cddc0$1f00a8c0@mike> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mike, I sent it to my daughter for a translation. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Mike Veglia Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:18 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] 4/3 stuff...anyone here speak French? http://www.photim.com/Infos/UneInfo.asp?N=732 Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9725 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:39:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:39:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:39:05 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix4-2.free.fr (postfix4-2.free.fr [213.228.0.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27372 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:39:03 -0800 Received: from min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (strasbourg-2-a7-62-147-14-79.dial.proxad.net [62.147.14.79]) by postfix4-2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A7AFC079 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:39:00 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 4/3 stuff...anyone here speak French? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:33:03 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <00e501c2a223$f58cddc0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02121222373300.00763@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes I am french living in France ;-)=20 but not sure I can=20 make a good translation.=20 To make it short, this very good photos magazine=20 is questionning himself about the ability of Olympus=20 and others to impose this 4/3 as a standard.=20 Cheers fischerchristian@free.fr Le jeu, 12 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > http://www.photim.com/Infos/UneInfo.asp?N=3D732 >=20 > Mike Veglia > Motor Sport Visions Photography > http://www.motorsportvisions.com >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10009 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:40:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:40:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:40:47 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27380 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:40:45 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:40:21 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:39:27 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] 4/3 stuff...anyone here speak French? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:43:51 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Dec 2002 21:40:21.0979 (UTC) FILETIME=[12A172B0:01C2A227] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Try using this translator. Worked for me... http://world.altavista.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Mike Veglia [mailto:msvphoto@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 1:18 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] 4/3 stuff...anyone here speak French? http://www.photim.com/Infos/UneInfo.asp?N=732 Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10268 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:43:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:43:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:43:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27387 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:43:06 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.213]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H7112Q01.1LH for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:59:14 +0800 Message-ID: <001101c2a226$ea150be0$d55b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:39:12 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How low a power must the small flash be to avoid messing up the exposure? Snip: I most often put a tiny manual flash on the camera, with the larger real flashes distributed around the subject to taste. The pipsqueak flash on the camera triggers the real flashes when the picture is taken. The lack of wires is a real help, and flash triggers are cheaper than radio triggers. titoy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Gwinn" To: Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 10:32 PM Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10685 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:56:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:56:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 13:56:56 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27399 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:56:54 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021212214410.PUEA214174.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:44:10 -0500 Message-ID: <02c001c2a225$64ba0f00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <269620-220021241215939202@M2W074.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:28:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:44:09 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, 12 December, 2002 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again The hood in question was an ULTRA, ULTRA rare 21mm Nikon RF hood, of which there are probably less than 50 known, maybe less. Most users didn't buy the hood, and those that did typically.....horrors of horrors.....used it and it got dinged up. The one that sold was in very nice condition and a couple of rabid, wealthy Japanese collectors both decided that they had to have it, so the auction fever set in. Nikon RF gear has become ridiculously collectable over the past 5-10 years, especially in Japan. This isn't unheard-of behavior in the auction market, when unique or hard-to-locate items appear and two or more committed buyers are in the fray. Just out of curiosity does anyone have the least idea of the present market value of an original Leitz rectangular metal hood in good to excellent condition for the Summarit 50mm / f1.5 lens? jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12733 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 01:07:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 01:07:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 17:07:09 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27549 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:07:06 -0800 Received: from user211.net001.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([205.245.5.211] helo=oemcomputer) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MeHp-00057j-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:06:41 -0800 Message-ID: <002b01c2a244$0a6719c0$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <001b01c2a137$47e33120$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> <000d01c2a139$d6e90b40$010000c0@oemcomputer> Subject: Re: [OM] OT Paper for B&W Contact Proofs Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:07:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Chris Barker" >Normal paper works fine for me. You merely have to >set an average >exposure and if it is wrong, try a new one. >Chris Thanks Chris, Jodi, John Ockman, Bill P. and Garry. You confirmed some suspicions and allayed some fears. I think I'm gonna get some trays and give it a try. I noticed that the Ilford website has some great and straightforward tips for making prints in the privacy of your own kitchen ;-). Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13465 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:08:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:08:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:08:40 2002 -0800 Received: from pop017.verizon.net (pop017pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27607 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:08:37 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.118.29]) by pop017.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021213020421.DJWL1532.pop017.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:04:21 -0600 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:03:56 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <3DF82CE2.2000004@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, you're killin' me! X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop017.verizon.net from [151.198.118.29] at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:04:21 -0600 Message-Id: <20021213020421.DJWL1532.pop017.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <3DF82CE2.2000004@achtung.com>, on 12/12/02 at 02:29 PM, Albert said: >I've done nothing... I still have my OM and I still love it. Just >wondering if the OM needs a big brother... Rent a MF kit for a holiday. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13797 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:19:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:19:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:19:55 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.bayou.com (smtp.bayou.com [209.209.192.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27611 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:19:52 -0800 Received: from pop.bayou.com (mail.bayou.com [206.28.99.20]) by smtp.bayou.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gBD2I4eL044648 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:18:04 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from wliles@bayou.com) Received: from cliles (max5-p102.bayou.com [209.209.195.102]) by pop.bayou.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with SMTP id gBD2Hvee059828 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:17:58 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from wliles@bayou.com) Message-ID: <3DF9455E.3992@bayou.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:26:38 -0600 From: "W. J. Liles" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica, Iwo Jima Flag References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021212125045.05666570@mail.spitfire.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.27 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John A. Lind wrote: > Not true. You misinterpreted what I wrote and I don't believe you have an > understanding of military combat operations. The first flag was raised on > orders from a ground commmander on the island. The fighting was quite > intense and the U.S. invasion force had by no means gained the upper hand > yet. Indeed, it was very early on in the battle for the island. Its sole > purpose was to inspire the U.S. ground forces and demoralize the Japanese > defenders. > Very well said John. Thank you Jerry Liles Maj MC USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14114 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:25:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:25:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:25:44 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27619 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:25:41 -0800 Received: from M2W035.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.35]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:25:18 -0500 Message-ID: <168270-220021251322518883@M2W035.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Great OM4T Champagne $295 BIN Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:25:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 02:25:19.0060 (UTC) FILETIME=[E148F940:01C2A24E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi=2Eebay=2Ecom/ws/eBayISAPI=2Edll?ViewItem&item=3D1945326809 $295 BIN -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14389 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:29:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:29:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:29:03 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27623 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:29:00 -0800 Received: from M2W042.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.42]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:28:37 -0500 Message-ID: <191690-220021251322837668@M2W042.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: 13874@rogers.com Cc: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:28:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 02:28:37.0676 (UTC) FILETIME=[57AB5EC0:01C2A24F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John,=20 Do you mean the big, barn-door hood with the four, fold-out sides? If it'= s the all-black, smooth-finished version, you can't give them away for $30-40=2E If it's the wrinkled-black version, maybe $60-70? The chrome a= nd black version is over $100=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: UWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRE Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:28:20 -0400 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again ----- Original Message ----- Wrom: SKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVF To: Sent: Thursday, 12 December, 2002 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again The hood in question was an ULTRA, ULTRA rare 21mm Nikon RF hood, of which= there are probably less than 50 known, maybe less=2E Most users didn't bu= y the hood, and those that did typically=2E=2E=2E=2E=2Ehorrors of horrors=2E= =2E=2E=2E=2Eused it and it got dinged up=2E The one that sold was in very nice condition and a couple of rabid, wealth= y Japanese collectors both decided that they had to have it, so the auction fever set in=2E Nikon RF gear has become ridiculously collectable over th= e past 5-10 years, especially in Japan=2E This isn't unheard-of behavior in the auction market, when unique or hard-to-locate items appear and two or more committed buyers are in the fray=2E Just out of curiosity does anyone have the least idea of the present marke= t value of an original Leitz rectangular metal hood in good to excellent condition for the Summarit 50mm / f1=2E5 lens? jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14640 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:29:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:29:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:29:22 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.spitfire.net ([207.227.203.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27627 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:29:07 -0800 Received: from netusa1.spitfire.net [65.128.116.61] by apollo.spitfire.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id A4CD967A014A; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:24:13 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021212211318.00c0a1b0@mail.spitfire.net> X-Sender: jlind@mail.spitfire.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:28:52 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "John A. Lind" Subject: RE: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021211215707.02db5580@mail.spitfire.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 01:34 12/12/02, you wrote: >John, Now add in your time at $80 per hour to get your "normal people" cost >impact. That's the part that hurts. Especially if the kid doing the work is >getting minimum wage. /jim Jim, Didn't want to make fun of Brian's predicament. I was actually smiling at the thought of carrying out the first steps in a major system upgrade this weekend. The very best laid plans are only good until the first shot is fired. All the planning does in reality is assemble the necessary resources. It never proceeds as originally planned and a there's always a few surprises. I'm trying **not** to think about the market value of my time in doing this. It's sweat equity; at least that's what I keep repeating to myself. Someday I might actully believe it. In the end though I know exactly what I did. There are too many who claim to know how to do these things when their knowledge is somewhat superficial. If they encounter a glitch, such as the one I did when upgrading RAM a while back, they're totally lost. Wasn't a bad motherboard or RAM, just incompatible. The reasons were subtle and buried in motherboard documentation. The First Surprise: The first step was replacing the drive in my system which I planned to do this evening. The one being replaced will be shelved for the other half's system upgrade. Before tearing the system apart I checked on a few things (learned the hard way to do these things). Ooops! The bios on my motherboard doesn't support drives that large. OK, off to the motherboard manufacturer's web site. Yep, there's a new bios that supports huge drives (among a few other things). New first step. Flash the bios on my motherboard. Not something I recommend doing very frequently. Risk is low but consequence can be catastrophic for the motherboard. If it doesn't flash properly, the machine will not boot . . . period. Similar to Houston wondering if the Apollo 13 crew fired the rockets correctly while around the dark side of the moon . . . and having to wait until they appeared on the other side to find out . . . only the consequences aren't nearly so severe. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15050 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:39:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:39:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:39:34 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27650 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:39:32 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Mfje-0005tk-00 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 19:39:31 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 19:38:39 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021212211318.00c0a1b0@mail.spitfire.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Now you're getting close to home. I have to upgrade the bios before I can load XP. I can do a lot of things but am not comfortable working in there. I agree with you that it's nice to know what has been done to your equipment. You are fortunate to be able to do much of your own work as those who can't are lost when something goes wrong. As for me, I know I'm lost some of the time. The rest of the time I'm probably lost but just don't realize it. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John A. Lind Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 7:29 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] ( OM ) Re: What's your standard setup? At 01:34 12/12/02, you wrote: >John, Now add in your time at $80 per hour to get your "normal people" cost >impact. That's the part that hurts. Especially if the kid doing the work is >getting minimum wage. /jim Jim, Didn't want to make fun of Brian's predicament. I was actually smiling at the thought of carrying out the first steps in a major system upgrade this weekend. The very best laid plans are only good until the first shot is fired. All the planning does in reality is assemble the necessary resources. It never proceeds as originally planned and a there's always a few surprises. I'm trying **not** to think about the market value of my time in doing this. It's sweat equity; at least that's what I keep repeating to myself. Someday I might actully believe it. In the end though I know exactly what I did. There are too many who claim to know how to do these things when their knowledge is somewhat superficial. If they encounter a glitch, such as the one I did when upgrading RAM a while back, they're totally lost. Wasn't a bad motherboard or RAM, just incompatible. The reasons were subtle and buried in motherboard documentation. The First Surprise: The first step was replacing the drive in my system which I planned to do this evening. The one being replaced will be shelved for the other half's system upgrade. Before tearing the system apart I checked on a few things (learned the hard way to do these things). Ooops! The bios on my motherboard doesn't support drives that large. OK, off to the motherboard manufacturer's web site. Yep, there's a new bios that supports huge drives (among a few other things). New first step. Flash the bios on my motherboard. Not something I recommend doing very frequently. Risk is low but consequence can be catastrophic for the motherboard. If it doesn't flash properly, the machine will not boot . . . period. Similar to Houston wondering if the Apollo 13 crew fired the rockets correctly while around the dark side of the moon . . . and having to wait until they appeared on the other side to find out . . . only the consequences aren't nearly so severe. -- John < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15427 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:50:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:50:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:50:04 2002 -0800 Received: from web20207.mail.yahoo.com (web20207.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.226.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA27669 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:50:00 -0800 Message-ID: <20021213024946.41320.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [129.44.116.12] by web20207.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:49:46 PST Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:49:46 -0800 (PST) From: marcus Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <5FA0C5BC-0D81-11D7-B387-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I second the OM-1 suggestion. I use an OM-2S with an OM-1 as a backup (except in New York winter when the OM-1 is more reliable, so it becomes primary). I went from an OM-4 to the -2S. I found the constant spot of the -2S to be much easier and more intuitive to use than the momentary spot readings on the OM-4. I do find the "averaging" meter of the OM-1 annoying after getting used to spot readings, however. -Marcus __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15762 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:59:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 02:59:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 18:59:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27673 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:59:48 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.67]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H71FWN01.XM8 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:19:35 +0800 Message-ID: <004b01c2a253$b296ae80$435b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <168270-220021251322518883@M2W035.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Great OM4T Champagne $295 BIN Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:59:47 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Skip: Look at me, after having told you a month ago that I was selling off some of our beloved OM's, your enabling has led me down the path of an OM4T ! Now gotta sell my mint OM 2s.....anyone there in need of one? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 10:25 AM Subject: [OM] Great OM4T Champagne $295 BIN http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1945326809 $295 BIN -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16651 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 04:17:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 04:17:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 20:17:05 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27731 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:16:54 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:19:40 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF95E97.5050000@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:14:15 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021212125045.05666570@mail.spitfire.net> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021212125045.05666570@mail.spitfire.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't know, I just looked at the Voigtlander Bessa's and they are cheap and take M-mount Leica lenses. Me-thinks that this might be the way to get into Leica's. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17088 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 04:37:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 04:37:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 20:37:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mx2.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27744 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:37:21 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx2.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H71006OLJ514W@mx2.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:29:25 -0400 (AST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:29:25 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: [OM] China suggestions To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the itinerary is fixed. Here's the short version of what I'll be covering: Fly in to Beijing WuDang mountain in HuBei province (This is the mountain with the monastery in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon) GuiZhou province where for cultural festival YunNan province for the ancient city of Lijiang GuangXi province for the Li-River Mt Huangshan in AnHui province Depart from Shanghai There's a few other areas being covered but that's the quick version. Travelling with a group so my photography is going to be somewhat more limited. Fortunately though, a number of the members of the group are serious photographers (a couple members of the local photography guild) and the leader of the group does some very beautiful work (Leica user). Fortunately as well, the transportation is all being dealt with so I won't be handling my luggage much in China and will be free to just travel with just my daypack. I'm looking at taking: 2 bodies (either 2 OM-1Ns or a 1n and a 2s) 21/3.5 24/2.8 28/2.8 35/2 50/1.8 (need to get mine replaced before then, sticky aperture) 85/2 or Tamron 90/2.5 macro 135/3.5 May or may not take the tripod, Manfrotto 055c with 168 head. If I go for the macro lens then I probably will so I can setup better macro shots. However, I'm doubting how much macro work I'm likely to do and working with a pod when travelling with a group could be a pain. I've had pretty good success with hand holding a 1n and 50/1.8 down to 1/30 or 1/15, should be able to get similar results with the wides. Film: Mostly Provia 100 probably throw in some 400 and maybe some Velvia, especially if I take the pod. I'd like to try some of the Kodak E100VS or E100SW before I go and that might change my mind. May also throw in some B&W. Anyways, just looking for opinions. That kit is fairly extensive but is still quite workable out of a backpack (did that in Europe last summer while travelling on my own). The pod may be too much of a hassle, but it would be nice to have. Idealy, I'd have the money to get a nice carbon fibre pod but I don't foresee that happening. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17426 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 04:49:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 04:49:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 20:49:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27753 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:49:04 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-179.datasync.com [209.205.138.187]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBD4n1G16560 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:49:02 -0600 Message-ID: <001501c2a263$9674e360$d28bcdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021211235128.02590078@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:52:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 1:59 AM Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces ... > I feel like playing the game "Twenty Questions :-)" and going around in > circles. OK, may be I am asking the Qs the wrong way, lets start again... > first of all, this is not about fill flash, but situations that plain need > flash... > > Lets say my goal is to be able to get reasonable looking flash pictures, > w/o the frontal burnout, sounds like > A) I should back off a bit and use a longer lens (e.g. 85mm), or > B) If the background is deep, dial in a -0.5 to -1.5 compensation. This > tells the camera not to overexpose the front. > > OK So far? Now in the quest of Flash Heaven, AND I already own a flash > meter, AND I don't mind getting another flash, say, the Metz 54-MZ3. I can > then: > A) Put a reflector/diffuser and bounce away, or > B) Use the manual GN and calculate distance, aperture and shutter, or > C) Use the Flash meter to do what? How do I meter what the Metz-54 output? > Is there a trigger outlet on the Metz? Or do I just press the Test Button? > > I feel like a blind man trying to understand what an elephant looks like > from different sighted persons describing different parts of the elephant :-O Are you're faces truly overexposed? That's hard to do with print film. (If you are using slide film, switch. They make print films designed just for this.) Or are the faces just overexposed relative to the rest of the frame? That's not hard to do. I have no trouble at all getting well exposed TTL flash with just an on-camera T32. Since the camera controls the flash the F280 should be no different unless it has a poor distribution. The procedure is 1. 400 or 800 ISO print film. 400 for brighter venues. 2. Set everything auto. Wide diffuser on flash for evenness. 3. Find a representative scene with no lights in it. Set an aperture that gives a shutter speed of about 1/30. Since the actual shutter speed will be 1/60, areas not dominated by flash will not black out. You should be able to get about f4-5.6. Then leave the aperture ring there. 4. Shoot away. Or buy a 3Ti, the only OM properly designed for indoor flash. Modern Metz units are handy because they have a large number of closely spaced auto and manual settings, and the auto ones don't shift with ISO. T20's and T32's auto and manual settings are much too strong, too few, and too closely spaced for balancing with indoor ambient light at non- ridiculous shutter speeds. Paul < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17772 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:00:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:00:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 21:00:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27761 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:59:59 -0800 Received: from asv10.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (asv10.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.38]) by mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H71007EUKENR7@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:56:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.46]) by asv10.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBD4ujw24312 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:56:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from optonline.net (ool-18bec8cc.dyn.optonline.net [24.190.200.204]) by mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H71004O1KEKSK@mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:56:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:59:13 -0500 From: Larry Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3DF96920.E201C3DA@optonline.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en References: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Are you at least renting a car for the easier ability to get farther on your own? Larry Andrew Dacey wrote: > Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be > travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the > itinerary is fixed. Here's the short version of what I'll be covering: > > Fly in to Beijing > WuDang mountain in HuBei province (This is the mountain with the monastery > in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon) > GuiZhou province where for cultural festival > YunNan province for the ancient city of Lijiang > GuangXi province for the Li-River > Mt Huangshan in AnHui province > Depart from Shanghai > > There's a few other areas being covered but that's the quick version. > > Travelling with a group so my photography is going to be somewhat more > limited. Fortunately though, a number of the members of the group are > serious photographers (a couple members of the local photography guild) and > the leader of the group does some very beautiful work (Leica user). > > Fortunately as well, the transportation is all being dealt with so I won't > be handling my luggage much in China and will be free to just travel with > just my daypack. > > I'm looking at taking: > > 2 bodies (either 2 OM-1Ns or a 1n and a 2s) > 21/3.5 > 24/2.8 > 28/2.8 > 35/2 > 50/1.8 (need to get mine replaced before then, sticky aperture) > 85/2 or Tamron 90/2.5 macro > 135/3.5 > > May or may not take the tripod, Manfrotto 055c with 168 head. If I go for > the macro lens then I probably will so I can setup better macro shots. > However, I'm doubting how much macro work I'm likely to do and working with > a pod when travelling with a group could be a pain. I've had pretty good > success with hand holding a 1n and 50/1.8 down to 1/30 or 1/15, should be > able to get similar results with the wides. > > Film: > > Mostly Provia 100 probably throw in some 400 and maybe some Velvia, > especially if I take the pod. I'd like to try some of the Kodak E100VS or > E100SW before I go and that might change my mind. May also throw in some > B&W. > > Anyways, just looking for opinions. That kit is fairly extensive but is > still quite workable out of a backpack (did that in Europe last summer while > travelling on my own). The pod may be too much of a hassle, but it would be > nice to have. Idealy, I'd have the money to get a nice carbon fibre pod but > I don't foresee that happening. > > -- > Andrew "Frugal" Dacey > frugal@tildefrugal.net > http://www.tildefrugal.net/ > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18584 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:15:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:15:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 21:15:08 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f84.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.84]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27791 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:15:06 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:06:26 -0800 Received: from 66.141.17.40 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:06:25 GMT X-Originating-IP: [66.141.17.40] From: "Lee Penzias" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Matt board Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:06:25 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 05:06:26.0115 (UTC) FILETIME=[634C8130:01C2A265] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I like "slightly off-white" and plain dark wood frames, but pure white looks good too IMO. Colored matts might suit some individual pieces better according to taste - perhaps pastel shades. But I think white, gray or black emphasize the picture itelf more. Cheers, Lee ----Original Message Follows---- From: NSURIT@aol.com Subject: [OM] Matt board I've recently had a number of color prints made from my Olympus OM material and now want to frame them. I'll order my framing stuff from American Frames. Does anyone have any suggestions about color of matt and frames to best show off your color prints. I've use a pewter colored frame with a white matt, however I'm not convinced that a colored matt might not be better. Ideas? Bill Barber _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18989 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:33:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:33:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 21:33:32 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f194.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27810 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:33:27 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:27:19 -0800 Received: from 66.141.17.40 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:27:18 GMT X-Originating-IP: [66.141.17.40] From: "Lee Penzias" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:27:18 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 05:27:19.0284 (UTC) FILETIME=[4E3EEB40:01C2A268] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca David, I have an OM-1 and an OM-1n - and recently aquired the same combo for my wife. Last time we went out I selected the "camera with no film" from her case to load it. Well; it was actually the "camera with half a film" and opening the back probably scorched a good portion of the exposed film. I was in a hurry of course, and the error was one of not paying attention, rather than getting flustered manipulating the camera itself. >From a general practical standpoint I might favor a duplicate OM-2SP. But it depends on how readily you can keep track of two cameras, which one is which at any given time, with different features requiring difference approaches to individual shots etc. If most of your shooting is done with plenty of time, set up etc, it might not matter. Cheers, Lee ----Original Message Follows---- From: "David Sharp" Subject: [OM] Which OM body? Hello, I'm new to the list. I came across this list on the internet, looking got info on things Olympus - I've owned an OM2-SP for several years now. Its a great camera. I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can run two different speed films at once. I'm doing an increasing amount of photography of ancient monuments / archaeological sites / archaeological artefacts (I'm an archaeology student), and find myself one minute in broad daylight and the next minute in the corner of a dark trench..and having to take accurate exposures quickly)... [etc] many thanks for any replies -- David Sharp, London, UK. david.sharp@manetho.net Tel: (+44) (0)208 291 0978 Mobile: 07811 407 635 _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19323 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:40:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:40:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 21:40:22 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f106.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27814 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:40:18 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:38:53 -0800 Received: from 66.141.17.40 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:38:52 GMT X-Originating-IP: [66.141.17.40] From: "Lee Penzias" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Picture for comment Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:38:52 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 05:38:53.0030 (UTC) FILETIME=[EBC02860:01C2A269] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I like it - great shot! Cheers, Lee ----Original Message Follows---- From: "om@skipwilliams.com" Subject: [OM] Picture for comment You know, I post so few new pictures that I had to talk about this one. It was done at the local Memorial Day Parade as a car came by. I've really enjoyed it's pleasant qualities. Comments? Positive or negative are appreciated. http://www.skipwilliams.com/paw2002/22-02-memorial-parade-westf.jpg Technical details: Delta 400, OM4Ti & MD2, 35-80/2.8. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19669 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:51:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:51:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 21:51:05 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27827 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:51:03 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.64]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021213055011.POH11653.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:50:11 -0500 Message-ID: <00dd01c2a26b$6e1d2780$402e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172607.0575f048@192.168.100.11> <3DF6A7A5.4050203@speakeasy.net> Subject: [OM] List archive search: broken? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:49:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Is it me or is the Oly List archive search broken? I tried to search for info but it only appears to work on a single year. If you select a different year, it claims that no one mentioned the phrase "Series1 macro" in that year, for example. Is there a way to download or purchase entire years so I can research that way? Thanks. Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20098 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 06:12:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 06:12:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 22:12:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA27848 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:12:07 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-14.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1039759859!173 Received: (qmail 30186 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 06:11:00 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-14.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 06:11:00 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBD5jSu32152 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:45:29 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF97A0F.37FBADDA@accura.com.hk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:11:27 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Andrew, What a great trip... I have dream for a long time! Everything look ok, some 400 film is really needed, you will not see sunshine everywhere in April. You seems missing a long lens, a 85-250, 50-250, 200/4, 300/4.5 or at least a good 2x is needed but I don't know how the 135/3.5 perform with a 2x. A long lens is good for distance landscape and shooting some people working in the rice field or washing clothes in the opposite side of the river...etc. C.H.Ling Andrew Dacey wrote: > > Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be > travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the > itinerary is fixed. Here's the short version of what I'll be covering: > > Fly in to Beijing > WuDang mountain in HuBei province (This is the mountain with the monastery > in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon) > GuiZhou province where for cultural festival > YunNan province for the ancient city of Lijiang > GuangXi province for the Li-River > Mt Huangshan in AnHui province > Depart from Shanghai > > There's a few other areas being covered but that's the quick version. > > Travelling with a group so my photography is going to be somewhat more > limited. Fortunately though, a number of the members of the group are > serious photographers (a couple members of the local photography guild) and > the leader of the group does some very beautiful work (Leica user). > > Fortunately as well, the transportation is all being dealt with so I won't > be handling my luggage much in China and will be free to just travel with > just my daypack. > > I'm looking at taking: > > 2 bodies (either 2 OM-1Ns or a 1n and a 2s) > 21/3.5 > 24/2.8 > 28/2.8 > 35/2 > 50/1.8 (need to get mine replaced before then, sticky aperture) > 85/2 or Tamron 90/2.5 macro > 135/3.5 > > May or may not take the tripod, Manfrotto 055c with 168 head. If I go for > the macro lens then I probably will so I can setup better macro shots. > However, I'm doubting how much macro work I'm likely to do and working with > a pod when travelling with a group could be a pain. I've had pretty good > success with hand holding a 1n and 50/1.8 down to 1/30 or 1/15, should be > able to get similar results with the wides. > > Film: > > Mostly Provia 100 probably throw in some 400 and maybe some Velvia, > especially if I take the pod. I'd like to try some of the Kodak E100VS or > E100SW before I go and that might change my mind. May also throw in some > B&W. > > Anyways, just looking for opinions. That kit is fairly extensive but is > still quite workable out of a backpack (did that in Europe last summer while > travelling on my own). The pod may be too much of a hassle, but it would be > nice to have. Idealy, I'd have the money to get a nice carbon fibre pod but > I don't foresee that happening. > > -- ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20626 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 06:50:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 06:50:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 22:50:03 2002 -0800 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27866 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:50:00 -0800 Received: from [207.214.214.29] by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H71009XDPKIFT@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:48:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:49:39 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Fake *Bay Scam In-reply-to: <1a9.d7f8256.2b2977bd@aol.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I too have received this email, and others telling me to "... log in and verify your password and user id... " purporting to be from eBay or PayPal, etc. IMO these are *always* going to be scams. The real site won't ask you for your password, they already have it. And some of these emails claim that my account is in danger of being deleted due to non-use... there's *no* possibility of that! -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... on 12/11/02 9:25 PM, Doggre@aol.com at Doggre@aol.com wrote: > Courtesy of Fool.com: "A fake website imitating *Bay has been shut down. > Scam artists apparently sent emails asking victims to log on to > *bayupdates.com and re-enter credit card information. No word on how much > info the credit thieves collected, if any." > > I received one of those emails... beware. > > Rich < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20931 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 06:56:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 06:56:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 22:56:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27870 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:56:14 -0800 Received: from [207.214.214.29] by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7100982PUWFT@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:54:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:55:52 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces In-reply-to: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211235128.02590078@192.168.100.11> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/11/02 11:59 PM, Richard F. Man at richard@imagecraft.com wrote: > I feel like playing the game "Twenty Questions :-)" and going around in > circles. OK, may be I am asking the Qs the wrong way, lets start again... > first of all, this is not about fill flash, but situations that plain need > flash... snippo > OK So far? Now in the quest of Flash Heaven, AND I already own a flash > meter, AND I don't mind getting another flash, say, the Metz 54-MZ3. I can > then: > A) Put a reflector/diffuser and bounce away, or > B) Use the manual GN and calculate distance, aperture and shutter, or > C) Use the Flash meter to do what? How do I meter what the Metz-54 output? > Is there a trigger outlet on the Metz? Or do I just press the Test Button? > > I feel like a blind man trying to understand what an elephant looks like > from different sighted persons describing different parts of the elephant :-O Correct answer could be... D) Buy Olympus 35-SP and use guide-number focus-linked 'flashmatic' feature. This is similar to the manual flash + guide number option, but works simply by focusing... yet another way the 'old outdated' cameras can yield better results than the new AF-AE wunderbricks and P&S (almost typed POS ) zooms... BTW, I've gotten the 'overexposed main subject with perfectly exposed background' too many times... -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21353 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 07:15:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 07:15:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 23:15:07 2002 -0800 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA27885 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:15:05 -0800 Received: from [207.214.214.29] by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H71009T2QQBFI@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:13:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:14:43 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again In-reply-to: <191690-220021251322837668@M2W042.mail2web.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/12/02 6:28 PM, om@skipwilliams.com at om@skipwilliams.com wrote: > John, > > Do you mean the big, barn-door hood with the four, fold-out sides? If it's > the all-black, smooth-finished version, you can't give them away for > $30-40. If it's the wrinkled-black version, maybe $60-70? The chrome and > black version is over $100. > > Skip Skip, is it just me or do you know *way* too much about this...? -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... Of course, I went and bought John Foster's new Pen F book on your recommendation, and I love it! Ask me a Pen F question... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21620 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 07:17:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 07:17:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 23:17:13 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA27890 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:17:10 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.64]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021213071618.THI11653.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu>; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:16:18 -0500 Message-ID: <016001c2a277$75a8cd40$402e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: Cc: "Paul D. Farrar" , References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209191713.02825e38@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:15:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For what it's worth, my opinion is you don't need more power if your subject distance is "about 6 to 8 feet." as you stated on 12/10. "Search out your feeeeelings, Luke. You know it to be true." (Obligatory Star Wars quote) You are using f4 on the F280. Check the negs. Is the face in the negative a medium tone or a deep, near-black tone? If the face is nearly black in the negative, you have an exposure difference between the foreground and the background. If you get a bigger flash, you get the same burned-out face and well-exposed background-- but you'll be able to use a smaller aperture. That's not a solution! Adding a diffuser will change the character of the over-exposure on the subject but it won't change the overexposure. (The face will be over-lit with a less harsh light but that's not a solution either.) The problem isn't that you've run out of flash power. It's that the camera-to-subject distance is shorter than the camera-to-background distance. If your flash was pointed straight ahead and your subject was 6 feet away but ALSO 6 feet from the wall behind her, you have discovered your problem! That's a two stop difference between the amount of light on the background and the amount on the subject. Since one of your aims is to keep it simple, I suggest trying these 3 methods, in order of increasing complexity. 1. Have the lab "fix" the prints. This is where you start. If they're printing color negs, they have a "+" button. If the kid behind the counter can't find it, you need another place to have your photos made. Until you have a quality-oriented lab, no amount of German hardware can save you. Since you are a quality-oriented photographer, you need good tools. You already have pro-grade tools in your shooting kit. You also need pro-grade tools (the lab) when the prints are made. If you've been using a 1-hour processor, maybe it's time to find a pro lab. It's worth it. When I took flash pictures at my sister's wedding reception, the subjects were 4-6 feet from me. The background was _dozens_ of feet beyond. Since I took the work to a pro lab, it cost me a bloody fortune but every single flesh tone was perfect and the backgrounds were black as pitch. Machine prints from the supermarket would have botched every frame- guaranteed. 2. Put the subject near the back wall. Maybe in a chair or in front of an interesting piece of furniture. This will make the background exposure much closer to the foreground exposure. 3. For horizontal shots, bounce the F280 off the ceiling. The flash-to-ceiling distance will be added to both the ceiling-to-subject distance AND the ceiling-to-background distance. The difference between the subject exposure and the background exposure will be less. Lama, who really liked Paul Farrar's solution. I'll try that one. He's talking about a lighting ratio there and that's the control-oriented type of working I'm interested in. It may not be the "simple" solution you said you're seeking though. From: "Richard F. Man" > OK, I need advice whether to spend the bucks or not. To recap, the problem > to solve is that w/ the F280, I get too many flash burn pictures - > typically the face is overexposed. The F280 is set to auto and the OM-4T > aperture is usually set to F4. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21884 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 07:19:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 07:19:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 23:19:06 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA27894 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:19:03 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA56825 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:18:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021212230833.025dabd0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:19:36 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces In-Reply-To: <001501c2a263$9674e360$d28bcdd1@datasync.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021211182651.02579e90@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021211235128.02590078@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:52 PM 12/12/2002 -0600, Paul D. Farrar wrote: >...The procedure is >1. 400 or 800 ISO print film. 400 for brighter venues. OK, in fact, I was using the slide film for that particular set of pictures >2. Set everything auto. Wide diffuser on flash for evenness. >3. Find a representative scene with no lights in it. Set an aperture that >gives >a shutter speed of about 1/30. Since the actual shutter speed will be 1/60, >areas not dominated by flash will not black out. You should be able to get >about f4-5.6. Then leave the aperture ring there. Heh, if I get 1/30 w/ f4-5.6, I will probably just shoot w/o flash! But I get your point.... >4. Shoot away. > >Or buy a 3Ti, the only OM properly designed for indoor flash. OK, AFAIK, the only difference is that the 3Ti does not set the shutter to 1/60th right? If so, can't I accomplish the same thing by doing the OM-4 slow sync hack and tape over the frontmost right contact? >Modern Metz units are handy because they have a large number of closely >spaced auto and manual settings, and the auto ones don't shift with ISO. >T20's and T32's auto and manual settings are much too strong, too few, >and too closely spaced for balancing with indoor ambient light at non- >ridiculous shutter speeds. OK, I just bought a Metz 54-Mz tonight, they found a "demo" SCA-321 in the drawer so the guy just threw it in for free ($50 value, but I buy lots of stuff from them anyway...) So what's the best way to achieve flash heaven w/ the OM4(T) and 54-MMZ combo, for 1) indoor flash, <--- just set the thing to TTL and try to bounce? I also bought a little diffuser cap... and 2) outdoor fill flash <-- I think I finally understand this one, set the aperture right below 1/60 and keep firing away :-), possibly w/ the taping over the contact hack? >Paul > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22328 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 07:41:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 07:41:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 23:41:02 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA27904 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:41:00 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.64]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021213074008.UJE11653.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:40:08 -0500 Message-ID: <020401c2a27a$c9a2e180$402e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6C2@EXCHANGE> Subject: Re: [OM] Introduction dates of macro equipment Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:39:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So they could sell them twice? Don't laugh. When Porsche brings out a new model it's always underpowered. With each successive year, guess what? They found a way to put in more power. The guys at Road and Track have been wise to that trick for decades....... Lama From: "Alan Wood" > I would also be interested to know why Olympus produced manual extension > tubes for the OM, when all of the lenses had automatic diaphragms (except > the original 20, 38 and 80 mm bellows macro lenses, which were not likely to > be used with extension tubes). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22717 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 07:57:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 07:57:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 23:57:48 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA27922 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:57:45 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBD7o9N7013275 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:50:09 +0100 (MET) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:50:07 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] List archive search: broken? Message-Id: <20021213085007.439bd2b2.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <00dd01c2a26b$6e1d2780$402e44d8@lhommedieu> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172607.0575f048@192.168.100.11> <3DF6A7A5.4050203@speakeasy.net> <00dd01c2a26b$6e1d2780$402e44d8@lhommedieu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id XAA27922 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The archives are not currently being maintained..... HOWEVER, I am working on a new home for the list, with new software and new archives. All with much improved functionality. Stay tuned for announcement soon (before christmas)... Best, --thomas On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:49:40 -0500 "Jim L'Hommedieu" wrote: > Is it me or is the Oly List archive search broken? I tried to > search for info but it only appears to work on a single year. If > you select a different year, it claims that no one mentioned the > phrase "Series1 macro" in that year, for example. >=20 > Is there a way to download or purchase entire years so I can > research that way? >=20 > Thanks. >=20 > Lama >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22968 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 07:58:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 07:58:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 12 23:58:06 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA27926 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:58:04 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.64]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021213075712.VHF11653.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:57:12 -0500 Message-ID: <02a401c2a27d$2bbe51e0$402e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <002301c2a163$c9cc5140$3d46893e@freelance> Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:56:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_02A1_01C2A253.42638980" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_02A1_01C2A253.42638980 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In addition to the fine advice you'll get I'll add this. If your OM-2SP = has never been to a repairman, it may have a mis-adjusted meter and = gooey foam by now. (When the mirror flips up, it comes to rest on a = piece of foam. When you close the camera back, the door is made = light-tight with foam. As it ages, the foam turns to goo. This is bad = for you camera's cleanliness.) =20 You may want to spend your first $100 to get your OM2-SP body to a = repairperson to have the foam replaced, the meters and shutter speeds = adjusted. (Some call the tuneup process "clean, lube, and adjust" or = "CLA".) Lama ------=_NextPart_000_02A1_01C2A253.42638980 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In addition to the fine advice you'll get I'll add = this. =20 If your OM-2SP has never been to a repairman, it may have a = mis-adjusted=20 meter and gooey foam by now.  (When the mirror flips up, it comes = to rest=20 on a piece of foam.  When you close the camera back, the door is = made=20 light-tight with foam.  As it ages, the foam turns to = goo.  This=20 is bad for you camera's cleanliness.) 
 
You may want to spend your first $100 to get your = OM2-SP body=20 to a repairperson to have the foam replaced, the meters and shutter = speeds=20 adjusted.  (Some call the tuneup process "clean, lube, and = adjust" or=20 "CLA".)
 
Lama
------=_NextPart_000_02A1_01C2A253.42638980-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23297 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 08:06:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 08:06:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 00:06:21 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27932 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:06:19 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.64]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021213080527.VPD11653.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:05:27 -0500 Message-ID: <02be01c2a27e$530af040$402e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:04:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Lee, Before you lift that crank's collar, you rotate it clockwise FIRST. Say it with me: "Rotate first, lift second." Of course, I've never fogged film........ :) Lama From: "Lee Penzias" > I have an OM-1 and an OM-1n - and recently aquired the same combo for my > wife. Last time we went out I selected the "camera with no film" from her > case to load it. Well; it was actually the "camera with half a film" and > opening the back probably scorched a good portion of the exposed film. I was > in a hurry of course, and the error was one of not paying attention, rather > than getting flustered manipulating the camera itself. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23550 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 08:08:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 08:08:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 00:08:04 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27936 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:08:01 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA72169; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:07:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021213000215.02615b88@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:08:33 -0800 To: "Jim L'Hommedieu" , From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Final advice needed - Metz flash or not Cc: "Paul D. Farrar" In-Reply-To: <016001c2a277$75a8cd40$402e44d8@lhommedieu> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021209191713.02825e38@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 02:15 AM 12/13/2002 -0500, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: >For what it's worth, my opinion is you don't need more power if your subject >distance is "about 6 to 8 feet." as you stated on 12/10. "Search out your >feeeeelings, Luke. You know it to be true." (Obligatory Star Wars quote) >You are using f4 on the F280. Yup, I need better techniques! >Check the negs. Is the face in the negative a medium tone or a deep, >near-black tone? near-white, on the slides :-) Actually, to be fair, only a few have the worst problems, and now I understand why - the camera is too close, the subject is too far from the wall, and of course in one case, the subjects are outside in the dark. All recipes for disasters, so to speak. >...Lama, >who really liked Paul Farrar's solution. I'll try that one. He's talking >about a lighting ratio there and that's the control-oriented type of working >I'm interested in. It may not be the "simple" solution you said you're >seeking though. >... I don't mind the "tech" solution, as long as it can be done fast. The typical shooting arrangement is I'd stop a costumer who is on the way to whatever and I have to inconvenient them as short as possible. So for example manual calculation of distance, aperture etc. is best to be avoided. I think I am getting better ideas to try though. One person wrote off list that he uses multiple flashes. All very good ideas. I bet I can tame this beast yet. Thanks to all who answered! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23884 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 08:19:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 08:19:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 00:19:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27940 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:19:37 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.129]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H71UPO03.YMC for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:39:24 +0800 Message-ID: <001901c2a280$5d1b9ec0$815b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <02be01c2a27e$530af040$402e44d8@lhommedieu> Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:19:31 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Rotate first, lift second." Ommmmmmm......( the zuikoholic's meditation....) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 4:04 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? > Lee, > > Before you lift that crank's collar, you rotate it clockwise FIRST. Say it > with me: "Rotate first, lift second." Of course, I've never fogged > film........ :) > > Lama > > From: "Lee Penzias" > > I have an OM-1 and an OM-1n - and recently aquired the same combo for my > > wife. Last time we went out I selected the "camera with no film" from her > > case to load it. Well; it was actually the "camera with half a film" and > > opening the back probably scorched a good portion of the exposed film. I > was > > in a hurry of course, and the error was one of not paying attention, > rather > > than getting flustered manipulating the camera itself. > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24447 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 08:59:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 08:59:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 00:59:36 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27966 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:59:32 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBD8wFnh035662 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:58:15 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:00:33 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 13-12-2002 10:00:34 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think that the best solution to this flash question is not a 35-SP, but an iS-3000 (or an iS-3 if you can not get the is-3000 with super FP). To quote e_SIF: "All (iS) models have a built-in flash, some of them very powerful compared to most SLR's. The flash system that is used is called IVP - Intelligent Variable Power. This is a modern, enhanced variant of the good old flashmatic system that can be found in rangefinder cameras from the seventies, where you have to set the Guide Number (GN) of the flash on the camera, and the camera determines the aperture dependent on shooting distance (automatic GN calculations). The old flashmatic system has the disadvantage that the flash always fires at full power and there is only one aperture available once the shooting distance is determined. The built-in flash of the iS cameras obviously is an electronic flash that can be quenched, meaning the GN can be varied, allowing multiple apertures to be selected for each distance. This makes IVP a strong alternative for TTL flash exposure: the shooting distance is much more reliable than the subjects reflectance. Very dark or very bright backgrounds or subjects can't fool this system. Because both the flash duration (GN) and aperture can be changed, the brightness of the subject can be taken into account. This greatly facilitates Fill-in Flash, a special flash mode that's available on all models in the Full Program Mode (the flash always fires and the shutter speed is fixed at 1/100 sec). In other modes only Auto Flash (the flash only fires when a shutter speed of 1/100 sec. or slower can be achieved using available light) and Auto-S Flash (same as Auto Flash but with red eye reducing pre-flashes) are available." I take almost all my flash pictures withe an iS-3000 now. I often use an extra G40 flash attached for bounce, and the built-in flash with automatically-reduced strength for direct flash. However, even the built-in flash on its own gives great results using IVP. Roger Key, Denmark >Correct answer could be... >D) Buy Olympus 35-SP and use guide-number focus-linked 'flashmatic' feature. >This is similar to the manual flash + guide number option, but works simply >by focusing... yet another way the 'old outdated' cameras can yield better >results than the new AF-AE wunderbricks and P&S (almost typed POS ) >zooms... >BTW, I've gotten the 'overexposed main subject with perfectly exposed >background' too many times... -- >Jim Brokaw < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:14 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24839 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 09:18:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 09:18:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 01:18:49 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27979 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:18:48 -0800 Received: from modem-1867.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.23.75] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Mly0-0005sl-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:18:45 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: [OM] Tokina on bay Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:18:44 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2A288.A2712050" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <70.2785c103.2b28d3c6@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2A288.A2712050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bill just noticed we're bidding on the same item (think I'm winning at th mo'). If you are seriously interested then I'll back off for you. I'm sort of interested but only because it is cheap enough to learn how to use PayPal + to import. I think I put a $31 + a few cents on - I'm PQ26bugsy. There are a couple of golf clubs for sale that I'm as equally interested in that I could get and will probably get more use anyway. Regrads Ian ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2A288.A2712050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi=20 Bill
 
just=20 noticed we're bidding on the same item (think I'm winning at th mo'). If = you are=20 seriously interested then I'll back off for you. I'm sort of interested = but only=20 because it is cheap enough to learn how to use PayPal + to import. = I think=20 I put a $31 + a few cents on - I'm PQ26bugsy.
 
There=20 are a couple of golf clubs for sale that I'm as equally interested in = that I=20 could get and will probably get more use anyway.
 
Regrads
Ian
------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2A288.A2712050-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25825 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 11:01:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 11:01:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 03:01:32 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA28208 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:01:31 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (h0050ba483652.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.30.245.120]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <200212131100170520019bq0e>; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:00:18 +0000 Message-ID: <3DF9BDC1.4000604@attbi.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:00:17 -0500 From: Chuck Norcutt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en, pdf, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus mail list Subject: [OM] [OT] The Iwo Jima flag Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In my wife's aunt's apartment there is another picture of the Iwo Jima flag which was apparently taken some time after the battle was over. It shows her husband, John H. Craven, the Marine chaplain posing with a group of other officers at the base of the flag. He was involved in many WWII and Korean campaigns and ultimately went on to become the Chaplain of the Marine Corps. He was a very interesting guy to talk to but I never thought to ask him about the Iwo Jima shot. You can read about him at the Arlington Cemetary web site below. He's also featured in one of Tom Brokaw's books. http://www.arlingtoncemetery.com/jhcraven.htm Chuck Norcutt Woburn, Massachusetts, USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26105 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 11:05:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 11:05:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 03:05:27 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA28217 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:05:24 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:09:23 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF9BE58.5050206@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:02:48 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Doing your own B&W Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need to do my own B&W development? If you care to list what I need for printing, that would be great too.. I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock. That's all I know. Please tell me more about my darkroom needs. The quality of the development has me really upset... The photos were ok, the development was ok, the printing SUCKED so bad, I'm redoing all of them in photoshop now.. arrg.. Thanks. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26600 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 11:39:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 11:39:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 03:39:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA28237 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:39:37 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MoA8-000GYV-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:39:24 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:40:37 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6D8@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:40:36 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert asked: Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need to do my own B&W development? I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock. That's all I know. Please tell me more about my darkroom needs. For developing a film, you also need: gadget to get the end off the cassette thermometer big measuring cylinder (big enough for the volume your developing tank needs) small measuring cylinder (for accurately measuring the undiluted chemicals) bowl to fill with water at the temperature of the developer, to keep the tank at the right temperature squeegee, to remove excess water after the final rinse somewhere dust-free to hang the developed film while it dries bottles to keep stop and fix - you can use them again Alan Wood < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27210 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 12:11:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 12:11:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 04:11:54 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m06.mx.aol.com (imo-m06.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.161]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28250 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:11:53 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.105.220ff0ac (3932) for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:09:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <105.220ff0ac.2b2b280c@aol.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:09:48 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Tokina on bay To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_105.220ff0ac.2b2b280c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_105.220ff0ac.2b2b280c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ian, I think this is the one that I asked the seller about the condition of the lens and they told me there was no fungus, however there were some "hairs" on one of the interior elements. Sounded a little like fungus to me, so I quit bidding. That is the bad news. The good news is that I've used one of these lenses and they are nice. I gave the one I had to my son-in-law. The other part of the bad news is that if you are as compulsive as I am about having the original lens hood for your lenses, you may get a little crazy as they are not easy to find. Bill Barber --part1_105.220ff0ac.2b2b280c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ian, I think this is the one that I asked the seller about the condition of the lens and they told me there was no fungus, however there were some "hairs" on one of the interior elements.  Sounded a little like fungus to me, so I quit bidding.  That is the bad news.  The good news is that I've used one of these lenses and they are nice. I gave the one I had to my son-in-law.  The other part of the bad news is that if you are as compulsive as I am about having the original lens hood for your lenses, you may get a little crazy as they are not easy to find.  Bill Barber --part1_105.220ff0ac.2b2b280c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27700 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 12:27:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 12:27:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 04:26:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28255 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:26:58 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:23:10 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBDCMfk25063 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:22:41 GMT Message-ID: <3DF9D111.7070301@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:22:41 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Welcome to the list from a fellow London OM user! I'm probably not much help for this question because the only OM I've ever used is the OM-1(n). Owned three of them, now have two, and for the type of photography I do (mainly landscape and cityscape) I don't see anything in the other OMs that makes me desperately want them. So I say, get an OM-1 or two. Cheers, Roger > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: "David Sharp" > Subject: [OM] Which OM body? > > Hello, > > I'm new to the list. I came across this list on the internet, looking > got info on things Olympus - I've owned an OM2-SP for several years now. > Its a great camera. > > I'd like some advice... I want to buy a second OM body, so I can run two > different speed films at once. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27972 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 12:30:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 12:30:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 04:30:12 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28259 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:30:11 -0800 Received: from modem-617.alligator.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.2.105] helo=skelly) by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18MoxD-00010C-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:30:07 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Tokina on bay Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:30:16 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0002_01C2A2A3.6439E540" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <105.220ff0ac.2b2b280c@aol.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C2A2A3.6439E540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is only a first dip in the water for me before I start seriously considering import so no big deal.... should I win I'll open the package outside I think, could well be the second and last Tokina that I bin. It'll be on a credit card the wife doesn't know about :-) I always use a hood but I'm not too concerned about it being original item, my gear gets abused too much to worry about cosmetics. Thanks for the info, in future I'll check to make sure we're not bidding against each other and maybe ask a few more questions before I bid......... regards Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: 13 December 2002 12:10 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Tokina on bay Ian, I think this is the one that I asked the seller about the condition of the lens and they told me there was no fungus, however there were some "hairs" on one of the interior elements. Sounded a little like fungus to me, so I quit bidding. That is the bad news. The good news is that I've used one of these lenses and they are nice. I gave the one I had to my son-in-law. The other part of the bad news is that if you are as compulsive as I am about having the original lens hood for your lenses, you may get a little crazy as they are not easy to find. Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C2A2A3.6439E540 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This=20 is only a first dip in the water for me before I start seriously = considering=20 import so no big deal.... should I win I'll open the package outside I=20 think,  could well be the second and last Tokina that I bin. It'll = be on a=20 credit card the wife doesn't know about :-)
 
I=20 always use a hood but I'm not too concerned about it being original = item, my=20 gear gets abused too much to worry about cosmetics.
 
Thanks=20 for the info, in future I'll check to make sure we're not bidding = against each=20 other and maybe ask a few more questions before I=20 bid.........
 
regards
Ian
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: 13 December 2002=20 12:10
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: = [OM] Tokina=20 on bay

Ian, I think this is the one that I = asked the seller=20 about the condition of the lens and they told me there was no fungus, = however=20 there were some "hairs" on one of the interior elements.  Sounded = a=20 little like fungus to me, so I quit bidding.  That is the bad = news. =20 The good news is that I've used one of these lenses and they are nice. = I gave=20 the one I had to my son-in-law.  The other part of the bad news = is that=20 if you are as compulsive as I am about having the original lens hood = for your=20 lenses, you may get a little crazy as they are not easy to find.  = Bill=20 Barber
------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C2A2A3.6439E540-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28330 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 12:40:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 12:40:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 04:40:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28268 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:40:25 -0800 Received: from [62.64.231.108] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MpBB-0007Hy-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:44:33 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212120114.gBC1EOSu023981@hestia.email.starband.net> References: <200212120114.gBC1EOSu023981@hestia.email.starband.net> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:30:22 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Damned with faint praise? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Barry, he hasn't praised you or damned you yet. Wait until he sees your work. If he says, "well that's not bad for a beginner"... then he is damning you with faint praise. Give him a chance... he might be shy rather than clueless ;-) Chris At 19:14 -0600 11/12/02, Barry B. Bean wrote: >This past weekend, I attended a gallery opening that featured a work >by my wife. When we were leaving, > >Gallery Owner (GO): Barry, I understand you do some photography. >Me: Yes. >GO: Do you work in black and white? >Me: Yes, I do. I have a small darkroom and do my own work. >GO: So, do you shoot any, you know, art pictures? > >With a mighty effort, I fought off the first thing that came to mind >(No, I mostly shoot crap, why do you ask?), and instead indicated >that I did, and he asked to >see some of my work. I'll be taking him a small portfolio next week. > >So - how do you respond when you've been insulted or damned with >faint praise (Wow, your camera sure takes some nice pictures!)? -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28343 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 12:40:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 12:40:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 04:40:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28271 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:40:27 -0800 Received: from [62.64.231.108] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MpBP-0007Hy-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:44:48 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:36:07 +0000 To: Olympus List Messages From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] Vuescan Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, I am starting, after 2+ years of use, to come around to liking Vuescan. I have been forced to use it more because festering Canon refuse to make a Photoshop plugin for their FS4000 for OSX :-(. But Vuescan works really quite well with it: 1. It works with OSX 2. Its files destination works with OSX 3. It can batch scan at an unsupported (by Elements 2) colour depth without asking permission to convert it to a different depth. 4. It tells you exactly what you are waiting for. 5. It is more stable than the OS9 plugin for Photoshop in that it does not run out of memory after you have left it to scan! And, Ed Hamrick revises the application more often than I can keep up with..= =2E Chris -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29154 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 13:17:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:17:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 05:17:40 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28291 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:17:39 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.b7.2b657b8b (3932) for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:15:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:15:42 EST Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_b7.2b657b8b.2b2b377e_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_b7.2b657b8b.2b2b377e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrew, I will watch with interest the replies to your post, as I am going on an organized tour (my first) to Ireland in August and will have a similar arrangement of not having to mess with my luggage, only my camera gear. It might be helpful to know what are the other choices of focal lengths. Like CH Ling, I would like something a little longer. I've been using and liking a 180mm recently, however many of the zooms will give you that range. I would also want a 2X and the Vivitar macro focusing probably being my choice when looking for quality and bang for my buck. Of the lenses you suggested, I would probably take the 21, 28, 50 (would make mine the f1.4), 90/2.5 ,135mm as they all use 49mm filters and then I would add a zoom or longer focal length telephoto. The 75-150, 100-200 and the 200mm f5 all use 49mm filters and with the possible exception of the 200mm f5 should be available for under $100. An adequate kit, might include the Tamron 60-300mm, Zuiko 28-48mm and Zuiko 50mm f1.4. We know, no self respecting Zuikoholic would consider carrying such a kit, however it would allow one to change lenses less frequently and "enjoy the ride" a bit more. Now that I've suggested all these lenses that use the same filter size, let me say that for my trip and if I were going on yours I would want some "fast glass." That could be accomplished with the 50mm f1.4 and I would be tempted to slip a f2 or two in my kit. In fact that is what I'll do. The really "big & fast glass" will stay at home, however I'll have some stuff that requires 55mm filters. One thing I will consider is what will fit under an airplane seat or in the overhead. I sure wouldn't want to show up at the airport with my soft case/back pack and be told I had to give it to the luggage gorillas to put in luggage compartment because it was too big. It will be a long flight agonizing flight if you stuff is in the bowels of the plane, rather than with you. It will be a long flight regardless, but at least you can avoid the agony part. The tripod issue is one I haven't resolved yet. Yes, I would like a carbon fiber, however haven't decided to spring for the bucks yet. I do carry a table top tripod sometimes which can be helpful if I want to be in the picture or for some macro work. Have thought about a monopod and the carbon fiber still calls out to me. My 2 cents worth and then some. Bill Barber --part1_b7.2b657b8b.2b2b377e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrew, I will watch with interest the replies to your post, as I am going on an organized tour (my first) to Ireland in August and will have a similar arrangement of not having to mess with my luggage, only my camera gear.

It might be helpful to know what are the other choices of focal lengths.  Like CH Ling, I would like something a little longer.  I've been using and liking a 180mm recently, however many of the zooms will give you that range.  I would also want a 2X and the Vivitar macro focusing probably being my choice when looking for quality and bang for my buck. 

Of the lenses you suggested, I would probably take the 21, 28, 50 (would make mine the f1.4), 90/2.5 ,135mm as they all use 49mm filters and then I would add a zoom or longer focal length telephoto.  The 75-150, 100-200 and the 200mm f5 all use 49mm filters and with the possible exception of the 200mm f5 should be available for under $100.

An adequate kit, might include the Tamron 60-300mm, Zuiko 28-48mm and Zuiko 50mm f1.4.  We know, no self respecting Zuikoholic would consider carrying such a kit, however it would allow one to change lenses less frequently and "enjoy the ride" a bit more.
 
Now that I've suggested all these lenses that use the same filter size, let me say that for my trip and if I were going on yours I would want some "fast glass."  That could be accomplished with the 50mm f1.4 and I would be tempted to slip a f2 or two in my kit.  In fact that is what I'll do.  The really "big & fast glass" will stay at home, however I'll have some stuff that requires 55mm filters.

One thing I will consider is what will fit under an airplane seat or in the overhead.  I sure wouldn't want to show up at the airport with my soft case/back pack and be told I had to give it to the luggage gorillas to put in luggage compartment because it was too big. It will be a long flight agonizing flight if you stuff is in the bowels of the plane, rather than with you. It will be a long flight regardless, but at least you can avoid the agony part. 

The tripod issue is one I haven't resolved yet.  Yes, I would like a carbon fiber, however haven't decided to spring for the bucks yet.  I do carry a table top tripod sometimes which can be helpful if I want to be in the picture or for some macro work.  Have thought about a monopod and the carbon fiber still calls out to me.

My 2 cents worth and then some.

Bill Barber   --part1_b7.2b657b8b.2b2b377e_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29509 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 13:25:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:25:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 05:25:50 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28301 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:25:45 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:30:12 +0800 Message-ID: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:23:13 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ok, I understand that the standard recommendation is not to drop below 1/focal length. What if my lens is a 90mm and I'm using a flash, and the sync is only 1/60th? (like on my OM1n)? I'm not sure how the flash sync works; but if the flash is only 1/500th let's say, am I basically shooting at that shutter speed due to flash exposure time length? Someone tell me what's the best setup for portrait photography when the lighting requires a flash, and I'm using a 90mm lens. Thanks! Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29883 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 13:42:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:42:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 05:42:42 2002 -0800 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA28311 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:42:41 -0800 Received: (qmail 14751 invoked by uid 417); 13 Dec 2002 13:40:25 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:40:25 -0000 Received: from enterprise.SoftHome.net ([204.39.228.132]) (AUTH: LOGIN csdunek@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:40:24 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021213010928.00a5e280@pop.softhome.net> X-Sender: csdunek@pop.softhome.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:10:26 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Charles Sdunek Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W In-Reply-To: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6D8@EXCHANGE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the cassette, or am I wierd? hehehe Chuck At 06:40 AM 12/13/02, you wrote: >Albert asked: > > Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need >to do > my own B&W development? > > I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock. That's all I know. Please >tell > me more about my darkroom needs. > >For developing a film, you also need: > >gadget to get the end off the cassette < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30271 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 13:55:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:55:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 05:55:33 2002 -0800 Received: from d12lmsgate-3.de.ibm.com (d12lmsgate-3.de.ibm.com [194.196.100.236]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28323 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:55:32 -0800 Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate-3.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBDDrgB1027298 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:53:43 +0100 Received: from d14ml005.italy.ibm.com (d14ml005.italy.ibm.com [9.87.60.141]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.12.3/NCO/VER6.4) with ESMTP id gBDDrgf7119486 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:53:42 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Ralf Loi" Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:52:49 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D14ML005/14/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 13/12/2002 14:53:42 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca << I'm not sure how the flash sync works; but if the flash is only 1/500th let's say, am I basically shooting at that shutter speed due to flash exposure time length? >> It depends on the ambient light. Let me provide two (extreme) examples. 1) The correct exposure (without flash) is 1 second. With flash you use 1/60, that is 6 times less, so with this speed the only light source is the flash, and the "real" speed is the flash duration. 2) The correct exposure (without flash) is slighty longer than 1/60. In this case the flash fires, but the light needed from the flash is very little. So although the flash provides a very short output (maybe 1/10000), you are basically shooting at 1/60. With ambient light good for 1/30, the problem is even worse: the flash freeze the image, but you could have a gosth (only 1 stop of underexposure) from the ambient light. Ralf Loi < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30522 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 13:56:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:56:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 05:56:24 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28327 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:56:23 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:56:00 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:56:00 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:59:22 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 13:56:00.0159 (UTC) FILETIME=[5E1ADAF0:01C2A2AF] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So which is it Roger, an OM-1, or two????? -----Original Message----- From: Roger Wesson So I say, get anOM-1 or two. Cheers, Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30784 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 13:59:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 13:59:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 05:59:10 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp001.nwlink.com (smtp001.nwlink.com [209.20.130.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28335 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:59:09 -0800 Received: from miracler64ly0o (ip047.skt-d4.nwlink.com [209.20.226.47]) by smtp001.nwlink.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBDDx7hI014431 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:59:08 -0800 Message-ID: <148501c2a2af$d55be0a0$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Subject: [OM] Mamiya MF vs. Olympus; overexposure; being good has nothing to do with it Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:59:18 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "A Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses is actually lighter and in a smaller kit than my Oly stuff." I assume this is a joke. When I worked for Bendix, I carried an OM-1 around my neck and eight lenses + Vitovar 292 in a tiny case. The only way "a Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses" could take up less space would be if you Olympus outfit included virtually every lens and accessory Olympus ever made. Furthermore, my kit included lenses for which there is no Mamiya 7 equivalent. One of the wonderful things about the OM system is that you can carry almost "everything" -- you don't have to decide what you will or won't need. "Are you're [sic] faces truly overexposed? That's hard to do with print film." It's easy to do with any film. Overexposure need not be absolute; it can be relative to the rest of the scene. "Does anyone want to buy me the 8/2.8 on KEH right now? I promise I've been a good boy this year! ;)" It's not a question of how good you've been, but how "good" you will be. Next year, and a few years after that, in all likelihood. I have one, but I wouldn't be willing to give it up unless I got enough to pay at least six months of my mortgage. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31108 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:04:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:04:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:04:24 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r09.mx.aol.com (imo-r09.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.105]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28359 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:04:23 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.68.2a141824 (3932) for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:02:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <68.2a141824.2b2b426d@aol.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:02:21 EST Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_68.2a141824.2b2b426d_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_68.2a141824.2b2b426d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/13/2002 7:26:21 AM Central Standard Time, olympus@achtung.com writes: > I'm not sure how the flash sync works; but if the flash is only 1/500th > let's say, am I basically shooting at that shutter speed due to flash > exposure time length? > > Someone tell me what's the best setup for portrait photography when the > lighting requires a flash, and I'm using a 90mm lens. > As I understand it, your flash sync speed of 1/60th, is really a function of using a focal plane shutter. With such a shutter your film is exposed by light hitting the film from a small gap in two curtains that travel across the full length of the film. If you use a faster shutter speed, only part of the film will be exposed by the light from the flash. Try it on something you don't care about. Set your shutter speed at 1/250 and see what happens. If you question is what do you do when in a studio where the ambient light is not an issue from the perspective of exposure, books have been written on the subject. I will tell you that you need to set your lights up to create a contrasting lighting rather than the flat lighting produced by a camera mounted flash, I will defer this question to those on the list with more experience and knowledge. If the need for flash is one you experience outside and is one of a need for fill flash, I will offer a couple of possible solutions. Meter your ambient light exposure using 1/60th of a second and then use a distance which will produce an under exposure if the flash was your primary source of light (I would have it be at least one stop under exposed and perhaps as much as 2 or 3). Another method I use is essentially the same, except I will take a clean white handkerchief and secure it to my flash with some rubber bands to demising the amount of light hitting my subject. I use two or three layers of handkerchief material. Might look a little strange, but it works. While on the subject of portraits, you might try using a very slight soft focus filter with your portraits. These filters are not particularly expensive unless you go for the Softar filters. I like your choice of focal length for portraits and hope this has answered some of your questions. Bill Barber --part1_68.2a141824.2b2b426d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/13/2002 7:26:21 AM Central Standard Time, olympus@achtung.com writes:

I'm not sure how the flash sync works; but if the flash is only 1/500th
let's say, am I basically shooting at that shutter speed due to flash
exposure time length?

Someone tell me what's the best setup for portrait photography when the
lighting requires a flash, and I'm using a 90mm lens.


As I understand it, your flash sync speed of 1/60th, is really a function of using a focal plane shutter.  With such a shutter your film is exposed by light hitting the film from a small gap in two curtains that travel across the full length of the film.  If you use a faster shutter speed, only part of the film will be exposed by the light from the flash.  Try it on something you don't care about.  Set your shutter speed at 1/250 and see what happens.

If you question is what do you do when in a studio where the ambient light is not an issue from the perspective of exposure, books have been written on the subject.  I will tell you that you need to set your lights up to create a contrasting lighting rather than the flat lighting produced by a camera mounted flash, I will defer this question to those on the list with more experience and knowledge.

If the need for flash is one you experience outside and is one of a need for fill flash, I will offer a couple of possible solutions.  Meter your ambient light exposure using 1/60th of a second and then use a distance which will produce an under exposure if the flash was your primary source of light (I would have it be at least one stop under exposed and perhaps as much as 2 or 3).  Another method I use is essentially the same, except I will take a clean white handkerchief and secure it to my flash with some rubber bands to demising the amount of light hitting my subject.  I use two or three layers of handkerchief material.  Might look a little strange, but it works.

While on the subject of portraits, you might try using a very slight soft focus filter with your portraits.  These filters are not particularly expensive unless you go for the Softar filters. I like your choice of focal length for portraits and hope this has answered some of your questions.  Bill Barber  --part1_68.2a141824.2b2b426d_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31822 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:09:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:09:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:09:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28384 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:09:50 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:05:42 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBDE55k02629 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:05:05 GMT Message-ID: <3DF9E910.2090608@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:05:04 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Shame the itinerary is fixed - I can give you tons of ideas of what to do in Beijing! Do you have free time while you're there? I'm sure you're taking far too much kit - I spent six weeks there over the summer, and I survived, photographically, with an OM-1 (I took an OM-1n as well but didn't use it at all), 28/2.8, 50/1.8 and 135/3.5. But if you're happy carrying it all... Beijing should not be too hot in April, but I hear that dust can be a major problem - it blows in from the Gobi desert. Careful when you're changing lenses! Humidity should not be too high in the north but might be high further south. Probably worth taking some silica gel. I expect you'll be looking inside one or two temples while you're there, and so I recommend either a tripod or a flash for interior shots. I had neither, and consequently have no interior shots! Roger Andrew Dacey wrote: > Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be > travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the > itinerary is fixed. Here's the short version of what I'll be covering: > > Fly in to Beijing > WuDang mountain in HuBei province (This is the mountain with the monastery > in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon) > GuiZhou province where for cultural festival > YunNan province for the ancient city of Lijiang > GuangXi province for the Li-River > Mt Huangshan in AnHui province > Depart from Shanghai > > There's a few other areas being covered but that's the quick version. > > Travelling with a group so my photography is going to be somewhat more > limited. Fortunately though, a number of the members of the group are > serious photographers (a couple members of the local photography guild) and > the leader of the group does some very beautiful work (Leica user). > > Fortunately as well, the transportation is all being dealt with so I won't > be handling my luggage much in China and will be free to just travel with > just my daypack. > > I'm looking at taking: > > 2 bodies (either 2 OM-1Ns or a 1n and a 2s) > 21/3.5 > 24/2.8 > 28/2.8 > 35/2 > 50/1.8 (need to get mine replaced before then, sticky aperture) > 85/2 or Tamron 90/2.5 macro > 135/3.5 > > May or may not take the tripod, Manfrotto 055c with 168 head. If I go for > the macro lens then I probably will so I can setup better macro shots. > However, I'm doubting how much macro work I'm likely to do and working with > a pod when travelling with a group could be a pain. I've had pretty good > success with hand holding a 1n and 50/1.8 down to 1/30 or 1/15, should be > able to get similar results with the wides. > > Film: > > Mostly Provia 100 probably throw in some 400 and maybe some Velvia, > especially if I take the pod. I'd like to try some of the Kodak E100VS or > E100SW before I go and that might change my mind. May also throw in some > B&W. > > Anyways, just looking for opinions. That kit is fairly extensive but is > still quite workable out of a backpack (did that in Europe last summer while > travelling on my own). The pod may be too much of a hassle, but it would be > nice to have. Idealy, I'd have the money to get a nice carbon fibre pod but > I don't foresee that happening. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32117 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:12:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:12:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:12:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28400 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:12:04 -0800 Received: from [62.64.206.207] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MqWQ-000Nso-00; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:10:35 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:45:20 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Cc: Andrew Dacey Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sounds great Andrew. I should suggest that the 24mm is superfluous, and that you could probably get by with a mini tripod for macro work. The trouble with close work is that you might forget to check the focus just before you release the shutter, and if you are hand-holding that is critical. I took my newly-acquired 50-250/5 to Spain recently as my only telephoto, and it was most useful. Chris At 00:29 -0400 13/12/02, Andrew Dacey wrote: >Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be >travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the >itinerary is fixed. Here's the short version of what I'll be covering: > >Fly in to Beijing >WuDang mountain in HuBei province (This is the mountain with the monastery >in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon) >GuiZhou province where for cultural festival >YunNan province for the ancient city of Lijiang >GuangXi province for the Li-River >Mt Huangshan in AnHui province >Depart from Shanghai > snip >I'm looking at taking: > >2 bodies (either 2 OM-1Ns or a 1n and a 2s) >21/3.5 >24/2.8 >28/2.8 >35/2 >50/1.8 (need to get mine replaced before then, sticky aperture) >85/2 or Tamron 90/2.5 macro >135/3.5 snip -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32368 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:12:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:12:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:12:18 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28405 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:12:13 -0800 Received: from [62.64.206.207] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MqWU-000Nso-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:10:39 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:48:22 +0000 To: Olympus List Messages From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Off topic: has anyone experience of the G2? I am interested in autofocus without going wunderbrick to complement my OM system. Chris -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32619 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:12:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:12:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:12:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28408 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:12:33 -0800 Received: from [62.64.206.207] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MqWP-000Nso-00; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:10:34 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DF95E97.5050000@achtung.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021209221315.0549ec80@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF84072.5020909@sbcglobal.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20021212125045.05666570@mail.spitfire.net> <3DF95E97.5050000@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:34:29 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs. Leica Cc: Albert Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A sort of self-granted entryism Albert? It would surely be an expensive way of getting into Leicas: if you are going to buy Leica, surely you should not add to it by spending money on other stuff first? Conversely, I believe that Leica owners use Voigtl=E4nder lenses because they are good but vastly cheaper than Leica equivalents. Chris At 12:14 +0800 13/12/02, Albert wrote: >I don't know, I just looked at the Voigtlander Bessa's and they are >cheap and take M-mount Leica lenses. Me-thinks that this might be >the way to get into Leica's. -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32679 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:12:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:12:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:12:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28411 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:12:37 -0800 Received: from [62.64.206.207] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MqWX-000Nso-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:10:42 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DF9BE58.5050206@achtung.com> References: <3DF9BE58.5050206@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:56:12 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As an alternative to Alan's reply: - Film leader retriever (I pull the film out rather than opening the canister, mainly because I have not been able to open one). - An accurate measuring jug (although consistency is more important than absolute accuracy with the measures) - Changing bag (as you say) - Developing tank (most will do 2 films at once if necessary). - Thermometer. - Accurate clock (I use an old clockwork one from Patterson in the UK, it has Stop, start and reset buttons). - Containers for your chemicals. - I use wetting agent and hang the film rather use my Squeegee. - Transparent envelopes for filing the negs. Chris At 19:02 +0800 13/12/02, Albert wrote: >Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need >to do my own B&W development? >If you care to list what I need for printing, that would be great too.. > >I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock. That's all I know. Please >tell me more about my darkroom needs. >The quality of the development has me really upset... The photos >were ok, the development was ok, the printing SUCKED so bad, I'm >redoing all of them in photoshop now.. arrg.. >Thanks. >Albert -- =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32764 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:12:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:12:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:12:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28414 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:12:41 -0800 Received: from [62.64.206.207] (helo=[62.64.231.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MqWZ-000Nso-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:10:44 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DF9D111.7070301@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> References: <3DF9D111.7070301@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:07:11 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] London camera shops Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Roger I have just been in London - I should have suggested a meeting, except I am seriously "tired and emotional". The London universities have an air squadron (ULAS) with its town HQ in Brompton Road and we had an end-of-term "revue" there last night. Aunty Betty would not pay for a night's hotel, so we (the staff of the squadron) kipped on the chairs after the revelries. Some brave souls went with the students to Hombre's (?) off Oxford Street, but I find socialising with 'young people" tiring enough as it is, and 0200 bed time is late enough for me now. I have not bopped since the last one - in October ;-) The reason for this post is that I visited Nicholas in Camden High St, near Mornington Crescent tube station. It is a bit of a shambles, worse than Campkins on King's Parade in Cambridge, but it looks like a treasure trove of stuff. I wanted to feel a Contax G2, but it was locked away and could not be retrieved for half-an-hour; my tiredness and emotion persuaded me to head off to King's Cross for the train home. Nicholas is well worth a visit for OM stuff in my opinion (see adverts in AP). Chris At 12:22 +0000 13/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Welcome to the list from a fellow London OM user! I'm probably not >much help for this question because the only OM I've ever used is >the OM-1(n). Owned three of them, now have two, and for the type of >photography I do (mainly landscape and cityscape) I don't see >anything in the other OMs that makes me desperately want them. So I >say, get an OM-1 or two. > >Cheers, >Roger -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1054 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:21:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:21:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:21:54 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28422 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:21:53 -0800 Received: from user175.net067.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([207.30.237.175] helo=oemcomputer) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Mqgz-00034f-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:21:30 -0800 Message-ID: <000801c2a2b3$13d27300$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:22:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C2A289.2634A9C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C2A289.2634A9C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Albert: Check out this .pdf from Ilford. I hope the link comes through. http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/Film%20Hobbyist.PDF Jamie Fort Myes, FL ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C2A289.2634A9C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Albert:
 
Check out this .pdf from Ilford.  = I hope the=20 link comes through.

 ht= tp://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/Film%20Hobbyist.PDF
 
Jamie
Fort Myes, = FL
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C2A289.2634A9C0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1415 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:28:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:28:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:28:40 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28436 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:28:38 -0800 Received: from M2W033.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.33]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:28:16 -0500 Message-ID: <191690-2200212513142816346@M2W033.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Now Voigtlander (OM vs. Leica) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:28:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:28:16.0575 (UTC) FILETIME=[E04C7CF0:01C2A2B3] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Very nice machines, great price, superb finders=2E Basically an OM-2000 i= n an M-Mount, RF body=2E The finish seems to wear poorly=2E =20 A great choice for a first body=2E see www=2Ecameraquest=2Ecom for more info=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Albert olympus@achtung=2Ecom Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:14:15 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: Fw: [OM] OM vs=2E Leica I don't know, I just looked at the Voigtlander Bessa's and they are=20 cheap and take M-mount Leica lenses=2E Me-thinks that this might be the=20= way to get into Leica's=2E =20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1681 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:29:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:29:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:29:41 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28444 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:29:40 -0800 Received: from M2W031.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.31]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:29:18 -0500 Message-ID: <243930-2200212513142918428@M2W031.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:29:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:29:18.0443 (UTC) FILETIME=[052CCBB0:01C2A2B4] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry, it's just my compulsive nature for information absorption=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Jim Brokaw jbrokaw@pacbell=2Enet Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:14:43 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 50/ vs Noctilux again on 12/12/02 6:28 PM, om@skipwilliams=2Ecom at om@skipwilliams=2Ecom wrote:= > John,=20 >=20 > Do you mean the big, barn-door hood with the four, fold-out sides? If it's > the all-black, smooth-finished version, you can't give them away for > $30-40=2E If it's the wrinkled-black version, maybe $60-70? The chrome= and > black version is over $100=2E >=20 > Skip Skip, is it just me or do you know *way* too much about this=2E=2E=2E? = --=20 Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney=2E=2E=2E Of course, I went and bought John Foster's new Pen F book on your recommendation, and I love it! Ask me a Pen F question=2E=2E=2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1950 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:30:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:30:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:30:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28448 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:30:04 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:26:22 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBDEPuk04500 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:25:56 GMT Message-ID: <3DF9EDF3.5020502@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:25:55 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca An OM-1 or two, and an OM-2 or three - the choice is yours! Timpe, Jim wrote: > So which is it Roger, an OM-1, or two????? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Wesson > > So I say, get anOM-1 or two. > > Cheers, > Roger > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2207 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:30:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:30:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:30:33 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28452 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:30:32 -0800 Received: from M2W083.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.83]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:30:11 -0500 Message-ID: <60980-2200212513143010871@M2W083.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] List archive search: broken? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:30:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:30:11.0003 (UTC) FILETIME=[2480D0B0:01C2A2B4] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Kudos to you Thomas if you can pull that off=2E It's a thankless task=2E = =20 Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Thomas Heide Clausen T=2EClausen@computer=2Eorg Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:50:07 +0100 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] List archive search: broken? The archives are not currently being maintained=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E HOWEVER, I am working on a new home for the list, with new software and new archives=2E All with much improved functionality=2E Stay tuned for announcement soon (before christmas)=2E=2E=2E Best, --thomas On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:49:40 -0500 "Jim L'Hommedieu" wrote: > Is it me or is the Oly List archive search broken? I tried to > search for info but it only appears to work on a single year=2E If > you select a different year, it claims that no one mentioned the > phrase "Series1 macro" in that year, for example=2E >=20 > Is there a way to download or purchase entire years so I can > research that way? >=20 > Thanks=2E >=20 > Lama >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand=2Epolyt) M=2ESc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T=2EClausen@computer=2Eorg WWW: http://www=2Ecs=2Eauc=2Edk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2473 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:33:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:33:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:33:02 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28456 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:33:01 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:37:42 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:32:37 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Which OM body? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:36:04 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:37:42.0906 (UTC) FILETIME=[31DBBDA0:01C2A2B5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca or a Gee or Pee Cee..... (sorry... twenty or forty)... -----Original Message----- From: Roger Wesson [mailto:roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 6:26 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Which OM body? An OM-1 or two, and an OM-2 or three - the choice is yours! Timpe, Jim wrote: > So which is it Roger, an OM-1, or two????? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Wesson > > So I say, get anOM-1 or two. > > Cheers, > Roger > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2800 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:38:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:38:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:38:24 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28460 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:38:23 -0800 Received: from M2W066.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.66]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:38:01 -0500 Message-ID: <168270-220021251314381689@M2W066.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:38:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:38:01.0701 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D0FA150:01C2A2B5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is my recommendation=2E And I do my B&W developing and scan the negatives=2E - Stainless steel tank and reels, 4 or 2 reel tank=2E I like SS as it is more durable than plastic, but the plastic, back-and-forth-twist loading reels are easier to use for someone just starting=2E SS reels can be a pa= in to load in the dark=2E I recommend trying to load with junk film 5-10 tim= es before you commit an exposed roll of film=2E - Changing bag for loading - Or you can use a closet=2E - Chemicals - I typically use liquid chemistry - Ilford DDX, Kodak Indicator Stop, Kodak Rapid fixer, Edwal HypoClear, Kodak PhotoFlo - Measuring cylinders or pitchers - Buy top-quality plastic from a photo store, durable and won't absorb chemistry=2E=20 - Timer - Can be anything, but a used GraLab 300 is perfect and easy to us= e=2E - Dial Thermometer - get the temperature right, or it doesn't work well=2E= - Basic photo book - Go to a used book store and get a basic 1970s or 80's= photo how-to book=2E It will have all the nuances on B&W developing=2E I= t hasn't changed much since then=2E You should be able to get everything for $100=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Albert olympus@achtung=2Ecom Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:02:48 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Doing your own B&W Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need to do=20= my own B&W development? =20 If you care to list what I need for printing, that would be great too=2E=2E= I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock=2E That's all I know=2E Please tell= =20 me more about my darkroom needs=2E =20 The quality of the development has me really upset=2E=2E=2E The photos we= re=20 ok, the development was ok, the printing SUCKED so bad, I'm redoing all=20= of them in photoshop now=2E=2E arrg=2E=2E =20 Thanks=2E Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3060 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:39:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:39:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:39:30 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28464 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:39:29 -0800 Received: from M2W055.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.55]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:39:07 -0500 Message-ID: <48270-220021251314397241@M2W055.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:39:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:39:07.0219 (UTC) FILETIME=[641CE230:01C2A2B5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oh, I forgot that one=2E I use a bottle opener too=2E Perhaps there are = other better gadgets, but I've never needed one=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Charles Sdunek csdunek@SoftHome=2Enet Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:10:26 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the cassette, or am I=20 wierd? hehehe Chuck At 06:40 AM 12/13/02, you wrote: >Albert asked: > > Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I ne= ed >to do > my own B&W development? > > I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock=2E That's all I know=2E P= lease >tell > me more about my darkroom needs=2E > >For developing a film, you also need: > >gadget to get the end off the cassette < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3356 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:42:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:42:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:42:30 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound02.telus.net [199.185.220.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28468 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:42:29 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021213143843.ERQW21763.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:38:43 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021213073609.00b1e648@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:38:36 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] List archive search: broken? In-Reply-To: <00dd01c2a26b$6e1d2780$402e44d8@lhommedieu> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021210172607.0575f048@192.168.100.11> <3DF6A7A5.4050203@speakeasy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:49 AM 13/12/2002 -0500, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: >Is it me or is the Oly List archive search broken? I tried to search for >info but it only appears to work on a single year. If you select a >different year, it claims that no one mentioned the phrase "Series1 macro" >in that year, for example. > >Is there a way to download or purchase entire years so I can research that >way? Well, what I used to do was manually download a month or so of text stuff at a time, then use a program like UltraEdit to search for text strings in all of the text files simultaneously (it's good at that, since it was originally written for programmers who are forever doing greps etc. on multiple files within directories...) A bit labour-intensive, but workable. Allowed me to search through all of 2000 looking for something. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3623 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:43:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:43:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:43:48 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28476 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:43:47 -0800 Received: from M2W076.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.76]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:43:25 -0500 Message-ID: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:43:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 14:43:25.0646 (UTC) FILETIME=[FE25B6E0:01C2A2B5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Go over toe photo=2Enet and search for threads on the G2=2E It's quirky c= amera and many people don't like it after extensive use=2E But it takes exceptional pictures=2E Summary? It's an interchangable lens, point-and-shoot=2E The lens are fabulous=2E The AF is a bit noisy, the viewfinder is a bit dim=2E MF is = only possible with focus-by-wire, no focusing with the lenses directly=2E =20 I prefer a Contax T2 as a take-everywhere camera=2E Search on Google for Contax, G2, Leica, Review, Opinion and combinations o= f those words=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Chris Barker imagopus@threeshoes=2Eco=2Euk Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:48:22 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Off topic: has anyone experience of the G2? I am interested in=20 autofocus without going wunderbrick to complement my OM system=2E Chris --=20 =95 ~~~~~ ><> Chris Barker Gamlingay, England mailto:chris@threeshoes=2Eco=2Euk mailto:cmib@macunlimited=2Enet < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3932 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:48:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:48:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 06:48:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.malarnet.com (mail.malarnet.com [217.150.65.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA28484 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:48:53 -0800 Received: (qmail 24440 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 14:52:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (217.150.80.226) by mail.malarnet.com with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 14:52:08 -0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:46:33 +0100 Subject: [OM] Erwin Voogt was China suggestions From: Johan Malmstr=?ISO-8859-1?B?9g==?=m To: "olympus Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca With no other intention than lust for lenses I 'googled' for "Zuiko 28-48 mm" and found the site of Erwin Voogt . So many nice pictures. His Zuikos must be proud of its owner. / Johan Den/At 02-12-13 14.15 skrev/wrote "NSURIT@aol.com" <[NSURIT@aol.com]>: > An adequate kit, might include the Tamron 60-300mm, Zuiko 28-48mm and Zuiko > 50mm f1.4. We know, no self respecting Zuikoholic would consider carrying > such a kit, however it would allow one to change lenses less frequently and > "enjoy the ride" a bit more. -- "Tell the world what we think of those mindless suburban drones that insist on getting 8 mpg while driving their kids to soccer practice. Join us as we direct our social activist energies toward the exciting new sport of Big Game SUV Hunting." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4401 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 15:06:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 15:06:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 07:06:05 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28513 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:06:04 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021213150218.IRDF6027.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:02:18 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021213074212.00b1e750@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:02:10 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W In-Reply-To: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6D8@EXCHANGE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:40 AM 13/12/2002 +0000, Alan Wood wrote: [snip] >For developing a film, you also need: > >gadget to get the end off the cassette A better way to do that, IMNSHO, is to rewind the film such that the "tongue" is still sticking out when you open the film back. Cut the film tongue off, leaving a blunt, square edge. Put two small snips through the film at 45 degree angles to the edges. Your film edge coming out of the canister should look like this: ----------- \ | | | / ----------- Then you can load it into the developing reel in a black bag or darkroom, and when you're finished, just snip the far end off with a pair of scissors. No messy prying open the 35mm cassette in the dark! (Way less chance of handling the picture-bearing sections of the film with your fingers, too...). The above solution is used by so many people that there's now a gadget on the market which helps retrieve the end of the film if you accidentally wind it all the way back into the cassette. I've had to use this a couple of times. :-/ >thermometer Critical! Don't skimp, get a good-quality easy-to-read glass one (or if you're flush with cash, a digital) specifically designed for development work. Ilford or Paterson makes a really good one. Time and temperature are your friends if done right and your worst enemies if done wrong... >big measuring cylinder (big enough for the volume your developing tank >needs) > >small measuring cylinder (for accurately measuring the undiluted chemicals) > >bowl to fill with water at the temperature of the developer, to keep the >tank at the right temperature > >squeegee, to remove excess water after the final rinse You can also use a soft, lint-free cotton cloth that's been moistened and thoroughly wrung out to do this. Prior to doing this, I'd give the film a final dunking in a solution of PhotoFlo or the Ilford equivalent (the name of which escapes me at the moment). Helps prevent spot formation. If your water's really hard, the final dunking can be in a solution of PhotoFlo and distilled water rather than regular tap water. >somewhere dust-free to hang the developed film while it dries Yep. For a few moments while it's drying, the gelatin emulsion's really sticky, and can attract dust like crazy. It's a short time window, but critical. I'd add "weights," which you clip to the free end of your drying film strips to keep the entire strip from curling up (or blowing around too much) as they dry. You can buy custom-made weights, or make your own out of alligator/butterfly clips (office supplies). >bottles to keep stop and fix - you can use them again In an emergency, stop bath can be made out of white vinegar (it's acetic acid, after all). Dilute it one part vinegar to four parts water, and immerse the film for twenty to thirty seconds. If all else fails, you can also use several changes of plain water in quick succession. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4665 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 15:09:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 15:09:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 07:09:17 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28517 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:09:16 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <20021213150802053002ja2pe>; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:08:02 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:07:59 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 5:00 AM +0000 12/13/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:39:12 +0800 >From: "Clemente Colayco" >Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) > >How low a power must the small flash be to avoid messing up the exposure? > >Snip: I most often put a tiny manual flash on the camera, with the larger >real flashes distributed around the subject to taste. The pipsqueak flash >on the camera triggers the real flashes when the picture is taken. The lack >of wires is a real help, and flash triggers are cheaper than radio triggers. It depends on the intent. The small flash can be used as a fill flash. In this case, it is pointed directly at the subject and should put perhaps half or a quarter (one stop, two stops) less light on the subject than the main flash. Some experimentation is in order, to get the fill effect without the fill look, or even the hated flash look. If the small flash is a trigger only, you want it to put three stops less light on the subject than the main flash. Typically, I do this by pointing the flash straight up, rather than at the subject. Then the small flash just adds to the ambient in the room (if the room isn't too large). Outdoors, or in a big room, you may do better pointing the small flash at the subject but dialing the flashpower down. Anyway, the flash triggers on my main flash units are sensitive enough that it's easy to arrange things so the main flash dominates. Although I give specific rules above, I must say that getting this to work isn't hard, and almost any reasonable setup will work. That's one reason I like it. Joe < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5351 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 15:47:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 15:47:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 07:47:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28572 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:46:59 -0800 Received: from [62.64.171.37] (helo=[62.64.206.207]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18MrxP-000CId-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:42:32 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> References: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:26:26 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: RE: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks Skip, I shall do that small thing. I have heard & read good things about the T3. Chris At 09:43 -0500 13/12/02, om@skipwilliams.com wrote: >Go over toe photo.net and search for threads on the G2. It's quirky camera >and many people don't like it after extensive use. But it takes >exceptional pictures. > >Summary? It's an interchangable lens, point-and-shoot. The lens are >fabulous. The AF is a bit noisy, the viewfinder is a bit dim. MF is only >possible with focus-by-wire, no focusing with the lenses directly. > >I prefer a Contax T2 as a take-everywhere camera. > >Search on Google for Contax, G2, Leica, Review, Opinion and combinations of >those words. > >Skip > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5771 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:02:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:02:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:02:50 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28604 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:02:48 -0800 Received: from modem-3892.crocodile.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.47.52] helo=skelly) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18MsGz-0006GT-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:02:45 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:02:54 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <48270-220021251314397241@M2W055.mail2web.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ah, so that is where I go wrong.. not a corkscrew after all then? I just found the whole darkroom / bag / chemicals too fraught with problems... it wasn't the contimating the dogs water so much as confusing fix with G+T that (almost) finished me. My recommendation is to join a school course in Photography rather than immediately buying kit. You learn what kit you need, what chemicals you need, how to use it all and how to produce your own print from your own film. From there you can gauge whether the darkroom is for you and whether it is worth the cost and space for the undoubted enjoyment of bringing a picture to life. My local school hires out its darkroom and equipment when not in use by students - I never had access problems. Regards Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of om@skipwilliams.com Sent: 13 December 2002 14:39 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Oh, I forgot that one. I use a bottle opener too. Perhaps there are other better gadgets, but I've never needed one. Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Charles Sdunek csdunek@SoftHome.net Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:10:26 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the cassette, or am I wierd? hehehe Chuck At 06:40 AM 12/13/02, you wrote: >Albert asked: > > Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need >to do > my own B&W development? > > I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock. That's all I know. Please >tell > me more about my darkroom needs. > >For developing a film, you also need: > >gadget to get the end off the cassette < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6195 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:17:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:17:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:17:28 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28632 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:17:27 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:17:03 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:17:02 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'Olist'" Subject: [OM] OT Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:20:29 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 16:17:03.0098 (UTC) FILETIME=[1268DDA0:01C2A2C3] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Scored a fang for a friend last weekend. Visiting one of my favorite pawn shops (more from a social standpoint than anything else... they employ a Rottweiler and a standard Poodle roaming the store as 'security', and I'm a bit of a dog lover), and saw a fairly large piece of glass staring up at me from the display case. It was a C*non 200mm F2.8 lens... and the tag said '125'. I did my usual scrutinizing, and said I'd offer one hundred even for it. She agreed. While ringing me up, she remarked to one of the owners (I was visiting with them at this point) 'gee, we paid 200 for that one', and the gentleman I was talking to said 'oh well, we'll make it up in volume'. Anyway, he's my best friend, has a lovely collection of C*non (he uses an A-1), and I can give him a bit of a Merry Christmas whilst enjoying a Fang on his behalf. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6581 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:30:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:30:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:30:44 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28644 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:30:42 -0800 Received: from modem-1160.crocodile.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.36.136] helo=skelly) by cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Mshx-0008T2-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:30:38 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:30:47 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id IAA28644 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I haven't been into town for years, quite fancy a look around and a fligh= t on the London Eye. regards Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: 13 December 2002 14:07 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] London camera shops Roger I have just been in London - I should have suggested a meeting, except I am seriously "tired and emotional". The London universities have an air squadron (ULAS) with its town HQ in Brompton Road and we had an end-of-term "revue" there last night. Aunty Betty would not pay for a night's hotel, so we (the staff of the squadron) kipped on the chairs after the revelries. Some brave souls went with the students to Hombre's (?) off Oxford Street, but I find socialising with 'young people" tiring enough as it is, and 0200 bed time is late enough for me now. I have not bopped since the last one - in October ;-) The reason for this post is that I visited Nicholas in Camden High St, near Mornington Crescent tube station. It is a bit of a shambles, worse than Campkins on King's Parade in Cambridge, but it looks like a treasure trove of stuff. I wanted to feel a Contax G2, but it was locked away and could not be retrieved for half-an-hour; my tiredness and emotion persuaded me to head off to King's Cross for the train home. Nicholas is well worth a visit for OM stuff in my opinion (see adverts in AP). Chris At 12:22 +0000 13/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Welcome to the list from a fellow London OM user! I'm probably not >much help for this question because the only OM I've ever used is >the OM-1(n). Owned three of them, now have two, and for the type of >photography I do (mainly landscape and cityscape) I don't see >anything in the other OMs that makes me desperately want them. So I >say, get an OM-1 or two. > >Cheers, >Roger -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6838 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:32:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:32:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:32:41 2002 -0800 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (murphys.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.225]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA28648 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:32:39 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 22258 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:31:03 -0000 Received: from dyn111-41.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.41.111) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:31:03 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:30:49 +0000 Message-ID: <2g2kvugp8nt7oha2clghafo2lqm5g2b48j@4ax.com> References: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> In-Reply-To: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:23:13 +0800, Albert wrote: >Ok, I understand that the standard recommendation is not to drop below=20 >1/focal length. What if my lens is a 90mm and I'm using a flash, and=20 >the sync is only 1/60th? (like on my OM1n)? > >I'm not sure how the flash sync works; but if the flash is only 1/500th=20 >let's say, am I basically shooting at that shutter speed due to flash=20 >exposure time length? The flash fires when the first curtain is fully open. Obviously, the second curtain must not have started to close and the maximum speed at which that condition is satisfied is 1/60 second on an OM1. Provided the ambient lighting contributes little to the lighting of the scene compared with the flash, there's no need to worry about the shutter speed being lower than the "ideal" 1/focal length. Regards John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7134 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:35:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:35:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:35:56 2002 -0800 Received: from netmail01.services.quay.plus.net (netmail01.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.219]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA28659 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:35:53 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 16153 invoked by uid 10001); 13 Dec 2002 16:25:15 -0000 Received: from dyn111-41.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.41.111) by netmail01.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:25:15 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:25:03 +0000 Message-ID: <9a2kvu016vhrqn5fnp3sd1onk3eqek9s6h@4ax.com> References: <168270-220021251314381689@M2W066.mail2web.com> In-Reply-To: <168270-220021251314381689@M2W066.mail2web.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:38:01 -0500, "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: >- Basic photo book - Go to a used book store and get a basic 1970s or = 80's >photo how-to book. It will have all the nuances on B&W developing. It >hasn't changed much since then. One of the best "proper" photographic primers I know is the Manual of Photography (used to be the Ilford Manual of Photography) published by =46ocal Press. It's one of those classics that's gone on forever. I don't know whether there is a current edition. John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7421 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:39:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:39:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:39:24 2002 -0800 Received: from netmail02.services.quay.plus.net (netmail02.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA28663 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:39:23 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 16381 invoked by uid 10001); 13 Dec 2002 16:35:24 -0000 Received: from dyn111-41.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.41.111) by netmail02.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:35:24 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:35:12 +0000 Message-ID: References: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> In-Reply-To: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:43:25 -0500, "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: >MF is only >possible with focus-by-wire, no focusing with the lenses directly. =20 That's almost the only thing I *hate* on my E-10! John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7731 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:41:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:41:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:41:57 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28671 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:41:53 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-82.s1017.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.82] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Msrr-0000sO-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:40:52 -0500 Message-ID: <003a01c2a2c6$676a28b0$52e47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] zoom and focus problem Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:40:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That should be a relatively easy focus adjustment. I don't recall the layout of that lens, There may be set screws underneath the leading edge of the focus rubber. If the screws come loose, the front group will unscrew and sometimes fall off the lens. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralf Loi" To: Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: Re: [OM] zoom and focus problem > > << > From: "Ralf Loi" > > > > Hi all, > > > > > I have a zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 that is very nice but ... infinity is > somewhere between the 10m and infinity > > marks. > > Mine is somewhat similar: infinity focus is "past" the infinity mark. I > had thought of sending it off to John H. or Clint. > > Jamie > >> > > Living in Italy, it's not easy to send a lens to the States for repair... > > Ralf Loi > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8026 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:44:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:44:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:44:17 2002 -0800 Received: from caduceus.sc.intel.com (fmr04.intel.com [143.183.121.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28691 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:44:15 -0800 Received: from talaria.sc.intel.com (talaria.sc.intel.com [10.3.253.5]) by caduceus.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/d: outer.mc,v 1.51 2002/09/23 20:43:23 dmccart Exp $) with ESMTP id gBDGfZe29346 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:41:35 GMT Received: from mipos2.intel.com (mipos2-seg48.sc.intel.com [143.183.48.42]) by talaria.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/d: inner.mc,v 1.27 2002/10/16 23:46:59 dmccart Exp $) with ESMTP id gBDGd8s08204 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:39:08 GMT Received: from zws705.sc.intel.com (zws705.sc.intel.com [143.183.38.136]) by mipos2.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/MailSET/hub) with ESMTP id gBDGgS828638 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:42:28 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Lau Received: (from dlau@localhost) by zws705.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/MailSET/client) id gBDGeoM21947 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:40:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:40:50 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200212131640.gBDGeoM21947@zws705.sc.intel.com> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:05, Roger Wesson wrote: >Andrew Dacey wrote: >> Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be >> travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the >> itinerary is fixed. >I'm sure you're taking far too much kit - I spent six weeks there over >the summer, and I survived, photographically, with an OM-1 (I took an >OM-1n as well but didn't use it at all), 28/2.8, 50/1.8 and 135/3.5. >But if you're happy carrying it all... Except for the back-up body, that was exactly the same kit I took when I went on a China tour several years ago. I also had a T20 flash, but no tripod. Everything survived, no mishaps with any equipment except I ran out of battery for the flash while inside a cave. I've done other trips with the 28-48 and 35-105 zooms, but I prefer the primes more. There are times that I wished I had a longer lens, and times I wish I had a wider lens. But overall, the tradeoff was between the frequency of usage and the amount of gear to carry. A few suggestions: I'd agree with others that the amount of equipment seems excessive. Since Andrew has done other trips, why not evaluate how often you use each piece of equipment and decide if you really need it? Leave the ones you don't use behind. The places you are traveling to seemed to be famous for their landscapes (Beijing/Great Wall, WuDang mountain, Lijiang, Li-River, and Mt. Huangshan). There will be the temples of course, but by and large, it will be a lot of landscape opportunities. I'd favor the wide angles more than the long lenses. But having said that, do you really need all those wides (21/24/28/35)? Also think about your filters, I don't know what the weather will be like in April, but many of those places are also famous for the mist/haze/ fog. >I expect you'll be looking inside one or two temples while you're there, >and so I recommend either a tripod or a flash for interior shots. I had >neither, and consequently have no interior shots! Depending on the type of tour group, I find traveling with a guided tour group tends to really limit the amount of time you have to set-up and take a careful shot. In other words, you will not have time to set up a tripod shot even when inside a temple or a cave. If your tour is like any typical guided tour, then 990f the shots must be done hand-held because the tour operates on a fixed schedule and they cannot wait for one straggler to take pictures. During my tour of China, I had to do a lot of running to catch up to the rest of the group that has moved on. Good luck, enjoy the tour. And share your pictures with us when you come back. -Dan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8358 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:49:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:49:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:49:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28699 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:49:49 -0800 Received: from pool0118.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.210.118] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Mt08-0002CF-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:49:25 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:49:20 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Erwin Voogt was China suggestions Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >With no other intention than lust for lenses I 'googled' for "Zuiko 28-48 >mm" and found the site of Erwin Voogt . So many >nice pictures. His Zuikos must be proud of its owner. > >/ Johan Pretty good. He has a nice site, is selling pictures and uses an OM40, not even one of the single digit models. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8786 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 16:58:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 16:58:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 08:58:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28711 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:58:49 -0800 Received: from pool0118.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.210.118] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Mt9E-0007F6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:58:48 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:58:44 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Vuescan Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Well, I am starting, after 2+ years of use, to come around to liking >Vuescan. I have been forced to use it more because festering Canon >refuse to make a Photoshop plugin for their FS4000 for OSX :-(. But >Vuescan works really quite well with it: > >1. It works with OSX >2. Its files destination works with OSX >3. It can batch scan at an unsupported (by Elements 2) colour depth >without asking permission to convert it to a different depth. >4. It tells you exactly what you are waiting for. >5. It is more stable than the OS9 plugin for Photoshop in that it >does not run out of memory after you have left it to scan! > >And, Ed Hamrick revises the application more often than I can keep up with.= =2E. > >Chris >-- >=95 I just made the plunge into OS X and also opted for VueScan to run my year old Epson flatbed for which which neither Apple nor Epson has a driver. Nicely Polaroid keeps up. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9225 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:09:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:09:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:09:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28739 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:09:51 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7200ANEI1WBF@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:03:32 -0400 (AST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:03:32 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-reply-to: <3DF96920.E201C3DA@optonline.net> To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/13/02 12:59 AM, "Larry" wrote: > Are you at least renting a car for the easier ability to get farther on your > own? > > Larry The group is renting a bus for parts of the trip and we are also going to be travelling by train and plane at times so renting a car is not going to feasible. Given that I don't read or speak Mandarin and have limited driving experience, I don't consider this to be too much of a drawback in this situation. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9241 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:09:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:09:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:09:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28742 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:09:53 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7200BOCI5UKT@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:05:55 -0400 (AST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:05:55 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-reply-to: <3DF97A0F.37FBADDA@accura.com.hk> To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/13/02 2:11 AM, "C.H.Ling" wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > What a great trip... I have dream for a long time! Everything look ok, > some 400 film is really needed, you will not see sunshine everywhere > in April. You seems missing a long lens, a 85-250, 50-250, 200/4, > 300/4.5 or at least a good 2x is needed but I don't know how the > 135/3.5 perform with a 2x. A long lens is good for distance landscape > and shooting some people working in the rice field or washing clothes > in the opposite side of the river...etc. > > C.H.Ling You, as well as some others are all suggesting a longer lens. Currently I don't own anything longer than the 135 so that would be why it's absent. I do own a Sigma 2x converter but I haven't really tried it out much. It seems to be having some problems with my 135 so perhaps I'll use the trip as an excuse to get a 200/4. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9895 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:20:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:20:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:20:44 2002 -0800 Received: from netmail02.services.quay.plus.net (netmail02.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA28754 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:20:42 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 26696 invoked by uid 10001); 13 Dec 2002 17:19:09 -0000 Received: from dyn111-41.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.41.111) by netmail02.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:19:09 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:18:57 +0000 Message-ID: References: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> <2g2kvugp8nt7oha2clghafo2lqm5g2b48j@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <2g2kvugp8nt7oha2clghafo2lqm5g2b48j@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:30:49 +0000, john@coedana.plus.com wrote: >On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:23:13 +0800, Albert >wrote: >>I'm not sure how the flash sync works; but if the flash is only 1/500th= =20 >>let's say, am I basically shooting at that shutter speed due to flash=20 >>exposure time length? > >The flash fires when the first curtain is fully open. Obviously, the >second curtain must not have started to close and the maximum speed at >which that condition is satisfied is 1/60 second on an OM1. > >Provided the ambient lighting contributes little to the lighting of >the scene compared with the flash, there's no need to worry about the >shutter speed being lower than the "ideal" 1/focal length. I'm sorry, I didn't fully answer your question! Your supposition is correct - the flash duration governs the exposure time provided, as I said, the flash is by far the dominant light source. Provided this is true, for all practical purposes, you can forget about camera shake and motion blur. The flash duration from auto flash guns is rarely more than 1/1000 second at full power and can be far less than that when quenched under auto control. John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10208 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:25:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:25:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:25:41 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28772 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:25:38 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:05:49 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA10957 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:05:46 GMT Message-ID: <3DFA136A.1030506@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:05:46 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Erwin Voogt was China suggestions References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ...and http://www.erwinvoogt.com/overland.html goes some way to explaining why Erwin hasn't posted to the list for a while! It appears he's in India right now, the lucky fellow. Roger Winsor Crosby wrote: >> With no other intention than lust for lenses I 'googled' for "Zuiko 28-48 >> mm" and found the site of Erwin Voogt . So >> many >> nice pictures. His Zuikos must be proud of its owner. >> >> / Johan > > > Pretty good. He has a nice site, is selling pictures and uses an OM40, > not even one of the single digit models. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10519 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:30:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:30:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:30:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28776 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:30:42 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7200CNQJ1RWH@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:25:04 -0400 (AST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:25:04 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-reply-to: To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/13/02 9:15 AM, "NSURIT@aol.com" wrote: > It might be helpful to know what are the other choices of focal lengths. > Like CH Ling, I would like something a little longer. I've been using and > liking a 180mm recently, however many of the zooms will give you that range. > I would also want a 2X and the Vivitar macro focusing probably being my > choice when looking for quality and bang for my buck. Well in terms of choices, the list I gave was basically my entire lens collection. As I mentioned to CH Ling, I don't have anything longer than the 135. > Of the lenses you suggested, I would probably take the 21, 28, 50 (would make > mine the f1.4), 90/2.5 ,135mm as they all use 49mm filters and then I would > add a zoom or longer focal length telephoto. The 75-150, 100-200 and the > 200mm f5 all use 49mm filters and with the possible exception of the 200mm f5 > should be available for under $100. Well my 90/2.5 is the 2nd generation (52BB) which takes 55mm filters. So from the filter size standpoint the 85/2 makes more sense, and it's also much smaller and lighter. However, if I were to acquire a 200/4 then I could have 3 lenses (35/2, 90/2.5, 200/4) that take 55mm filters in my kit. Generally I don't use a lot of filters (usually only UV and polarizer). I agree though that the 24 could be dropped, which would leave room in the camera bag for a longer lens (200/4) if I were to acquire one. Throw in a 1.4x or 2x converter and I'd really have some long reach if I need it. As for the 50, I mentioned 1.8 in my list but where I need to replace it anyways, it could easily be a 1.4. > An adequate kit, might include the Tamron 60-300mm, Zuiko 28-48mm and Zuiko > 50mm f1.4. We know, no self respecting Zuikoholic would consider carrying > such a kit, however it would allow one to change lenses less frequently and > "enjoy the ride" a bit more. Well currently I don't own any OM zooms and I'm not as much of a fan of zoom lenses. This is one of the reasons why I'm taking 2 bodies. > Now that I've suggested all these lenses that use the same filter size, let > me say that for my trip and if I were going on yours I would want some "fast > glass." That could be accomplished with the 50mm f1.4 and I would be tempted > to slip a f2 or two in my kit. In fact that is what I'll do. The really > "big & fast glass" will stay at home, however I'll have some stuff that > requires 55mm filters. Well that could be a good argument for keeping the 35/2 in and for the 85/2 over the 90/2.5. As well, I think it makes a good case for the 200/4 over a 200/5, especially if I'm going to be using a converter with it. The 85/2 is barely larger than a 50/1.8 and the 35/2 isn't that big either. > One thing I will consider is what will fit under an airplane seat or in the > overhead. I sure wouldn't want to show up at the airport with my soft > case/back pack and be told I had to give it to the luggage gorillas to put in > luggage compartment because it was too big. It will be a long flight > agonizing flight if you stuff is in the bowels of the plane, rather than with > you. It will be a long flight regardless, but at least you can avoid the > agony part. Fortunately, I have travelled already with my camera backpack and have had no troubles with taking it as carry-on. When I was last in Europe, I even had a sleeping bag and bicycle helmet attached to the outside and they still let me take it on the plane with me! > The tripod issue is one I haven't resolved yet. Yes, I would like a carbon > fiber, however haven't decided to spring for the bucks yet. I do carry a > table top tripod sometimes which can be helpful if I want to be in the > picture or for some macro work. Have thought about a monopod and the carbon > fiber still calls out to me. My concern with a pod in general is whether I'll get much use out of it where I'm travelling with a group. It's an extra piece of gear to lug around that I might never get the opportunity to use because of having to keep up with the group. This is also part of my feeling towards taking macro gear. I might see some good macro opportunities but I might not have the chance to stop and set up the shot. My current pod is a great pod but I think it's too large/heavy to take on this kind of trip. If I do take a pod, I think I'm going to need to get either a smaller model (such as a table top) or carbon fibre. I suppose a monopod would be another option. I believe there are some that double as a walking stick? The extra utility of having a walking stick could be handy in it's own right and having some extra support would be nice (especially if I take a longer lens). -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10545 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:30:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:30:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:30:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28779 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:30:44 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7200C7AJ6HIP@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:27:53 -0400 (AST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:27:54 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-reply-to: To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/13/02 9:45 AM, "Chris Barker" wrote: > Sounds great Andrew. I should suggest that the 24mm is superfluous, > and that you could probably get by with a mini tripod for macro work. > The trouble with close work is that you might forget to check the > focus just before you release the shutter, and if you are > hand-holding that is critical. Yes, given the number of suggestions I've received that I take a longer lens, I'm thinking that I'll leave the 24mm at home and use the space to take a 200. If I do decide to do macro work, I'm going to take a pod. Bill Barber has me thinking about a monopod though. Definitely useful for the camera support for a longer lens, probably not as useful for macro but better than not having any support at all. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11633 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:42:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:42:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:42:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28817 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:42:03 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7200DJ7JMRH8@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:37:39 -0400 (AST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:37:40 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-reply-to: <3DF9E910.2090608@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/13/02 10:05 AM, "Roger Wesson" wrote: > Shame the itinerary is fixed - I can give you tons of ideas of what to > do in Beijing! Do you have free time while you're there? We're spending 2-3 days in Beijing so I will have some free time I think. I know the day we arrive has nothing planned but I might be wiped out from the plane trip (flying from the east coast of Canada). I'm pretty sure that we're going to hit the summer palace and the temple of heaven. > I'm sure you're taking far too much kit - I spent six weeks there over > the summer, and I survived, photographically, with an OM-1 (I took an > OM-1n as well but didn't use it at all), 28/2.8, 50/1.8 and 135/3.5. > But if you're happy carrying it all... I've travelled with this kit before so I know what the weight is like and that was while dealing with my luggage as well at times. I've even contended with this kit (held in a LowePro Rover backpack) with the daypack full of 12 bottles of beer, several hard cover books, and 3 beer glasses, with a sleeping bag and bike helmet attached to the outside as well as managing my other backpack that held all my clothing. It wasn't pleasant but I did it. This trip shouldn't be nearly as insane in terms of what I'll be lugging around so carrying the gear won't be a problem. > Beijing should not be too hot in April, but I hear that dust can be a > major problem - it blows in from the Gobi desert. Careful when you're > changing lenses! Humidity should not be too high in the north but might > be high further south. Probably worth taking some silica gel. Yes, I'll have to keep this in mind. I gather that April is a really good time to be travelling in China though, it's spring time so it's not really hot yet and it's less busy with tourists. Silica gel does sound like a really good plan though. > I expect you'll be looking inside one or two temples while you're there, > and so I recommend either a tripod or a flash for interior shots. I had > neither, and consequently have no interior shots! Yes, this is what really has me leaning towards a monopod now. If I can get one that can double as a walking stick then I think I'll get some good use out of it for that alone, and being able to stick a camera on it for using a long lens, macro, or indoor shot will be great. Plus, I know that while some places have restrictions on tripod use, a monopod is acceptable. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11987 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:51:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 17:51:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 09:51:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mailout05.sul.t-online.com (mailout05.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28835 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:51:47 -0800 Received: from fwd05.sul.t-online.de by mailout05.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18MtyT-0000hR-03; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:51:45 +0100 Received: from garten (520018063974-0001@[80.133.114.222]) by fwd05.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18MtyO-0OhNMeC; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:51:40 +0100 From: jochen.schiffler@t-online.de (Jochen Schiffler) To: "Olympus" Subject: [OM] I'm back and back foam Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:52:18 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal X-Sender: 520018063974-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi everyone! It's been a while since my last contribution. I hope you're all well and had more time to use your beloved equipment than I did. The exams in August were and my new job is kinda time consuming and so I hardly took a shot in the past few months. Any issues I should be aware of? Anyway, here's what made me resubscribe: On the last shots I actually did with my OM-2S I recognised a reddish flare. Some slides are more affected than others, some not at all. I would guess it's light leaking into the camera back due to deteriorated back foam but since I have no experience with those things I decided you guys should have a look at it. You'll probably know better. Here's a sample image: http://www.schiffler.net/stuff/om2s.jpg The flare (or whatever you call it) is quite obvious at the bottom right. Considering the vertical format and the flipped image the lens creates the leak must be close to the viewfinder (IF I'm getting this right). BTW, it was a bright sunny day when I took this image. So what do you think and what should I do about it? Thanx in advance! Cheers Jochen Cologne, Germany P.S.: Here are a few additional shots from the "Tag der Raumfahrt" (Day of Spacetravel) at DLR (German Aerospace Center) near Cologne. Though not specifically space related. http://www.schiffler.net/stuff/tdr1.jpg http://www.schiffler.net/stuff/tdr3.jpg http://www.schiffler.net/stuff/tdr4.jpg < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12622 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 18:21:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 18:21:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 10:21:04 2002 -0800 Received: from web13709.mail.yahoo.com (web13709.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.251]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA28905 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:21:03 -0800 Message-ID: <20021213182049.5375.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.108] by web13709.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:20:49 PST Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:20:49 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021213140430.31157.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >>>>gadget to get the end off the cassette >>Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the >>cassette, or am I wierd? hehehe I've been doing very well lately with using the "wet film-leader" trick. However, I couldn't, for the life of me, get one stinkin roll of PanF to cooperate. After a couple dozen attempts I gave up and went with the tried-and-true brute force method of removing the end off of the cassette. Ended up that the leader had a little kink at the very end (must have been barely hanging onto the take-up spindle's slot) which prevented it from finding its way out of the cassette. So, yes, a bottle opener is a good thing to have around. Besides, you need it for your favorite darkroom beverage anyway. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12952 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 18:27:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 18:27:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 10:27:39 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28928 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:27:38 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2002121318262905100jesshe>; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:26:29 +0000 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:24:38 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20021213182049.5375.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Message-Id: <237154DE-0EC8-11D7-90C1-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oooh, this looks like a thread in the making. What beverages still taste good over the smells of the darkroom? ;-) -Rob On Friday, December 13, 2002, at 10:20 AM, AG Schnozz wrote: > So, yes, a bottle opener is a good thing to have around. > Besides, you need it for your favorite darkroom beverage anyway. > > AG-Schnozz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13319 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 18:35:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 18:35:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 10:35:23 2002 -0800 Received: from mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.117]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28947 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:35:17 -0800 From: bsandyman@att.net Received: from mtiwebc21 ([204.127.135.60]) by mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21>; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:34:07 +0000 Received: from [199.181.237.2] by mtiwebc21; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:34:06 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Digital Threshold Question Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:34:06 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 25 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: YnNhbmR5bWFuQGF0dC5uZXQ= Message-Id: <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I keep reading hype that digital has arrived. For instance some clever person has figured out how to do a better color sensor. (This was in a recent edition of Discover.) The article went on and on about how it made digital as good as film, without any mention of the other drawback, resolution. I have always thought that digital would never equal film simply because a molecule of photo sensitive material would always be smaller then even the smallest CCD element. I loosley followed a thread on this list about how at ~15 MB digital would equal film. The gist being (if I understood correctly, which is by no means certain) that further resolving power on the part of the digital sensor was wasted due to the lack of resolving power of the optics. In other words the sensor would not get more information, because more information would not make it thorugh the lenses. Since the optics are the information bottleneck at this point, then the difference between film and digital becomes moot (as far as resolution is concerned). Is this right? Can some one point me to apropriate literature so I can read up on it myself? I am not going to give up my film gear, and very likely will get more. I just want to know if I have good reason not too, or if I am just going to have to be stubborn. Feel free to respond off list. I don't want to start a war, I just want to be informed. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13606 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 18:40:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 18:40:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 10:40:04 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28951 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:40:00 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021213183609.KZOT21412.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:36:09 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021213113521.00b284e0@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:36:03 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W In-Reply-To: <237154DE-0EC8-11D7-90C1-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> References: <20021213182049.5375.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:24 AM 13/12/2002 -0800, Rob Jackson wrote: >Oooh, this looks like a thread in the making. What beverages still taste >good over the smells of the darkroom? ;-) A good porter or stout, IMNSHO. 8^> Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14172 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 19:04:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 19:04:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 11:04:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mons.uio.no (mons.uio.no [129.240.130.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29009 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:04:55 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by mons.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18Mv3c-0004jF-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:01:08 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18Mv3b-00039o-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:01:08 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021213195003.02066970@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:00:58 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: Re: [OM] OT In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 17:20 13.12.02, Jim Timpe wrote: >Scored a fang for a friend last weekend. Visiting one of my favorite pawn >shops (more from a social standpoint than anything else... they employ a >Rottweiler and a standard Poodle roaming the store as 'security', and I'm a >bit of a dog lover), and saw a fairly large piece of glass staring up at me >from the display case. It was a C*non 200mm F2.8 lens... and the tag said >'125'. I did my usual scrutinizing, and said I'd offer one hundred even >for it. She agreed. I picked up a C*non 24/1.4 for ~300USD today. I've not decided what to do with it, but the price was certainly right. I may revenge some of the big white Zuikos that were converted to other lens mounts, or just sell it and put the profit into more Zuikos. No clunky C*non cameras for me. For starters I'll just make an adapter to use it on a simple shutterless 6x6 camera. It should be even better for northers lights than my good ol' Zuiko 21/2.0. Sorry, just had to share this... Thomas < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14658 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 19:24:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 19:24:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 11:24:11 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29050 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:24:09 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:20:19 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBDJK4k22649 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:20:05 GMT Message-ID: <3DFA32E4.7060906@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:20:04 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London camera shops References: <3DF9D111.7070301@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll have to check out Nicholas, though I have no OMoney until after Christmas now. Maybe I'll find the elusive 21/3.5 for 50 quid there... The do sounds like a good one! Hope you're recovering from the hangover. You might appreciate this legendary retort given to the original 'tired and emotional', Foreign Secretary George Brown, at a diplomatic reception in 1968: 'I will not dance with you for three reasons. First, because you are drunk. Second, because this is not a waltz but the national anthem of Peru. And third, because I am not a beautiful lady in red; I am the Cardinal Archbishop of Lima'. Cheers, Roger Chris Barker wrote: > Roger > > I have just been in London - I should have suggested a meeting, except I > am seriously "tired and emotional". The London universities have an air > squadron (ULAS) with its town HQ in Brompton Road and we had an > end-of-term "revue" there last night. Aunty Betty would not pay for a > night's hotel, so we (the staff of the squadron) kipped on the chairs > after the revelries. Some brave souls went with the students to > Hombre's (?) off Oxford Street, but I find socialising with 'young > people" tiring enough as it is, and 0200 bed time is late enough for me > now. I have not bopped since the last one - in October ;-) > > The reason for this post is that I visited Nicholas in Camden High St, > near Mornington Crescent tube station. It is a bit of a shambles, worse > than Campkins on King's Parade in Cambridge, but it looks like a > treasure trove of stuff. I wanted to feel a Contax G2, but it was > locked away and could not be retrieved for half-an-hour; my tiredness > and emotion persuaded me to head off to King's Cross for the train > home. Nicholas is well worth a visit for OM stuff in my opinion (see > adverts in AP). > > Chris > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15460 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 20:10:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 20:10:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 12:10:01 2002 -0800 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29179 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:10:00 -0800 Received: from pool0649.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.212.139] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Mw7n-0000vA-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:09:35 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> References: <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:09:20 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Threshold Question Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I keep reading hype that digital has arrived. For instance some clever person >has figured out how to do a better color sensor. (This was in a recent edition >of Discover.) The article went on and on about how it made digital as good as >film, without any mention of the other drawback, resolution. > >I have always thought that digital would never equal film simply because a >molecule of photo sensitive material would always be smaller then even the >smallest CCD element. > >I loosley followed a thread on this list about how at ~15 MB digital >would equal >film. The gist being (if I understood correctly, which is by no means certain) >that further resolving power on the part of the digital sensor was >wasted due to >the lack of resolving power of the optics. In other words the sensor would not >get more information, because more information would not make it thorugh the >lenses. Since the optics are the information bottleneck at this >point, then the >difference between film and digital becomes moot (as far as resolution is >concerned). > >Is this right? > >Can some one point me to apropriate literature so I can read up on it myself? > >I am not going to give up my film gear, and very likely will get more. I just >want to know if I have good reason not too, or if I am just going to >have to be >stubborn. > >Feel free to respond off list. I don't want to start a war, I just want to be >informed. The last thing I read was that 35mm film performance would be equalled at 8-10 megapixels. It was written before such sensors were available. That time has arrived, but they are still very expensive compared to film cameras. That mathematical estimate did not take the subjective reaction to viewing images recorded digitally however. The eye seems to like digital images better than higher resolution film images. There are several on the list who are very happy with the 5 megapixels of their E-20s. In addition the Super CCD from Fuji and the Foveon seem to provide better images with fewer pixels that "regular" ccds. I don't understand how a pixel can be as small as a grain crystal(not an individual molecule) on a piece of film either. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15932 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 20:29:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 20:29:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 12:29:25 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.hccnet.nl (smtp.hccnet.nl [62.251.0.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29219 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:29:22 -0800 Received: from fsc.ujwf24.nl by smtp.hccnet.nl via fia50-1.dsl.hccnet.nl [62.251.1.50] with SMTP id VAA28564 (8.8.8/1.13); Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:25:34 +0100 (MET) From: Frank van Lindert To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS: Olympus IS 3000 + G-40 flash Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:25:34 +0100 Message-ID: <3mfkvu070p2l8kk3qmo5ptlhpjfhg537qa@4ax.com> References: <000d01c29d65$b27a1c40$747a063e@default> In-Reply-To: <000d01c29d65$b27a1c40$747a063e@default> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have for sale a IS-3000 camera in excellent condition, $ 220, and a matched G-40 flash, $ 120. The IS-3000 is almost the same as the USA IS-3 version, but there is one important difference: The IS-3000 has Super FP flash, allowing for flash synchronization until 1/2000 sec... More details on this camera can be found in the IS section of the e-SIF: http://olympus.dementia.org/eSIF/om-sif/is-series/is-series.htm or http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif/om-sif/is-series/is-series.htm I will ship around the globe (shipping cost extra). PayPal welcome. When interested please let me know in a private email message Do not simply press the reply button but mailto:Frank.van@Lindert.com =46rank van Lindert, Utrecht NL. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16244 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 20:34:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 20:34:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 12:34:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com (mailout04.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29230 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:34:43 -0800 Received: from fwd05.sul.t-online.de by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18MwW7-0001f3-08; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:34:39 +0100 Received: from garten (520018063974-0001@[80.133.114.222]) by fwd05.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18MwW1-1iJ3GCC; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:34:33 +0100 From: jochen.schiffler@t-online.de (Jochen Schiffler) To: Subject: [OM] OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:35:14 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> X-Sender: 520018063974-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, to add some additional ammo to the 'film vs. digital' debate I recommend a visit to the website of 'Max Lyons'. For quite some time now I'm planning to buy an EOS 30 film camera and never thought of digital. After I accidently found Max' website while looking for Can*n lens reviews my decision for the EOS 30 lost some of it's power and I wish I could afford an additional D 60 (or G3 to start with) ;-) Dunno whether some of you already know his website http://www.tawbaware.com/ or http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/index.html for the galleries but it's worth a deep dive. This guy shoots exclusively digital and besides his 'normal' pictures he creates breathtaking panoramic images by stitching and stacking multiple high-resolution shots together (resulting in 6-40! megapixel images). When I saw them for the first time I was (usually I hate to say this) blown away. You may argue about the changes color and parallax error correction tools do to the original images but for me the results matter and Max' results are truely awesome. In fact the blended images (one set of images for the highlights combinded with a set for optimised shadow detail) show more detail due to a higher dynamic range and IMHO they look more like the human eye would see the scene. I was intrigued by his 'Digital Scotland" gallery and this is one of my favourites (if the link is split in two or more lines, you may have to copy/paste both parts to the address field of your browser): http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/cgi-bin/image.pl?showFileName=SCO_0369-SCO _0372_Eilean_Donan_Castle_Pano.jpg&gallery=9 Besides the panoramic images Max Lyons simply takes great photographs and I really don't care if they're digital or not. A shame there's no digital SLR that eats Zuikos (or did I miss something important). Nonetheless I'll always keep my film camera(s). 'digital' regards Jochen < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16616 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 20:42:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 20:42:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 12:42:41 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29242 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:42:39 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-25.s960.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.25] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Mwco-00030T-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:41:34 -0500 Message-ID: <000b01c2a2e8$08051b60$19e47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <4.2.2.20021213074212.00b1e750@mail.telusplanet.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:41:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Pulling the film through the light tight felt again invites the possibility of scratches. Carry a medium size pair of wire cutters into the darkroom. In the dark it is very easy to grip the edge of the cassette with the pliers. Then just pull the end cap off. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garth Wood" To: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 10:02 AM Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W > At 11:40 AM 13/12/2002 +0000, Alan Wood wrote: > > [snip] > > >For developing a film, you also need: > > > >gadget to get the end off the cassette > > A better way to do that, IMNSHO, is to rewind the film such that the > "tongue" is still sticking out when you open the film back. Cut the film > tongue off, leaving a blunt, square edge. Put two small snips through the > film at 45 degree angles to the edges. Your film edge coming out of the > canister should look like this: > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16986 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 20:54:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 20:54:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 12:54:12 2002 -0800 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (murphys.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.225]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA29268 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:54:09 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 21129 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 20:52:36 -0000 Received: from a174-07-02.dial.plus.net.uk (195.166.140.174) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 20:52:36 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Threshold Question Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:52:24 +0000 Message-ID: <0shkvucalmff2h3qj0fmbeg91bb1v3o90d@4ax.com> References: <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:09:20 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >That mathematical estimate did not take the subjective reaction to=20 >viewing images recorded digitally however. The eye seems to like=20 >digital images better than higher resolution film images. There are=20 >several on the list who are very happy with the 5 megapixels of their=20 >E-20s. In addition the Super CCD from Fuji and the Foveon seem to=20 >provide better images with fewer pixels that "regular" ccds. > >I don't understand how a pixel can be as small as a grain crystal(not=20 >an individual molecule) on a piece of film either. No, I can't explain this either, but my E-10 images continue to amaze me, even compared with those from medium format (Bronica ETRS). I also scan my medium format negs with an Epson 2450 scanner. They amaze me too, although many have pointed out elsewhere that the 2450 is no more than just adequate for the job. Is it simply subjective, or is there a real measurable reason for this? John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17347 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 21:03:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 21:03:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 13:03:22 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29280 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:03:20 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-190-88.adsl.pi.be [212.239.190.88]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id F228136DDC for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:02:47 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:02:51 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 13-12-2002 05:29 schreef Andrew Dacey op frugal@tildefrugal.net: > Okay, I've kept this under wraps for long enough. Next April I will be > travelling to China for 22 days. I'm travelling with a group so the > itinerary is fixed. Here's the short version of what I'll be covering: >=20 > I'm looking at taking: >=20 > 2 bodies (either 2 OM-1Ns or a 1n and a 2s) > 21/3.5 > 24/2.8 > 28/2.8 > 35/2 > 50/1.8 (need to get mine replaced before then, sticky aperture) > 85/2 or Tamron 90/2.5 macro > 135/3.5 >=20 >From my experience in bus travelling; a hood for your lens comes in very handy... the closer you keep it to the window of the bus the less reflections. If it is a rubber one, you could even press it to the window (with a high shutter speed and if the roads are ok). A polarizer could be a problem in the bus because some windows are polarized as well and will give a kind of moir=E9 patterns (obvious and visible in the viewfinder, so no real problem, just annoying, and makes the polarizer unusable). When I went for = a tour on my own I always decided what to do before, am I in the city (narrow streets, wide angle, avenues...?), fields, street shots... and mostly took only one, sometimes two lenses. The advantage to me is that you know what you'll see and loose less time by changing lenses and thinking. On foot you can step closer or step back easily (very difficult in a bus, btw an 85f2 will just reach to the other side without seeing any window frame... and I was very lucky the driver cleaned the windows every day!) >=20 > Film: >=20 > Mostly Provia 100 probably throw in some 400 and maybe some Velvia, > especially if I take the pod. I'd like to try some of the Kodak E100VS or > E100SW before I go and that might change my mind. May also throw in some > B&W. >=20 fast B&W can be very nice for night shots without flash. Have a nice trip, Iwert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17908 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 21:28:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 21:28:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 13:28:15 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29321 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:28:13 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18MxLt-00025X-00 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:28:09 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:27:19 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <20021213182049.5375.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There is a special tool made for pulling the cassette ends. I think Porter's sells them. I will find out. I always used a church key too, along with some short unchurchy words. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of AG Schnozz Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:21 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W >>>>gadget to get the end off the cassette >>Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the >>cassette, or am I wierd? hehehe I've been doing very well lately with using the "wet film-leader" trick. However, I couldn't, for the life of me, get one stinkin roll of PanF to cooperate. After a couple dozen attempts I gave up and went with the tried-and-true brute force method of removing the end off of the cassette. Ended up that the leader had a little kink at the very end (must have been barely hanging onto the take-up spindle's slot) which prevented it from finding its way out of the cassette. So, yes, a bottle opener is a good thing to have around. Besides, you need it for your favorite darkroom beverage anyway. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18227 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 21:32:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 21:32:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 13:32:07 2002 -0800 Received: from protactinium (protactinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29329 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:32:04 -0800 Received: from host213-1-148-191.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.1.148.191] helo=Inwin) by protactinium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18MxMf-0002QO-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:28:58 +0000 Message-ID: <002901c2a2ee$d9038d40$bf9401d5@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Re: Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:28:15 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ------Original message------ >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:10:26 -0500 >From: Charles Sdunek >Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W >Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the cassette, or am I >wierd? hehehe You don't need to open the cassette! Feed the film into the developing-tank spiral whilst gradually pulling the film out of the cassette until there is no more film to pull out. Then take a pair of scissors and cut the film along the edge of the cassette. Finally give the spiral a couple of more twists to ensure that the last bit of film is located in the spiral. If you hold the spiral so that the film and cassette hang down during loading, the cassette weights the film and stops it twisting into a horrible unloadable mess. Don't pull all the film out in one go -- pull out only a few inches as you gradually load it into the developing spiral. -- from Cy in the UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18584 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 21:40:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 21:40:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 13:40:56 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29340 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:40:54 -0800 Received: from user-2inish2.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.114.34] helo=earthlink.net) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MxXm-0002vP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:40:26 -0800 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:40:19 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <000f01c2a089$c8048ba0$48fcbed0@swbell.net> Message-Id: <79EA7110-0EE3-11D7-841C-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 12:21 PM, Bill Pearce wrote: -snip > > Both Mamiya's have well regarded lenses. Both are fairly compact. Both > present some ergonomic challenges that the Bronica doesn't (It's > really well > thought out in regard to loading and lens changing). . > -snip > > Bill Pearce > I was curious as to what you meant by the Mamiya ergonomic challenges. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18930 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 21:49:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 21:49:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 13:49:46 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29362 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:49:44 -0800 Received: from user-2inish2.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.114.34] helo=earthlink.net) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Mxgl-0000eg-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:49:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:49:36 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Threshold Question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <0shkvucalmff2h3qj0fmbeg91bb1v3o90d@4ax.com> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > No, I can't explain this either, but my E-10 images continue to amaze > me, even compared with those from medium format (Bronica ETRS). > > I also scan my medium format negs with an Epson 2450 scanner. They > amaze me too, although many have pointed out elsewhere that the 2450 > is no more than just adequate for the job. > > Is it simply subjective, or is there a real measurable reason for > this? > > > > John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) > > I suspect what you are comparing is a good, though resolution challenged digital camera, and output from an unsuitable scanner. You might, as an experiment, have images from each printed professionally by a good processor. Or just have an image from the Bronica scanned at 4000dpi and look at the result on your scanner compared to the best that the E-10 can do. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19211 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 21:50:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 21:50:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 13:50:43 2002 -0800 Received: from shell.datasync.com (shell.datasync.com [205.216.82.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29366 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:50:41 -0800 Received: (from farrar@localhost) by shell.datasync.com (8.8.8/Datasync) id PAA22663 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:50:39 -0600 Message-Id: <200212132150.PAA22663@shell.datasync.com> Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:50:39 -0600 (CST) From: "Paul Farrar" In-Reply-To: from "Richard F. Man" at Dec 12, 2002 11:19:36 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL5] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > At 10:52 PM 12/12/2002 -0600, Paul D. Farrar wrote: > >...The procedure is > >1. 400 or 800 ISO print film. 400 for brighter venues. > > OK, in fact, I was using the slide film for that particular set of pictures They make films specifically for this. The 400 or 800 speed portrait films. I just use Walmart Superia, but that does sometimes give poor skin tones. > > >2. Set everything auto. Wide diffuser on flash for evenness. > >3. Find a representative scene with no lights in it. Set an aperture that > >gives > >a shutter speed of about 1/30. Since the actual shutter speed will be 1/60, > >areas not dominated by flash will not black out. You should be able to get > >about f4-5.6. Then leave the aperture ring there. > > Heh, if I get 1/30 w/ f4-5.6, I will probably just shoot w/o flash! But I > get your point.... Here's what you do. Turn the aperture ring so the shutterr speed is over 1/60. Take the ambient light picture. Indoor ambient light usually comes in one of two flavors: 1. Dim and orange. 2. Dim and green. Turn the aperture ring to get 2-3 ticks below 1/60. Take your balanced flash exposure. Turn the ring to get a SS of 1/15 or less to get the traditional amateur ghosts-in-a-cave shot. > >4. Shoot away. > > > >Or buy a 3Ti, the only OM properly designed for indoor flash. > > OK, AFAIK, the only difference is that the 3Ti does not set the shutter to > 1/60th right? That is a BIG difference. It gives you full control over both ambient and flash. Earlier OM cameras were built for the deer-in-headlights type flash look. > If so, can't I accomplish the same thing by doing the OM-4 > slow sync hack and tape over the frontmost right contact? No. That isn't the same thing. That only works when the shot is ambient light dominated. That is a nice effect (much beloved by contemporary Nat. Geog. photographers), but now that you have a modern Metz, you can get the effect with no taping. > > >Modern Metz units are handy because they have a large number of closely > >spaced auto and manual settings, and the auto ones don't shift with ISO. > >T20's and T32's auto and manual settings are much too strong, too few, > >and too closely spaced for balancing with indoor ambient light at non- > >ridiculous shutter speeds. > > OK, I just bought a Metz 54-Mz tonight, they found a "demo" SCA-321 in the > drawer so the guy just threw it in for free ($50 value, but I buy lots of > stuff from them anyway...) > > So what's the best way to achieve flash heaven w/ the OM4(T) and 54-MMZ > combo, for > 1) indoor flash, <--- just set the thing to TTL and try to bounce? I also > bought a little diffuser cap... You can do 3Ti tricks, but with auto control from the flash, not the TTL sensor. You can't do this with OM flashes. The F280 has no auto mode, and the T flashes' auto modes are far too powerful. The T32's least powerful setting is f/11 at ISO 800, which would require a SS of about 1/4s or so for proper balance. Try several shots with flash ranging from 2 stops under ambient to 2 stops over. Each level has a different effect. > > and > 2) outdoor fill flash <-- I think I finally understand this one, set the > aperture right below 1/60 and keep firing away :-), possibly w/ the taping > over the contact hack? Put the F280 back on! > > >Paul > > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19824 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 22:22:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 22:22:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 14:22:01 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29411 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:21:58 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021213220923.PJSL148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:09:23 -0500 Message-ID: <009001c2a2ec$19d0efa0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <79EA7110-0EE3-11D7-841C-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:10:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:09:23 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" To: Sent: Friday, 13 December, 2002 05:40 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Albert, Albert, Albert.... > > On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 12:21 PM, Bill Pearce wrote: > > -snip > > > > > Both Mamiya's have well regarded lenses. Both are fairly compact. Both > > present some ergonomic challenges that the Bronica doesn't (It's > > really well > > thought out in regard to loading and lens changing). . > > > -snip > > > > Bill Pearce > > > > I was curious as to what you meant by the Mamiya ergonomic challenges. There are no ergonomic challenges with my M7. jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20113 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 22:25:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 22:25:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 14:25:47 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29426 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:25:36 -0800 Received: from user-2inish2.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.114.34] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MyEj-0007b3-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:24:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:24:31 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OT - Awesome Digital Photography Content-Type: text/plain; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Friday, December 13, 2002, at 12:35 PM, Jochen Schiffler wrote: > Hi, > > to add some additional ammo to the 'film vs. digital' debate I > recommend a > visit to the website of 'Max Lyons'. > For quite some time now I'm planning to buy an EOS 30 film camera and > never > thought of digital. After I accidently found Max' website while > looking for > Can*n lens reviews my decision for the EOS 30 lost some of it's power > and I > wish I could afford an additional D 60 (or G3 to start with) ;-) > > Dunno whether some of you already know his website > http://www.tawbaware.com/ > or http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/index.html for the galleries but > it's > worth a deep dive. > > This guy shoots exclusively digital and besides his 'normal' pictures > he > creates breathtaking panoramic images by stitching and stacking > multiple > high-resolution shots together (resulting in 6-40! megapixel images). > When I > saw them for the first time I was (usually I hate to say this) blown > away. > > You may argue about the changes color and parallax error correction > tools do > to the original images but for me the results matter and Max' results > are > truely awesome. In fact the blended images (one set of images for the > highlights combinded with a set for optimised shadow detail) show more > detail due to a higher dynamic range and IMHO they look more like the > human > eye would see the scene. > > I was intrigued by his 'Digital Scotland" gallery and this is one of my > favourites (if the link is split in two or more lines, you may have to > copy/paste both parts to the address field of your browser): > http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/cgi-bin/ > image.pl?showFileName=SCO_0369-SCO > _0372_Eilean_Donan_Castle_Pano.jpg&gallery=9 > > > Besides the panoramic images Max Lyons simply takes great photographs > and I > really don't care if they're digital or not. > > A shame there's no digital SLR that eats Zuikos (or did I miss > something > important). > Nonetheless I'll always keep my film camera(s). > > > 'digital' regards > Jochen > An interesting site with nice images although I might question some of the math being an idiot myself. He notes Kodak's web site explanation that a 3072 x 2048 scan captures all the information on a 35mm slide, but anyone will tell you who has used one that a 4000dpi scanner captures more than a 2000dpi scanner. A drum scanner will get more. It might explain the poor quality of Kodak Photo CDs. Kodak kind of then contradicts itself by bringing out a 14 megapixel camera. I also get very confused when people start talking about comparisons between scanners which I understand gives you dpi which can be any combination of RGB and photo CCD which are mapped and only R, G, or B which reduces the megapixel count to about a 1/3 of the stated. I agree. His Scotland pictures are very nice. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20366 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 22:26:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 22:26:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 14:26:29 2002 -0800 Received: from sand.cybersurf.com (sand.cybersurf.com [209.197.145.195]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29430 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:26:18 -0800 Received: from localhost (cal-uas-2-209197182146.3web.net [209.197.182.146]) by sand.cybersurf.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBDMOaoA012010 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:24:49 -0700 From: Sean Davis To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Vivitar 400/5.6 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:24:21 -0700 Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, Wondering if anyone has any experience with the Vivitar 400/5.6. I've got one that i've had for a few months now, and i have difficulty getting sharp pictures with it - even 4x6's aren't very sharp - i can tell that it would look really awful going larger. I always use a tripod or bean bag and frequently use the timer so as to avoid shake (shooting with a 2n so i have no mirror lock up). I'm wondering if perhaps higher shutter speeds might help (250 and above), or if it's just not a very sharp lens. In any case, it seems to me to be woefully underperforming at the present. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Sean Davis p.s. anyone familiar with the Tamron SP 300/5.6? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20799 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 22:43:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 22:43:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 14:43:50 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29453 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:43:47 -0800 Received: from user-2inish2.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.114.34] helo=earthlink.net) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18MyX2-0000an-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:43:45 -0800 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:43:38 -0800 Subject: [OM] [OT]EPay Fraud with a Happy Ending Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <51EDF4C8-0EEC-11D7-841C-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This was a pretty good story for ePay people. http://www.remodern.com/caught.html < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21489 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 23:22:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 23:22:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 15:22:24 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (outbound04.telus.net [199.185.220.223]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29497 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:22:20 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021213231834.MYKS4607.priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:18:34 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021213161658.00a9f040@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:18:31 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W In-Reply-To: <000b01c2a2e8$08051b60$19e47ad1@hppav> References: <4.2.2.20021213074212.00b1e750@mail.telusplanet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:41 PM 13/12/2002 -0500, John Hermanson wrote: >Pulling the film through the light tight felt again invites the possibility >of scratches. Carry a medium size pair of wire cutters into the darkroom. >In the dark it is very easy to grip the edge of the cassette with the >pliers. Then just pull the end cap off. I've heard this objection many times, and yet I've used this technique off and on for the last 30 years or so, and have yet to experience *any* significant scratching whatsoever. Am I just inhumanly clean, or are most people obsessing too much on this point? Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21884 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 23:31:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 23:31:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 15:31:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29532 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:31:49 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBDNOGN7010259 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:24:17 +0100 (MET) Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:24:13 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Message-Id: <20021214002413.42c05e24.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> References: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA29532 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:43:25 -0500 "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > Go over toe photo.net and search for threads on the G2. It's > quirky camera and many people don't like it after extensive use.=20 > But it takes exceptional pictures. Nothing to do with OM, but.....I have a good friend who has a Contax G1, which I was allowed to play with intensively. I let him enjoy some OM stuff meanwhile :) The G1 and G2 are not *that* different, so I permit myself to chip in.....and bring the thread more OT than it is.... It is a nice camera, however it does have its quirks. Still, though, I found that after a short while I had grown quite comfortable with it, and the only thing I did not immediately like was the AF, as you point out below. >=20 > Summary? It's an interchangable lens, point-and-shoot. The lens > are fabulous. The AF is a bit noisy, the viewfinder is a bit dim.=20 > MF is only possible with focus-by-wire, no focusing with the lenses > directly. =20 >=20 I did not try the camera under dim conditions, however the viewfinder of the G1 was not a problem. It was in August in Japan, so sunlight was not in short supply.... The focus system of the G1 was weird, though. The AF took getting used to, however MF did not work atall for me. My friend said, that it did not work for him either, however that he'd eventually grown quite fond of the AF of the camera. I've honestly considered rangefinder cameras for a while, and have even been close to a Leica M7 for a while. If I was to choose between the M7 and the G1 (or G2), I think I would go G2. The M7 seems clumsy in its handeling, whereas the G1 felt very ergonomic and nice...and the glass for the Contax'en is absolutely wonderfull too :) This is just my opinion. Also, the M7 is amazingly expensive, IMO. Still, though, I have not yet found justification enough to actually acquire either :) > I prefer a Contax T2 as a take-everywhere camera. >=20 Never had my hands on a T2. I use a Minox Tlx as take-everywhere :) --thomas > Search on Google for Contax, G2, Leica, Review, Opinion and > combinations of those words. >=20 > Skip >=20 >=20 > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Chris Barker imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk > Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:48:22 +0000 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] OT - Contax G2? >=20 >=20 > Off topic: has anyone experience of the G2? I am interested in=20 > autofocus without going wunderbrick to complement my OM system. >=20 > Chris > --=20 > _ > ~~~~~ ><> > Chris Barker > Gamlingay, England > mailto:chris@threeshoes.co.uk > mailto:cmib@macunlimited.net >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22627 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 00:19:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 00:19:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 16:19:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29601 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:19:28 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.140]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H732ZC02.GO4 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:35:36 +0800 Message-ID: <00ac01c2a305$f2965e60$8c5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:15:45 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks very much Joe. I also thought of trying this on digital cameras. I am thinking of taping over the tiny flash in the digicam just enough so that I am able to trigger another flash such as the T32 fitted with a wireless optical foot. Titoy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Gwinn" To: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:07 PM Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) > At 5:00 AM +0000 12/13/02, olympus-digest wrote: > >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 05:39:12 +0800 > >From: "Clemente Colayco" > >Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) > > > >How low a power must the small flash be to avoid messing up the exposure? > > > >Snip: I most often put a tiny manual flash on the camera, with the larger > >real flashes distributed around the subject to taste. The pipsqueak flash > >on the camera triggers the real flashes when the picture is taken. The lack > >of wires is a real help, and flash triggers are cheaper than radio triggers. > > It depends on the intent. > > The small flash can be used as a fill flash. In this case, it is pointed directly at the subject and should put perhaps half or a quarter (one stop, two stops) less light on the subject than the main flash. Some experimentation is in order, to get the fill effect without the fill look, or even the hated flash look. > > If the small flash is a trigger only, you want it to put three stops less light on the subject than the main flash. Typically, I do this by pointing the flash straight up, rather than at the subject. Then the small flash just adds to the ambient in the room (if the room isn't too large). Outdoors, or in a big room, you may do better pointing the small flash at the subject but dialing the flashpower down. Anyway, the flash triggers on my main flash units are sensitive enough that it's easy to arrange things so the main flash dominates. > > Although I give specific rules above, I must say that getting this to work isn't hard, and almost any reasonable setup will work. That's one reason I like it. > > Joe > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22879 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 00:19:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 00:19:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 16:19:55 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29604 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:19:50 -0800 From: Pandionhalietius@aol.com Received: from Pandionhalietius@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.174.13794a11 (1320) for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:17:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <174.13794a11.2b2bd2b0@aol.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:17:52 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Mamiya MF vs. Olympus; overexposure; being good has nothing to do wi... To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_174.13794a11.2b2bd2b0_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_174.13794a11.2b2bd2b0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I will pretty much agree with the former Mamiya 7 statement, it really does take up only as much space as my typical Olympus outfit. It is not a big camera and the lenses are not big either. When I take an Olympus outift I take a couple extra lenses so in the end each outfit weighs 5-6 pounds( Mamiya body-2 lenses versus Olympus OM body 3-5 lenses). They compliment each other very well! John > > "A Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses is actually lighter and in a smaller kit > than my Oly stuff." > > I assume this is a joke. When I worked for Bendix, I carried an OM-1 around > my neck and eight lenses + Vitovar 292 in a tiny case. The only way "a > Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses" could take up less space would be if you > Olympus outfit included virtually every lens and accessory Olympus ever > made. Furthermore, my kit included lenses for which there is no Mamiya 7 > equivalent --part1_174.13794a11.2b2bd2b0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I will pretty much agree with the former Mamiya 7 statement, it really does take up only as much space as my typical Olympus outfit.  It is not a big camera and the lenses are not big either.  When I take an Olympus outift I take a couple extra lenses so in the end each outfit weighs 5-6 pounds( Mamiya body-2 lenses versus Olympus OM body 3-5 lenses).
They compliment each other very well!
John

"A Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses is actually lighter and in a smaller kit
than my Oly stuff."

I assume this is a joke. When I worked for Bendix, I carried an OM-1 around
my neck and eight lenses + Vitovar 292 in a tiny case. The only way "a
Mamiya 7 and a couple of lenses" could take up less space would be if you
Olympus outfit included virtually every lens and accessory Olympus ever
made. Furthermore, my kit included lenses for which there is no Mamiya 7
equivalent

 --part1_174.13794a11.2b2bd2b0_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23426 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 00:47:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 00:47:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 16:47:48 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29648 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:47:44 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh46.interisland.net [12.17.134.46]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBE0iAs22062 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:44:10 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFA7FA6.454EC795@interisland.net> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:47:34 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] 85/2 and 100/2.8 MC vs SC versions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id QAA29648 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Can anyone who has used both the single coated and multicoated versions of these lenses comment on the performance differences. I'm assuming there are more design differences than just mc vs sc. I would think that the mc would have less importance on telephotos than on wides but what about other issues? Is it worth the upgrade? I have the opportunity but don't know if it's worth it or not. (Yeah, yeah I know, buy 'em all and let my heirs sort it out :>), not an option at this point). I know this topic has been discussed but more as a tangent to another thread. I wonder if there is any consensus. mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24271 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 01:49:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 01:49:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 17:49:15 2002 -0800 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA29748 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:49:13 -0800 Received: (qmail 24698 invoked by uid 417); 14 Dec 2002 01:49:12 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 01:49:12 -0000 Received: from enterprise.SoftHome.net ([204.39.228.183]) (AUTH: LOGIN csdunek@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:49:11 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021213035304.00a6ecb0@pop.softhome.net> X-Sender: csdunek@pop.softhome.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:53:38 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Charles Sdunek Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W In-Reply-To: <237154DE-0EC8-11D7-90C1-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> References: <20021213182049.5375.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My first suggestion would be Guinness. Chuck At 01:24 PM 12/13/02, you wrote: >Oooh, this looks like a thread in the making. What beverages still taste >good over the smells of the darkroom? ;-) > >-Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24647 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 02:01:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:01:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 18:01:29 2002 -0800 Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.136]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA29756 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:01:26 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b122.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.122]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBE21Mc28161 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:01:23 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:58:31 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <48270-220021251314397241@M2W055.mail2web.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I generally just rap the cassette's spindle sharply on the bench, floor etc and the opposite end cover will pop off allowing the spooled film to fall into one's hand (or unravel itself into the distance leaving the film all over the laundry floor!). Now a bottle opener, that's an idea! John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of om@skipwilliams.com Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 1:39 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Oh, I forgot that one. I use a bottle opener too. Perhaps there are other better gadgets, but I've never needed one. Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Charles Sdunek csdunek@SoftHome.net Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:10:26 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Doesnt everyone just use a bottle opener to open the cassette, or am I wierd? hehehe Chuck At 06:40 AM 12/13/02, you wrote: >Albert asked: > > Since I've never done it before, can someone list the items I need >to do > my own B&W development? > > I need a darkbag, a can, and a clock. That's all I know. Please >tell > me more about my darkroom needs. > >For developing a film, you also need: > >gadget to get the end off the cassette < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25096 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 02:22:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:22:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 18:22:54 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA29791 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:22:52 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <200212140221440520014mq9e>; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 02:21:44 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:24:06 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Many good suggestions in this thread. A few other thoughts: I don't use a changing bag. I wait 'til after sundown and retreat to the hall bathroom with all the lights turned off at that end of the house. And I can't remember where I left the changing bag. Anyway, loading reels inside a bag does require quite a bit of dexterity. I find it lots easier standing at the counter in the dark without a bag squeezing on everything. Popping the film cassette end off with a church key is easy. Remembering where you left the church key last time you souped film is hard - is there a trend developing here? (so keep it with your tank and other stuff - nobody uses it for beer anymore.) Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25470 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 02:32:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:32:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 18:32:32 2002 -0800 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA29823 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:32:29 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax20-018.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.129.18]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBE2WPF27265 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:32:26 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:32:06 +1100 Message-ID: <001f01c2a319$0265c890$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20021213161658.00a9f040@mail.telusplanet.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > I've heard this objection many times, and yet I've used this > technique off > and on for the last 30 years or so, and have yet to experience *any* > significant scratching whatsoever. Am I just inhumanly > clean, or are most > people obsessing too much on this point? > I agree, I think the possibility of damage to the film is greater with potentially a whole cassette unravelling in the changing bag. Everything is more controllable by feeding a few inches at a time direct from the cassette. Can't say that I have ever had problems doing it this way in 34 years ! ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25762 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 02:35:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:35:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 18:35:56 2002 -0800 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA29831 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:35:54 -0800 Received: (qmail 32475 invoked by uid 417); 14 Dec 2002 02:35:53 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:35:53 -0000 Received: from enterprise.SoftHome.net ([204.39.228.183]) (AUTH: LOGIN csdunek@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:35:49 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021213043846.00a0ebb0@pop.softhome.net> X-Sender: csdunek@pop.softhome.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:39:53 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Charles Sdunek Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W In-Reply-To: References: <48270-220021251314397241@M2W055.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One of the benefits of buying bulk film is cassettes with screw tops! heheh, Charles At 08:58 PM 12/13/02, you wrote: >I generally just rap the cassette's spindle sharply on the bench, floor etc >and the opposite end cover will pop off allowing the spooled film to fall >into one's hand (or unravel itself into the distance leaving the film all >over the laundry floor!). Now a bottle opener, that's an idea! > >John. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26149 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 02:52:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:52:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 18:52:45 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA29851 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:52:43 -0800 Received: (qmail 25192 invoked by uid 706); 14 Dec 2002 02:51:18 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 02:51:17 -0000 Message-ID: <003901c2a31c$77d73700$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> <2g2kvugp8nt7oha2clghafo2lqm5g2b48j@4ax.com> Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:56:56 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: > > I'm sorry, I didn't fully answer your question! Your supposition is > correct - the flash duration governs the exposure time provided, as I > said, the flash is by far the dominant light source. Provided this is > true, for all practical purposes, you can forget about camera shake > and motion blur. The flash duration from auto flash guns is rarely > more than 1/1000 second at full power and can be far less than that > when quenched under auto control. I remember the Metz 45T series flash was 1/300s at full power output, rather slow when compared to the 1/1000s T32 do. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26622 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 03:17:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 03:17:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 19:17:32 2002 -0800 Received: from mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29871 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:17:28 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b122.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.122]) by mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBE3HON09555 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:17:25 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: "The Zuikoholics" Subject: [OM] Beater or Mint Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:14:33 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca G'day Zuiks, I recently bid on an OM-1 that had apparently seen better days and was successful. The seller was pretty correct in saying the camera needed 'some repairs'. In fact when I left it with the Sydney repairer he rang me before commencing work to say that although he could bring it up to scratch 'as new' it would cost about $US110 and one could buy a good example for that much. The thing is I only spent $US75 for the camera so am thinking that a total of $US185 for a fully working, CLA'd OM-1 with a new prism and twelve month warranty from the repairer was a better bet than a $US200 near-mint unit (the latter may still need a CLA). Am I wrong? John (who's really trying to justify a phoned 'go-ahead' to my friendly and very capable repairer). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27021 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 03:33:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 03:33:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 19:33:06 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29887 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:33:04 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <20021214033155052001566ge>; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 03:31:56 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Beater or Mint Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:34:19 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's a noble thing that you do, John, rescuing and nursing back to health that poor, neglected OM. . . (how's that for rationalizing?) Gary -----Original Message----- In fact when I left it with the Sydney repairer he rang me before commencing work to say that although he could bring it up to scratch 'as new' it would cost about $US110 and one could buy a good example for that much. The thing is I only spent $US75 for the camera so am thinking that a total of $US185 for a fully working, CLA'd OM-1 with a new prism and twelve month warranty from the repairer was a better bet than a $US200 near-mint unit (the latter may still need a CLA). Am I wrong? John (who's really trying to justify a phoned 'go-ahead' to my friendly and very capable repairer). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27466 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 03:51:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 03:51:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 19:51:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29910 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:51:47 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b122.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.122]) by mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBE3pim03124 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:51:44 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Beater or Mint Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:48:53 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ooh, what a nice warm and fuzzy that is. Thanks, Gary. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Gary L. Edwards Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 2:34 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Beater or Mint It's a noble thing that you do, John, rescuing and nursing back to health that poor, neglected OM. . . (how's that for rationalizing?) Gary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27730 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 03:54:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 03:54:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 19:54:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29915 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:54:28 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax17-086.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.162.86]) by mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBE3sPs23396 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:54:25 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Beater or Mint Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:54:12 +1100 Message-ID: <002101c2a324$7a28a770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > I recently bid on an OM-1 that had apparently seen better > days and was successful. The seller was pretty correct in > saying the camera needed 'some repairs'. In fact when I left > it with the Sydney repairer he rang me before commencing work > to say that although he could bring it up to scratch 'as new' > it would cost about $US110 and one could buy a good example > for that much. > > The thing is I only spent $US75 for the camera so am thinking > that a total of $US185 for a fully working, CLA'd OM-1 with a > new prism and twelve month warranty from the repairer was a > better bet than a $US200 near-mint unit (the latter may still > need a CLA). > > Am I wrong? > > John (who's really trying to justify a phoned 'go-ahead' to > my friendly and very capable repairer). > To put it into perspective. In Melbourne an OM-1 with 50/1.8 in "nice" condition sells for $AU350 to $AU400 in a camera shop with a 90 day warranty. For this you would expect a perfectly functioning camera with good foam seals. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28529 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 04:05:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 04:05:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 20:05:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.139]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29944 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:05:19 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b122.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.122]) by mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBE45FN24776 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:05:16 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Beater or Mint Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:02:24 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <002101c2a324$7a28a770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So Wayne, I'm in the ballpark! Now, if only the Leader of the Opposition can be kept at bay... -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Harridge Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 2:54 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Beater or Mint > To put it into perspective. In Melbourne an OM-1 with 50/1.8 in "nice" condition sells for $AU350 to $AU400 in a camera shop with a 90 day warranty. For this you would expect a perfectly functioning camera with good foam seals. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28873 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 04:13:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 04:13:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 20:13:13 2002 -0800 Received: from web20204.mail.yahoo.com (web20204.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.226.59]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA29973 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:13:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20021214041254.1979.qmail@web20204.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [129.44.117.250] by web20204.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:12:54 PST Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:12:54 -0800 (PST) From: marcus Subject: Re: [OM] Beater or Mint To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think rescuing the one you have is definitely the safest bet. Also the best for posterity. Of course fixing your beater depresses the value of my beater by some amount...;-) -Marcus --- John Wheeler wrote: > G'day Zuiks, > > I recently bid on an OM-1 that had apparently seen > better days and was > successful. The seller was pretty correct in saying > the camera needed 'some > repairs'. In fact when I left it with the Sydney > repairer he rang me before > commencing work to say that although he could bring > it up to scratch 'as > new' it would cost about $US110 and one could buy a > good example for that > much. > > The thing is I only spent $US75 for the camera so am > thinking that a total > of $US185 for a fully working, CLA'd OM-1 with a new > prism and twelve month > warranty from the repairer was a better bet than a > $US200 near-mint unit > (the latter may still need a CLA). > > Am I wrong? > > John (who's really trying to justify a phoned > 'go-ahead' to my friendly and > very capable repairer). > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing > List > > < For questions, > mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: > http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29955 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 05:39:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 05:39:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 21:39:45 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30076 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:39:42 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-208-190-253-147.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [208.190.253.147]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBE5d8Mv522036 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:39:09 -0500 Message-ID: <001801c2a333$1243fba0$93fdbed0@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] the ultimate tool Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:38:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Carry a medium size pair of wire cutters into the darkroom." John, John, Two words, CHURCH KEY! Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30287 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 05:47:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 05:47:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 21:47:24 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30090 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:47:20 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-208-190-253-147.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [208.190.253.147]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBE5kmMv671228 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:46:48 -0500 Message-ID: <001d01c2a334$23fceb80$93fdbed0@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] OT mamiya Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:46:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "I was curious as to what you meant by the Mamiya ergonomic challenges." Winsor, I'm especially refering to the M6. the one thing about the Bronica is that it is the current state of the ergonomic art. To change lenses, it closes the blinds automatically. The other cameras, a few years older, require more steps. There is a changing bar, regarding what we are willing to accept in ergonomics. It is like the article in this week's Sports Illustrated, that indicates that, as baseball parks or golf course hazards become smaller or closer, we accept less obstacles in our path to greatness. While some would consider stop down metering OK, most of us think it archaic. What photographers considered acceptable, as regards lens changes, with the M6, is unacceptable today. I;m not making a value judgement, just trying to relate the cold, harsh realities of life in teh twentieth century. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30582 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 05:52:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 05:52:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 21:52:37 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30102 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:52:35 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-208-190-253-147.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [208.190.253.147]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBE5q3Mv487492 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:52:03 -0500 Message-ID: <002201c2a334$dfdfacc0$93fdbed0@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Heretic! Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:51:40 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "so keep it with your tank and other stuff - nobody uses it for beer anymore.) Gary Edwards" But, beer tastes better from bottles (at least the first one). Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31011 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 06:10:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 06:10:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 22:10:57 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30124 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:10:54 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.16.29bd1618 (4214) for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:09:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <16.29bd1618.2b2c2500@aol.com> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:09:04 EST Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16.29bd1618.2b2c2500_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_16.29bd1618.2b2c2500_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/13/2002 11:39:53 PM Central Standard Time, bspearce@sbcglobal.net writes: > John, John, Two words, CHURCH KEY! > > Bill Pearce > Bill you are dating yourself. There are probably a bunch of folks on this list who are totally aclueistic about church keys. I once had a theory about church keys. Figured they were the larval stage of coat hangers. Seems like whenever you needed one you couldn't find one however you always had a closet full of coat hangers, so it just figures the church keys were turning into coat hangers. Bill Barber --part1_16.29bd1618.2b2c2500_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/13/2002 11:39:53 PM Central Standard Time, bspearce@sbcglobal.net writes:

John, John, Two words, CHURCH KEY!

Bill Pearce


Bill you are dating yourself.  There are probably a bunch of folks on this list who are totally aclueistic about church keys.  I once had a theory about church keys.  Figured they were the larval stage of coat hangers.  Seems like whenever you needed one you couldn't find one however you always had a closet full of coat hangers, so it just figures the church keys were turning into coat hangers.  Bill Barber --part1_16.29bd1618.2b2c2500_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31422 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 06:28:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 06:28:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 22:28:38 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30140 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:28:36 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP id <2002121406272400200egg6te>; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 06:27:24 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:27:22 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 3:54 AM +0000 12/14/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:15:45 +0800 >From: "Clemente Colayco" >Subject: Re: [OM] fill flash and burned-out faces (use a flashmeter) > >Thanks very much Joe. I also thought of trying this on digital cameras. I am >thinking of taping over the tiny flash in the digicam just enough so that I >am able to trigger another flash such as the T32 fitted with a wireless >optical foot. There may be a problem with this, as the camera probably has some kind of automatic flash control, and there could be a fight. The only way to know is to try it. If you are working inside, I would suggest taping a small upward-pointing reflector made of white acrd stock to the digicam flash, to direct the flash upward. By the way, lighter fluid, used in cigarette lighters, will take the residual adhesive off the camera body cleanly, when it's time to remove the reflector. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31786 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 06:40:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 06:40:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 22:40:19 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30152 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:40:16 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18N5yB-0007FP-00 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:40:15 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: [FS][OM] Case for Zuiko 400mm f-6.3 Lens Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:39:26 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have a like-new original hard case for a Zuiko 400mm f-6.3 lens that I'll sell for $45 plus shipping. Other items for sale are listed at: http://www.onewest.net/~jnmcbr/eqforsale.htm /jim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32048 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 06:41:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 06:41:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 13 22:41:25 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30160 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:41:22 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.123] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A2E160B8005A; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:42:41 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:31:47 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <16.29bd1618.2b2c2500@aol.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/13/2002 10:09:04 PM, NSURIT@aol.com wrote: > > > From: NSURIT@aol.com > > Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:09:04 EST > Subject:Re: [OM] the ultimate tool > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > > In a message dated 12/13/2002 11:39:53 PM Central Standard Time, > bspearce@sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > John, John, Two words, CHURCH KEY! > > Bill Pearce > > > > Bill you are dating yourself. There are probably a bunch of folks on this > > list who are totally aclueistic about church keys. I once had a theory > about church keys. Figured they were the larval stage of coat hangers. > Seems like whenever you needed one you couldn't find one however you always > had a closet full of coat hangers, so it just figures the church keys were > > turning into coat hangers. Bill Barber so pray tell me what are church keys and coat hangers references to? somehow I gather the former is a bottle cap opener? how the heck did these terms arise the whippersnapper. /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 773 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 08:29:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 08:29:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 00:29:00 2002 -0800 Received: from web14401.mail.yahoo.com (web14401.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA30230 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:28:59 -0800 Message-ID: <20021214082846.97096.qmail@web14401.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [205.188.208.104] by web14401.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:28:46 PST Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:28:46 -0800 (PST) From: "W. Xato" Subject: Re: [OM] Vivitar 400/5.6 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have one of these I lent to a friend about 12 years ago and never asked for it back. Sigmas and Tokinas of the same age are much better. I think I could get sharp 5x7 out of it though. I do have a Tokina 300/5.6 and find it to be very sharp at f8. Warren << Subject: [OM] Vivitar 400/5.6 Hi, Wondering if anyone has any experience with the Vivitar 400/5.6. I've got one that i've had for a few months now, and i have difficulty getting sharp pictures with it - even 4x6's aren't very sharp - i can tell that it would look really awful going larger. I always use a tripod or bean bag and frequently use the timer so as to avoid shake (shooting with a 2n so i have no mirror lock up). I'm wondering if perhaps higher shutter speeds might help (250 and above), or if it's just not a very sharp lens. In any case, it seems to me to be woefully underperforming at the present. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Sean Davis p.s. anyone familiar with the Tamron SP 300/5.6?>>> __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1468 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 09:31:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 09:31:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 01:31:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA30258 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:31:41 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBE9UX350417; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:30:34 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.46] (195-74-112-46.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.46]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBE9URo50308; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:30:28 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:25:55 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Cc: Andrew Dacey Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you are after a monopod, I really like the Billingham Camcane. It's an extensible walking stick made of carbon-fibre in 2 sections, one inside the other. At the top is a screw thread into which screws a ball. You screw a rubber cup into the camera and place it on the ball to steady the camera. Alternatively, you can get a "Stalking Grip" which is an arc of tough rubber which screws onto the top of the Camcane and on which you can rest the lens (it's intended for telephoto lenses). Another option is the "Rubberneck" which is basically a flexible mount with a tripod screw. It steadies the camera, but allows movement. The first 2 options are comfortable for use as a walking cane and it is good for rough trails and river crossings for steadying you... I have had one Camcane for 5 years, and I have just bought a second, both with shoulder straps. Try www.billingham.com for details, but an email to them will get an order sorted - if you fancy it. Chis At 13:27 -0400 13/12/02, Andrew Dacey wrote: > >Yes, given the number of suggestions I've received that I take a longer >lens, I'm thinking that I'll leave the 24mm at home and use the space to >take a 200. If I do decide to do macro work, I'm going to take a pod. Bill >Barber has me thinking about a monopod though. Definitely useful for the >camera support for a longer lens, probably not as useful for macro but >better than not having any support at all. -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1473 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 09:31:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 09:31:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 01:31:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA30257 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:31:40 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBE9URt50303; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:30:27 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.46] (195-74-112-46.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.46]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBE9UOo50251; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:30:25 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:17:29 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Vuescan Cc: Winsor Crosby Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Give me a shout if I can offer advice Winsor; I say this as a veteran, nearly full-time user of OSX ;-) Chris At 08:58 -0800 13/12/02, Winsor Crosby wrote: >>Well, I am starting, after 2+ years of use, to come around to liking >>Vuescan. I have been forced to use it more because festering Canon >>refuse to make a Photoshop plugin for their FS4000 for OSX :-(. But >>Vuescan works really quite well with it: >> >>1. It works with OSX >>2. Its files destination works with OSX >>3. It can batch scan at an unsupported (by Elements 2) colour depth >>without asking permission to convert it to a different depth. >>4. It tells you exactly what you are waiting for. >>5. It is more stable than the OS9 plugin for Photoshop in that it >>does not run out of memory after you have left it to scan! >> >>And, Ed Hamrick revises the application more often than I can keep up with= =2E.. >> >>Chris >>-- >>=95 > >I just made the plunge into OS X and also opted for VueScan to run my >year old Epson flatbed for which which neither Apple nor Epson has a >driver. Nicely Polaroid keeps up. >-- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2079 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 09:49:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 09:49:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 01:49:27 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA30274 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:49:27 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA30136 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:48:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021214014247.02677ec8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 01:49:59 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] flash and burned-out faces In-Reply-To: <200212132150.PAA22663@shell.datasync.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:50 PM 12/13/2002 -0600, Paul wrote: >...> So what's the best way to achieve flash heaven w/ the OM4(T) and 54-MMZ > > combo, for > > 1) indoor flash, <--- just set the thing to TTL and try to bounce? I also > > bought a little diffuser cap... > >You can do 3Ti tricks, but with auto control from the flash, not the >TTL sensor. You can't do this with OM flashes. The F280 has no auto >mode, and the T flashes' auto modes are far too powerful. The T32's >least powerful setting is f/11 at ISO 800, which would require a SS >of about 1/4s or so for proper balance. > >Try several shots with flash ranging from 2 stops under ambient to >2 stops over. Each level has a different effect. >... OK, I think I understand almost everything now and it is beginning to make sense, regarding this last sentence, do you mean: First, take a meter reading of the ambient light, say F4 at 1/30th. 1/30th is good since it is just below 1/60, the sync speed - then For "normal" balanced picture, just shoot w/ the Metz set to auto (and the aperture/zoom/ISO dial in since we are only using the lowly SCA321) Then I can try shooting at different apertures, +1 at F2.8, +2 and F2, -1 at F5.6, and -2 at F8. Is this what you mean? And for indoor flash, if the subject has no background to speak of (e.g. in the middle of a room), then I would use the exposure compensation on the Metz to dial in -1 to -2 correction, so the front will not be overexposed. Do I have it right now? Thanks all. I really appreciate all the comments so far. I am learning a lot! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3138 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 11:43:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 11:43:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 03:43:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA30310 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 03:43:49 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBEBgfQ06908; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:42:41 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.46] (195-74-112-242.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.242]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBEBgao06800; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:42:36 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021214002413.42c05e24.T.Clausen@computer.org> References: <232810-2200212513144325589@M2W076.mail2web.com> <20021214002413.42c05e24.T.Clausen@computer.org> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:52:10 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] OT - Contax G2? Cc: Thomas Heide Clausen Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for your thoughts Thomas. The G2 seems to generate diametrically opposed views. Some hate the AF, some love it; some hate the VF, others hate that... Chris At 00:24 +0100 14/12/02, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote: >On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:43:25 -0500 >"om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > >> Go over toe photo.net and search for threads on the G2. It's >> quirky camera and many people don't like it after extensive use. >> But it takes exceptional pictures. > >Nothing to do with OM, but.....I have a good friend who has a Contax >G1, which I was allowed to play with intensively. I let him enjoy >some OM stuff meanwhile :) The G1 and G2 are not *that* different, so >I permit myself to chip in.....and bring the thread more OT than it >is.... > >It is a nice camera, however it does have its quirks. Still, though, >I found that after a short while I had grown quite comfortable with >it, and the only thing I did not immediately like was the AF, as you >point out below. snip -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4925 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 14:45:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 14:45:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 06:45:05 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA30390 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 06:45:04 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021214144118.NBYS1598.priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 07:41:18 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021214073323.00a9f040@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 07:41:19 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool In-Reply-To: References: <16.29bd1618.2b2c2500@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:31 PM 13/12/2002 -0800, siddiq wrote: [snip] >so pray tell me what are church keys and coat hangers references to? >somehow I gather the former is a bottle cap opener? how the heck did these >terms arise? Yeah, I've always wondered about "church key" references, too. First time I heard the phrase was from an American -- until then, I'd always known them as "bottle openers" or "can punches." Of course, the two-sided ones (typically made by the Handy Corp. of New York state), with a bottle opener on one side and a can punch on the other, is one of the great simple tools of the modern Western kitchen, and totally dependent on advances in food technology (without bottles or cans of liquid, the tool wouldn't exist). Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5231 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 14:51:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 14:51:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 06:51:20 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA30401 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 06:51:19 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021214145011053005tm77e>; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:50:11 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: "Olympus List" Subject: [OM] WTB or TF Zuiko 24/2.8 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:52:37 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Come this spring I'll again be out shooting pyrotechnic events in the desert. My usual practice is to run two remote cameras each with a 24. I've been borrowing a second lens from the generous Tom Scales long enough, it's time to get my own. So, anyone have a 24/2.8 to sell or perhaps trade for a nice black OM-1 (up or down as need be)? Doesn't need to be fancy or even MC as long as the glass is pretty clean. Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6526 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 17:06:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 17:06:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 09:06:47 2002 -0800 Received: from cedar.petroglyph.crestline.ca.us ([209.185.214.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30523 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:06:46 -0800 Received: by CEDAR with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:06:29 -0800 Message-ID: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F19A4@CEDAR> From: Scott Gomez To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] the ultimate tool Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:06:23 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://www.quinion.com/words/qa/qa-chu2.htm I suspect the theory of church keys turning into coat hangers arose during too much use of the key for its intended purpose. --- Scott Gomez -----Original Message----- From: siddiq [mailto:iddibhai@ev1.net] Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool > Bill you are dating yourself. There are probably a bunch of folks on this > > list who are totally aclueistic about church keys. I once had a theory > about church keys. Figured they were the larval stage of coat hangers. > Seems like whenever you needed one you couldn't find one however you always > had a closet full of coat hangers, so it just figures the church keys were > > turning into coat hangers. Bill Barber so pray tell me what are church keys and coat hangers references to? somehow I gather the former is a bottle cap opener? how the heck did these terms arise the whippersnapper. /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6823 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 17:13:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 17:13:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 09:13:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30534 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:13:50 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBEHCgY05554 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:12:42 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.247] (195-74-112-247.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.247]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBEHCeo05492 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:12:41 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DFA32E4.7060906@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> References: <3DF9D111.7070301@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> <3DFA32E4.7060906@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:45:12 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] London camera shops Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Luckily, I have never got that drunk (and remained upright) ;-). Chris At 19:20 +0000 13/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >I'll have to check out Nicholas, though I have no OMoney until after >Christmas now. Maybe I'll find the elusive 21/3.5 for 50 quid >there... > >The do sounds like a good one! Hope you're recovering from the >hangover. You might appreciate this legendary retort given to the >original 'tired and emotional', Foreign Secretary George Brown, at a >diplomatic reception in 1968: > >'I will not dance with you for three reasons. First, because you >are drunk. Second, because this is not a waltz but the national >anthem of Peru. And third, because I am not a beautiful lady in >red; I am the Cardinal Archbishop of Lima'. > >Cheers, >Roger > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7108 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 17:16:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 17:16:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 09:16:06 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30538 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 09:16:04 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021214171218.QTHJ1559.priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:12:18 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021214101135.00a9f130@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:12:15 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: RE: [OM] the ultimate tool In-Reply-To: <1B981EEA6C25D411B94D0050BAD3604B5F19A4@CEDAR> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:06 AM 14/12/2002 -0800, Scott Gomez wrote: >http://www.quinion.com/words/qa/qa-chu2.htm > >I suspect the theory of church keys turning into coat hangers arose during >too much use of the key for its intended purpose. Great site, Scott! I've bookmarked it for future spelunking... Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7704 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:02:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:02:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:02:16 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.hrnoc.net (relay3.hrnoc.net [66.192.46.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30573 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:02:15 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay3.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18NFbF-000N5X-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:57:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 41228 invoked by uid 89); 14 Dec 2002 16:57:16 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-51-16.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.51.16) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 16:57:16 -0000 Message-ID: <039001c2a391$d3667d90$9a01a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] WTB or TF Zuiko 24/2.8 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:56:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Good thing too, since I sold mine :) Tom > Come this spring I'll again be out shooting pyrotechnic events in the > desert. My usual practice is to run two remote cameras each with a 24. > I've been borrowing a second lens from the generous Tom Scales long enough, > it's time to get my own. So, anyone have a 24/2.8 to sell or perhaps trade > for a nice black OM-1 (up or down as need be)? Doesn't need to be fancy or > even MC as long as the glass is pretty clean. > > Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7955 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:02:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:02:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:02:39 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30577 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:02:37 -0800 Received: from pool0682.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.212.172] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NGc9-0000fy-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:02:13 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:48:03 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] Doing your own B&W Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Many good suggestions in this thread. A few other thoughts: > >I don't use a changing bag. I wait 'til after sundown and retreat to the >hall bathroom with all the lights turned off at that end of the house. And >I can't remember where I left the changing bag. Anyway, loading reels >inside a bag does require quite a bit of dexterity. I find it lots easier >standing at the counter in the dark without a bag squeezing on everything. > >Popping the film cassette end off with a church key is easy. Remembering >where you left the church key last time you souped film is hard - is there a >trend developing here? (so keep it with your tank and other stuff - nobody >uses it for beer anymore.) > >Gary Edwards With their increasing scarcity the time is ripe to rename it as a photographic film cassette opener and sell it for $25. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8248 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:07:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:07:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:07:29 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30586 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:07:27 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18NGhB-00030n-00 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:07:25 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:06:37 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA30586 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't know if being upright or horizontal gets us in the worst trouble. Both options have potential for trouble....and photo ops for observers. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 4:45 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London camera shops Luckily, I have never got that drunk (and remained upright) ;-). Chris At 19:20 +0000 13/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >I'll have to check out Nicholas, though I have no OMoney until after >Christmas now. Maybe I'll find the elusive 21/3.5 for 50 quid >there... > >The do sounds like a good one! Hope you're recovering from the >hangover. You might appreciate this legendary retort given to the >original 'tired and emotional', Foreign Secretary George Brown, at a >diplomatic reception in 1968: > >'I will not dance with you for three reasons. First, because you >are drunk. Second, because this is not a waltz but the national >anthem of Peru. And third, because I am not a beautiful lady in >red; I am the Cardinal Archbishop of Lima'. > >Cheers, >Roger > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8673 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:29:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:29:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:29:33 2002 -0800 Received: from web13708.mail.yahoo.com (web13708.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA30614 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:29:31 -0800 Message-ID: <20021214182918.68208.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.51.139.102] by web13708.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:29:18 PST Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:29:18 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Pulling the film through the light tight felt again invites the >possibility of scratches. Yes it does. I do carefully examine the felts for any sand or other particles that could scratch the surface. When in doubt, the bottle opener is put into service. This is the same reason why many people refuse to reuse film canisters when "rolling their own" from bulk. Almost ALL commercial processing is done without opening the canister. They use commercially available leader-pullers where we are just cheepskates making due with bottle-openers and licked film. AG __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8964 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:32:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:32:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:32:31 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30622 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:32:28 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021214181956.NJKQ4715.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:19:56 -0500 Message-ID: <006b01c2a39d$8aa5a660$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] OM T32 flash gun Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:20:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:19:55 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca With which OM bodies can you use an Olympus T32 flash with? For a used one in good shape and working condition what is the market value in the USA / Canada? John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9265 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:38:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:38:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:38:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30630 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:38:50 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBEIVGN7000449 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:31:17 +0100 (MET) Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:31:10 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] WTB or TF Zuiko 24/2.8 Message-Id: <20021214193110.605eca69.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <039001c2a391$d3667d90$9a01a8c0@inspiron> References: <039001c2a391$d3667d90$9a01a8c0@inspiron> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA30630 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah....I think I know where it is on its way to :) --thomas On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:56:58 -0500 "Tom Scales" wrote: > Good thing too, since I sold mine :) >=20 > Tom > > Come this spring I'll again be out shooting pyrotechnic events in > > the desert. My usual practice is to run two remote cameras each > > with a 24. I've been borrowing a second lens from the generous > > Tom Scales long > enough, > > it's time to get my own. So, anyone have a 24/2.8 to sell or > > perhaps > trade > > for a nice black OM-1 (up or down as need be)? Doesn't need to > > be fancy > or > > even MC as long as the glass is pretty clean. > > > > Gary Edwards >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9562 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:41:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:41:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:41:06 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30642 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:41:05 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.17e.13881b48 (4214) for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:36:44 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c@aol.com> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:36:44 EST Subject: [OM] OM represented in Pop Photo, Best Photos of Year To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just got January issue of Popular Photography and there are two photographs out of the 55 represented done by a photographer using an OM 1 and an OM 2. Both were done by the same person, Joshua Grenrock from Studio City, California and both were done in black & white. There were 67,000 entries, 55 winners and 33 were shot on film. Of the 33 film based winners, only six were traditional b & w. I'd say this was a spectacular showing by Joshua Grenrock and a decent one by Olympus OM. I wonder if any folks from the list submitted entries? We have all seen the work of list members and there are many who have photographs which rival the winners in this years' competition. It would be nice to see us, as a group, make a concerted effort to enter this competition next year and see what kind of presence we could make for OM users. I'd be interested in seeing responses that might support such a challenge and also from hearing from folks who did enter. --part1_17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just got January issue of Popular Photography and there are two photographs out of the 55 represented done by a photographer using an OM 1 and an OM 2. Both were done by the same person, Joshua Grenrock from Studio City, California and both were done in black & white.  There were 67,000 entries, 55 winners and 33 were shot on film.  Of the 33 film based winners, only six were traditional b & w.  I'd say this was a spectacular showing by Joshua Grenrock and a decent one by Olympus OM. 

I wonder if any folks from the list submitted entries?  We have all seen the work of list members and there are many who have photographs which rival the winners in this years' competition.  It would be nice to see us, as a group, make a concerted effort to enter this competition next year and see what kind of presence we could make for OM users.  I'd be interested in seeing responses that might support such a challenge and also from hearing from folks who did enter.   --part1_17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9937 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 18:57:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 18:57:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 10:57:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30654 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:57:51 -0800 Received: from kirk ([216.101.212.57]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7400J3XHXLIR@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:56:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:56:09 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Threshold Question In-reply-to: <0shkvucalmff2h3qj0fmbeg91bb1v3o90d@4ax.com> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <20021214105609.5ceac17f.talrmr@pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <20021213183407.KKKH20003.mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc21> <0shkvucalmff2h3qj0fmbeg91bb1v3o90d@4ax.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I feel the real answer is really subjective. If one only views their images on 4x6 prints, then the current generation of 4+MP cameras should be acceptable. I am referring exclusively to image detail and ignoring all of the other pros and cons. Ok, what about about 8x10 images or 11x17? A 4000dpi film scan (consumer level) and a 8-10MP should provide about the same kind of detail. As to the question do the current 13M cameras have the same detail that film does? To answer that, get you 35mm or medium format film drum scanned and printed at 20x24 (medium format or 16x24 35mm) and compare it to what you get with the current high end digital cameras. I submit that the film still will have more detail. (Of course this presumes you are shooting with some kind of fine grain film like Provia 100) Or I guess it would be cheaper to just compare the scan and digital image pixel for pixel on your computer screen, but it wouldn't be nearly so gratifying. Tal On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:52:24 +0000 john@coedana.plus.com wrote: > On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:09:20 -0800, Winsor Crosby > wrote: > > > >That mathematical estimate did not take the subjective reaction to > >viewing images recorded digitally however. The eye seems to like > >digital images better than higher resolution film images. There are > >several on the list who are very happy with the 5 megapixels of their > >E-20s. In addition the Super CCD from Fuji and the Foveon seem to > >provide better images with fewer pixels that "regular" ccds. > > > >I don't understand how a pixel can be as small as a grain crystal(not > >an individual molecule) on a piece of film either. > > No, I can't explain this either, but my E-10 images continue to amaze > me, even compared with those from medium format (Bronica ETRS). > > I also scan my medium format negs with an Epson 2450 scanner. They > amaze me too, although many have pointed out elsewhere that the 2450 > is no more than just adequate for the job. > > Is it simply subjective, or is there a real measurable reason for > this? > > > > John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10554 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 19:45:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 19:45:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 11:45:53 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30692 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:45:51 -0800 Received: from modem-3199.elk.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.76.172.127] helo=skelly) by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18NIEO-0000zR-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:45:49 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:45:59 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA30692 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Much to my disgust I've been sober for a year now... more worrying is the thought that if I post such silly messages when I'm sober what on earth d= id I do when I was enjoying myself.. But at least I may be able to find my way home from London now (homage to subject) and I'd quite enjoy a UK chapter meet in town one day if anybody= is up for it? Or perhaps another location? ian PS I was going to join in the thread about beer in the darkroom but the whole idea was just too upsetting :-( Stella Artois, in ice cold cans wit= h a light coat of condensation gently rolling down the side and that soft sig= h as the ring pull is gently teased open for the........ ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sob sob sob. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of James N. McBride Sent: 14 December 2002 18:07 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops I don't know if being upright or horizontal gets us in the worst trouble. Both options have potential for trouble....and photo ops for observers. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 4:45 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London camera shops Luckily, I have never got that drunk (and remained upright) ;-). Chris At 19:20 +0000 13/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >I'll have to check out Nicholas, though I have no OMoney until after >Christmas now. Maybe I'll find the elusive 21/3.5 for 50 quid >there... > >The do sounds like a good one! Hope you're recovering from the >hangover. You might appreciate this legendary retort given to the >original 'tired and emotional', Foreign Secretary George Brown, at a >diplomatic reception in 1968: > >'I will not dance with you for three reasons. First, because you >are drunk. Second, because this is not a waltz but the national >anthem of Peru. And third, because I am not a beautiful lady in >red; I am the Cardinal Archbishop of Lima'. > >Cheers, >Roger > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10909 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 20:02:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 20:02:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 12:02:22 2002 -0800 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA30704 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:02:19 -0800 Received: from pool0755.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.245] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NITz-0005w6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:01:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c@aol.com> References: <17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c@aol.com> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:01:50 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] OM represented in Pop Photo, Best Photos of Year Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Just got January issue of Popular Photography and there are two >photographs out of the 55 represented done by a photographer using >an OM 1 and an OM 2. Both were done by the same person, Joshua >Grenrock from Studio City, California and both were done in black & >white. There were 67,000 entries, 55 winners and 33 were shot on >film. Of the 33 film based winners, only six were traditional b & >w. I'd say this was a spectacular showing by Joshua Grenrock and a >decent one by Olympus OM. > >I wonder if any folks from the list submitted entries? We have all >seen the work of list members and there are many who have >photographs which rival the winners in this years' competition. It >would be nice to see us, as a group, make a concerted effort to >enter this competition next year and see what kind of presence we >could make for OM users. I'd be interested in seeing responses that >might support such a challenge and also from hearing from folks who >did enter. I have not seen the issue yet, but Joshua Grenrock has a business site: http://www.petsandpeoplephoto.com/images/Looking/looking.htm He does not mention Olympus. :-( -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11250 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 20:13:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 20:13:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 12:13:04 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA30729 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:13:02 -0800 Received: from user86.net068.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([207.30.191.86] helo=oemcomputer) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NIeM-00070t-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:12:38 -0800 Message-ID: <00af01c2a3ad$4961a180$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM represented in Pop Photo, Best Photos of Year Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:13:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Winsor Crosby" > > I have not seen the issue yet, but Joshua Grenrock has a business site: > > http://www.petsandpeoplephoto.com/images/Looking/looking.htm > > He does not mention Olympus. :-( > -- The photgraph of the feet (dog and human) on the last page of his gallery was one of the PopPhoto winners. Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11978 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 21:17:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 21:17:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 13:17:23 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30763 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:17:21 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.40.107]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021214211629.FGSQ25477.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:16:29 -0500 Message-ID: <001b01c2a3b6$068a56a0$6b2844d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Beater or Mint Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:16:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think you're way ahead, John. Be sure to get the meter tuned for a modern battery and fresh foam too. Then you'll have a tuned meter which you would not have if you'd bought an untuned "mint" example. That's better than the were when they were new. Lama ps, sorry about the html the other day guys. I guess Outlook Express will reply to an html email with html, even though my default format is set to plain text. I'll check the format before sending replies. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12520 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 21:58:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 21:58:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 13:58:40 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30799 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:58:38 -0800 Received: from M2W074.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.74]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:58:15 -0500 Message-ID: <1530-2200212614215815690@M2W074.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] OM T32 flash gun Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:58:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Dec 2002 21:58:15.0810 (UTC) FILETIME=[E7828E20:01C2A3BB] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A T-32 will works on all the OM bodies, but only does TTL-OTF flash with OM2n, 2sp, 3ti, 3?, 4, 4ti, PC=2E I don't know about the 10, F, G or AF bodies=2E TTL-OTF flash is possible with the OM2 only with the QA310=2E Market price is $40-70 for one in average shape, more for mint or boxed=2E= =20 Less for a broken one=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: HGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXI Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:20:54 -0400 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] OM T32 flash gun With which OM bodies can you use an Olympus T32 flash with? For a used one in good shape and working condition what is the market val= ue in the USA / Canada? John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12840 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 22:06:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 22:06:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 14:06:53 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.hrnoc.net (relay3.hrnoc.net [66.192.46.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30811 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:06:50 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay3.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18NKQb-000CdN-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:06:33 -0500 Received: (qmail 60942 invoked by uid 89); 14 Dec 2002 22:06:49 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-51-16.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.51.16) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 22:06:49 -0000 Message-ID: <04bb01c2a3bd$100e6340$9a01a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: <1530-2200212614215815690@M2W074.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM T32 flash gun Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:06:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca TTL-OTF works just fine on a regular OM-2 with a Shoe 3. Been doing it for 20+ years. Shoe 2 is QA310 only. I am 'pretty sure' the OM-G/OM-20 will do it to, but not positive. Tom A T-32 will works on all the OM bodies, but only does TTL-OTF flash with OM2n, 2sp, 3ti, 3?, 4, 4ti, PC. I don't know about the 10, F, G or AF bodies. TTL-OTF flash is possible with the OM2 only with the QA310. Market price is $40-70 for one in average shape, more for mint or boxed. Less for a broken one. Skip < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13494 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 23:03:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 23:03:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 15:03:54 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30871 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:03:50 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021214225118.WNWJ4715.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:51:18 -0500 Message-ID: <00b401c2a3c3$66be6860$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <1530-2200212614215815690@M2W074.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM T32 flash gun Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:51:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:51:18 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, 14 December, 2002 05:58 PM Subject: RE: [OM] OM T32 flash gun A T-32 will works on all the OM bodies, but only does TTL-OTF flash with OM2n, 2sp, 3ti, 3?, 4, 4ti, PC. I don't know about the 10, F, G or AF bodies. TTL-OTF flash is possible with the OM2 only with the QA310. Market price is $40-70 for one in average shape, more for mint or boxed. Less for a broken one. Skip Skip ........ thanks for this info. Does the T-32 syn at all speeds with the 4T? If so is this a better / more versatile flash than the F280? The one I saw today looks more like a "real" flash gun than the F280 but then I have never used a T-32 or even explored its possibilities. John Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: HGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXI Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:20:54 -0400 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OM T32 flash gun With which OM bodies can you use an Olympus T32 flash with? For a used one in good shape and working condition what is the market value in the USA / Canada? John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13981 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 23:34:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 23:34:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 15:34:51 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30918 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:34:49 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.16f.1890173c (4552); Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:30:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <16f.1890173c.2b2d1914@aol.com> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:30:28 EST Subject: Re: [OM] OM T32 flash gun To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca CC: 13874@rogers.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16f.1890173c.2b2d1914_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_16f.1890173c.2b2d1914_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A quick summary of flash compatability. All bodies X-synch at 1/60 except as noted: Camera bodies which support full synch at all speeds with the F280: OM-3Ti OM-4Ti OM-707/OM-77 (X-synch at 1/100) Camera bodies which support TTL with a T series flash: OM-2 with shoe 3 OM-2n with shoe 4 OM-2S OM-3Ti OM-4 OM-4Ti OM-40/OM-PC OM-707/OM-77 (X-synch is 1/100) OM-101/OM-88 (X-synch is 1/80) Camera bodies which support TTL flash with QA310: OM-2 with shoe 2 Camera bodies with no TTL support: OM-1 OM-1n OM-3 OM-10 OM-20/OM-G OM-30/OM-F OM2000 (X-synch is 1/125) None of the T series flashes support synch at all speeds. Only the F280 does that. Most 3rd party flashes that claim Olympus TTL support (Metz/Sunpack/Vivitar/etc...) work the same as the Olympus T series flashes. I don't believe there were ever any 3rd party flashes manufactured which supported full synch like the F280. All T series flashes have roughly the same functionality, differing only in power: T-18 (no built-in auto sensor, manual and TTL only) T-20 T-32 T-45 The macro flashes (T8, T10, T28, T28 twin) all use T Power Control 1, which I believe is manual or TTL only. Hope this helps, Paul --part1_16f.1890173c.2b2d1914_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A quick summary of flash compatability. All bodies X-synch at 1/60 except as noted:

Camera bodies which support full synch at all speeds with the F280:
OM-3Ti
OM-4Ti
OM-707/OM-77 (X-synch at 1/100)

Camera bodies which support TTL with a T series flash:
OM-2 with shoe 3
OM-2n with shoe 4
OM-2S
OM-3Ti
OM-4
OM-4Ti
OM-40/OM-PC
OM-707/OM-77 (X-synch is 1/100)
OM-101/OM-88 (X-synch is 1/80)

Camera bodies which support TTL flash with QA310:
OM-2 with shoe 2

Camera bodies with no TTL support:
OM-1
OM-1n
OM-3
OM-10
OM-20/OM-G
OM-30/OM-F
OM2000 (X-synch is 1/125)

None of the T series flashes support synch at all speeds. Only the F280 does that.

Most 3rd party flashes that claim Olympus TTL support (Metz/Sunpack/Vivitar/etc...) work the same as the Olympus T series flashes. I don't believe there were ever any 3rd party flashes manufactured which supported full synch like the F280.

All T series flashes have roughly the same functionality, differing only in power:
T-18 (no built-in auto sensor, manual and TTL only)
T-20
T-32
T-45

The macro flashes (T8, T10, T28, T28 twin) all use T Power Control 1, which I believe is manual or TTL only.

Hope this helps,

Paul --part1_16f.1890173c.2b2d1914_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14259 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 23:36:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 23:36:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 15:36:30 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30922 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:36:28 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19362 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:35:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021214153358.0268ede8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:37:02 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] TTL vs. Auto on the OM-4T and Metz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Is there a difference, result-wise, with these TTL vs. auto mode with the 4 or 4T combined with the Metz 54? I understand the light reading is different - in auto mode, the flash's sensor reads the light whereas in TTL mode, the camera reads the exposure OTF at "real time." Since the flash sensor position is usually higher than the camera, it may read differently (especially at close subject?). My question is besides that, is that any difference? Thanks // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14582 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2002 23:46:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 14 Dec 2002 23:46:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 15:46:43 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts7.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.165]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30930 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:46:42 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.149.80]) by simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021214234223.JCPS26473.simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:42:23 -0500 Message-ID: <002d01c2a3ca$8ce786a0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <1530-2200212614215815690@M2W074.mail2web.com> <00b401c2a3c3$66be6860$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM T32 flash gun Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:43:03 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > Skip ........ thanks for this info. Does the T-32 syn at all speeds with the > 4T? If so is this a better / more versatile flash than the F280? The one I > saw today looks more like a "real" flash gun than the F280 but then I have > never used a T-32 or even explored its possibilities. > > John > John, I think I can answer this one. The t32 just gives one flash, so syncs at only 1/60 or less, when both curtains are fully open. Any faster speed than 1/60 would not illuminate the entire frame. The F280 gives off a series of flashes, which to the eye appear as one flash, but extend over the entire time the curtains are opening and closing. Thus it "syncs" at all speeds up to 1/2000, but is somewhat reduced in strength because of having to fire so many times. If you want to try a t32, you can borrow mine for awhile to see if you like it. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16334 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 02:53:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 02:53:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 18:53:07 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31080 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:53:03 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:16:44 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFBEDF6.9090307@achtung.com> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:50:30 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Heretic! References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <002201c2a334$dfdfacc0$93fdbed0@swbell.net> In-Reply-To: <002201c2a334$dfdfacc0$93fdbed0@swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I remember my physics of fluids class; on our final test (this is in NJ, so it's to be expected) one of the questions was which stays cooler longer? Bottle, or can? The answer was bottle, and so if you like your beer cold, then you will probably prefer the bottle. I at one point in my life can show you the proof of why that is so, but not anymore... Albert > >But, beer tastes better from bottles (at least the first one). > >Bill Pearce > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16589 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 02:53:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 02:53:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 18:53:31 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31083 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:53:27 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:18:46 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFBEE6B.8020605@achtung.com> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:52:27 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM represented in Pop Photo, Best Photos of Year References: <17e.13881b48.2b2cd43c@aol.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca When the photographer is very good; he is "one" with his gear, he doesn't mention OM because it's part of him ;-) Use the force! Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16867 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 02:57:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 02:57:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 18:57:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.175]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31087 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:57:11 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-b130.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.75.130]) by mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBF2v8C18306 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:57:08 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] the ultimate tool Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:56:05 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001801c2a333$1243fba0$93fdbed0@swbell.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bill, you'll have to excuse us Down Under heretics. Just what sort/shape of implement is a 'Church Key'? John (who continues to be bemused by North American idiom. First 'wazoo' and now this!). -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Bill Pearce Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 4:39 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] the ultimate tool "Carry a medium size pair of wire cutters into the darkroom." John, John, Two words, CHURCH KEY! Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18154 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 05:31:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 05:31:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 21:31:19 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31126 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:31:14 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-36.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.36]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBF5R1W26736; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:27:02 +1300 Message-Id: <200212150527.gBF5R1W26736@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: om@skipwilliams.com, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:29:11 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, Just killing some time late on Sunday afternoon between chores, and I noticed Skip wrote >Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:22:42 -0500 >From: "om@skipwilliams.com" >Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book >A paper book would be a monumental project, IMO=2E >Just the compilation of data for a CD will be a large task=2E=20 >Has anyone put together a Table of Contents for such an undertaking? I >can't think of much that isn't already readily available=2E >Skip Well, not necessarily as monumental an undertaking as would have had to be the case a few years ago. I'm writing a book at the moment, and I intend to make it self-funding apart from a small capital injection right at the start. I have found a printer who converts all text and formatting to PDF files, and prints on the paper format and type of your choice, on a high-quality photocopier. This mean that there is no type setup costs and the cost per copy is the same whether the print run is 10 or 10,000. For me it also means I can produce revised editions quite often if I so choose. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18838 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 05:37:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 05:37:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 14 21:37:38 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31142 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:37:35 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.b4.1679f320 (3932) for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:35:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:35:45 EST Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_b4.1679f320.2b2d6eb1_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_b4.1679f320.2b2d6eb1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A church key is an opener for bottles to remove a cap on one end and the other serves to punch a hole in the top of a can so the liquid inside may be consumed. Many years ago and in another life, when I would purchase a case of adult beverage the store owner might throw in a "church key" which would probably be embossed with the brand name of the adult beverage company. Some examples might be Lone Star, Pearl, Shiner, Falstaff, Schlitz and so on. It is a flat implement with a bend on either end. One end (for caps) will be flat across the end. The other end will have a triangular end used for punching a couple of holes in the top on a properly cooled adult beverage. I've discovered they can also open non-adult beverages. Hope that helps. This all started off with a discussion about how to open a roll of 35mm film. It has been many a year since I've done it, however it seems like we use to just bang the end that has the spool protruding from it against a hard surface and that would force open the end so you could remove the film. Did anyone ever do it that way or is it just my imagination. Bill Barber --part1_b4.1679f320.2b2d6eb1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A church key is an opener for bottles to remove a cap on one end and the other serves to punch a hole in the top of a can so the liquid inside may be consumed.  Many years ago and in another life, when I would purchase a case of adult beverage the store owner might throw in a "church key" which would probably be embossed with the brand name of the adult beverage company.  Some examples might be Lone Star, Pearl, Shiner, Falstaff, Schlitz and so on.  It is a flat implement with a bend on either end. One end (for caps) will be flat across the end.  The other end will have a triangular end used for punching a couple of holes in the top on a properly cooled adult beverage.  I've discovered they can also open non-adult beverages.  Hope that helps.

This all started off with a discussion about how to open a roll of 35mm film.  It has been many a year since I've done it, however it seems like we use to just bang the end that has the spool protruding from it against a hard surface and that would force open the end so you could remove the film.  Did anyone ever do it that way or is it just my imagination.  Bill Barber --part1_b4.1679f320.2b2d6eb1_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20320 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 08:25:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 08:25:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 00:25:45 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA31276 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:25:43 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-01.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.1]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBF8LfW04998 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 21:21:41 +1300 Message-Id: <200212150821.gBF8LfW04998@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 21:23:53 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Tamron 300 f/2.8 adaptall + 2x converter X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, seen you know where http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1944535914 no connection Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20635 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 08:37:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 08:37:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 00:37:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA31284 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:37:51 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.69]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H75KPZ02.DS0 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:53:59 +0800 Message-ID: <002001c2a414$be12cec0$455b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <200212150527.gBF5R1W26736@central.caverock.net.nz> Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:34:10 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca HI Brian Can you forward to me the contact information of this small volume printer? He may be just what I need from some business related publications. Regards Titoy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Swale" To: ; Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 1:29 PM Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > Hi folks, > > Just killing some time late on Sunday afternoon between chores, and I > noticed Skip wrote > > >Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:22:42 -0500 > >From: "om@skipwilliams.com" > >Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > > >A paper book would be a monumental project, IMO=2E > > >Just the compilation of data for a CD will be a large task=2E=20 > > >Has anyone put together a Table of Contents for such an undertaking? I > >can't think of much that isn't already readily available=2E > > >Skip > > Well, not necessarily as monumental an undertaking as would have had to > be the case a few years ago. > > I'm writing a book at the moment, and I intend to make it self-funding apart > from a small capital injection right at the start. > > I have found a printer who converts all text and formatting to PDF files, and > prints on the paper format and type of your choice, on a high-quality > photocopier. > > This mean that there is no type setup costs and the cost per copy is the > same whether the print run is 10 or 10,000. > > For me it also means I can produce revised editions quite often if I so choose. > > Brian > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20886 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 08:38:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 08:38:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 00:38:21 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA31288 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:38:19 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.69]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H75KQR03.UQU for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:54:27 +0800 Message-ID: <002801c2a414$cf9efec0$455b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: "OlympusWebring" Subject: Fw: [OM] the definitive OM book Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:34:40 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oopps sorry for the off topic coments below. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Titoy" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 4:34 PM Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > HI Brian > > Can you forward to me the contact information of this small volume printer? > He may be just what I need from some business related publications. > > Regards > > Titoy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Swale" > To: ; > Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 1:29 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > > > > Hi folks, > > > > Just killing some time late on Sunday afternoon between chores, and I > > noticed Skip wrote > > > > >Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:22:42 -0500 > > >From: "om@skipwilliams.com" > > >Subject: Re: [OM] the definitive OM book > > > > >A paper book would be a monumental project, IMO=2E > > > > >Just the compilation of data for a CD will be a large task=2E=20 > > > > >Has anyone put together a Table of Contents for such an undertaking? I > > >can't think of much that isn't already readily available=2E > > > > >Skip > > > > Well, not necessarily as monumental an undertaking as would have had to > > be the case a few years ago. > > > > I'm writing a book at the moment, and I intend to make it self-funding > apart > > from a small capital injection right at the start. > > > > I have found a printer who converts all text and formatting to PDF files, > and > > prints on the paper format and type of your choice, on a high-quality > > photocopier. > > > > This mean that there is no type setup costs and the cost per copy is the > > same whether the print run is 10 or 10,000. > > > > For me it also means I can produce revised editions quite often if I so > choose. > > > > Brian > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21166 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 08:43:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 08:43:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 00:43:18 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA31292 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:43:17 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA36305 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:42:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021215004153.025d13b0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:43:53 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] ergonomic of the E-10 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have seen plenty pictures of the E-10 and E-20, but until today, I have never held one before. By all reviews that I have read, they are suppose to be well balanced and easy to hold... not on my hands. I have small hands, and the right hand grip is way too big for me. Yikes. Hope the mythical 4/3 systems handle better.... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21769 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 09:39:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 09:39:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 01:39:09 2002 -0800 Received: from einsteinium (einsteinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31308 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 01:39:08 -0800 Received: from host213-123-50-193.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.123.50.193] helo=Inwin) by einsteinium with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18NVBq-0001yO-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:36:03 +0000 Message-ID: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:37:15 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ------Original message------ >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:35:14 +0100 >From: jochen.schiffler@t-online.de (Jochen Schiffler) >Subject: Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography >A shame there's no digital SLR that eats Zuikos Ahh, but there is! I came across this on US Ebay: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1944135606 It is an Olympus-OM to Minolta-Maxxum lens adapter, allowing you to fit your Zuikos to a Minolta Maxxum. Then all you need to do is buy the Minolta RD175 digital body that accepts Maxxum lenses. The downsides are: (1) The lens adapter looks as though it contains an optical element (presumably to extend the focal length slightly in order to give enough space for the adapter and still achieve infinity focus). (2) There would be a multiplication factor for the focal lengths, in addition to that resulting from the optical element in the adapter. (3) Metering would presumably be stop-down metering (although I think that you would get focus confirmation using manual focus with the Maxxum body). (4) The Minolta RD175 is only 1.7 megapixels (I think) -- somewhat backward by current standards. -- from Cy in the UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22084 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 09:46:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 09:46:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 01:46:46 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31312 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 01:46:45 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBF9jax31383; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:45:36 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.237] (195-74-112-237.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.237]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBF9jYo31331; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:45:35 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 07:24:30 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: RE: [OM] the ultimate tool Cc: "John Wheeler" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's a bottle opener John; but I don't think it originates in the US. I think that you'll find that it's a British term and I have known it since I bought my first Swiss Army knife (as an adult) in 1979. Chris At 13:56 +1100 15/12/02, John Wheeler wrote: >Bill, you'll have to excuse us Down Under heretics. Just what sort/shape of >implement is a 'Church Key'? > >John (who continues to be bemused by North American idiom. First 'wazoo' an= d >now this!). > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22685 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 10:41:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 10:41:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 02:40:59 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA31329 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 02:40:57 -0800 Received: (qmail 10173 invoked by uid 706); 15 Dec 2002 10:39:53 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 10:39:50 -0000 Message-ID: <002a01c2a427$19461ba0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:45:33 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You don't need to do so, there is OM lens to EOS adapter, you can use Zuiko on D60 or even 1Ds. No lens element in between. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "CyberSimian" > > Ahh, but there is! I came across this on US Ebay: > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1944135606 > It is an Olympus-OM to Minolta-Maxxum lens adapter, allowing you to fit your > Zuikos to a Minolta Maxxum. Then all you need to do is buy the Minolta > RD175 digital body that accepts Maxxum lenses. > > The downsides are: > (1) The lens adapter looks as though it contains an optical element > (presumably to extend the focal length slightly in order to give enough > space for the adapter and still achieve infinity focus). > (2) There would be a multiplication factor for the focal lengths, in > addition to that resulting from the optical element in the adapter. > (3) Metering would presumably be stop-down metering (although I think that > you would get focus confirmation using manual focus with the Maxxum body). > (4) The Minolta RD175 is only 1.7 megapixels (I think) -- somewhat backward > by current standards. > > -- from Cy in the UK > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23225 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 11:25:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 11:25:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 03:25:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA31346 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 03:25:34 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax80-b065.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.8.65]) by mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBFBPVs26513 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:25:31 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] the ultimate tool Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:24:28 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks, Chris. Actually Scott Gomez emailed me and very kindly attached a graphic with three examples and of course it all becomes clear. We used to use these on steel cans for a number of years before the aluminium cans took over with their ring pulls. Now cans are being taken over by the 375ml glass 'stubbies' incorporating screw-on crown seals. Bill Barber remarked that he always raps the protruding spindle on the bench to pop open the cassette's opposite end plate and that's what I've always done. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 6:25 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: John Wheeler Subject: RE: [OM] the ultimate tool It's a bottle opener John; but I don't think it originates in the US. I think that you'll find that it's a British term and I have known it since I bought my first Swiss Army knife (as an adult) in 1979. Chris < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29554 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 13:37:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 13:37:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 05:37:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mons.uio.no (mons.uio.no [129.240.130.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA31394 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:37:44 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by mons.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18NYu6-00059r-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:33:58 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18NYu5-0003VK-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:33:57 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021215143036.01edcd00@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:33:02 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography In-Reply-To: <002a01c2a427$19461ba0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:45 15.12.02, C.H.Ling wrote: >You don't need to do so, there is OM lens to EOS adapter, you can use Zuiko >on D60 or even 1Ds. No lens element in between. Can these adapters still be found new? As far as I remember, Tomoko acted as a broker for a few international purchases, but I've never seen them in any web shop. Thomas Bryhn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29856 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 13:44:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 13:44:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 05:44:53 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA31402 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:44:52 -0800 Received: (qmail 28840 invoked by uid 706); 15 Dec 2002 13:43:50 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 13:43:42 -0000 Message-ID: <014701c2a440$c92802e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> <5.1.0.14.0.20021215143036.01edcd00@tid.uio.no> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 21:49:26 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think Norman S. Nadel has the source, he just bought one this summer. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Bryhn" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:33 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > At 11:45 15.12.02, C.H.Ling wrote: > >You don't need to do so, there is OM lens to EOS adapter, you can use Zuiko > >on D60 or even 1Ds. No lens element in between. > > Can these adapters still be found new? As far as I remember, Tomoko acted > as a broker for a few international purchases, but I've never seen them in > any web shop. > > Thomas Bryhn > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31207 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 16:33:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 16:33:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 08:33:19 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA31489 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 08:33:18 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-64-217-135-245.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [64.217.135.245]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBFGWjqV097384 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:32:46 -0500 Message-ID: <001001c2a457$7a11eba0$f587d940@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021215053123.18196.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:31:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Bill you are dating yourself." Ho yeah, bill? Well, takes one to know one, nayh, nayh, nayh! For the younger of you, a proper Church Key is a piece of metal about 4 inches long. One end is for old fashioned cans, and has a sharp point, with a little hook that goes under the rim of the can. One punches two holes in the can opposite each other, and enjoys a cool, frosty can of a fine brew, once called "A Loaf of Bread in a Glass." The other end is similar, but the end is squared off. It is used to remove what are properly called in America, Crown Caps. The big flat part goes on top of the cap, and the little hook under the edge, and with a flick of the wrist, thirst-quenching is here! This end is still important, as most of the finer brands of this delightful beverage are not equipped with screw-off caps. It is indeed unfortunate that these handy devices are not given away freely, as they once were by the breweries, as they are as important to the film processor as they are to those who enjoy a finer brew. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31488 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 16:38:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 16:38:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 08:38:01 2002 -0800 Received: from warrior.services.quay.plus.net (warrior.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.227]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA31493 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 08:38:00 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 13479 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 16:36:25 -0000 Received: from dyn147-37.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.37.147) by warrior.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 16:36:25 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:36:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> <2g2kvugp8nt7oha2clghafo2lqm5g2b48j@4ax.com> <003901c2a31c$77d73700$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> In-Reply-To: <003901c2a31c$77d73700$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:56:56 +0800, "C.H.Ling" wrote: > >I remember the Metz 45T series flash was 1/300s at full power output, = rather >slow when compared to the 1/1000s T32 do. > You're absolutely right - I hang my head on this one, especially as I *have* a Metz 45CT4! Regards John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 359 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 19:13:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 19:13:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 11:13:08 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA31588 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:13:06 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.101] (u212-239-187-226.adsl.pi.be [212.239.187.226]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9DEC36C85 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:12:33 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:12:59 +0000 Subject: Re: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! From: zuiko To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001001c2a457$7a11eba0$f587d940@swbell.net> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 15-12-2002 16:31 schreef Bill Pearce op bspearce@sbcglobal.net: > "Bill you are dating yourself." > > The other end is similar, but the end is squared off. It is used to remove > what are properly called in America, Crown Caps. The big flat part goes on > top of the cap, and the little hook under the edge, and with a flick of the > wrist, thirst-quenching is here! This end is still important, as most of the > finer brands of this delightful beverage are not equipped with screw-off > caps. > > It is indeed unfortunate that these handy devices are not given away freely, > as they once were by the breweries, as they are as important to the film > processor as they are to those who enjoy a finer brew. > > Bill Pearce > Quality never gets dated, Bill Crown Capped bottles are still standard in dated Belgium... I don't think we have any screw-off caps (but then, we only have the finer brands) and if you're lucky, you even get a free church key from one of our 90+ breweries. Iwert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 852 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 19:43:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 19:43:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 11:43:43 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA31623 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:43:41 -0800 Received: from a800 ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021215193955.WMAF6027.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@a800> for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:39:55 -0700 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20021215123539.00a9f130@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:39:56 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! In-Reply-To: References: <001001c2a457$7a11eba0$f587d940@swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:12 PM 15/12/2002 +0000, Iwert wrote: [snip] >Crown Capped bottles are still standard in dated Belgium... I don't think we >have any screw-off caps (but then, we only have the finer brands) and if >you're lucky, you even get a free church key from one of our 90+ breweries. 90+? I heard it was more like 400! I'm *so* disappointed -- a cousin of mine from the Netherlands was going to arrange a three-week bike ride around Belgium, stopping at various and sundry breweries along the way to sample their foamy potations. But if there's only 90 or so ... ... what *ever* will I do on weeks two and three? 8^> Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1211 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 19:56:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 19:56:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 11:56:02 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA31639 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:55:59 -0800 Received: from modem-823.rhino.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.137.99.55] helo=BrownFamily) by cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Nerk-0006Rj-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:55:56 +0000 Message-ID: <02f401c2a473$f3dd34f0$3763893e@BrownFamily> From: "DGB" To: References: <001001c2a457$7a11eba0$f587d940@swbell.net> <4.2.2.20021215123539.00a9f130@mail.telusplanet.net> Subject: [OM] A little more OM kit on ebay Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:51:16 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_02CF_01C2A473.546E6330" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_02CF_01C2A473.546E6330 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear list - a few more items on ebay for anyone interested: Olympus M Quartz Remote Controller 1 - item number 1945879766=20 Olympus Recordata Back 2 - item number 1945884432 Olympus Slide Copier - item number 1945870914 Olympus Double Cable Release - item number 1945871193=20 Olympus T20 Flash - item number 1945870202 Olympus 10M Relay Cord - item number 1945870597 My ebay user id is keswick@rmplc.co.uk. A full listing of what I will be selling can be seen at = http://www.keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk/olympussale.htm. Best wishes to you all, David Brown BTW I am in the UK but very happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and = sold many times throughout Europe, the US and Japan. My ebay rating is = +136 with no negatives or neutrals and I can accept PayPal. ------=_NextPart_000_02CF_01C2A473.546E6330 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear list - a few more items on ebay = for anyone=20 interested:
 
Olympus M Quartz Remote Controller 1 - item number = 1945879766=20
Olympus=20 Recordata Back 2 - item number 1945884432
Olympus Slide Copier  - item number=20 1945870914
Olympus Double Cable Release - item number 1945871193 =
Olympus T20=20 Flash - item number 1945870202
Olympus 10M Relay Cord - item number=20 1945870597
 
My ebay user id is keswick@rmplc.co.uk.
 
A full listing of = what I=20 will be selling can be seen at http:/= /www.keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk/olympussale.htm.
 
Best wishes to = you all,=20 David Brown
 
BTW I am in the = UK but very=20 happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and sold many = times throughout=20 Europe, the US and Japan. My ebay rating is +136 with no = negatives or=20 neutrals and I can accept=20 PayPal.
------=_NextPart_000_02CF_01C2A473.546E6330-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1496 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 20:02:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 20:02:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 12:02:38 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA31643 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:02:37 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-19.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.19] helo=earthlink.net) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Nexo-0005Zn-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:02:12 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFCE160.8070405@earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:09:04 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Rapping the end works fine in the darkroom, but not so well in a changing bag! :) When I lost access to a darkroom and started loading my tanks in a changing bag I started using the bottle opener. Jim Couch John Wheeler wrote: >Bill Barber remarked that he always raps the protruding spindle on the bench >to pop open the cassette's opposite end plate and that's what I've always >done. > >John. > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1782 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 20:07:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 20:07:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 12:07:15 2002 -0800 Received: from firebird.planetinternet.be (brussels-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.34.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA31648 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:07:14 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.101] (u212-239-187-97.adsl.pi.be [212.239.187.97]) by firebird.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BF38D3873 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 21:06:41 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 21:07:06 +0000 Subject: [OM] Beer, bikes and TC was Oh, I am, huh, well take this! From: zuiko To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20021215123539.00a9f130@mail.telusplanet.net> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca op 15-12-2002 19:39 schreef Garth Wood op garth@telusplanet.net: > 90+? I heard it was more like 400! I'm *so* disappointed -- a cousin of > mine from the Netherlands was going to arrange a three-week bike ride > around Belgium, stopping at various and sundry breweries along the way to > sample their foamy potations. But if there's only 90 or so ... > > ... what *ever* will I do on weeks two and three? 8^> > > Garth > Sorry to disappoint you, but as there are more than 400 different kinds of beer in Belgium, this doesn't mean different breweries (and most breweries are owned by interbrew or alken anyway) They don't taste less however. BTW, you are always welcome to stay over for a night at our place... we have two spare rooms and the biggest flea-market of the benelux in the oldest town of Belgium every sunday morning from 5am till 1pm (Tongeren). Also more than 1000km of car-free biking paths in the neighbourhood... (this was my promotional self). I just closed out bidding at 82$ for a mint OM 2*TC which will fit the 50-250 (at 271$), anybody any experiences with this combo? iwert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2141 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 20:24:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 20:24:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 12:24:25 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA31656 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:24:23 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021215201142.KOTB513731.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:11:42 -0500 Message-ID: <001b01c2a476$57ec5f00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] test - do no read Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:12:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:11:41 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Test - sent 4:10pm AST < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2754 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 21:11:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 21:11:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 13:11:52 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31681 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:11:49 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-35.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.35]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBFL7aW22680 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:07:36 +1300 Message-Id: <200212152107.gBFL7aW22680@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:09:48 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Totally OT. Kalahari Bushmen X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, This is totally Off Topic, so if you don't like it, please just delete it and move on. Many years ago I was introduced me to the writings of Sir Laurens van der Post, who wrote much about the remarkable race of little people of the Kalahari, once over all Africa, but displaced by negroid races from the north and whites from the south, during the last 400 years. If you do a search on bookfinder.com for "van der Post" his books should turn up; the first I would read are "The heart of the Hunter" and "The Lost world of the Kalahari". I would have loved to go there but is has never been possible for me and I feel sure I'll never make it there now. Through an Oxford University magazine I get several times a year, I have become aware of the plight of the Kalahari bushmen of today. In a letter, this is in part what I read. "Abandoning the more enlightened policies of Botswana's first President Seretse Khama, current president Festus Mogae and his government have brutally evicted all but a few of the last 700 Gana and Gwi from their ancestral land in the Kalahari Game Reserve, cutting off their water supplies and banning them from hunting and gathering. They are being forced to live in bleak resettlement camps which they describe as "places of death", where they become dependent on government hand-outs and are reduced to boredom, alcoholism and despair. Survival International (http://www.survival-international.org) the world-wide organisation supporting tribal peoples, is running a major campaign in support of the Gana and Gwi and their right to choose for themselves how they wish to live, on the land that is their under international law. In striving for recognition of this right, these peoples are meeting fierce resistance from some of the Oxonians in Botswana. END OF QUOTE I have decided to give a small regular donation in their support. It's at least something positive I can do. I'll never get there myself now. OM content - there are - or used to be - great photographic opportunities there. But a tough tough climate. These are the little people who figure in the films "The Gods must be Crazy" and "The Gods must be Crazy II". A very nice coffee-table book which contains very many stunning shots is "The Bushmen". Photography Peter Johnson & Anthony Bannister, Text Alf Wannenburgh. Country Life Books, 1979. ISBN 0 600 31575 4 Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3083 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 21:22:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 21:22:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 13:22:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mhub-c2.tc.umn.edu (mhub-c2.tc.umn.edu [160.94.128.45]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31692 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:22:56 -0800 Received: from diamond.tc.umn.edu (diamond.tc.umn.edu [160.94.128.2]) by mhub-c2.tc.umn.edu with ESMTP for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:19:10 -0600 (CST) Received: from chedman_ras.tc.umn.edu (x128-101-249-159.dialup.umn.edu [128.101.249.159]) by diamond.tc.umn.edu with ESMTP for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:19:09 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021215150750.00a2dec0@hedma003.email.umn.edu> X-Sender: hedma003@hedma003.email.umn.edu X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:20:29 -0600 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Curtis P. Hedman" Subject: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] x128-101-249-159.dialup.umn.edu #+LO+TR X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] diamond.tc.umn.edu #+LO+TR Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've searched the archives on this without much success... From what I have picked up here and there, the OM-4 does a 'battery check' before releasing the shutter; does anyone know what level of current drain is applied to the batteries during this check? I have a small battery tester (made for button cells) that tests at 1 milliampere; when I check batteries that my newly acquired OM-4 doesn't like, they test "good" on this tester, suggesting that the OM-4 draws a LOT more current during its pre-release test, and during an actual firing. I'm not adverse to making this little tester "OM Specific" by altering a load resistor or two, if I had some idea what load current I should be trying for. Also, does anyone know the load currents for other models? I have a 2n, 2s, PC, 4 and 4T; at one time or another they've all 'failed' with a set of batteries that "pass" the manual in-camera check, but immediately recover when a new set of 357's are installed. Generally, said batteries also test "good" on my external tester. Any insights will be greatly appreciated! Curt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3411 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 21:30:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 21:30:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 13:30:41 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31704 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:30:38 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (u212-239-187-97.adsl.pi.be [212.239.187.97]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE7337157 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:30:03 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:30:04 +0100 Subject: [OM] FS several OM & Pen FT From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <04bb01c2a3bd$100e6340$9a01a8c0@inspiron> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello, I don't use the following items anymore, I'ld like to offer these to the list first... (prices are dollars/euros, excluding shipping, remember I live in Belgium, work in Holland, so shipment from within the Benelux to anywhere) I tried to describe everything as accurate as possible, if there are any questions let me know, if interested, I can send an image of the items by mail. Iwert. OM Lenses (all zuiko) - 35mm f2 MC, blacknosed, Mint, Original box + hardcase + metal hood + lens cap: 220,- - 135mm f2.8 SC, silvernosed, Very slight, barely noticeable cleaning mark on front element, original box + hardcase + lens cap: 110,- - 35-70mm f3.6 MC, including hood. very good condition, no marks on glass, slight brass marks on mounting flange (camera side), abrasions on metal part of hood have been repainted black + lens cap: 225,- - 28 f2.8 MC MIJ, Original box + rubber hood, dent in filter ring has been fixed unprofessionally, but still accepts filters, including UV filter to improve the esthaetics. Glass in mint condition, rest of body in Mint condition: 50,- OM Flash system, all like new, Mint in original box: - 2x T32, MIB, never used with batteries: 110,- each - 2x Electric Flash AC-Adapter 2, MIB: 50,- each (this is a 230V, german - belgian - french - dutch - spanish - ? plug!) - 3x TTL Autocord T 5m, MIB: 30,- each - 1x TTL multiconnector MIB: 25,- - 1x TTL auto conn.type 3 MIB: 20,- - 1x Accessory shoe 2 MIB: 15,- OM Motor: - 1x Winder 2, used but good working condition: 50,- Pen FT system: - Pen FT chrome body + 38 f2.8 pancake! both very good condition, including hardcase, recent CLA: 600,- - Pen FT chrome body + 38 f1.8 standard lens, both good working condition, but normall wear, plastic of viewfinder broken off, but replaceable as mentioned last week, recent CLA: 200,- - F flash shoe: 15,- - 20mm f3.5, Very nice wide angle; good condition: 300,- - original penf yellow filter MIB: 25,- If interested in multiple items, an offer can be made. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3813 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 21:53:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 21:53:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 13:53:03 2002 -0800 Received: from mailout02.sul.t-online.com (mailout02.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31730 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:53:01 -0800 Received: from fwd09.sul.t-online.de by mailout02.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18Ngh1-0007Xb-04; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:52:59 +0100 Received: from garten (520018063974-0001@[217.225.71.203]) by fwd09.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18Nggv-0rNPbEC; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:52:53 +0100 From: jochen.schiffler@t-online.de (Jochen Schiffler) To: Subject: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:53:40 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <001001c2a457$7a11eba0$f587d940@swbell.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal X-Sender: 520018063974-0001@t-dialin.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA31730 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nice one :-) For Germany it's the same as for Belgium. You find very few screw-off cap= s here. I remember only one and that living near Cologne where a great bunc= h of brews is added to the list of locally available beers. If you live in a (nearly) screw-off cap free country you get really imaginative about how to open your bottles if you don't have a bottle ope= ner handy. I wonder if it's a special skill of europeans to use 'one-way' lighters or is this just widespread instinct? I never managed to open a film cartridge with a lighter though. Jochen > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]Im Auftrag von Bill Pearce > Gesendet: Sonntag, 15. Dezember 2002 17:32 > An: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Betreff: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! > > > "Bill you are dating yourself." > > Ho yeah, bill? Well, takes one to know one, nayh, nayh, nayh! > > For the younger of you, a proper Church Key is a piece of metal about 4 > inches long. One end is for old fashioned cans, and has a sharp > point, with > a little hook that goes under the rim of the can. One punches two holes= in > the can opposite each other, and enjoys a cool, frosty can of a fine br= ew, > once called "A Loaf of Bread in a Glass." > > The other end is similar, but the end is squared off. It is used to rem= ove > what are properly called in America, Crown Caps. The big flat part goes= on > top of the cap, and the little hook under the edge, and with a > flick of the > wrist, thirst-quenching is here! This end is still important, as > most of the > finer brands of this delightful beverage are not equipped with screw-of= f > caps. > > It is indeed unfortunate that these handy devices are not given > away freely, > as they once were by the breweries, as they are as important to the fil= m > processor as they are to those who enjoy a finer brew. > > Bill Pearce > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4158 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 22:07:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 22:07:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 14:07:34 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31739 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:07:32 -0800 Received: from modem-3720.alligator.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.14.136] helo=skelly) by cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Ngv3-0004xN-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:07:29 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:07:28 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id OAA31739 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We went to Baveria to see the Audi factory. Beer there is considered food= so each factory worker is restricted to only 3 litres a shift. Its available from vending machines strategically located throughout the factory floor with company bicycles (NOT that type) freely avaiable to aid with collection... Don't know what they use to open the stuff but judging by my car they obviously have no trouble :-( -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Jochen Schiffler Sent: 15 December 2002 21:54 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Nice one :-) For Germany it's the same as for Belgium. You find very few screw-off cap= s here. I remember only one and that living near Cologne where a great bunc= h of brews is added to the list of locally available beers. If you live in a (nearly) screw-off cap free country you get really imaginative about how to open your bottles if you don't have a bottle ope= ner handy. I wonder if it's a special skill of europeans to use 'one-way' lighters or is this just widespread instinct? I never managed to open a film cartridge with a lighter though. Jochen > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]Im Auftrag von Bill Pearce > Gesendet: Sonntag, 15. Dezember 2002 17:32 > An: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Betreff: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! > > > "Bill you are dating yourself." > > Ho yeah, bill? Well, takes one to know one, nayh, nayh, nayh! > > For the younger of you, a proper Church Key is a piece of metal about 4 > inches long. One end is for old fashioned cans, and has a sharp > point, with > a little hook that goes under the rim of the can. One punches two holes= in > the can opposite each other, and enjoys a cool, frosty can of a fine br= ew, > once called "A Loaf of Bread in a Glass." > > The other end is similar, but the end is squared off. It is used to rem= ove > what are properly called in America, Crown Caps. The big flat part goes= on > top of the cap, and the little hook under the edge, and with a > flick of the > wrist, thirst-quenching is here! This end is still important, as > most of the > finer brands of this delightful beverage are not equipped with screw-of= f > caps. > > It is indeed unfortunate that these handy devices are not given > away freely, > as they once were by the breweries, as they are as important to the fil= m > processor as they are to those who enjoy a finer brew. > > Bill Pearce > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4817 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 22:56:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 22:56:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 14:56:01 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31806 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:55:59 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.69.31ef5c4c (4214) for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:54:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <69.31ef5c4c.2b2e620e@aol.com> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:54:06 EST Subject: Re: [OM] A little more OM kit on ebay To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_69.31ef5c4c.2b2e620e_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_69.31ef5c4c.2b2e620e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/15/2002 2:23:11 PM Central Standard Time, dgb@keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk writes: > Best wishes to you all, David Brown > > BTW I am in the UK but very happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and > sold many times throughout Europe, the US and Japan > I have purchased from David and that has been a good experience. Bill Barber --part1_69.31ef5c4c.2b2e620e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/15/2002 2:23:11 PM Central Standard Time, dgb@keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk writes:

Best wishes to you all, David Brown
 
BTW I am in the UK but very happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and sold many times throughout Europe, the US and Japan


I have purchased from David and that has been a good experience.  Bill Barber --part1_69.31ef5c4c.2b2e620e_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 713 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 04:51:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 04:51:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 20:51:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00429 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:36:49 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-73.datasync.com [209.205.138.81]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBG0FYh13319 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:15:34 -0600 Message-ID: <001501c2a498$deb0ace0$518acdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021214153358.0268ede8@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] TTL vs. Auto on the OM-4T and Metz Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:19:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The TTL sensor in the 4T starts measuring as soon as the 1st curtain is released. If the ambient light is not totally insignificant, it will reduce the flash by the amount of ambient light. If the SS indicator was on 1/30s when the shutter was released, half an exposure will have accumulated before the flash is fired; so the flash will be reduced by half. The flash doesn't know to start measuring until it gets the signal to fire, and while the flash is on, it greatly exceeds ambient; so it will always give a full exposure. For higher levels of ambient light, you may have to compensate. I recommend running test series. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: "oly" Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 5:37 PM Subject: [OM] TTL vs. Auto on the OM-4T and Metz > Is there a difference, result-wise, with these TTL vs. auto mode with the 4 > or 4T combined with the Metz 54? I understand the light reading is > different - in auto mode, the flash's sensor reads the light whereas in TTL > mode, the camera reads the exposure OTF at "real time." Since the flash > sensor position is usually higher than the camera, it may read differently > (especially at close subject?). My question is besides that, is that any > difference? > > Thanks > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 999 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 04:53:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 04:53:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 20:53:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00443 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:39:19 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H76008RLPSC0K@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:41:00 -0400 (AST) Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:41:00 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: [OM] Want to buy To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well the general consensus from the China suggestions was that I need a longer lens and a tele converter would be nice so I thought I'd check out the list to see if anyone has some spares. Here's what I'm looking for: 50mm (1.4 preferred) 200/4 Tele converter (1.4x or 2x), I don't have any lenses that would take the 1.4x-a though but a 2x-a or other brand converter (such as the vivitar macro focusing 2x) would be nice. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1258 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 04:54:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 04:54:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 20:54:36 2002 -0800 Received: from rly-ip03.mx.aol.com (rly-ip03.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00447 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:40:21 -0800 Received: from logs-wa.proxy.aol.com (logs-wa.proxy.aol.com [205.188.192.14]) by rly-ip03.mx.aol.com (v89.10) with ESMTP id RELAYIN10-1215233551; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:35:51 -0500 Received: from Dmkq (AC8518FE.ipt.aol.com [172.133.24.254]) by logs-wa.proxy.aol.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with SMTP id gBG4D7N409055 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:13:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:13:09 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200212160413.gBG4D7N409055@logs-wa.proxy.aol.com> From: cachuu To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Else if ( type MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=G3WS623O1vj8DLZ1Hd5YNLgmJYk17B5F X-Apparently-From: JAQ50@aol.com Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Network Associates WebShield SMTP V4.5 on proxy detected virus Exploit-MIME.gen.exe in attachment unknown from and it was Cleaned and Quarantined. . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1682 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:00:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:00:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:00:22 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00466 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:46:12 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.28]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021216005712.BEGP19273.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu>; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:57:12 -0500 Message-ID: <021c01c2a49e$0c0c0ea0$1c2a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Thomas Heide Clausen" , Cc: References: <60980-2200212513143010871@M2W083.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] List archive search: broken? Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:56:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No it isn't. "Thank you, Thomas." I hope you know I wasn't complaining. I apprecate whatever is available. Jim From: Kudos to you Thomas if you can pull that off. It's a thankless task. From: Thomas Heide Clausen T.Clausen@computer.org The archives are not currently being maintained..... HOWEVER, I am working on a new home for the list, with new software and new archives. All with much improved functionality. Stay tuned for announcement soon (before christmas)... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2082 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:08:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:08:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:08:26 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00478 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:54:15 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.14] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A39A86290108; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:43:22 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:37:30 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <69.31ef5c4c.2b2e620e@aol.com> Message-Id: <41UQA5A5C883753XBAWUT54ROGXW6Z.3dfd123a@desktop> Subject: Re: [OM] A little more OM kit on ebay MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/15/2002 2:54:06 PM, NSURIT@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 12/15/2002 2:23:11 PM Central Standard Time, > dgb@keswickcumbria.freeserve.co.uk writes: > > > > Best wishes to you all, David Brown > > BTW I am in the UK but very happy to deal worldwide - I have bought and sold > many times throughout Europe, the US and Japan > > > > I have purchased from David and that has been a good experience. Bill > > Barber Ditto /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2335 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:09:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:09:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:09:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mx2.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00482 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:54:53 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx2.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7600GMWQHA01@mx2.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:55:59 -0400 (AST) Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:55:58 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-reply-to: <200212131640.gBDGeoM21947@zws705.sc.intel.com> To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/13/02 12:40 PM, "Dan Lau" wrote: > The places you are traveling to seemed to be famous for their > landscapes (Beijing/Great Wall, WuDang mountain, Lijiang, Li-River, > and Mt. Huangshan). There will be the temples of course, but by > and large, it will be a lot of landscape opportunities. I'd favor > the wide angles more than the long lenses. But having said that, > do you really need all those wides (21/24/28/35)? Also think > about your filters, I don't know what the weather will be like in > April, but many of those places are also famous for the mist/haze/ > fog. Well just about everyone has suggested a longer lens so my current thinking is to pick up a 200/4 as well as a tele converter. My backpack (LowePro Rover) has 6 sections so cutting down to 6 lenses would make sense. I've taken 7 before by using a LowePro S&F pouch on the waist belt but I find it a bit awkward. If I drop 2 of the wides I could have enough space in the pack for the rest including the 200mm. Currently I'm considering a couple of different combinations. I'm thinking possibly the 21 and 28 while dropping the 24 and 35. Or, dropping the 21 and 28 and taking the 24 and 35. I suppose the 21 and 35 would be another possibility. Currently, I'm leaning towards taking the 24 and 35, that gives me nice slightly wide and really wide choices. The 21 is nice to have but would probably be my least used of my wides and I think it makes more sense to take the 24 so that I have a bit more of range between the 2 lenses. I can always move a bit or crop if I have to. > Depending on the type of tour group, I find traveling with a guided > tour group tends to really limit the amount of time you have to > set-up and take a careful shot. In other words, you will not have > time to set up a tripod shot even when inside a temple or a cave. > If your tour is like any typical guided tour, then 990f the shots > must be done hand-held because the tour operates on a fixed schedule > and they cannot wait for one straggler to take pictures. During my > tour of China, I had to do a lot of running to catch up to the rest > of the group that has moved on. Fortunately, there's a number of photographers (amateur and pro) in the group so I don't think this will be a problem. I think there's 14 in the group and at least 4 of us are photographers, possibly more. > Good luck, enjoy the tour. And share your pictures with us when you > come back. Definitely plan on this. Of course I need to get caught up on my older scanning as well (I have some stuff from 4 years ago that I need to scan yet, don't have anything scanned from my last trip to Europe). Where I'm planning on shooting quite a bit on this trip, I think that might help to motivate me to get more caught up. I think I'm going to have to do some bulk scanning and then work through touch ups later. Once I get everything scanned then I think it will be easier to get the work done because I can just open up an image and work on it without having to worry about scanning it then. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2633 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:10:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:10:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:10:22 2002 -0800 Received: from saturn.aros.net (saturn.aros.net [66.219.192.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00490 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 17:56:11 -0800 Received: from biesele.net (42dbdb31.dsl.aros.net [66.219.219.49]) by biesele.net (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBG5A6rk088574 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:10:06 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bill@biesele.net) Message-ID: <3DFD7198.704B2544@biesele.net> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:24:24 -0700 From: bill biesele X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.10-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Else if ( type References: <200212160413.gBG4D7N409055@logs-wa.proxy.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca line 1: syntax error near unexpected token `else' line 1: `else if ( type' cachuu wrote: < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2980 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:18:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:18:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:18:19 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00498 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 18:04:08 -0800 Received: from [209.176.65.197] (HELO suite224.net) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 310541 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:17:28 -0500 Message-ID: <3DFD61F1.BCF380DA@suite224.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:17:37 -0500 From: John and Julie Ockman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Want to buy References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Andrew, About the previous offer. I'll buy back the 200/f4 at cost after the trip if you want. I just do not want it out wandering about China with no real insurance on it. John Andrew Dacey wrote: > > Well the general consensus from the China suggestions was that I need a > longer lens and a tele converter would be nice so I thought I'd check out > the list to see if anyone has some spares. Here's what I'm looking for: > > 50mm (1.4 preferred) > 200/4 > Tele converter (1.4x or 2x), I don't have any lenses that would take the > 1.4x-a though but a 2x-a or other brand converter (such as the vivitar macro > focusing 2x) would be nice. > > -- > Andrew "Frugal" Dacey > frugal@tildefrugal.net > http://www.tildefrugal.net/ > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3272 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:21:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:21:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:21:19 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00502 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 18:07:07 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-276.datasync.com [209.205.139.28]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBG5LEh15871 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:21:14 -0600 Message-ID: <001801c2a4c3$9101fdc0$1c8bcdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021214153358.0268ede8@192.168.100.11> <001501c2a498$deb0ace0$518acdd1@datasync.com> Subject: Re: [OM] TTL vs. Auto on the OM-4T and Metz Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:25:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 6:19 PM Subject: Re: [OM] TTL vs. Auto on the OM-4T and Metz > The TTL sensor in the 4T starts measuring as soon as the 1st curtain > is released. If the ambient light is not totally insignificant, it will > reduce > the flash by the amount of ambient light. If the SS indicator was on 1/30s > when the shutter was released, half an exposure will have accumulated > before the flash is fired; so the flash will be reduced by half. > The following isn't very clear. I should have said, "The 54MZ, when set on auto (not TTL), doesn't know ..." > The flash doesn't know to start measuring until it gets the signal to fire, > and while the flash is on, it greatly exceeds ambient; so it will always > give a full exposure. For higher levels of ambient light, you may have to > compensate. > > I recommend running test series. > > Paul > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard F. Man" > To: "oly" > Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 5:37 PM > Subject: [OM] TTL vs. Auto on the OM-4T and Metz > > > > Is there a difference, result-wise, with these TTL vs. auto mode with the > 4 > > or 4T combined with the Metz 54? I understand the light reading is > > different - in auto mode, the flash's sensor reads the light whereas in > TTL > > mode, the camera reads the exposure OTF at "real time." Since the flash > > sensor position is usually higher than the camera, it may read differently > > (especially at close subject?). My question is besides that, is that any > > difference? > > > > Thanks > > > > // richard > > > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all > previous > > replies in your msgs. ] > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3547 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:23:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:23:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:23:37 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA00506 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 18:09:26 -0800 Received: (cpmta 13218 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 21:22:32 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 21:22:32 -0800 X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 05:22:32 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:22:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] (Fwd) [OMCameras] OM-2n,75-150mm zoom lens, Electronic Flash T Message-ID: <3DFD1CC7.31939.13D2353@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ------- Forwarded message follows ------- To: OMCameras@yahoogroups.com From: Paul Rothschild Date sent: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:41:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [OMCameras] OM-2n,75-150mm zoom lens, Electronic Flash T32, broken but needs a home Send reply to: OMCameras@yahoogroups.com [ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] I have an OM-2n, Hoya 49mm Skylight(1B) 75-150mm,and Electronic Flash T32. Something inside the OM2 is broken (the viewfinder no longer shows the meters) but otherwise the equipment is in perfect condition, with owner's manual and cases. Ideally someone will volunteer to fix it and donate it to a highschool or something, but I'm open to ideas. Email me to make contact. Thanks! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Community email addresses: Post message: OMCameras@onelist.com Subscribe: OMCameras-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: OMCameras-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: OMCameras-owner@onelist.com Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/OMCameras Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------- End of forwarded message ------- ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4077 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:50:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:50:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:50:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00523 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 18:36:41 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.140]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H76U0J01.MRY for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:12:19 +0800 Message-ID: <000e01c2a49d$6522dec0$8c5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> <5.1.0.14.0.20021215143036.01edcd00@tid.uio.no> <014701c2a440$c92802e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:52:21 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How can Norman be contacted? ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:49 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > I think Norman S. Nadel has the source, he just bought one this summer. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Thomas Bryhn" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:33 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > > > > At 11:45 15.12.02, C.H.Ling wrote: > > >You don't need to do so, there is OM lens to EOS adapter, you can use > Zuiko > > >on D60 or even 1Ds. No lens element in between. > > > > Can these adapters still be found new? As far as I remember, Tomoko acted > > as a broker for a few international purchases, but I've never seen them in > > any web shop. > > > > Thomas Bryhn > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4788 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 05:56:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 05:56:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 21:56:42 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00548 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 18:42:30 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 341285B2A3 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:04:15 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions In-Reply-To: Message from NSURIT@aol.com of "Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:15:42 EST." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:04:15 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021216010415.341285B2A3@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message , NSURIT@aol.com writes: >One thing I will consider is what will fit under an airplane seat or in the >overhead. I sure wouldn't want to show up at the airport with my soft >case/back pack and be told I had to give it to the luggage gorillas to put in >luggage compartment because it was too big. It will be a long flight >agonizing flight if you stuff is in the bowels of the plane, rather than with >you. It will be a long flight regardless, but at least you can avoid the >agony part. This is what has primarily driven me to buy Lowepro's Stealth AW backpack for my trip to Magnetic Island. It has it's pros and cons, one of them being that it's just butt-ugly (for all you fashion conscious people). :-) It looks big, and it is big. It fits quite a bit of equipment and don't believe it when they say it only has 3 lens compartments -- you can easily fit quite a few Zuiko primes in the backpack without worrying about your glass. The camera compartments are made for ditigal wunderbricks, I.e. oversized for OM's. I ended up putting 100/2.8 on -3 and 135/3.5 on -4Ti and problem was solved. And there was more space for more lenses in the lens pouches. :-) Of course, Stealth backpack being "digital warrior's best friend", there's an extra notebook compartment there. I can say it's well-padded and can take much bigger notebooks than the two I tried, IBM's T20 and Dell's Inspiron 2100. So, if you plan to take a digital backup with you and want to check your photos in the peace and quiet of your hotel room, Stealth will take good care of your notebook. In the front big pocket, there's plenty of space for a spare t-shirt or any other piece of clothing you might want to take with you on a daily trip (we normally had a couple of spare t-shirts on our hikes around the island - minus notebook). It's definitely not my backpack of choice for more than a few hours trips in the wild, but since we had to travel light, we needed to improvise. Just take the notebook compartment out, put in more water than you need and you're fine. :-) So, if you need a backpack for your business travel and you want it to fit a camera body or two plus a few lens, have a look at Stealth. Having said that, I'm looking for a new small backpack now, something that I can take on one day treks around Blue Mountains. :-) I'm thinking of Mini Trekker or even Micro Trekker. :-) With the plane be careful if you plan to take bigger bag, LowePro and I guess other camera bag manufacturers usualy only state the interior dimensions, so take something as small as possible. Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5379 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 06:39:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 06:39:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 22:39:48 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00562 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 19:25:35 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:08:37 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD7493.7040104@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:37:07 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca When I was standing on top of the great wall of China, the 35mm from my P&S (wasn't into photography back then, regrets regrets...) But it was just wide enough. I wish I had a 28mm or wider when I was at the forbidden city. So make sure you bring something wide, like 24mm, because there are some scenery that you won't want to miss, and unless you want to stitch it up on photoshop, I suggest you take something wide. The chinese locals are great pics. I like a 50mm for that myself, as you can fit the person and just a little bit of surrounding to give you an idea where you are, all in the picture. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5669 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 06:43:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 06:43:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 22:43:38 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00565 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 19:29:26 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:14:04 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD75DF.7010405@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:42:39 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Camera Commandos Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was at a church xmas function on Saturday.. It was VERY dark, and so I brought along a roll of Fuji Superia 800. OK, let me list a few annoying things offhand. There was a N*kon guy there, who "felt the need" to take pictures from the back of the church, with a 300mm/f4 lens. Of course the lights were all out except for the stage, and so he decided to "arm" himself with a flashpack that was a little smaller then a briefcase bomb, but no less bright. Why he felt the need to take pictures with a 300mm lens in church, I have no idea. Since available light wasn't good, he decided he needed to "light up" the entire church and made sure everybody noticed his 12lb lens and his 8lb flash. I walked up to the subjects and snapped a few shots. He looked at my camera... "Toy" he thought, you could tell by his snicker... I didn't have a flash, and he dusted the top of his flash, and laughed again... Whatever. These seem like "camera commandos" and not really photographers, the photo seems secondary to the equipment you can display. How he was shooting a 300mm lens HAND HELD while walking is beyond me, again he must be the superior photography, I mean after all, he's got the $4000 piece of glass right? Annoyed.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5952 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 06:45:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 06:45:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 22:45:46 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00568 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 19:31:34 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:16:13 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:44:41 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Portrait shots Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Saturday was the first time I used my 50mm/f1.8 for portrait shots. I usually use my 90mm, never tried my 50mm. I liked it a lot. The framing was good, and allowed me to walk pretty close up to my subjects, (which made them nervous, but oh well, they get use to it when you do it enough heheheh) But I didn't see much barrelling distortion at that distance like I always thought I would, the picture looked pretty flat at close focus, and so I think it should be nice pictures. That's great... you discover something new everyday... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6250 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 06:51:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 06:51:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 22:51:24 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00581 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 19:37:12 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfkoj.dsl.mindspring.com ([165.247.211.19]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Np5T-0004ZS-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 01:50:48 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021209151301.20521.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021209151301.20521.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 22:50:59 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3750 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:38:51 -0800 >From: Motor Sport Visions Photography >Subject: [OM] Day out with friends > >The new Olympus C-50 is quite cute. If I had wads of excess cash to >spend (I have zero) I would grab one for my wife for her next P&S (I >gave her a Stylus Epic a while back which she loves, but doesn't get >much use since we got the E-10 a year ago). Appears well made (all metal >even), and I bet makes really nice images provided you have enough >light. They had stacks of 'em at Costco for $569.00 when I was there >last week. > >Mike Veglia >Motor Sport Visions Photography >http://www.motorsportvisions.com > Yeah, I have had my eye on the C-50Z for a while now....given that my C4040Z got "lifted" at that hotel in Baltimore. I have been thinking I would replace the 4040 with a more compact digital. The new C50-Z seems like a very nice little camera, and the viewfinder is more accurate than the C*n*n P*wershot S40 (which is what I had been considering as a replacement for the 4040). The other thing I noticed is that the shutter lag is notably less than the C4040, which is a good thing (still not as fast as an E10 or E20, though). I am thinking about getting one at some point in time, but I want to see more reviews first. The latest scuttlebut on the digital Olympus mailing list (at yahoo groups) is that the latest 5 megapixel Oly's (C5050Z and C-50Z) have problems with noise issues. Seem that Oly engineers have tried to cram 5 megapixels into a space previously occupied by 4, and the noise has gone up. Moreover, right now, I have to save for "L" lenses...(yes, *those* "L" lenses). OTOH, I hear that C*nt*x is coming out with a digital TVS....hmmm.... -Stephen Scharf > > >Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:14:41 +1100 >From: Marc Lawrence >Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends > >> Mike Veglia [mailto:msvphoto@pacbell.net] wrote: >> The new Olympus C-50 is quite cute.... > >I've been tossing up between the 4 megapixel Canon G3 >(which'll use my Canon 380EX flash with full E-TTL >compatibility) and the 5 megapixel C-5050 for my first >digital camera (the D60-suggestion causing my partner to >laugh hysterically, vomit up their own stomach, and then >bludgeon me with my own OM1, in repeating stages, until >I retracted ;-) ) > > > >I've decided pretty much to go with the C-5050 (are you >there Wayne Culberson? It's probably not "perfect", but for >me, having looked, it seems close enough). Having finally held >that compact little body in my hands, and felt the "glove" >effect (one I've only previously got from the 35RC), the >heart may be overriding the mind in some areas. These views >*may* change on use. I *have* seen a suggestion that the >C-5050's lens is not as sharp as the G3's, but I'm wondering >if the extra megapixel compensates. > >Still, what else is credit for? ;-) > >Cheers >Marc >Sydney, Oz Marc, If you haven't gotten the C5050Z yet, you might want to do some research on noise levels on that camera. It has been the subject of much discussion. As for the G3, the lens barrel obstructs the lower left portion of the viewfinder in full "wide" mode. > >Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:43:15 -0500 (EST) >From: "Boris Grigorov" >Subject: [OM] Printer Wanted > > > Dear Zuiks and Zuikettes, >It is this time of the year when the good boys and girls receive >presents and wifey has allowed me to spend some $130-150 on a >printer. Here are the things that are important to me. >I would like to have the one that would give me the best quality >possible for the little money. Since I admitted at the beginning >that I am cheap, >So, what do you think? Am I going to get anything decent at this >price? I also remember that at least an year ago, someone wrote to >this list, praising an HP model and his exact words were " my >friends thought that I used wet processing to develop my pictures". >Thanks in advice. >Boris > Boris, For $99, you can get an Epson 820....incredible printer at an incredible price. I am VERY happy with mine. -Stephen. > > >Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:06:38 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 vs 50/1.2 > >The film is Fuji Provia F100 (RDP III). It is the least grain slide >film currently. The scanner is Nikon LS4000ED scanned at 3000dpi. > >C.H.Ling Yeah, Provia F100 is awesome...my favorite slide film. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6550 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 06:56:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 06:56:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 22:56:48 2002 -0800 Received: from mx1.eastlink.ca (nx.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00585 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 19:42:37 -0800 Received: from [24.222.164.21] by mx1.eastlink.ca (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.05 (built Nov 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H76007T1PKCMN@mx1.eastlink.ca> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:36:12 -0400 (AST) Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:36:12 -0400 From: Andrew Dacey Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! In-reply-to: To: Olympus Mailing list Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 12/15/02 5:53 PM, "Jochen Schiffler" wrote: > Nice one :-) > > For Germany it's the same as for Belgium. You find very few screw-off caps > here. I remember only one and that living near Cologne where a great bunch > of brews is added to the list of locally available beers. > > If you live in a (nearly) screw-off cap free country you get really > imaginative about how to open your bottles if you don't have a bottle opener > handy. I wonder if it's a special skill of europeans to use 'one-way' > lighters or is this just widespread instinct? > > I never managed to open a film cartridge with a lighter though. The bottle opener is probably the most frequently used tool on my swiss army knife. I life in Canada so twist off caps are pretty common but I tend to drink a lot of imported beer which isn't. When I was in Russia none of the beer we could get had twist off caps. Living in a dorm with an international group of students, I think I saw every method of bottle opening known to man. I never did get the hang of the lighter trick (having a swiss army knife made it unnecessary for myself and I don't smoke). If done properly (or incorrectly depending on your point of view), you can use the lighter to launch the cap to the ceiling or across the room, very impressive. Of course there was also the crazy guy who would open bottles with his teeth but that's another story. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7095 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 07:32:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 07:32:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 23:32:18 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00593 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:18:06 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18NpjZ-0004hE-00 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:32:13 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:31:24 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000e01c2a49d$6522dec0$8c5b68cb@titoy> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Try this: ns.nadel@gte.net It used to be his email address. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Clemente Colayco Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 5:52 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography How can Norman be contacted? ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:49 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > I think Norman S. Nadel has the source, he just bought one this summer. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Thomas Bryhn" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:33 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > > > > At 11:45 15.12.02, C.H.Ling wrote: > > >You don't need to do so, there is OM lens to EOS adapter, you can use > Zuiko > > >on D60 or even 1Ds. No lens element in between. > > > > Can these adapters still be found new? As far as I remember, Tomoko acted > > as a broker for a few international purchases, but I've never seen them in > > any web shop. > > > > Thomas Bryhn > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7349 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 07:33:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 07:33:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 23:33:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00597 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:19:28 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfkoj.dsl.mindspring.com ([165.247.211.19]) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NpkN-00016u-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:33:04 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021210045338.5037.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021210045338.5037.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:33:14 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3751 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:35:39 -0800 >From: "William Sommerwerck" >Subject: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos > > >At the Mike & Key Christmas party, one of the members called me over to her >table. "I want to show you something." She opened a thick folder with dozens >of incredibly beautiful prints. The colors were rich and accurate, densities >were dead-on, and the images reasonably sharp (though not quite up to what I >expect from 35mm -- but still acceptable). I was particularly impressed with >shots of a sunrise and a sunset that were perfectly printed. "Those are >really beautiful prints. Who did the photofinishing?" > >She dropped the bombshell -- "Nobody. They're digital photos from our Kodak >camera. They were printed by sticking the memory chip in an Epson printer >and pushing the Print button." > >!!! > >So there's no question about it -- for those who can afford a digital camera >and photo-quality printer, conventional color-print film will soon be >"dead." It is dead as far as I am concerned....I've even gotten great results from scanning color print negatives on my Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II and printing on my Epson 820. The prints look WAY better than what you get printing conventional prints. > >Marc >I'm still not sure which way I'll go, as I'm having trouble justifying the >extra dollars for the Oly C-5050 over the C-4000. I'm not sure what that >extra megapixel will do for me for what I'll be mostly using it for, and >some of the other extras don't mean a lot to me right now. But since >digital is all new to me, go with your heart, not what I think. >The lens difference is sort of a toss up. The C-5050 has a 35-105mm >equivalent, starts at 1.8, but is at 2.6 when zoomed (and to f/10). The >C-4000 has a 32-96mm equivalent, and is constant 2.8 throughout (and to >f/11). I think I'd almost prefer the slightly wider of the C-4000, and the >slightly faster lens on the C5050 is only at the wider settings. >(Uhhhh, yes, don't sell your 35RC just yet.) >Wayne > I wouldn't be able to justify the extra dollars for a C5050Z, either. I think of the three cameras mentioned here, the C4000Z would have the best image quality (resolution differences aside). The new 5 megapixel Oly's have been getting some comments about noise issues. For $460 at Best Buy, the C4000Z is a killer deal. You won't notice the difference in lens speed to speak of, but you WILL notice less CA at full wide angle. > >Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:36:22 -0800 >From: Keith Whaley >Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos > >I just bought an early present for my little office...an Epson 820 >printer. I'm going to be installed and printing by the next couple of days. >My Epson digital camera (PhotoPC 750 Z) is supposed to connect >directly to the printer, and print right from the camera, instead of >having to go thru uploading etc... We'll see! > >keith whaley You're going to love it. > >Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:49:53 -0500 >From: "om@skipwilliams.com" >Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends > >I've been a VERY HAPPY G2 user for a year, and I'd enthusiastically >recommend the G3=2E Read Phil Asky's review on dpreview=2Ecom=2E I was >initially underwhelmed by the G3, but after reading all the little goodies= > >and improvements that Canon has put into that camera, I'm sold=2E Many ar= >e >really user features, not extra specifications=2E Canon's really refined >this camera since the G1 and except for infrared performance, has really >hit the mark=2E > >Skip I wouldn't get rid of a G2 for G3, if it were me, Skip. I like the G2 better. Remember that when you live with a camera day after day, year after year, little irksome things that seem niggles in the showroom can prove to be hard to live with in the long haul. The one thing I don't like about the G3 is that the len barrel *really* obstructs your vision through the viewfinder when the lens is at full wide angle. I found this to be a major shortcoming, and if I owned the camera, I think it drive me nut when in a "live with it in the real world" situation. While I really liked my C4040Z (especially the image quality), there were some things about living with it that drove me to distraction at times. Most notable were the shutter lag and the slow boot times. The shutter lag on a G2 is WAY better than the C4040. -Stephen. > >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:05:03 +0800 >From: "Clemente Colayco" >Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends > >How would the G2 or 3 compare against the equivalent Olympus model? Would >that be the 4040? or 5050? Okay, here's a comparison from someone who has played with a G2 a lot and owned a C4040Z. G2 is very comparable to a C4040Z for image quality. The G2 has some nicer features, e.g. the ability to shoot in RAW mode, to use Compact Flash, and the way cool LCD that is multi-position-able. The G2 also has a center positioned viewfinder, which I like more than the C4040 or C5050Z viewfinder. The C4040Z is a bit smaller, has more shutter lag, but a slightly faster lens. The build quality of the Olys is better, with a very nice magnesium body. The LCD screen on the C4040Z sticks out from the body though, and is easily scratched as a result. The boot-up and boot-down times on the Oly 4040Z drives me nuts, along with Oly's incredibly stupid lens cap design, which causes the camera to go into error mode if you turn the camera on with the lens cap on. The C5050Z is a clear design improvement over the C4040Z in terms of ergonomics and using the controls, but the (yes, once more) incredibly stupid lens cap design is retained, and the camera takes an annoyingly long time to lock focus, notably longer than the C-50Z. There are also concerns about noise issues with the C5050Z. There are good reasons Canon decided to stay with 4 megapixels for the G3. If I had to choose between a G2 or C4040Z, I would likely take the G2. If I had to choose between the G3 and an Oly, I would take an Oly C4000Z. If I had to choose between the Powershot S-40 and the C-50Z, I would take the Oly. I don't think I would buy a C5050Z for $800 retail when there are C4000Z's avaiable for $469 retail. None of them are perfect....like anything in life, you have to make compromises... -Stephen -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7744 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 07:49:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 07:49:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 23:49:28 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d05.mx.aol.com (imo-d05.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00602 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:35:17 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.3c.291cd4e3 (26116) for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:45:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:45:03 EST Subject: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ian wrote: snip >each factory worker is restricted to only 3 litres a shift snip ONLY 3 litres a shift... I' m workin' in the wrong country.... :-( Rich --part1_3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ian wrote:
snip
>each factory worker is restricted to only 3 litres a shift
snip

ONLY 3 litres a shift... I' m workin' in the wrong country.... :-(

Rich --part1_3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7996 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 07:49:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 07:49:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 23:49:53 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00606 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:35:42 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Nq0b-0004vT-00 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:49:49 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:49:00 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I used to open beer bottles with my teeth...until I chipped one....tooth, not bottle. You can use pliers, a big knife, the edge of old car bumpers, girlfriends bra hardware, a hammer and nail, or just break off the neck of the bottle and strain the beer through your t-shirt. If no t-shirt you can use someone's shorts. In Canada there used to be a song that mentioned opening a beer with the crotch of a chilled Winnipeg whore....but I forget the details of that one. If the thirst is sufficient you will find a way. By-the-way, I have a Vivitar 2X converter for sale but it's not the macro-focusing type. It seems to work well. See http://www.onewest.net/~jnmcbr/eqforsale.htm /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Andrew Dacey Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 4:36 PM To: Olympus Mailing list Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! On 12/15/02 5:53 PM, "Jochen Schiffler" wrote: > Nice one :-) > > For Germany it's the same as for Belgium. You find very few screw-off caps > here. I remember only one and that living near Cologne where a great bunch > of brews is added to the list of locally available beers. > > If you live in a (nearly) screw-off cap free country you get really > imaginative about how to open your bottles if you don't have a bottle opener > handy. I wonder if it's a special skill of europeans to use 'one-way' > lighters or is this just widespread instinct? > > I never managed to open a film cartridge with a lighter though. The bottle opener is probably the most frequently used tool on my swiss army knife. I life in Canada so twist off caps are pretty common but I tend to drink a lot of imported beer which isn't. When I was in Russia none of the beer we could get had twist off caps. Living in a dorm with an international group of students, I think I saw every method of bottle opening known to man. I never did get the hang of the lighter trick (having a swiss army knife made it unnecessary for myself and I don't smoke). If done properly (or incorrectly depending on your point of view), you can use the lighter to launch the cap to the ceiling or across the room, very impressive. Of course there was also the crazy guy who would open bottles with his teeth but that's another story. -- Andrew "Frugal" Dacey frugal@tildefrugal.net http://www.tildefrugal.net/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8280 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 07:50:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 07:50:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 23:50:58 2002 -0800 Received: from granger.mail.mindspring.net (granger.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00610 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:36:47 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfkoj.dsl.mindspring.com ([165.247.211.19]) by granger.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Nq19-0002cH-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:50:24 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021211030107.2075.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021211030107.2075.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:50:34 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3753 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Pets are pest to photograph, cats doubly so. :-) Your average cat's >attention span is about half that of your average hyperactive kid[1], >and their attitute towards being photographed and especially towards >photographers is that of superior species. [2,3] > >Just like in any other portrait assignment, you'll need to get to know >your subject quite well to produce good photos. In your case that might >be a bit hard, since you're allergic to cats, but maybe you can get some >info out of _the cat's_ human, i.e. owner. > I take portraits of my cats all the time. The key is to get far enough away from to let them behave like cats, and not so close they'll be relating to you, the photographer. Here are a couple of my favorites: The first was taken with my Oly C4040Z. http://www.pbase.com/image/2417664 The second was taken with my OM-2S and 300 mm Zuiko. http://www.pbase.com/image/1997611 (sorry for the el cheapo scan). -Stephen. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8770 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 07:55:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 07:55:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 15 23:55:32 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00768 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:41:21 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.163.189d55db (26116) for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:51:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <163.189d55db.2b2edfec@aol.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:51:08 EST Subject: [OM] Oh I am, huh, well take this! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_163.189d55db.2b2edfec_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_163.189d55db.2b2edfec_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Like old beer cans (flat top, cone top, etc.) "church keys" are now collectible. Pop and beer distributors used to give them away. And grocery stores, gas stations. Royal Crown Cola, Squirt, Shasta, Hires, Pabst Blue Ribbon, Schlitz, etc. First one was supposedly invented in 1898 in Baltimore, for Crown Cork & Seal (first wrinkle style caps resembled a crown, hence the name "crown cap"). Many of the newer "micro brewers" have reverted to the old style cap. I bet some give away "church keys". I'll have to investigate. :-) And of course, many imported beers still use the crown style caps. Keep a church key in my tool box; one on the refrigerator door; and one in the truck. Swiss Army knife in pocket (...Semper Paratus...). Nine of 'em, you-know-where, item 748131771 Rich --part1_163.189d55db.2b2edfec_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Like old beer cans (flat top, cone top, etc.) "church keys" are now collectible.  Pop and beer distributors used to give them away.  And grocery stores, gas stations.  Royal Crown Cola, Squirt, Shasta, Hires, Pabst Blue Ribbon, Schlitz, etc.  First one was supposedly invented in 1898 in Baltimore, for Crown Cork & Seal (first wrinkle style caps resembled a crown, hence the name "crown cap").

Many of the newer "micro brewers" have reverted to the old style cap.  I bet some give away "church keys".  I'll have to investigate. :-)  And of course, many imported beers still use the crown style caps.  Keep a church key in my tool box; one on the refrigerator door; and one in the truck.  Swiss Army knife in pocket (...Semper Paratus...).

Nine of 'em, you-know-where, item 748131771

Rich
--part1_163.189d55db.2b2edfec_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9195 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 08:10:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 08:10:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 00:10:52 2002 -0800 Received: from web80209.mail.yahoo.com (web80209.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.79.44]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA00784 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 20:56:41 -0800 Message-ID: <20021216081006.10897.qmail@web80209.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [63.206.94.229] by web80209.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:10:06 PST Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:10:06 -0800 (PST) From: Dr Timothy Hughes Subject: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question To: Olympus List Cc: john@coedana.plus.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-2112824451-1040026206=:10373" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-2112824451-1040026206=:10373 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii john@coedana.plus.com wrote: On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:56:56 +0800, "C.H.Ling" wrote: >>I remember the Metz 45T series flash was 1/300s at full power output, rather slow when compared to the 1/1000s T32 do.< You're absolutely right - I hang my head on this one, especially as I *have* a Metz 45CT4! << This is not a fault it's a design feature!! (sort of) Automatic flashes all extend the flash duration out, so they can cut it off more easily, when they have integrated enough light measured from the scene. They do it by adding an air core series inductor in the lead to the flash tube. If they did not do this it would be tough for them to cut the light off soon enough when the flash is close to the subject. It is also why there is a minimum auto flash distance below which they can't respond quick enough to cut off the light without some overexposure. Extending the flash duration also helps reduce peak current so extending flash tube life, as well as making it easier for the high power electronics needed to cut off the flash. A typical auto flash must interupt about 200-300Amps though the flash tube when cutting it off on auto. The thyristors used as tube switches, are special flash rated devices with a guaranteed minimum number of flash interuptions at full rated energy (typically ~70Joules for larger on camera flashes) with a sp! ecified series inductor. By making the flash duration longer Metz traded of frieze movement versus distance range of auto flash and flash tube life. Regards, Tim Hughes TimHughes@ieee.org --0-2112824451-1040026206=:10373 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

 john@coedana.plus.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:56:56 +0800, "C.H.Ling" <chling@accura.com.hk>
wrote:
>>I remember the Metz 45T series flash was 1/300s at full power output,
rather slow when compared to the 1/1000s T32 do.<

You're absolutely right - I hang my head on this one, especially as I
*have* a Metz 45CT4!

<<

This is not a fault it's a design feature!!  (sort of)

Automatic flashes all extend the flash duration out, so they can cut it off more easily, when they have integrated enough light measured from the scene. They do it by adding an air core series inductor in the lead to the flash tube. If they did not do this it would be tough for them to cut the light off soon enough when the flash is close to the subject. It is also why there is a minimum auto flash distance below which they can't respond quick enough to cut off the light without some overexposure. Extending the flash duration also helps reduce peak current so extending flash tube life, as well as making it easier for the high power electronics needed to cut off the flash. A typical auto flash must interupt about 200-300Amps though the flash tube when cutting it off on auto. The thyristors used as tube switches, are special flash rated devices with a guaranteed minimum number of flash interuptions at full rated energy (typically ~70Joules for larger on ca! mera flashes) with a specified series inductor. By making the flash duration longer Metz traded of frieze movement versus distance range of auto flash and flash tube life.

Regards,

Tim Hughes

TimHughes@ieee.org

--0-2112824451-1040026206=:10373-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9595 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 08:25:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 08:25:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 00:25:25 2002 -0800 Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00801 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:11:13 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfkoj.dsl.mindspring.com ([165.247.211.19]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NqYT-0002zY-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:24:50 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021213173055.10656.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021213173055.10656.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 00:25:01 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3760 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:48:22 +0000 >From: Chris Barker >Subject: [OM] OT - Contax G2? > >Off topic: has anyone experience of the G2? I am interested in >autofocus without going wunderbrick to complement my OM system. They're great cameras. I want one. > > >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:43:25 -0500 >From: "om@skipwilliams.com" >Subject: RE: [OM] OT - Contax G2? > >Go over toe photo=2Enet and search for threads on the G2=2E It's quirky c= >amera >and many people don't like it after extensive use=2E But it takes >exceptional pictures=2E > >Summary? It's an interchangable lens, point-and-shoot=2E The lens are >fabulous=2E The AF is a bit noisy, the viewfinder is a bit dim=2E MF is = >only >possible with focus-by-wire, no focusing with the lenses directly=2E =20 > >I prefer a Contax T2 as a take-everywhere camera=2E > >Search on Google for Contax, G2, Leica, Review, Opinion and combinations o= >f >those words=2E > >Skip I still want a G2.. I think they are beautiful cameras....a friend/high school classmate has one and really likes it. Plus the lenses for it are quite reasonable compared to Leica lenses, and those Zeiss T* lenses are quite exceptional. Oh, and the Contax T2 is no longer available....it's been replaced with the newer T3 (I have one and LOVE it-it goes with me everywhere at all times). I am waiting for the new Contax TVS Digital to show up...just think, the equivalent of a T3 as a digital! (oh yeah!). -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9897 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 08:32:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 08:32:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 00:32:40 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00805 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:18:28 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-02.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.2]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBG8RxW19043; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:28:03 +1300 Message-Id: <200212160828.gBG8RxW19043@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: frugal@tildefrugal.net, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:30:23 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] Want to buy for China trip X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Andrew, Is it likely to be worth it to go for a 50/1.4 rather than a 50/1.8? The extra opening isn't all that usable. For better pictures, I'd suggest looking for a 50/1.8 Made in Japan model; they are not necessarily expensive, and certainly seem sharper. Just ensure there's no oil on the blades; this has been reported. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10182 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 08:35:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 08:35:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 00:35:38 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00809 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:21:26 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBG8YHnh038510 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:34:17 +0100 Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:36:36 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 16-12-2002 09:36:37 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In Denmark, twist-off caps are unknown. Most Danes seem to learn very early in life how to use an unopened bottle to open another bottle, or to use a lighter using the same technique. I have never mastered their methods, so I tend to use a danish comb (aluminium, with a built-in bottle opener), or my Leatherman Micro (knife). The latter, by the way, is an extremely versatile tool, and takes almost no space in a camera bag. Roger Key >The bottle opener is probably the most frequently used tool on my swiss army >knife. I life in Canada so twist off caps are pretty common but I tend to >drink a lot of imported beer which isn't. >When I was in Russia none of the beer we could get had twist off caps. >Living in a dorm with an international group of students, I think I saw >every method of bottle opening known to man. I never did get the hang of the >lighter trick (having a swiss army knife made it unnecessary for myself and >I don't smoke). If done properly (or incorrectly depending on your point of >view), you can use the lighter to launch the cap to the ceiling or across >the room, very impressive. Of course there was also the crazy guy who would >open bottles with his teeth but that's another story. -- >Andrew "Frugal" Dacey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10480 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 08:42:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 08:42:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 00:42:02 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00813 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:27:48 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:11:05 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD9136.6020900@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:39:18 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Want to buy for China trip References: <200212160828.gBG8RxW19043@central.caverock.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <200212160828.gBG8RxW19043@central.caverock.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I purchased my Om1n, and the meter was bad, they shoved the wrong battery into it. I since had it converted. It came with a "Made in Japan" 50mm/f1.8 which took horrible pictures. I took it to a smith, and he cleaned the oil off the blades, and now it's snappy and razor sharp. I have a piece of lint in it, I don't know how long I'm going to let the lint sit in there before it bothers me enough to get it removed and cleaned, but so far, it doesn't seem to effect image quality any (that I can see). The 50mm/f1.8 is seriously sharp. Took pics vs the Minolta 50mmf1.7, and the Leica 50mmf2.0. On the scenery, we couldn't tell the difference. On a tripod, it is that sharp... (at least mine is). Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10777 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 08:47:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 08:47:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 00:47:41 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h014.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.242]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA00968 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:33:30 -0800 Received: (cpmta 4446 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 00:46:37 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.242) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 00:46:37 -0800 X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 08:46:37 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:46:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Message-ID: <3DFD4C9B.7384.1F7F751@localhost> In-reply-to: <3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f@aol.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, otherwise they'd spend too much time skipping to the loo. tOM On Monday, December 16, 2002 at 2:45 Doggre@aol.com wrote: > Ian wrote: > snip > >each factory worker is restricted to only 3 litres a shift > snip > > ONLY 3 litres a shift... I' > m workin' in the wrong country.... :-( > > Rich > ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11157 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:01:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:01:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:01:14 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.228]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA00984 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:47:04 -0800 Received: (cpmta 11051 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 01:00:11 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.228) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 01:00:11 -0800 X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 09:00:11 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 04:00:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Message-ID: <3DFD4FC5.24751.204524D@localhost> References: Message from NSURIT@aol.com of "Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:15:42 EST." In-reply-to: <20021216010415.341285B2A3@yellow3.eunet.si> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You could always get a Pelican carry-on. One nice feature is the ability to add your own padlocks, as well as having great strength and beng perfectly waterproof and dustproof. tOM On Monday, December 16, 2002 at 12:04 VS wrote: > In message , NSURIT@aol.com writes: > > >One thing I will consider is what will fit under an airplane seat or in the > >overhead. I sure wouldn't want to show up at the airport with my soft > >case/back pack and be told I had to give it to the luggage gorillas to put in > >luggage compartment because it was too big. It will be a long flight > >agonizing flight if you stuff is in the bowels of the plane, rather than with > >you. It will be a long flight regardless, but at least you can avoid the > >agony part. > > This is what has primarily driven me to buy Lowepro's Stealth AW > backpack for my trip to Magnetic Island. It has it's pros and cons, one > of them being that it's just butt-ugly (for all you fashion conscious > people). :-) It looks big, and it is big. It fits quite a bit of > equipment and don't believe it when they say it only has 3 lens > compartments -- you can easily fit quite a few Zuiko primes in the > backpack without worrying about your glass. > > The camera compartments are made for ditigal wunderbricks, > I.e. oversized for OM's. I ended up putting 100/2.8 on -3 and 135/3.5 on > -4Ti and problem was solved. And there was more space for more lenses in > the lens pouches. :-) > > Of course, Stealth backpack being "digital warrior's best friend", > there's an extra notebook compartment there. I can say it's well-padded > and can take much bigger notebooks than the two I tried, IBM's T20 and > Dell's Inspiron 2100. So, if you plan to take a digital backup with you > and want to check your photos in the peace and quiet of your hotel room, > Stealth will take good care of your notebook. > > In the front big pocket, there's plenty of space for a spare t-shirt or > any other piece of clothing you might want to take with you on a daily > trip (we normally had a couple of spare t-shirts on our hikes around the > island - minus notebook). It's definitely not my backpack of choice for > more than a few hours trips in the wild, but since we had to travel > light, we needed to improvise. Just take the notebook compartment out, > put in more water than you need and you're fine. :-) > > So, if you need a backpack for your business travel and you want it to > fit a camera body or two plus a few lens, have a look at Stealth. > > Having said that, I'm looking for a new small backpack now, something > that I can take on one day treks around Blue Mountains. :-) I'm thinking > of Mini Trekker or even Micro Trekker. :-) > > With the plane be careful if you plan to take bigger bag, LowePro and I > guess other camera bag manufacturers usualy only state the interior > dimensions, so take something as small as possible. > > Cheers, > > Saso > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11445 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:05:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:05:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:05:22 2002 -0800 Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00988 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:51:11 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfkoj.dsl.mindspring.com ([165.247.211.19]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NrB8-0005kM-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 04:04:47 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 01:04:57 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3761 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:34:06 +0000 >From: bsandyman@att.net >Subject: [OM] Digital Threshold Question > >I keep reading hype that digital has arrived. For instance some clever person >has figured out how to do a better color sensor. (This was in a recent edition >of Discover.) The article went on and on about how it made digital as good as >film, without any mention of the other drawback, resolution. > >I have always thought that digital would never equal film simply because a >molecule of photo sensitive material would always be smaller then even the >smallest CCD element. > >I loosley followed a thread on this list about how at ~15 MB digital >would equal >film. The gist being (if I understood correctly, which is by no means certain) >that further resolving power on the part of the digital sensor was >wasted due to >the lack of resolving power of the optics. In other words the sensor would not >get more information, because more information would not make it thorugh the >lenses. Since the optics are the information bottleneck at this >point, then the >difference between film and digital becomes moot (as far as resolution is >concerned). > >Is this right? > >Can some one point me to apropriate literature so I can read up on it myself? > >I am not going to give up my film gear, and very likely will get more. I just >want to know if I have good reason not too, or if I am just going to >have to be >stubborn. > >Feel free to respond off list. I don't want to start a war, I just want to be >informed. Digital is here, right now, and has been for some time. I recently took the plunge and bought an EOS D60 to be able to work with a pro motorsports photography group next year (that Mike V also knows). Yes, I have gone over to the dark side. I'll tell you what, though, that D60 is a beautiful camera, and for a "plastic" wonderbrick, it is beautifully executed and implemented, and VERY well thought out for real world use; I am impressed and I am a diehard Olympus guy. I gotta hand it to Canon, they have their sh*t together; this camera is joy to use. I *really* like it, and the image quality I get from it is pretty extraordinary. I was shooting some beach/surf scenes at Bodega Bay last weekend during a sunset, and shot both with my OM-2S and the D60. The OM-2S did not get any exposures right (shot on "Auto" ; it was pretty dark), but the D60 nailed the exposures bang-on. For pro journalists, for example, no one shoots film anymore in the U.S. Just ask David Hume Kennerly. All the newspapers and most magazines shoot strictly digital now. You can't get a roll of film developed at Associated Press anymore. It's very tough to get photos sold to magazines, for race tracks, or into print or on web-based magazines or motorsports sites unless you're shooting digital. Mike Veglia is an exception, but all the mags want digital these days, for the most part. -Stephen Scharf > > >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:35:14 +0100 >From: jochen.schiffler@t-online.de (Jochen Schiffler) >Subject: [OM] OT - Awesome Digital Photography > >Hi, > >to add some additional ammo to the 'film vs. digital' debate I recommend a >visit to the website of 'Max Lyons'. >For quite some time now I'm planning to buy an EOS 30 film camera and never >thought of digital. After I accidently found Max' website while looking for >Can*n lens reviews my decision for the EOS 30 lost some of it's power and I >wish I could afford an additional D 60 (or G3 to start with) ;-) > >Dunno whether some of you already know his website http://www.tawbaware.com/ >or http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/index.html for the galleries but it's >worth a deep dive. > >This guy shoots exclusively digital and besides his 'normal' pictures he >creates breathtaking panoramic images by stitching and stacking multiple >high-resolution shots together (resulting in 6-40! megapixel images). When I >saw them for the first time I was (usually I hate to say this) blown away. > >You may argue about the changes color and parallax error correction tools do >to the original images but for me the results matter and Max' results are >truely awesome. In fact the blended images (one set of images for the >highlights combinded with a set for optimised shadow detail) show more >detail due to a higher dynamic range and IMHO they look more like the human >eye would see the scene. > >I was intrigued by his 'Digital Scotland" gallery and this is one of my >favourites (if the link is split in two or more lines, you may have to >copy/paste both parts to the address field of your browser): >http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/cgi-bin/image.pl?showFileName=SCO_0369-SCO >_0372_Eilean_Donan_Castle_Pano.jpg&gallery=9 > > >Besides the panoramic images Max Lyons simply takes great photographs and I >really don't care if they're digital or not. > >A shame there's no digital SLR that eats Zuikos (or did I miss something >important). >Nonetheless I'll always keep my film camera(s). > > >'digital' regards >Jochen > I agree...his photos are amazing...I need to find out how he does that, as I have a D60 now, too. Maybe he'll be willing to discuss how he does that. >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:49:36 -0800 >From: Winsor Crosby >Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Threshold Question > >> >> No, I can't explain this either, but my E-10 images continue to amaze >> me, even compared with those from medium format (Bronica ETRS). >> >> I also scan my medium format negs with an Epson 2450 scanner. They > > amaze me too, although many have pointed out elsewhere that the 2450 > > is no more than just adequate for the job. > > John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) >> >> >I suspect what you are comparing is a good, though resolution >challenged digital camera, and output from an unsuitable scanner. You >might, as an experiment, have images from each printed professionally >by a good processor. Or just have an image from the Bronica scanned at >4000dpi and look at the result on your scanner compared to the best >that the E-10 can do. Yes, Winsor, you might surprised what the E10 can do, too. Don't underestimate what those E-series cameras are capable of doing. There is more to it than megapixels. > >Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:24:13 +0100 >From: Thomas Heide Clausen >Subject: Re: [OM] OT - Contax G2? > > >Never had my hands on a T2. I use a Minox Tlx as take-everywhere :) > Thomas, Don't ever get your hands on one....you will want it....I put my hands on one, and bought it there and then.....no regrets! -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11699 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:07:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:07:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:07:17 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00992 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 21:53:04 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:36:37 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD972C.8090400@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:04:44 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question References: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> In-Reply-To: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca When I buy a flash, will it tell me what the equivalent is in speed? I had always assumed (correctly I think) that the shutter speed is moot if the light exposure time is governed by the flash duration. If the flash is for 1/500th of a second, I'm shooting equal to that shutter speed. I had a T20 but it's in America... So I need to go buy another one.. There are no places around here that sells OM equipment... And also, I like flashes that I can tilt up, so I don't get a flash burn on the face but instead, a softer light effect. Any suggestions of a flash I can buy?? Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12036 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:16:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:16:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:16:08 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00997 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:01:54 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:47:00 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD999B.4010507@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:15:07 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One thing that digital will never do that film will do, is grain. Some grain looks great. Digital however has "pixelation" which is horrible. B&W pics, low resolution or using ISO1600 film, you get a lot of grain, but I'd have to say it's great character. Pixelation is just flat out ugly.. There is also another problem with digital that is not mentioned. 35mm replacement, sure. But making optics that will take up a 4x5 or a 8x10 plane, is all but impossible or would cost more then most 3rd world countries. So digital is "here" vs. the 35mm camera, but compared to say 6x6, or 4x5 or 8x10, no way. I remember I was tempted to buy a copy of playboy (for the articles!!) ;-) But in all seriousness, there was an article about the amount of work needed to do a centerfold. That's taken on an 8x10 large format. You are almost looking at a contact sheet. Digital has a long ways to go before Playboy switches. Interesting articles. One of the things I did notice about asia vs. America, which asians are more reserved, they seem to have a clearer definition of "art". Almost all the bookstores have "nude photography books", and nobody thinks anything of it. But you almost can't find any in America... or without someone giving you weird stares as if you just whipped out a copy of Hussler. I don't remember who, but they said "I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it." So true, and I know art vs. porn when I see it too.. I've seen avid photographers have nude photobooks on their coffee tables, and think it's perfectly acceptable here in Taiwan... but not in America... (or at least LA where I use to live) you'd think it'd be backwards.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12488 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:38:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:38:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:38:19 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA01032 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:24:08 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040031419!2020 Received: (qmail 8864 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:37:00 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-3.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:37:00 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBG9B1u26979 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:11:02 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFD9E85.163D58E@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:36:05 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3761 References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Stephen Scharf wrote: > > I was shooting some beach/surf scenes at > Bodega Bay last weekend during a sunset, and shot both with my OM-2S > and the D60. The OM-2S did not get any exposures right (shot on > "Auto" ; it was pretty dark), but the D60 nailed the exposures > bang-on. > I think most of you know I'm not a anti-digital guy, but your example looks a little poor, it simply means you don't understand exposure and the characteristic of your tools (the average metering of OM2sp in auto mode). Beach scenes need exposure compensation and it is well known, you can't simply shoot at auto. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12740 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:39:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:39:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:39:18 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com (sagan.skybridgegroup.com [194.201.127.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01036 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:25:06 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RE: [OM] London camera shops Thread-Index: AcKk5tI2nQxz/x5TQRmZRhN0/aRK+A== From: "Sam Shiell" To: "olympus@zuiko. sls. bc. ca \(E-mail\)" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >.....and I'd quite enjoy a UK chapter meet in town one day if anybody = is up for it? Or perhaps another location? Yep count me in if you ever arrange anything.... Sam=20 (a Londoner froo and froo) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13149 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 09:55:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 09:55:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 01:55:43 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp04.iprimus.com.au (smtp04.iprimus.com.au [210.50.76.52]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01045 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:41:32 -0800 Received: from smtp02.iprimus.net.au (210.50.76.70) by smtp04.iprimus.com.au (6.7.010) id 3DF583C3000C59A8 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:55:14 +1100 Received: from default ([211.26.72.120]) by smtp02.iprimus.net.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:55:13 +1100 Message-ID: <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> From: "Bolty" To: References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:53:34 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Dec 2002 09:55:13.0703 (UTC) FILETIME=[3A95DB70:01C2A4E9] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have used the 50 for some great portraits. This is one I took recently for my sister in law and her boyfriend http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=460256 I have used this lens a number of times now and always find it to be great for portraits. Get too close, then you can see a slight distortion but it can be used to your advantage when selective focusing see http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=428393 Cheers Adam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13450 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:03:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:03:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:03:47 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01049 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:49:36 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Ns6B-0006kZ-00 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:03:43 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:02:55 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Using one bottle to open another is extremely dangerous. What if both caps come off at the same time? Then you would have to drink two beers......and we know how awful that would be! -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Roger D. Key Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:37 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! In Denmark, twist-off caps are unknown. Most Danes seem to learn very early in life how to use an unopened bottle to open another bottle, or to use a lighter using the same technique. I have never mastered their methods, so I tend to use a danish comb (aluminium, with a built-in bottle opener), or my Leatherman Micro (knife). The latter, by the way, is an extremely versatile tool, and takes almost no space in a camera bag. Roger Key >The bottle opener is probably the most frequently used tool on my swiss army >knife. I life in Canada so twist off caps are pretty common but I tend to >drink a lot of imported beer which isn't. >When I was in Russia none of the beer we could get had twist off caps. >Living in a dorm with an international group of students, I think I saw >every method of bottle opening known to man. I never did get the hang of the >lighter trick (having a swiss army knife made it unnecessary for myself and >I don't smoke). If done properly (or incorrectly depending on your point of >view), you can use the lighter to launch the cap to the ceiling or across >the room, very impressive. Of course there was also the crazy guy who would >open bottles with his teeth but that's another story. -- >Andrew "Frugal" Dacey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13738 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:06:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:06:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:06:47 2002 -0800 Received: from dirf.bris.ac.uk (dirf.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01053 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:52:36 -0800 Received: from gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk by dirf.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:04:55 +0000 Received: from bristol.ac.uk (pn97 [137.222.25.97]) by gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBG9v1KF013234 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:57:02 GMT Message-ID: <3DFDA5AC.3040603@bristol.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:06:36 +0000 From: "Gareth.J.Martin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Never been into portrait photography but those photos are absolute belters! I must try B+W sometime. I never have done before and I think now is the time. Thanks for a bit of inspiration! All the best, Gareth. >I have used the 50 for some great portraits. This is one I took recently for >my sister in law and her boyfriend >http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=460256 >I have used this lens a number of times now and always find it to be great >for portraits. Get too close, then you can see a slight distortion but it >can be used to your advantage when selective focusing see >http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=428393 >Cheers Adam > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > -- Gareth.J.Martin Research Postgraduate School of Geographical Sciences University of Bristol University Road Bristol BS8 1SS g.j.martin@bristol.ac.uk attackwarningred@yahoo.co.uk eclipsing.binary@bristol.ac.uk NE NLCOG - The amateur NLC observing group: http://freespace.virgin.net/eclipsing.binary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14401 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:09:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:09:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:09:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.136]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01073 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:55:14 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax29-204.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.191.204]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBGA9Ic23455 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:09:18 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3753 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:09:08 +1100 Message-ID: <001401c2a4eb$2ff37770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I take portraits of my cats all the time. The key is to get far > enough away from to let them > behave like cats, and not so close they'll be relating to you, the > photographer. I thought the method for photographing cats was to put then in the freezer for a while to slow them down, then shoot them before they warm up too much. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14696 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:11:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:11:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:11:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA01081 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:57:25 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-8.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040033416!2149 Received: (qmail 6060 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:10:17 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-8.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:10:17 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBG9iMu27476 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:44:22 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFDA657.25913751@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:09:27 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <3DFD999B.4010507@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote: > > One thing that digital will never do that film will do, is grain. Some > grain looks great. Digital however has "pixelation" which is horrible. > B&W pics, low resolution or using ISO1600 film, you get a lot of grain, > but I'd have to say it's great character. Pixelation is just flat out > ugly.. I think you have never use any digital camera or still stay at the <2MB age. There is NO pixelation on DC >3MP and proper printer, you won't seen any even at 11x14 or even larger. Most advance RIP handle it very well, I output my E-10 shots to Velvia and projected to 60" screen, the edges are very smooth and the tone are great! On the other hand if you need grain I'm sure it can be simulated by software. > > There is also another problem with digital that is not mentioned. 35mm > replacement, sure. But making optics that will take up a 4x5 or a 8x10 > plane, is all but impossible or would cost more then most 3rd world > countries. So digital is "here" vs. the 35mm camera, but compared to > say 6x6, or 4x5 or 8x10, no way. > > I remember I was tempted to buy a copy of playboy (for the articles!!) > ;-) But in all seriousness, there was an article about the amount of > work needed to do a centerfold. That's taken on an 8x10 large format. > You are almost looking at a contact sheet. Digital has a long ways to > go before Playboy switches. Interesting articles. > I'm not sure about Playboy but portrait photographer is one of the first kind of photographer change to digital, every digital fans agree portrait is the strongest point of DC, the beautiful skin tone is hard to achieve with film except the very experience photographer. On the other hand many novice can take great portrait with a DC. Technically the only type of photography film is still leading is landscapes since it demand very high resolution. On most other fields the DC wins film hands down. But I will still stay with film since what I need is not only the result, it is the process that I enjoy. I treat slide shooting is challenge, I don't like the idea of shooting a thousand to get a good one so I never bracket exposure. Something that is too easy to obtain has no fun. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14949 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:12:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:12:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:12:25 2002 -0800 Received: from web80209.mail.yahoo.com (web80209.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.79.44]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA01085 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:58:15 -0800 Message-ID: <20021216101139.17199.qmail@web80209.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [63.206.94.229] by web80209.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:11:39 PST Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:11:39 -0800 (PST) From: Dr Timothy Hughes Subject: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain To: Olympus List Cc: Curtis.P.Hedman-1@tc.umn.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-2093490869-1040033499=:16953" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --0-2093490869-1040033499=:16953 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Curt wrote: >> Also, does anyone know the load currents for other models? I have a 2n, 2s, PC, 4 and 4T; at one time or another they've all 'failed' with a set of batteries that "pass" the manual in-camera check, but immediately recover when a new set of 357's are installed. Generally, said batteries also test "good" on my external tester.<< The OM's run up to as high as 12mA and even 18mA under certain conditions (service manual for OM2+OM2N test spec is 12mA max in auto or manual). In some circumstances they run a bit higher e.g. OM2/2N in B, 15mA. The in camera manual battery test on the OM2N is specd as going as high as 18mA although typically runs less. The worst case for higher end OM's is probably display light on plus shutter release. I would guess the OM2S with display light on and releasing shutter could easily run up to 15mA if the ic does not shut it off? OM2S spec: 7mA illumination viewfinder 0.5mA LCD on 5mA LED in viewfinder 13mA self timer 8mA Battery check The OM4 specs: illuminator 7 to 13 mA Shutter 7-7.5mA memo mode 3-5 mA color mode 3-5 mA self timer 4-6 mA batt check 4-6 mA shutter operation 8mA approx. OM10: Current not specified in service manual but lock voltage 2.0V Batt Check voltage 2.0-2.2V Regards, Tim Hughes TimHughes@ieee.org --0-2093490869-1040033499=:16953 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Curt wrote:

>> Also, does anyone know the load currents for other models? I have a 2n, 2s, PC, 4 and 4T; at one time or another they've all 'failed' with a set of batteries that "pass" the manual in-camera check, but immediately recover when a new set of 357's are installed. Generally, said batteries also test "good" on my external tester.<<

The OM's run up to as high as 12mA and even 18mA under certain conditions (service manual for OM2+OM2N test spec is 12mA max in auto or manual). In some circumstances they run a bit higher e.g. OM2/2N in B, 15mA. The in camera manual battery test on the OM2N is specd as going as high as 18mA although typically runs less.

The worst case for higher end OM's is probably display light on plus shutter release. I would guess the OM2S with display light on and releasing shutter could easily run up to 15mA if the ic does not shut it off?

OM2S spec:

  7mA  illumination viewfinder

  0.5mA LCD on

  5mA LED in viewfinder

  13mA self timer

  8mA Battery check

The OM4 specs:

illuminator     7 to 13 mA

Shutter    7-7.5mA

memo mode  3-5 mA

color mode    3-5 mA

self timer      4-6 mA

batt check    4-6 mA

shutter operation  8mA approx.

OM10:

Current not specified in service manual but

lock voltage   2.0V

Batt Check voltage 2.0-2.2V

Regards,

Tim Hughes

TimHughes@ieee.org

--0-2093490869-1040033499=:16953-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15211 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:13:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:13:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:13:43 2002 -0800 Received: from guard.edv.mdc-berlin.de (guard.edv.mdc-berlin.de [141.80.8.30]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01089 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 22:59:32 -0800 Received: from [141.80.152.139] ([141.80.152.139]) by guard.edv.mdc-berlin.de (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBGADct13468 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:13:38 +0100 (MET) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: thomu@campusmail.mdc-berlin.de Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021216055058.4133.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021216055058.4133.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:13:37 +0100 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= Subject: [OM] flash sync hack-I stll did not quite get it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear all, even though the flash discussion has been going on for a while now, I still did not quite get it. Question: If you seal this front right contact on an OM4 (T), you loose the flash ready light, shutter speed is not set to 1/60 with TTL-dedicated flash (I use a Metz with SCA 321) on. So apparently the camera does not know that there is a TTL-flash. It will fire the flash anyway (just like any other flash with a hot shoe contact). But, will the camera switch off the flash like in TTL-mode? My experience with slow sync: Until recently I used an SB24 in AUTO (direct or bounced, usually set on -1 meaning f4 with lens at f5.6) on my Om4 in AUTO for slow sync flash. That works reasonable well indoors in not too big rooms, but it does not really work outside with a smaller subject in the foreground because the reflective area is too small which results in overexposure of the foreground. Only thing which would help here is to control the flash output manually by the GN rule. Would the trick with sealing the contact and using a TTL-flash help in this case? The best flash exposure in low light I get with my K*nica Hexar AF in program-mode. This great little camera syncs on the rear curtain and adjusts the aperture according to flash GN and focussing distance. But to let in enough ambient light in a not too long exposure time, it opens first with a wider aperture, then closes and fires the flash. Works really great. Cheers, Merry Chrismas, best wishes for the New Year to all of you, Thomas -- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15625 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:28:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:28:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:28:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01099 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 23:13:54 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBGAKSN7021282 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:20:28 +0100 (MET) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:20:28 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3753 Message-Id: <20021216112028.71738c3d.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <001401c2a4eb$2ff37770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> References: <001401c2a4eb$2ff37770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:09:08 +1100 "Wayne Harridge" wrote: > > I take portraits of my cats all the time. The key is to get far > > enough away from to let them > > behave like cats, and not so close they'll be relating to you, > > the photographer. > > I thought the method for photographing cats was to put then in the > freezer for a while to slow them down, then shoot them before they > warm up too much. > Nahh, depending on the age of the cat. I have friends who have a fairly old cat. He behaves the same, regardless if you are far or close. Hist behavioral patterns are limited to three: eating, sleeping, soliciting for affection (which is really just "jumping onto your lap, then sleeping"). He can be tricked into striking a pose for the camera, though, since he has learned that it usually is followed by a cat-goodie and affection. The alternative: a photo of a sleeping cat....I have a few of those, since he rarely can keep interrested for long at a time :) Btw., kittens are impossible to photograph without help. Curious creatures by nature, the introduction of a camera into their proximity clearly calls for crawling over, on, licking, pushing etc. It seems to me, that for their first 3 years, cats never sleep....then, they make up for it by sleeping 36h/day (!) for the rest of their life :) Ahh, I want to be a cat in my next life :) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16026 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:43:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:43:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:43:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.alcatel.be (alc239.alcatel.be [195.207.101.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01107 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 23:29:25 -0800 From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be Received: from bemail04.net.alcatel.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alcatel.be (8.10.1/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBGAdlm05188 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:39:48 +0100 (MET) Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:39:45 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL04/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 12/16/2002 11:39:47 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca CHLing wrote: "I output my E-10 shots to Velvia and projected to 60" screen, the edges are very smooth and the tone are great!" I've accepted that for print purposes digital now probably exceeds what is possible on 35mm film. ( Highly recommended reading: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/like-it-is.shtml ) But I've been holding out since (a) I like to make the occasional 12" x 18" print and (b) I like to show the occasional slide at the camera club. Tell me more about how you get Velvia slides made from E10 output... thanks jez < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16391 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 10:58:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 10:58:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 02:58:52 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01116 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 1934 23:44:41 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-45.s980.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.45] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18NiEd-0005Hk-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:31:48 -0500 Message-ID: <003201c2a492$296ff9e0$2de47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <4.2.2.20021213074212.00b1e750@mail.telusplanet.net> <4.2.2.20021213161658.00a9f040@mail.telusplanet.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:31:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm just saying, there's just no reason to do it when it is do simple to take the end cap off. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garth Wood" To: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 6:18 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Doing your own B&W > At 03:41 PM 13/12/2002 -0500, John Hermanson wrote: > >Pulling the film through the light tight felt again invites the possibility > >of scratches. Carry a medium size pair of wire cutters into the darkroom. > >In the dark it is very easy to grip the edge of the cassette with the > >pliers. Then just pull the end cap off. > > I've heard this objection many times, and yet I've used this technique off > and on for the last 30 years or so, and have yet to experience *any* > significant scratching whatsoever. Am I just inhumanly clean, or are most > people obsessing too much on this point? > > Garth > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16978 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 11:27:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 11:27:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 03:27:30 2002 -0800 Received: from pat.uio.no (7411@pat.uio.no [129.240.130.16]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01203 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 00:13:19 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by pat.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18NtLW-0007YV-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:23:38 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18NtLV-0007Md-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:23:37 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021216121412.01eb6680@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:21:27 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: RE: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3753 In-Reply-To: <001401c2a4eb$2ff37770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:09 16.12.02, Wayne Harridge wrote: >I thought the method for photographing cats was to put then in the >freezer for a while to slow them down, then shoot them before they warm >up too much. No, you must be shinking of small children. Brings out their best facial expressions too.... Thomas (I'M KIDDING!) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17340 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 11:35:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 11:35:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 03:35:55 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA01227 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 00:21:44 -0800 Received: (qmail 20084 invoked by uid 706); 16 Dec 2002 11:34:44 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 11:34:42 -0000 Message-ID: <007201c2a4f7$f090e420$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:40:24 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I use my Polaroid Propalette 8000 to output the E-10 file to slide at home. C.H.Ling Ok, do some ad here, www.accura.com.hk mailing list member get special price ;-) ----- Original Message ----- From: > > But I've been holding out since (a) I like to make the occasional 12" x 18" > print and (b) I like to show the occasional slide at the camera club. > Tell me more about how you get Velvia slides made from E10 output... > > thanks > jez < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18180 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 12:15:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 12:15:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 04:15:53 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA01274 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 01:01:40 -0800 Received: (qmail 16147 invoked by uid 706); 16 Dec 2002 12:14:46 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 12:14:35 -0000 Message-ID: <00eb01c2a4fd$82e63000$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021216055058.4133.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] flash sync hack-I stll did not quite get it Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:20:23 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id BAA01274 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas M=FCller" > The best flash exposure in low light I get with my K*nica Hexar AF in > program-mode. This great little camera syncs on the rear curtain and > adjusts the aperture according to flash GN and focussing distance. > But to let in enough ambient light in a not too long exposure time, > it opens first with a wider aperture, then closes and fires the > flash. Works really great. > Many compact cameras work in this way, my Yashica T4 and the Mju II also. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18758 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 13:00:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 13:00:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 05:00:28 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA01306 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 01:46:16 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021216124750.BPWL4715.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:47:50 -0500 Message-ID: <017501c2a501$08e6f7e0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <3DF9DF41.40308@achtung.com> <3DFD972C.8090400@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:45:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:47:50 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" To: Sent: Monday, 16 December, 2002 05:04 AM Subject: Re: [OM] 1/focal length, flash dilemma/question > When I buy a flash, will it tell me what the equivalent is in speed? I > had always assumed (correctly I think) that the shutter speed is moot if > the light exposure time is governed by the flash duration. If the flash > is for 1/500th of a second, I'm shooting equal to that shutter speed. > > I had a T20 but it's in America... So I need to go buy another one.. > There are no places around here that sells OM equipment... And also, I > like flashes that I can tilt up, so I don't get a flash burn on the face > but instead, a softer light effect. > > Any suggestions of a flash I can buy?? > > Albert I might suggest a Vivitar 285HV. It has a tilt up and down head [forward to vertical], a push / pull head accomodating wide, normal and short tele lenses, a guide number of ~110 feet with 100 ISO [assuming the capacitor is not worn], a vari-power thrystor circuit, and a reasonable price new or used. Also, buy an off camera mounting bracket or frame to reduce or eliminate red eye. Whatever flash you buy the major variable is the one with largest guide number for your budget. jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19141 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 13:16:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 13:16:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 05:16:38 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA01320 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 02:02:26 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.7e.329f76d1 (25508) for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:14:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <7e.329f76d1.2b2f2bc1@aol.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:14:41 EST Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7e.329f76d1.2b2f2bc1_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_7e.329f76d1.2b2f2bc1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/2002 1:50:11 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: > By-the-way, I have a Vivitar 2X converter for sale Have you used it to open a beer bottle? Could you? Would you? Bill Barber --part1_7e.329f76d1.2b2f2bc1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/2002 1:50:11 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes:

By-the-way, I have a Vivitar 2X converter for sale


Have you used it to open a beer bottle? Could you? Would you?  Bill Barber --part1_7e.329f76d1.2b2f2bc1_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19738 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 13:59:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 13:59:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 05:59:55 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA01366 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 02:45:44 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-85-48.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.85.48]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBGDxKMv106772 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:59:20 -0500 Message-ID: <000e01c2a50b$13fa76c0$30554241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021216055058.4133.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] you haven't totally lost it... Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:57:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >it seems like we use to just bang the end that has the spool protruding from it against a hard surface and that would force >open the end so you could remove the film. Did anyone ever do it that way or is it just my imagination. Bill Barber Yes and no. I never could get a Kodak cannister to open that way when I was doing a lot of film processing. Their cannisters are mechanically crimped at the factory, and are tough to open. Others, I remember, used snap together cannisters, just like the reloadable ones, and they snap open easily. Sometimes, too easily. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20087 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 14:08:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 14:08:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 06:08:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.alcatel.be (alc239.alcatel.be [195.207.101.239]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA01387 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 02:54:35 -0800 From: Jez.Cunningham@alcatel.be Received: from bemail04.net.alcatel.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alcatel.be (8.10.1/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBGE4rQ28292 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:04:53 +0100 (MET) Sensitivity: Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:04:49 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL04/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 12/16/2002 15:04:52 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Extension tubes are better - no glass to damage... Jez NSURIT@aol.com@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 16-12-2002 02:14:41 PM Please respond to olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sent by: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca cc: Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! In a message dated 12/16/2002 1:50:11 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: By-the-way, I have a Vivitar 2X converter for sale Have you used it to open a beer bottle? Could you? Would you?=A0 Bill B= arber = < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20419 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 14:19:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 14:19:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 06:19:49 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id DAA01397 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 03:05:37 -0800 Received: (qmail 13285 invoked by uid 706); 16 Dec 2002 14:18:39 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 14:18:25 -0000 Message-ID: <01f601c2a50e$cf30c400$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <200212160828.gBG8RxW19043@central.caverock.net.nz> Subject: Re: [OM] Want to buy for China trip Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:24:12 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sometimes the feel of more superior in holding a large aperture lens is important, I feel happier in using a 50/1.4. Although the percentage price of the 1.4 is much higher than the 1.8 but the actual money is very small. Unless weight is a critical issue or the smaller aperture lens has some special characteristics that the other one does not otherwise I will choose the larger aperture one. I myself will choose the 1.4 any time. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Swale" > Hi Andrew, > > Is it likely to be worth it to go for a 50/1.4 rather than a 50/1.8? > > The extra opening isn't all that usable. > > For better pictures, I'd suggest looking for a 50/1.8 Made in Japan model; > they are not necessarily expensive, and certainly seem sharper. Just ensure > there's no oil on the blades; this has been reported. > > Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20956 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 14:51:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 14:51:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 06:51:29 2002 -0800 Received: from orngca-mls03.socal.rr.com (orngca-mls03.socal.rr.com [66.75.160.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA01428 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 03:37:18 -0800 Received: from norman (cpe-66-74-25-128.dc.rr.com [66.74.25.128]) by orngca-mls03.socal.rr.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.3) with SMTP id gBGEp4D07824 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 06:51:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <00fd01c2a50a$9753c220$6401a8c0@norman> From: "Norman S. Nadel" To: References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> <5.1.0.14.0.20021215143036.01edcd00@tid.uio.no> <014701c2a440$c92802e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 05:54:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca C.H. Here it is. I have not as yet used it since I cannot find a D60 locally for testing purposes,. Kindai International, Hiroike Building, 1-21-13 Takadanobaba, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Tel. (0081) 32080911 Fax (0081) 3200- 8560 Attention of Mr. Masuda www.kindai-inc.co.jp eMail: t.masuda@kindai-inc.co.jp Norm ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 5:49 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > I think Norman S. Nadel has the source, he just bought one this summer. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Thomas Bryhn" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:33 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > > > > At 11:45 15.12.02, C.H.Ling wrote: > > >You don't need to do so, there is OM lens to EOS adapter, you can use > Zuiko > > >on D60 or even 1Ds. No lens element in between. > > > > Can these adapters still be found new? As far as I remember, Tomoko acted > > as a broker for a few international purchases, but I've never seen them in > > any web shop. > > > > Thomas Bryhn > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21299 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 15:02:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 15:02:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 07:02:39 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id DAA01452 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 03:48:27 -0800 Received: (qmail 25835 invoked by uid 104); 16 Dec 2002 15:00:49 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 15:00:41 -0000 Message-ID: <000b01c2a514$c3efd940$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> <5.1.0.14.0.20021215143036.01edcd00@tid.uio.no> <014701c2a440$c92802e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <00fd01c2a50a$9753c220$6401a8c0@norman> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:06:50 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Norman, thanks for your information! C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Norman S. Nadel" > C.H. > > Here it is. I have not as yet used it since I cannot find a D60 locally > for testing purposes,. > > > Kindai International, Hiroike Building, 1-21-13 Takadanobaba, Shinjuku-ku, > Tokyo > Tel. (0081) 32080911 Fax (0081) 3200- 8560 > Attention of Mr. Masuda > www.kindai-inc.co.jp > eMail: t.masuda@kindai-inc.co.jp > > Norm > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21827 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 15:32:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 15:32:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 07:33:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.malarnet.com (mail.malarnet.com [217.150.65.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA01574 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 04:18:49 -0800 Received: (qmail 509 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 15:36:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (217.150.80.226) by mail.malarnet.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 15:36:05 -0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:30:28 +0100 Subject: [OM] Soligor 24/2.5 From: Johan Malmstr=?ISO-8859-1?B?9g==?=m To: "olympus Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi! I have found this lens in a mail-order store here in Sweden. Any one have any experience with it? / Johan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22274 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 15:52:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 15:52:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 07:52:36 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA01591 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 04:38:24 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh104.interisland.net [12.17.134.104]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBGFmxs26545 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:48:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFDF6CD.CA2AEC8D@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:52:45 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id EAA01591 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > ...Having said that, I'm looking for a new small backpack now, somethin= g > that I can take on one day treks around Blue Mountains. :-) I'm thinkin= g > of Mini Trekker or even Micro Trekker. :-).... > Unbelievable amount of stuff will fit in the Micro Trekker. I got it because the Mini Trekker was too big for afternoon outings. Only thing I'd add to both Mini and Micro would be straps to attach the tripod or monopod in the vertical position rather than flopping around on the bottom. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22825 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:17:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:17:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:17:07 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01645 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:02:55 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18NxvS-0004qy-00 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:17:03 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:16:14 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0031_01C2A4E3.C812C540" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <7e.329f76d1.2b2f2bc1@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C2A4E3.C812C540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nooooooooooo and if I had I wouldn't admit it to this group. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 6:15 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! In a message dated 12/16/2002 1:50:11 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: By-the-way, I have a Vivitar 2X converter for sale Have you used it to open a beer bottle? Could you? Would you? Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C2A4E3.C812C540 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nooooooooooo and if I had I wouldn't admit it to this group.=20 /jim
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 = 6:15=20 AM
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: AW: = [OM] Oh, I=20 am, huh, well take this!

In a message dated = 12/16/2002=20 1:50:11 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes:

By-the-way, I have a Vivitar 2X converter for sale=20


Have you used it to open a beer bottle? Could = you? Would=20 you?  Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C2A4E3.C812C540-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23195 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:30:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:30:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:30:06 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01661 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:15:54 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021216161725.OYCW148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:17:25 -0500 Message-ID: <007401c2a51e$47d15be0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] Phototgraphing Christmas lights after dark Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:14:58 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:17:25 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I want to take some night time photos of this city's very excellent displays of outside Christmas lights using slide film, a tripod, and my OM4T. I have a choice of using Fujichrome 64T Type II tungsten light film [64 ISO] or Provia III 100F daylight film with a blue 80A filter making for a 40 to 50 ISO film after taking account of the 2.2 filter factor. Is there any advice as to which film I should use? John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23518 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:37:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:37:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:37:03 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01673 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:22:52 -0800 Received: from pool0078.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.134.78] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18NyEI-0004AU-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:36:31 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000e01c2a49d$6522dec0$8c5b68cb@titoy> References: <001301c2a41d$970a0ba0$c1327bd5@Inwin> <5.1.0.14.0.20021215143036.01edcd00@tid.uio.no> <014701c2a440$c92802e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <000e01c2a49d$6522dec0$8c5b68cb@titoy> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:36:22 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >How can Norman be contacted? > I found Norman's email address in a search on Google. He was kind enough to send the following information: At 3:55 PM -0800 12/15/02, Norman S. Nadel wrote: > Kindai International, Hiroike Building, 1-21-13 Takadanobaba, Shinjuku-ku, >Tokyo >Tel. (0081) 32080911 Fax (0081) 3200- 8560 >Attention of Mr. Masuda >www.kindai-inc.co.jp >eMail: t.masuda@kindai-inc.co.jp > >It may take a few days for him to answer. I believe it cost about $165. > >Norm He also said he had not tried it out yet. He is trying to get his hands on a D60. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23845 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:41:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:41:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:41:51 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01689 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:27:39 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <20021216164039003006lolfe>; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:40:40 +0000 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:38:24 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DFDA657.25913751@accura.com.hk> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is something the Mini-DV kids at school keep saying to me about my shooting synch-sound Super-8, but my experience has been that software "film-look" filters just make a bad situation worse in that realm. Of course, you can't compare Mini-DV to digital still photography. The resolution is just so low and the exposure latitude sucks so bad. Shooting Kodak 200T I have about seven stops of latitude to work with vs. about two on a camcorder. I routinely overexpose by a stop or two because in telecine pulling down the exposure is artifact-free, but boosting it pixelates the image. Of course, neither of these are pro formats and I'm sure if I had the option of shooting with a Panavision or Sony Cine-Alta Vista 24P rig I'd be a lot more impressed with digital, but for right now I'm not seeing it as much of an option. It's a shame pro-sumer video hasn't kept pace with still photography as far as resolution and color rendition. I know it all ends up being screened on NTSC televisions, but that extra quality at the point of image acquisition makes a huge difference even on crappy TV systems. And I have now ranged a little too far off-topic. Forgive me. ;-) -Rob On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 02:09 AM, C.H.Ling wrote: > On the other > hand if you need grain I'm sure it can be simulated by software. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24149 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:48:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:48:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:48:10 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01698 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:33:58 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.ad.27da697d (4206) for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:43:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:43:23 EST Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_ad.27da697d.2b2f5cab_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_ad.27da697d.2b2f5cab_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/02 10:24:16 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: > Nooooooooooo and if I had I wouldn't admit it to this group. /jim Some on this list would appreciate your resourcefulness and creativity. BB --part1_ad.27da697d.2b2f5cab_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/02 10:24:16 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes:


Nooooooooooo and if I had I wouldn't admit it to this group. /jim


Some on this list would appreciate your resourcefulness and creativity.  BB --part1_ad.27da697d.2b2f5cab_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24481 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:54:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:54:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:54:21 2002 -0800 Received: from caduceus.sc.intel.com (fmr04.intel.com [143.183.121.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01713 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:40:10 -0800 Received: from talaria.sc.intel.com (talaria.sc.intel.com [10.3.253.5]) by caduceus.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/d: outer.mc,v 1.51 2002/09/23 20:43:23 dmccart Exp $) with ESMTP id gBGGpYN16080 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:51:34 GMT Received: from mipos2.intel.com (mipos2-seg48.sc.intel.com [143.183.48.42]) by talaria.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/d: inner.mc,v 1.27 2002/10/16 23:46:59 dmccart Exp $) with ESMTP id gBGGn4C25782 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:49:04 GMT Received: from zws705.sc.intel.com (zws705.sc.intel.com [143.183.38.136]) by mipos2.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/MailSET/hub) with ESMTP id gBGGqR808101 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:52:27 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Lau Received: (from dlau@localhost) by zws705.sc.intel.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/MailSET/client) id gBGGokK16073 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:50:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:50:46 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200212161650.gBGGokK16073@zws705.sc.intel.com> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:55, Andrew Dacey wrote: >Well just about everyone has suggested a longer lens so my current thinking >is to pick up a 200/4 as well as a tele converter. Of course, everyone's experiences and interests are different, so we are all just giving you comments from our own experiences when we travel :-). What I found in China is that there is so much that is close by that I very seldom used my long lenses. Either that or the landscape is so beautiful that I wanted to capture it all with as wide a lens as possible. >Fortunately, there's a number of photographers (amateur and pro) in the >group so I don't think this will be a problem. I think there's 14 in the >group and at least 4 of us are photographers, possibly more. We had 19 in our tour group and 4 were photographers, but the 4 of us all did quite a bit of running to catch up. Fortunately there were enough "shopping stops" that we always managed to find the rest of teh group :-). I am not trying to discourage you or anything, just trying to prepare your for what may happen. -Dan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24761 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 16:55:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 16:55:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 08:55:07 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01717 for ; Wed, 28 Nov 1934 05:40:55 -0800 From: JMeyers102@aol.com Received: from JMeyers102@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1ab.dca3942 (4592) for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:53:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1ab.dca3942.2b2f5ef7@aol.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:53:11 EST Subject: [OM] WTB: OM-4T To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 28 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, I am looking to buy a black OM-4T. I'd like one that is in excellent working condition. If it shows some cosmetic wear, that doesn't matter much to me. If any list members have one that they wish to sell. Please contact me off-list. Thanks. John Meyers JMeyers102@aol.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25165 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 17:12:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 17:12:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 09:12:59 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts19-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts19.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01763 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:12:31 -0800 Received: from [206.172.131.85] by tomts19-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021216170904.MPSZ23963.tomts19-srv.bellnexxia.net@[206.172.131.85]> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:09:04 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: b1qgsf00@pop1.sympatico.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:09:29 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Robert T McFetridge Subject: RE: AW: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Worse is you might drop or spill one -- Robert T McFetridge 5489 Edgewater Dr Ottawa, ON, K4M 1B4 Canada Ph: 613 692 4896 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25610 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 17:30:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 17:30:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 09:30:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01785 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:30:08 -0800 Received: from pop-b.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:26:44 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-b.ucl.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA27982 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:26:41 GMT Message-ID: <3DFE0CCC.5040402@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:26:36 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Phototgraphing Christmas lights after dark References: <007401c2a51e$47d15be0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hmmm, not sure about the filtration. I do quite a lot of city photography at night, and I never use filters. Over a 20-second or so exposure, the colour shift with Sensia 100 seems not at all undesirable or obtrusive to me and the results look quite natural. Therefore I would suggest using a daylight film and not filtering the result. That said I don't know anything about how Provia behaves over long exposures. Roger John Hudson wrote: > I want to take some night time photos of this city's very excellent displays > of outside Christmas lights using slide film, a tripod, and my OM4T. > > I have a choice of using Fujichrome 64T Type II tungsten light film [64 ISO] > or Provia III 100F daylight film with a blue 80A filter making for a 40 to > 50 ISO film after taking account of the 2.2 filter factor. > > Is there any advice as to which film I should use? > > John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25867 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 17:34:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 17:34:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 09:34:10 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01789 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:33:42 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-47.s982.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.47] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Nz72-0002tf-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:33:04 -0500 Message-ID: <000301c2a529$35ff4840$2fe47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20021215150750.00a2dec0@hedma003.email.umn.edu> Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:51:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 5 ma +- 1 for battery check 10 ma +-3 for vf illuminator 4 ma +- 1 for memo indicator 4 ma +- for color illumination (this may be memo blinking led) 5 ma +-1 for self timer. Standby current, up to 35 micro amps, if measured properly. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Curtis P. Hedman" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 4:20 PM Subject: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? > I've searched the archives on this without much success... > > From what I have picked up here and there, the OM-4 does a 'battery check' > before releasing the shutter; does anyone know what level of current drain > is applied to the batteries during this check? I have a small battery > tester (made for button cells) that tests at 1 milliampere; when I check > batteries that my newly acquired OM-4 doesn't like, they test "good" on > this tester, suggesting that the OM-4 draws a LOT more current during its > pre-release test, and during an actual firing. I'm not adverse to making > this little tester "OM Specific" by altering a load resistor or two, if I > had some idea what load current I should be trying for. Also, does anyone > know the load currents for other models? I have a 2n, 2s, PC, 4 and 4T; at > one time or another they've all 'failed' with a set of batteries that > "pass" the manual in-camera check, but immediately recover when a new set > of 357's are installed. Generally, said batteries also test "good" on my > external tester. > > Any insights will be greatly appreciated! > > Curt > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26240 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 17:41:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 17:41:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 09:41:14 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01814 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:40:46 -0800 Received: from modem-3915.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.31.75] helo=skelly) by cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18NzEp-0006pW-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:41:08 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:41:09 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <000301c2a529$35ff4840$2fe47ad1@hppav> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How about with a T32 fitted and turned on? I've got to the stage where I always pack 2 sets of fresh batteries if there is any chance of using the flash - I know it will kill them. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Hermanson Sent: 16 December 2002 13:51 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? 5 ma +- 1 for battery check 10 ma +-3 for vf illuminator 4 ma +- 1 for memo indicator 4 ma +- for color illumination (this may be memo blinking led) 5 ma +-1 for self timer. Standby current, up to 35 micro amps, if measured properly. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Curtis P. Hedman" To: Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 4:20 PM Subject: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? > I've searched the archives on this without much success... > > From what I have picked up here and there, the OM-4 does a 'battery check' > before releasing the shutter; does anyone know what level of current drain > is applied to the batteries during this check? I have a small battery > tester (made for button cells) that tests at 1 milliampere; when I check > batteries that my newly acquired OM-4 doesn't like, they test "good" on > this tester, suggesting that the OM-4 draws a LOT more current during its > pre-release test, and during an actual firing. I'm not adverse to making > this little tester "OM Specific" by altering a load resistor or two, if I > had some idea what load current I should be trying for. Also, does anyone > know the load currents for other models? I have a 2n, 2s, PC, 4 and 4T; at > one time or another they've all 'failed' with a set of batteries that > "pass" the manual in-camera check, but immediately recover when a new set > of 357's are installed. Generally, said batteries also test "good" on my > external tester. > > Any insights will be greatly appreciated! > > Curt > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26705 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 18:01:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 18:01:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 10:01:33 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01832 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:01:05 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh43.interisland.net [12.17.134.43]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBGHvvs01104 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:57:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:01:41 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA01832 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just updated my for sale list. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.doc Thanks for looking. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27479 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 19:01:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 19:01:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 11:01:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01896 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:01:31 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBGIrxN7028262 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:53:59 +0100 (MET) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:53:58 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] FS list Message-Id: <20021216195358.116759a7.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA01896 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mike, For those of us who do not have access to MS Word, could you be convinced to produce your list in another (preferably open) format? --thomas On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:01:41 -0800 Mike wrote: > I just updated my for sale list. >=20 > http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.doc >=20 > Thanks for looking. >=20 > Mike >=20 > -- > Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27769 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 19:06:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 19:06:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 11:06:44 2002 -0800 Received: from webmail6.nyc.untd.com (outbound-20.nyc.untd.com [64.136.20.100]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA01900 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:06:40 -0800 From: gaasland@juno.com Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"CPLfuOMB7uY9fLQ80xO8aY5NHotnbV7A8Fo+YL8A59xbT9w5trZ71Q=="> Received: (from gaasland@juno.com) by webmail6.nyc.untd.com (jqueuemail) id HK62SCJ2; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:04:21 EST X-Original-From: gaasland@juno.com Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:04:03 GMT To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: Subject: [OM] For Sale 35-70/3.5-4.5 X-Mailer: Juno Webmail Version 1.0 Message-Id: <20021216.140421.5926.504272@webmail6.nyc.untd.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Excellent condition, glass excellent. $90+$5 ship. 5 day moneyback if anything isn't right. Thanks, John Gaasland. ________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28208 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 19:25:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 19:25:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 11:25:29 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01920 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:25:24 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021216191235.ZNRR214174.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a>; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:12:35 -0500 Message-ID: <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: Cc: References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> <20021216195358.116759a7.T.Clausen@computer.org> Subject: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:10:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:12:35 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA01920 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Heide Clausen" To: Sent: Monday, 16 December, 2002 02:53 PM Subject: Re: [OM] FS list Mike, For those of us who do not have access to MS Word, could you be convinced to produce your list in another (preferably open) format? --thomas Microsoft has a freeware reader program called "Microsoft Reader" you can download from the MS site. This allows you to open and read MS Word documents even though you do not have Word on your system. The *.exe file= I downloaded is called Wd97vw32.exe and according to the site details is go= od from and including Word 97 right up to date. It worked fine with Mike's f= or sale list and I do not have Word on my system. John Hudson Moncton, NB On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:01:41 -0800 Mike wrote: > I just updated my for sale list. > > http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.doc > > Thanks for looking. > > Mike > > -- > Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > -- ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28872 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 20:09:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 20:09:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 12:09:02 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01979 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:08:58 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBGK7fnh017850 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:07:41 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:10:00 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 16-12-2002 21:10:01 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Mike, You obviously do not have the latest Mini Trekker; it has a drop down flap with a pocket that holds two tripod legs. Two elastic straps, one at the top of the pack and one in the middle, hold the tripod vertically. I myself would prefer the pack to be longer, to fit a long back better; capacity is reasonably good.It also has an outside pocket over the whole back side of the pack, that can hold some clothing. Roger Key > ...Having said that, I'm looking for a new small backpack now, something > that I can take on one day treks around Blue Mountains. :-) I'm thinking > of Mini Trekker or even Micro Trekker. :-).... > Unbelievable amount of stuff will fit in the Micro Trekker. I got it because the Mini Trekker was too big for afternoon outings. Only thing I'd add to both Mini and Micro would be straps to attach the tripod or monopod in the vertical position rather than flopping around on the bottom. Mike < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29159 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 20:11:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 20:11:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 12:11:13 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01983 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:11:09 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021216195826.VJTA513731.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:58:26 -0500 Message-ID: <004701c2a53d$25f50d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] animal photos Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:55:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:58:26 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Someone said in a message today that animals and pets are notoriously difficult to pose and capture on film. Not so this little critter seen here www.hudsonphoto.ca/TEMP/13.jpg which ran up my wife's sweater at breakfast time. This three month old kitten is everywhere and she had done this climbing exercise before. I was ready with a 4T / 90/2 / F280 with Fuji Press 400 print film loaded and shot at f2.8 or f4. John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29663 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 20:41:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 20:41:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 12:41:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mons.uio.no (mons.uio.no [129.240.130.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02020 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:41:04 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by mons.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18O1zK-0006dp-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:37:18 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18O1zK-0003Pm-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:37:18 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021216210414.01eb2040@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:33:56 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list In-Reply-To: <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> <20021216195358.116759a7.T.Clausen@computer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 20:10 16.12.02, John Hudson wrote: >Microsoft has a freeware reader program called "Microsoft Reader" you can >download from the MS site. This allows you to open and read MS Word >documents even though you do not have Word on your system. The *.exe file I >downloaded is called Wd97vw32.exe and according to the site details is good >from and including Word 97 right up to date. It worked fine with Mike's for >sale list and I do not have Word on my system. Why would anyone open .doc-files with potential executable content to view a list of equipment? I'm not saying Mike has hatched out an evil plan to infect all zuikoholics with macro viri, but who knows what his machine's infected with? A text list should be very easy to publish in html, or if that fails, sending the list in text fomat by email would be even easier. Surely it wouldn't be many bytes when the Word header and tags are removed. Grumpy (Word installed, still without clue about what Mike's selling) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29923 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 20:44:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 20:44:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 12:44:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02028 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:44:03 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBGKaUN7007806 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:36:31 +0100 (MET) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:36:29 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] animal photos Message-Id: <20021216213629.3a20a55b.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <004701c2a53d$25f50d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> References: <004701c2a53d$25f50d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:55:56 -0400 "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> wrote: > Someone said in a message today that animals and pets are > notoriously difficult to pose and capture on film. > > Not so this little critter seen here > > www.hudsonphoto.ca/TEMP/13.jpg Aww....cute. Good seen, John :) Got a whole flock of those, or just that single one? Either way, if you develop fast reflexes, then you've got a whole furball of photo-opportunities there :) > > which ran up my wife's sweater at breakfast time. This three month > old kitten is everywhere and she had done this climbing exercise > before. I was ready with a 4T / 90/2 / F280 with Fuji Press 400 > print film loaded and shot at f2.8 or f4. For how long did the kitten stick around in that position? I guess "not very long". --thomas (who lives in an apartment, where aquarium fishes are the only viable critters to keep around) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30234 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 20:50:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 20:50:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 12:50:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02041 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:50:02 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-a245.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.76.245]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBGKnxF10952 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:49:59 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Portrait shots Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:48:52 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Great shots Adam, particularly the little girl. Am now negotiating with the Leader of the Opposition to move my B&W darkroom gear back into the laundry (it may happen, perhaps in the Spirit of Christmas...) John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Bolty Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 8:54 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots I have used the 50 for some great portraits. This is one I took recently for my sister in law and her boyfriend http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=460256 I have used this lens a number of times now and always find it to be great for portraits. Get too close, then you can see a slight distortion but it can be used to your advantage when selective focusing see http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=428393 Cheers Adam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30667 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:04:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:04:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:04:59 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.hrnoc.net (relay1.hrnoc.net [66.192.44.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02068 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:04:54 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay1.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18O2PN-000F8m-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:04:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 55663 invoked by uid 89); 16 Dec 2002 21:04:24 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-37-2.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.37.2) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:04:24 -0000 Message-ID: <029801c2a546$afffdcf0$9e01a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: Cc: References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> <20021216195358.116759a7.T.Clausen@computer.org> <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:04:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My guess, though, is that he doesn't have Windows either, which would be required for the reader. Tom Mike, For those of us who do not have access to MS Word, could you be convinced to produce your list in another (preferably open) format? --thomas Microsoft has a freeware reader program called "Microsoft Reader" you can download from the MS site. This allows you to open and read MS Word documents even though you do not have Word on your system. The *.exe file I downloaded is called Wd97vw32.exe and according to the site details is good from and including Word 97 right up to date. It worked fine with Mike's for sale list and I do not have Word on my system. John Hudson Moncton, NB < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31034 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:13:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:13:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:13:06 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02101 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:13:02 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.55]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021216210847.JFXK21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:08:47 -0600 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:08:20 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <004701c2a53d$25f50d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] animal photos X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [151.198.121.55] at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:08:46 -0600 Message-Id: <20021216210847.JFXK21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <004701c2a53d$25f50d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>, on 12/16/02 at 03:55 PM, "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> said: >Someone said in a message today that animals and pets are notoriously >difficult to pose and capture on film. >Not so this little critter seen here The kitten's adorable, but your wife doesn't look entranced with the whole idea. Good shot! ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31343 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:18:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:18:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:18:15 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02109 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:18:11 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.55]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021216211356.GOLU4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:13:56 -0600 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:13:30 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <3DFD75DF.7010405@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Camera Commandos X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.121.55] at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:13:56 -0600 Message-Id: <20021216211356.GOLU4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <3DFD75DF.7010405@achtung.com>, on 12/16/02 at 02:42 PM, Albert said: >How he was shooting a 300mm lens HAND HELD while walking is beyond me, Yet, if he's using flash, that would arrest movement. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31596 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:18:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:18:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:18:44 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02112 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:18:40 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021216210558.YNUO513731.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:05:58 -0500 Message-ID: <007f01c2a546$92c25be0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <004701c2a53d$25f50d40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> <20021216213629.3a20a55b.T.Clausen@computer.org> Subject: Re: [OM] animal photos Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:03:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:05:58 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Heide Clausen" To: Sent: Monday, 16 December, 2002 04:36 PM Subject: Re: [OM] animal photos > On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:55:56 -0400 > "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> wrote: > > > Someone said in a message today that animals and pets are > > notoriously difficult to pose and capture on film. > > > > Not so this little critter seen here > > > > www.hudsonphoto.ca/TEMP/13.jpg > > Aww....cute. Good seen, John :) > > Got a whole flock of those, or just that single one? Either way, if > you develop fast reflexes, then you've got a whole furball of > photo-opportunities there :) Just one! > > > > > which ran up my wife's sweater at breakfast time. This three month > > old kitten is everywhere and she had done this climbing exercise > > before. I was ready with a 4T / 90/2 / F280 with Fuji Press 400 > > print film loaded and shot at f2.8 or f4. > > For how long did the kitten stick around in that position? I guess > "not very long". She will sit there and pur for as long as she is able so posing is not a problem!! > > --thomas > > (who lives in an apartment, where aquarium fishes are the only viable > critters to keep around) > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31894 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:20:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:20:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:20:55 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02120 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:20:51 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021216210816.PEWL4715.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:08:16 -0500 Message-ID: <008d01c2a546$e0df0080$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> <20021216195358.116759a7.T.Clausen@computer.org> <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> <029801c2a546$afffdcf0$9e01a8c0@inspiron> Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:05:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:08:16 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Scales" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, 16 December, 2002 05:04 PM Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list > My guess, though, is that he doesn't have Windows either, which would be > required for the reader. > > Tom He doesn't ! > > Mike, > > For those of us who do not have access to MS Word, could you be > convinced to produce your list in another (preferably open) format? > > --thomas > > Microsoft has a freeware reader program called "Microsoft Reader" you can > download from the MS site. This allows you to open and read MS Word > documents even though you do not have Word on your system. The *.exe file I > downloaded is called Wd97vw32.exe and according to the site details is good > from and including Word 97 right up to date. It worked fine with Mike's for > sale list and I do not have Word on my system. > > John Hudson > Moncton, NB > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32194 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:25:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:25:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:25:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02128 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:25:13 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7800D6RDZW2C@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:21:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:24:08 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <01b901c2a549$78317ce0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If anyone comes up with a real source (beyond urban legend) for an OM lens to EOS body adapter, please post it and also let me know :) Much as I hold out hope for the 4/3 system, my "ace in the hole" will be to go to the dark side...eventually. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32596 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:35:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:35:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:35:40 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02164 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:35:37 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA03026 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:34:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216133158.0269fc78@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:36:13 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography In-Reply-To: <01b901c2a549$78317ce0$1f00a8c0@mike> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 01:24 PM 12/16/2002 -0800, Mike wrote: >If anyone comes up with a real source (beyond urban legend) for an OM lens >to EOS body adapter, please post it and also let me know :) > >Much as I hold out hope for the 4/3 system, my "ace in the hole" will be to >go to the dark side...eventually. >... Did you just miss Norman's post? This is my thinking also. For our "business," we will need to get a digital system some times next year. Looking at the current crop, the Sigma still has a way to go, so it is still down to either the Nik*n D100 or the Can*n D60. The Can*n 1Ds and the Kod*k DCS-14n is just out of the budget. If either Pent*x or the Olydak 4/3 comes out a 6+MP system w/ good selection of lens in a form factor that I like, then great. Otherwise, then it will have to be either the D100 or the D60, with the D60 has the potential advantage of able to use the Zuiko with an adapter. I think the D100 is much lighter though, being based on the lighter F100/F80 film body. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1063 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 21:54:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 21:54:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 13:54:15 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02217 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:54:10 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA26599 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:54:10 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] Phototgraphing Christmas lights after dark Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:50:46 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c2a54d$34246360$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021216213542.32639.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John: I would recommend the 64T as the lights are incandescent, and you will get truer colors from this film. I'd also suggest shooting right at dusk when the lights come on. With the 64T, the ambient light/background will go a nice dark hue of blue that is quite pleasing. It is much better than unfiltered - especially with those awful sodium lights! I'd also trust you cameras meter, or if there is a large area that you want detail, I'd spot meter, memory function, and bracket +2/3. Let us know how they turn out! Bob I want to take some night time photos of this city's very excellent displays of outside Christmas lights using slide film, a tripod, and my OM4T. I have a choice of using Fujichrome 64T Type II tungsten light film [64 ISO] or Provia III 100F daylight film with a blue 80A filter making for a 40 to 50 ISO film after taking account of the 2.2 filter factor. Is there any advice as to which film I should use? John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1414 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:01:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:01:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:01:59 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02233 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:01:54 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.55]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021216215738.GYRE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:57:38 -0600 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:57:34 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.121.55] at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:57:38 -0600 Message-Id: <20021216215738.GYRE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default>, on 12/16/02 at 07:53 PM, "Bolty" said: >I have used the 50 for some great portraits. You sure have! ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1675 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:02:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:02:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:02:46 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02237 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:02:41 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh141.interisland.net [12.17.134.141]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBGLx8s16267 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:59:08 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFE4D8B.D065CD64@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:02:51 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id OAA02237 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Mike, > > For those of us who do not have access to MS Word, could you be > convinced to produce your list in another (preferably open) format? > > - --thomas > Sorry about that. I originally also had a txt version but have neglected to keep it current. How about a *.htm version? There are a few formatting errors in the translation but it should work in most browsers. mike http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.htm -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1942 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:04:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:04:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:04:48 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02241 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:04:44 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBGM3Ti18009; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:29 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.47] (195-74-115-47.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.47]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBGM3Ro17949; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:28 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212152107.gBFL7aW22680@central.caverock.net.nz> References: <200212152107.gBFL7aW22680@central.caverock.net.nz> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:49 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Totally OT. Kalahari Bushmen Cc: "Brian Swale" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well done Brian. There was a documentary on the BBC a few weeks ago on the Bushmen of the Kalahari. Chris At 10:09 +1300 16/12/02, Brian Swale wrote: >Hi folks, > >This is totally Off Topic, so if you don't like it, please just >delete it and move >on. > >Many years ago I was introduced me to the writings of Sir Laurens van der >Post, who wrote much about the remarkable race of little people of the >Kalahari, once over all Africa, but displaced by negroid races from the nor= th >and whites from the south, during the last 400 years. If you do a search on >bookfinder.com for "van der Post" his books should turn up; the first I wou= ld >read are "The heart of the Hunter" and "The Lost world of the Kalahari". > >I would have loved to go there but is has never been possible for me >and I feel >sure I'll never make it there now. > >Through an Oxford University magazine I get several times a year, I have >become aware of the plight of the Kalahari bushmen of today. > >In a letter, this is in part what I read. > >"Abandoning the more enlightened policies of Botswana's first President >Seretse Khama, current president Festus Mogae and his government have >brutally evicted all but a few of the last 700 Gana and Gwi from their >ancestral land in the Kalahari Game Reserve, cutting off their water suppli= es >and banning them from hunting and gathering. They are being forced to live = in >bleak resettlement camps which they describe as "places of death", where >they become dependent on government hand-outs and are reduced to >boredom, alcoholism and despair. > >Survival International (http://www.survival-international.org) the world-wi= de >organisation supporting tribal peoples, is running a major campaign in >support of the Gana and Gwi and their right to choose for themselves how >they wish to live, on the land that is their under international law. In >striving for recognition of this right, these peoples are meeting fierce >resistance from some of the Oxonians in Botswana. >END OF QUOTE > >I have decided to give a small regular donation in their support. >It's at least >something positive I can do. I'll never get there myself now. > snip -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1950 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:04:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:04:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:04:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02243 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:04:46 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBGM3aj18221; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:36 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.47] (195-74-115-47.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.47]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBGM3Uo18012; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:30 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:45 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Cc: "IanG" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Perhaps we ought to arrange a meeting in London when the weather is a) cold, frosty or snowy b) brighter. Unless that is we all take OM1s loaded with fast B/W (old type) film to do some street photography. Chris At 19:45 +0000 14/12/02, IanG wrote: >Much to my disgust I've been sober for a year now... more worrying is the >thought that if I post such silly messages when I'm sober what on earth did >I do when I was enjoying myself.. > >But at least I may be able to find my way home from London now (homage to >subject) and I'd quite enjoy a UK chapter meet in town one day if anybody i= s >up for it? Or perhaps another location? > >ian > >PS I was going to join in the thread about beer in the darkroom but the >whole idea was just too upsetting :-( Stella Artois, in ice cold cans with = a >light coat of condensation gently rolling down the side and that soft sigh >as the ring pull is gently teased open for the........ >ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sob sob sob. -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2509 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:06:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:06:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:06:52 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02253 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:06:47 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh141.interisland.net [12.17.134.141]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBGM3Es16575 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:03:15 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFE4E81.8C32AA75@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:06:57 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id OAA02253 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Hi Mike, > > You obviously do not have the latest Mini Trekker; it has a drop down f= lap > with a pocket that holds two tripod legs. Two elastic straps, one at th= e > top of the pack and one in the middle, hold the tripod vertically. > They must have heard me cursing while the tripod was slapping my arse. I'll check them out next time I get to civilization. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3011 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:25:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:25:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:25:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mpmail1.accesstoledo.com (mpmail1.accesstoledo.com [208.16.180.231] (may be forged)) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02291 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:25:48 -0800 Received: from computer (unverified [65.221.34.179]) by buckeye-express.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 5.2.5) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:24:56 -0500 Message-ID: <010901c2a552$55ed1fa0$b322dd41@computer> From: "Richard Allen" To: References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:27:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Adam, Your work is great! It is surprising, the result that you have gotten from the 50mm lens! Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bolty" To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 4:53 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots > I have used the 50 for some great portraits. This is one I took recently for > my sister in law and her boyfriend > http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=460256 > I have used this lens a number of times now and always find it to be great > for portraits. Get too close, then you can see a slight distortion but it > can be used to your advantage when selective focusing see > http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=428393 > Cheers Adam > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3354 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:31:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:31:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:31:47 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02315 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:31:42 -0800 Received: from modem-3768.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.62.184] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18O3lz-0001NY-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:31:39 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:31:41 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id OAA02315 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's not going to take too much arranging, just a date and a place to tak= e some pix... is anybody interested in a meet? Central London may not be the best place but probably beats Watford Gap services... I've been led to believe that = the world stops just past there..... Thames Barrier could be good.... Bluewater with partners and freshly prepared cedit cards? One of the big parks - Woburn maybe (superb pubs an= d grub around there).. Longleat? Windsor? - feed the family to the lions. Just a thought. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: 16 December 2002 22:04 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: IanG Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Perhaps we ought to arrange a meeting in London when the weather is a) cold, frosty or snowy b) brighter. Unless that is we all take OM1s loaded with fast B/W (old type) film to do some street photography. Chris At 19:45 +0000 14/12/02, IanG wrote: >Much to my disgust I've been sober for a year now... more worrying is th= e >thought that if I post such silly messages when I'm sober what on earth = did >I do when I was enjoying myself.. > >But at least I may be able to find my way home from London now (homage t= o >subject) and I'd quite enjoy a UK chapter meet in town one day if anybod= y is >up for it? Or perhaps another location? > >ian > >PS I was going to join in the thread about beer in the darkroom but the >whole idea was just too upsetting :-( Stella Artois, in ice cold cans wi= th a >light coat of condensation gently rolling down the side and that soft si= gh >as the ring pull is gently teased open for the........ >ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sob sob sob. -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3698 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:38:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:38:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:39:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02323 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:38:57 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D773F20 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:39:52 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021216213542.32639.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021216213542.32639.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:38:40 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There are some of us who do not allow any Microsoft products on-site, including certain government agencies who are concerned about security. I agree: plain text is the lingua franca for such lists, or PDF for anything more complicated. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4062 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 22:50:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:50:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 14:50:05 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02344 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:50:01 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05255B2A3 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:49:15 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots In-Reply-To: Message from Albert of "Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:44:41 +0800." <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:49:15 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021216224915.B05255B2A3@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com>, Albert writes: Albert, >Saturday was the first time I used my 50mm/f1.8 for portrait shots. I >usually use my 90mm, never tried my 50mm. I liked it a lot. [snip] >That's great... you discover something new everyday... Don't stop at 50mm. Try 35, 28, 24 as well for a different view. :-) It's well worth experimenting. Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4540 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:10:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:10:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:10:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02372 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:10:04 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBGNA3F10884 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:10:03 +1100 Message-Id: <200212162310.gBGNA3F10884@mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:10:03 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Jan Steinman wrote: > > : Buy My Step Van! > Looks like a perfect OM carrier ! Working from the roof would be great for architectural stuff. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4806 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:11:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:11:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:11:44 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02376 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:11:39 -0800 Received: from modem-3768.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.62.184] helo=skelly) by cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18O4Oe-00055v-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:11:36 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: [OM] A couple of pix Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:11:37 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thought I should load a couple of pix up to a site I can use. With one exception all taken with an OM4 + a zuiko, the exception being a Tamron. The site is run by the RPS Digit group. http://www.digit.org.uk/images/thumbs.asp?user_id=60089&personal=1 Ian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5061 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:12:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:12:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:12:12 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02380 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:12:06 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBGN41U08107 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:04:02 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:10:46 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F5690@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Portrait shots Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:10:43 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Bolty [mailto:boldbolty@iprimus.com.au] wrote: > This is one I took recently for my sister in law and her > boyfriend http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=460256 I'm a current lover of selective focussing, and enjoy seeing others use it in the way I probably would (okay, your shots are better than mine, but you know what I mean :-)). Of course, sometimes I have to remind myself when a photo cops quite justified and helpful criticism for overuse of it that *I* like it, and I'm taking them for *me*. This obviously doesn't apply if I'm not. > Get too close, then you can see a slight distortion but it > can be used to your advantage when selective focusing see > http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=428393 My god! She's hideous! Put it away! Put it away! [tee hee] Joking, naturally ;-) The photo, and more to the point your "little girl", is gorgeous, Adam. It's always a pleasure and an inspiration viewing your photos. Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5403 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:20:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:20:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:20:03 2002 -0800 Received: from out002.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02392 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:19:57 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.95.150]) by out002.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021216231542.DLBW8264.out002.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:15:42 -0600 Message-ID: <00c601c2a559$0fb4ba50$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> <20021216195358.116759a7.T.Clausen@computer.org> <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> <029801c2a546$afffdcf0$9e01a8c0@inspiron> <008d01c2a546$e0df0080$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:15:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out002.verizon.net from [141.157.95.150] at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:15:41 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca An M$ alternative office suite that works well with the M$ formats is OpenOffice.org . Versions availabe for Windows and Linux. Although I have only light needs, I've found it to be more than sufficient. It's a free, legal download. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 4:05 PM Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Scales" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Monday, 16 December, 2002 05:04 PM > Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list > > > > My guess, though, is that he doesn't have Windows either, which would be > > required for the reader. > > > > Tom > > He doesn't ! > > > > > > Mike, > > > > For those of us who do not have access to MS Word, could you be > > convinced to produce your list in another (preferably open) format? > > > > --thomas > > > > Microsoft has a freeware reader program called "Microsoft Reader" you can > > download from the MS site. This allows you to open and read MS Word > > documents even though you do not have Word on your system. The *.exe file > I > > downloaded is called Wd97vw32.exe and according to the site details is > good > > from and including Word 97 right up to date. It worked fine with Mike's > for > > sale list and I do not have Word on my system. > > > > John Hudson > > Moncton, NB > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5793 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:31:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:31:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:31:12 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02408 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:31:06 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.171]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H78KQR01.6TG for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:47:15 +0800 Message-ID: <005301c2a55a$ad5406c0$ab5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216133158.0269fc78@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:27:17 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Is it possible to do manual focusing on the D60 or D100 cameras with a zuiko mounted on it ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:36 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > At 01:24 PM 12/16/2002 -0800, Mike wrote: > >If anyone comes up with a real source (beyond urban legend) for an OM lens > >to EOS body adapter, please post it and also let me know :) > > > >Much as I hold out hope for the 4/3 system, my "ace in the hole" will be to > >go to the dark side...eventually. > >... > > Did you just miss Norman's post? This is my thinking also. For our > "business," we will need to get a digital system some times next year. > Looking at the current crop, the Sigma still has a way to go, so it is > still down to either the Nik*n D100 or the Can*n D60. The Can*n 1Ds and the > Kod*k DCS-14n is just out of the budget. If either Pent*x or the Olydak 4/3 > comes out a 6+MP system w/ good selection of lens in a form factor that I > like, then great. Otherwise, then it will have to be either the D100 or the > D60, with the D60 has the potential advantage of able to use the Zuiko with > an adapter. I think the D100 is much lighter though, being based on the > lighter F100/F80 film body. > > > // richard > > On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. > [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous > replies in your msgs. ] > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6091 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:37:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:37:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:37:27 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02416 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:37:22 -0800 Received: from unknown (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.136.212 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:36:34 -0000 Message-ID: <3DFE8117.5070602@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:42:47 -0500 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Makes no difference, as the flash ready light is powered by the flash batteries. Early versions of the OM-2s that powered the ready light from the camera batteries may be what you are thinking about. Moose IanG wrote: >How about with a T32 fitted and turned on? I've got to the stage where I >always pack 2 sets of fresh batteries if there is any chance of using the >flash - I know it will kill them. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6456 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2002 23:45:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:45:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 15:46:02 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02431 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:45:56 -0800 Received: from unknown (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.136.212 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 23:45:10 -0000 Message-ID: <3DFE831C.5030005@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:51:24 -0500 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] the ultimate tool References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There was quite an amusing SciFi story many years ago about the process of paper clips metamorphing into wire coat hangers and then into bicycle frames. Moose >> I once had a theory >> about church keys. Figured they were the larval stage of coat hangers. >> Seems like whenever you needed one you couldn't find one however you always >> had a closet full of coat hangers, so it just figures the church keys were >> >> turning into coat hangers. Bill Barber >> >> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6900 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 00:05:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 00:05:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 16:06:02 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02452 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:05:57 -0800 Received: from modem-3588.crocodile.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.46.4] helo=skelly) by cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18O5FB-0001vY-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:05:55 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:05:47 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <3DFE8117.5070602@sbcglobal.net> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 'Fraid not. Put a T32 onto my OM4 and the batteries are dead within an hour max... It has always done it. The camera has been repaired / serviced a number of times as well. I need to constantly turn the gun off to conserve the camera batteries. I've not got another flash to try. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Moose Sent: 17 December 2002 01:43 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? Makes no difference, as the flash ready light is powered by the flash batteries. Early versions of the OM-2s that powered the ready light from the camera batteries may be what you are thinking about. Moose IanG wrote: >How about with a T32 fitted and turned on? I've got to the stage where I >always pack 2 sets of fresh batteries if there is any chance of using the >flash - I know it will kill them. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7154 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 00:06:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 00:06:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 16:06:37 2002 -0800 Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02456 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:06:32 -0800 Received: from pool0894.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.179.129] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18O5FL-000075-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:06:04 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <005301c2a55a$ad5406c0$ab5b68cb@titoy> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216133158.0269fc78@192.168.100.11> <005301c2a55a$ad5406c0$ab5b68cb@titoy> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:05:55 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Is it possible to do manual focusing on the D60 or D100 cameras with a zuiko >mounted on it ? I would think so. The B&H says that the D60 takes EF lenses and all of the tilt/shift EF lenses are manual focus. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7647 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 00:30:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 00:30:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 16:30:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02484 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:30:34 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7800D5TMKSDT@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:26:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:29:07 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <024d01c2a563$4ff1fec0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/16/2002 Richard F. Man writes: << Did you just miss Norman's post? >> No, not now. I'm in digest mode so there's a lag time for me...sorry. << This is my thinking also. For our "business," we will need to get a digital system some times next year. Looking at the current crop, the Sigma still has a way to go, so it is still down to either the Nik*n D100 or the Can*n D60. >> I would add the Fuji S2 to that list...if you get one that works reliably it may be the best of the three. << The Can*n 1Ds and the Kod*k DCS-14n is just out of the budget. >> Right. Mine too. << If either Pent*x or the Olydak 4/3 comes out a 6+MP system w/ good selection of lens in a form factor that I like, then great. >> That's pretty much the holding pattern I'm in too (besides having no equipment budget that is). << Otherwise, then it will have to be either the D100 or the D60, with the D60 has the potential advantage of able to use the Zuiko with an adapter. I think the D100 is much lighter though, being based on the lighter F100/F80 film body. >> So is the Fuji S2, and from what I gather it offers pretty amazing image quality. However, I would really like to test a Can*n D60 with the Zuiko 350/2.8 (Stephen, I'm guessing you're game to help me test this if we can score an adapter????) to see how well it works out. One place that does adapters, in the UK, told me they do not do an OM to EOS adapter because lenses won't focus out to infinity (and they could be wrong). The 350/2.8 focuses beyond infinity anyway so that wouldn't be an issue for me. Let's not also forget the guy from Arcatech I met in a hotel spa in Desert Hot Springs who says he fully intends to do an OM to 4/3 adapter the moment bodies are in the photography media's (specifically Shutterbug magazine) hands. I know of one very well known and highly respected motorsports photographer who recently dumped Nik*ns in favor of L*ica R8s because of reliability problems. He has an adapter to use his beautiful L*itz super-telephotos on a D-60 and suggested I look for one of these adapters as well for shooting digital. (And yes, he does still shoot film with those R8s as well, and scans the slides with a Sprintscan 4000+ film scanner.) Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8283 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 01:16:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 01:16:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 17:16:05 2002 -0800 Received: from out002.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02510 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:16:01 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.55]) by out002.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021217011145.EGKI8264.out002.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:11:45 -0600 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:11:39 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [OM] A couple of pix X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out002.verizon.net from [151.198.121.55] at Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:11:45 -0600 Message-Id: <20021217011145.EGKI8264.out002.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In , on 12/16/02 at 11:11 PM, "IanG" said: >Thought I should load a couple of pix up to a site I can use. With one >exception all taken with an OM4 + a zuiko, the exception being a >Tamron. Very nice indeed. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8664 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 01:30:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 01:30:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 17:30:53 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (oe55.law11.hotmail.com [64.4.16.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02530 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:30:47 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:29:54 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [128.107.248.220] From: "Jeff Keller" To: Subject: Trekker Packs was [OM] China suggestions Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:29:54 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2002 01:29:54.0420 (UTC) FILETIME=[CD4C2B40:01C2A56B] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There are two different sizes of Micro Trekker. Both hold quite a bit of gear. I believe the smaller one is referred to as a Micro Trekker 100. I find it rides on my shoulder blades. Not all that comfortable. I think the larger one is a Micro Trekker 150. It is slightly larger in every dimension and seems to feel better. It doesn't hold all that much more. The Mini Trekker is even larger, holds more, and for me is fairly comfortable (but I'm only 71" tall). It will hold a 400mm Zuiko but I'm not so sure about a 400mm Tamron. The Mini Trekker will also fit in a desk drawer intended for 8.5"x11" hanging files. -jeff >snip snip > >I myself would prefer the pack to be longer, to fit a long back better; >capacity is reasonably good.It also has an outside pocket over the whole >back side of the pack, that can hold some clothing. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9075 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 01:53:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 01:53:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 17:53:51 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.hrnoc.net (relay3.hrnoc.net [66.192.46.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02543 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:53:46 -0800 Received: from mailbox.hrnoc.net ([66.162.74.6]) by relay3.hrnoc.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 18O4Ac-00088m-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:57:06 -0500 Received: (qmail 57953 invoked by uid 89); 16 Dec 2002 22:57:11 -0000 Received: from adsl-18-37-2.mco.bellsouth.net (HELO inspiron) (tscales%zuikoholic.com@68.18.37.2) by mailbox.hrnoc.net with SMTP; 16 Dec 2002 22:57:11 -0000 Message-ID: <037d01c2a556$70d1bfc0$9e01a8c0@inspiron> From: "Tom Scales" To: References: <20021216213542.32639.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:56:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1123 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1123 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You might want to read this before you trust PDF files. They can also be virus infected: http://www.techtv.com/news/print/0,23102,3341369,00.html Tom > There are some of us who do not allow any Microsoft products on-site, including certain government agencies who are concerned about security. > > I agree: plain text is the lingua franca for such lists, or PDF for anything more complicated. > -- > : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9684 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 02:37:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 02:37:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 18:37:16 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao03.cox.net (lakemtao03.cox.net [68.1.17.242]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02575 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:37:10 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021217023255.BBC26808.lakemtao03.cox.net@number1> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:32:55 -0500 Message-ID: <004001c2a574$68be8160$0201a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:31:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id SAA02575 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This link is dead, the file must not have been uploaded. Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:01 PM Subject: [OM] FS list I just updated my for sale list. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.doc Thanks for looking. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9938 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 02:38:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 02:38:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 18:38:45 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao04.cox.net (lakemtao04.cox.net [68.1.17.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02579 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:38:40 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021217023425.SQQ22825.lakemtao04.cox.net@number1> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:34:25 -0500 Message-ID: <004901c2a574$9d59e9a0$0201a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <3DFE1505.4D80B6DC@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] FS list Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:32:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id SAA02579 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The link should be (I believe) http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.htm Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:01 PM Subject: [OM] FS list I just updated my for sale list. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.doc Thanks for looking. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10318 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 02:51:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 02:51:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 18:51:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02584 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:51:30 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax83-a193.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.22.193]) by mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBH2pQN13237 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:51:26 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:50:16 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id SAA02584 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hey Chris, Why don't you blokes pop down to Sydney early in Jan 2003 and join OUR meeting. The weather's warm (30deg C and 89 percent humidity), you could catch a little cricket with the Balmy Army (they're welcoming any extra support), and, as you know, Oz beer is the best in the world! ;-) Cheers, John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 9:04 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: IanG Subject: RE: [OM] London camera shops Perhaps we ought to arrange a meeting in London when the weather is a) cold, frosty or snowy b) brighter. Unless that is we all take OM1s loaded with fast B/W (old type) film to do some street photography. Chris At 19:45 +0000 14/12/02, IanG wrote: >Much to my disgust I've been sober for a year now... more worrying is th= e >thought that if I post such silly messages when I'm sober what on earth = did >I do when I was enjoying myself.. > >But at least I may be able to find my way home from London now (homage t= o >subject) and I'd quite enjoy a UK chapter meet in town one day if anybod= y is >up for it? Or perhaps another location? > >ian > >PS I was going to join in the thread about beer in the darkroom but the >whole idea was just too upsetting :-( Stella Artois, in ice cold cans wi= th a >light coat of condensation gently rolling down the side and that soft si= gh >as the ring pull is gently teased open for the........ >ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sob sob sob. -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10384 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 02:51:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 02:51:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 18:51:43 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02588 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:51:37 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.38.2]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021217025045.FOWL24108.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:50:45 -0500 Message-ID: <005301c2a577$12b5f0c0$022644d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216133158.0269fc78@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:50:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Popular Photography says gives the nod to the Nikon D100 for faster focusing especially under low light. (That's not important to everyone, admittedly.) For what it's worth, Pop Photo says the D100 is not based on a film camera but they may be in denial. Never having held the D100, it sure looks like the N80 to me. There are certainly many other factors to consider. Best of luck. Fuji also offers one or two Nikon-mount digitals. Lama > Looking at the current crop, the Sigma still has a way to go, so it is > still down to either the Nik*n D100 or the Can*n D60. The Can*n 1Ds and the > Kod*k DCS-14n is just out of the budget. If either Pent*x or the Olydak 4/3 > comes out a 6+MP system w/ good selection of lens in a form factor that I > like, then great. Otherwise, then it will have to be either the D100 or the > D60, with the D60 has the potential advantage of able to use the Zuiko with > an adapter. I think the D100 is much lighter though, being based on the > lighter F100/F80 film body. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10984 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:06:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:06:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:06:16 2002 -0800 Received: from granger.mail.mindspring.net (granger.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02604 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:06:11 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfimj.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.202.211]) by granger.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18O838-0004Ag-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:05:38 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021216100651.13785.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021216100651.13785.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:05:49 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:15:07 +0800 >From: Albert >Subject: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain > >One thing that digital will never do that film will do, is grain. Some >grain looks great. Digital however has "pixelation" which is horrible. Albert, That's simply not true....what digital photos have you been looking at? If anything, the "noise" than constitutes "grain" in digital cameras is often less disturbing to my eye than film grain. The one thing that I am struck about most digital photographs is their complete LACK of grain. Take a look at these and see if you see ugly pixelation... http://www.jsfotografie.de/zepeople/index.htm http://www.jsfotografie.de/portzeland/index.htm > B&W pics, low resolution or using ISO1600 film, you get a lot of grain, >but I'd have to say it's great character. Pixelation is just flat out >ugly.. ???? >There is also another problem with digital that is not mentioned. 35mm >replacement, sure. But making optics that will take up a 4x5 or a 8x10 >plane, is all but impossible or would cost more then most 3rd world >countries. So digital is "here" vs. the 35mm camera, but compared to >say 6x6, or 4x5 or 8x10, no way. Sorry, don't agree. You can get digital backs for Mamiya's, Blad's and Contax's now that will probably produce absolutely superb quality images in a "medium format". > >I remember I was tempted to buy a copy of playboy (for the articles!!) >;-) But in all seriousness, there was an article about the amount of >work needed to do a centerfold. That's taken on an 8x10 large format. > You are almost looking at a contact sheet. Digital has a long ways to >go before Playboy switches. Interesting articles. I would doubt that Playboy is shooting film anymore. In fact, I would be quite surprised if they are...they are probably shooting 645 or 'Blad with a Kodak digital back. > >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:36:05 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3761 > > > > I was shooting some beach/surf scenes at >> Bodega Bay last weekend during a sunset, and shot both with my OM-2S >> and the D60. The OM-2S did not get any exposures right (shot on >> "Auto" ; it was pretty dark), but the D60 nailed the exposures > > bang-on. >> > >I think most of you know I'm not a anti-digital guy, but your example >looks a little poor, it simply means you don't understand exposure and >the characteristic of your tools (the average metering of OM2sp in >auto mode). Beach scenes need exposure compensation and it is well >known, you can't simply shoot at auto. > >C.H.Ling > C.H., Well, you may well be right in that it wasn't a good example. However, I must take exception to your comments. I am fully aware of the center-weighted averaging metering of the OM-2S, it's limitations, and what the exposure compensation dial is for, and how to use it. I was conducting an experiment between the two cameras, and I thought I had taken the center-weighted metering into account when I took the photo(s). Turns out I made a mistake in my use of the camera in that particular setting and photograph. You know what? That's okay....we learn from trying things and making mistakes, and seeing what works and what doesn't. I made some mistakes using the C*n*n that day, too, and learned from those mistakes as well. No offense meant here, C.H. I respect you as a person and as a photographer, but to state that I don't understand exposure or the characteristics of my tools is inaccurate and incorrect. I might not be as good a photographer as you, but I'm not a hack, either. -Stephen Scharf -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11307 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:14:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:14:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:14:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.139]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02619 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:14:03 -0800 Received: from webmail09.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail09.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.126]) by mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBH3E1N28623 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:14:01 +1100 Message-Id: <200212170314.gBH3E1N28623@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:14:01 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Stephen Scharf wrote: > > > > > > >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:15:07 +0800 > >From: Albert > >Subject: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain > > > >One thing that digital will never do that film will do, is grain. > Some > >grain looks great. Digital however has "pixelation" which is > horrible. > Albert, > That's simply not true....what digital photos have you been looking > at? > If anything, the "noise" than constitutes "grain" in digital cameras > is often less > disturbing to my eye than film grain. The one thing that I am struck > about most > digital photographs is their complete LACK of grain. > > Take a look at these and see if you see ugly pixelation... > > http://www.jsfotografie.de/zepeople/index.htm > http://www.jsfotografie.de/portzeland/index.htm > Don't know about ugly pixelation, but definitely some ugly artifacts from what looks like sharpening. Have a look at the hair across the girl's face. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11564 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:14:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:14:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:14:59 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02623 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:14:54 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <20021217031346052005irare>; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:13:46 +0000 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:11:30 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <3D65AEC9-116D-11D7-878D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No, that would be me. ;-) Thanks, folks. I'm still doing three shows a night. Try the veal and remember to be kind to your waitresses. -Rob (Die, Ego! Die!) Jackson On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 07:05 PM, Stephen Scharf wrote: > I might not be as good a photographer as you, but I'm not a hack, > either. > > -Stephen Scharf < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11979 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:29:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:29:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:29:22 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts11.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.55]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02659 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:29:17 -0800 Received: from [192.168.51.101] ([64.229.66.25]) by tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021217032531.QGPN23192.tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net@[192.168.51.101]> for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:25:31 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: mcollins@mail.squam.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DFDF6CD.CA2AEC8D@interisland.net> References: <3DFDF6CD.CA2AEC8D@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:25:31 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Michael R. Collins" Subject: Re: [OM] China suggestions Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Unbelievable amount of stuff will fit in the Micro Trekker. Yep, my choice for roaming the city (Micro Trekker 100). One body with a decent size zoom or tele mounted, second body with cap on one side, second tele or zoom or wide on the other, a 50, a teleconverter, four rolls of Delta - and that's just the main compartment :-). Use the front to tuck in a T20, a Swiss Army knife, a minipod, more Delta... Michael -- Michael R. Collins ... Michael.Collins@squam.org Toronto, Ontario, Canada < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12266 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:30:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:30:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:30:55 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02667 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:30:51 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <20021217032943003006o32me>; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:29:43 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] WTB or TF Zuiko 24/2.8 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:32:04 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks to all who responded - I have a nice, and nicely priced, 24 on the way from my beloved Pacific Northwest. Gary Edwards -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Gary L. Edwards Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 8:53 AM To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] WTB or TF Zuiko 24/2.8 Come this spring I'll again be out shooting pyrotechnic events in the desert. My usual practice is to run two remote cameras each with a 24. I've been borrowing a second lens from the generous Tom Scales long enough, it's time to get my own. So, anyone have a 24/2.8 to sell or perhaps trade for a nice black OM-1 (up or down as need be)? Doesn't need to be fancy or even MC as long as the glass is pretty clean. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12689 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:48:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:48:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:48:16 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02705 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:48:11 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.c5.2dcd352d (25508) for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:43:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:43:49 EST Subject: Re: [OM] A couple of pix To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c5.2dcd352d.2b2ff775_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_c5.2dcd352d.2b2ff775_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/2002 5:12:01 PM Central Standard Time, I@nskelly.com writes: > http://www.digit.org.uk/images/thumbs.asp?user_id=60089&personal=1 > > Ian, Nice work! Bill Barber --part1_c5.2dcd352d.2b2ff775_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/16/2002 5:12:01 PM Central Standard Time, I@nskelly.com writes:

http://www.digit.org.uk/images/thumbs.asp?user_id=60089&personal=1



Ian, Nice work!  Bill Barber --part1_c5.2dcd352d.2b2ff775_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12955 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:50:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:50:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 19:50:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA02713 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:50:00 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040096923!813 Received: (qmail 3253 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 03:48:44 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-3.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 03:48:44 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH3Mdu02317 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:22:39 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFE9F18.9A97E5FB@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:50:48 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film References: <20021216100651.13785.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Stephen, May be my words was a bit straight, I apologize if it make you feel uncomfortable. I just interpret from what you have said and provide me comment: "The OM-2S did not get any exposures right (shot on "Auto" ; it was pretty dark), but the D60 nailed the exposures bang-on." BTW, I don't think the OM2s or the 2n work in center-weigthed mode when set to auto, it is most likely average mode, the 2n's meter is center-weighted when in manual mode though. C.H.Ling Stephen Scharf wrote: > > C.H., > Well, you may well be right in that it wasn't a good example. > However, I must take exception to your comments. I am fully aware of > the center-weighted averaging metering of the OM-2S, it's > limitations, and what the exposure compensation dial is for, and how > to use it. I was conducting an experiment between the two cameras, > and I thought I had taken the center-weighted metering into account > when I took the photo(s). Turns out I made a mistake in my use of the > camera in that particular setting and photograph. You know what? > That's okay....we learn from trying things and making mistakes, and > seeing what works and what doesn't. I made some mistakes using the > C*n*n that day, too, and learned from those mistakes as well. No > offense meant here, C.H. I respect you as a person and as a > photographer, but to state that I don't understand exposure or the > characteristics of my tools is inaccurate and incorrect. I might not > be as good a photographer as you, but I'm not a hack, either. > > -Stephen Scharf > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13626 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 04:37:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 04:37:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 20:37:24 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp04.iprimus.com.au (smtp04.iprimus.com.au [210.50.76.52]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02762 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:37:03 -0800 Received: from smtp01.iprimus.net.au (210.50.30.70) by smtp04.iprimus.com.au (6.7.010) id 3DF583C3000DFD78 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:36:19 +1100 Received: from default ([211.26.72.187]) by smtp01.iprimus.net.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:36:18 +1100 Message-ID: <004101c2a585$984223e0$bb481ad3@default> From: "Bolty" To: Subject: [OM] Need Help on Winder 2 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:34:30 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2002 04:36:19.0215 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7F471F0:01C2A585] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just fanged a winder 2 for AUS $30 (approx US $17) for my OM-10. The other winder had given the ghost. I know the new one works (have tried it on a couple of bodies) but now for some reason it wont work on my OM-10. Does anyone have info on what the electronics in the OM-10 should be like so I can check mine and make sure that I don't have any loose wires inside my OM-10's body. I found the camera so much easier with the winder working for the type of images that I like to take. Thanks Adam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13889 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 04:40:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 04:40:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 20:40:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02766 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:40:00 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax83-a193.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.22.193]) by mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBH4duj26232 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:39:58 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: "The Zuikoholics" Subject: [OM] An Apology Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:38:36 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca G'day Zuiks, Well, I've just (with much trepidation) placed my first FS item on e*ay. And, horror of horrors, just realised that in my haste to get everything right I failed to offer the item, an OM-20, to the list first. My profound apologies. John. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14359 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:03:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:03:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:03:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02779 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:03:08 -0800 Received: from webmail09.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail09.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.126]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBH537F02666 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:03:07 +1100 Message-Id: <200212170503.gBH537F02666@mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:03:06 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Winsor Crosby wrote: > > >Is it possible to do manual focusing on the D60 or D100 cameras with > a zuiko > >mounted on it ? > > I would think so. The B&H says that the D60 takes EF lenses and all > of the tilt/shift EF lenses are manual focus. > -- No way you could do AF with the Zuikos. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14710 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:13:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:13:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:13:53 2002 -0800 Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02885 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:13:49 -0800 Received: from user-2init1i.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.116.50] helo=earthlink.net) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OA2m-0000u7-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:13:24 -0800 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:13:13 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2--482231773 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <005301c2a577$12b5f0c0$022644d8@lhommedieu> Message-Id: <3E52F1E4-117E-11D7-BF6D-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --Apple-Mail-2--482231773 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 06:50 PM, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: > Popular Photography says gives the nod to the Nikon D100 for faster > focusing > especially under low light. (That's not important to everyone, > admittedly.) > For what it's worth, Pop Photo says the D100 is not based on a film > camera > but they may be in denial. Never having held the D100, it sure looks > like > the N80 to me. > > There are certainly many other factors to consider. Best of luck. > Fuji > also offers one or two Nikon-mount digitals. > > Lama > DP Review on the web says: > The D100 has a six megapixel sensor, a body loosely based on the N80 > (although Nikon are keen to note that it shares only some of its > components with that camera), a Nikon F mount and a set of features > which make it an extremely attractive and capable proposition. --Apple-Mail-2--482231773 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=US-ASCII On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 06:50 PM, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: Popular Photography says gives the nod to the Nikon D100 for faster focusing especially under low light. (That's not important to everyone, admittedly.) For what it's worth, Pop Photo says the D100 is not based on a film camera but they may be in denial. Never having held the D100, it sure looks like the N80 to me. There are certainly many other factors to consider. Best of luck. Fuji also offers one or two Nikon-mount digitals. Lama DP Review on the web says: ArialAAAA,AAAA,AAAAThe D100 has a six megapixel sensor, a body loosely based on the N80 (although Nikon are keen to note that it shares only some of its components with that camera), a Nikon F mount and a set of features which make it an extremely attractive and capable proposition. --Apple-Mail-2--482231773-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14995 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:15:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:15:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:15:43 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA02893 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:15:37 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040101995!1152 Received: (qmail 18298 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:13:16 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-2.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:13:16 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH4mFu03383 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:48:16 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEB328.508488B7@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:16:24 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography References: <200212170503.gBH537F02666@mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wayne Harridge wrote: > > > Winsor Crosby wrote: > > > > >Is it possible to do manual focusing on the D60 or D100 cameras with > > a zuiko > > >mounted on it ? > > > > I would think so. The B&H says that the D60 takes EF lenses and all > > of the tilt/shift EF lenses are manual focus. > > -- > > No way you could do AF with the Zuikos. > > Wayne Harridge > They can, if you can mount them on C*nt*x AX. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15256 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:18:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:18:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:18:43 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02954 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:18:39 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2002121705173100100mso7de>; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:17:31 +0000 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:15:16 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3DFEB328.508488B7@accura.com.hk> Message-Id: <8770F13A-117E-11D7-878D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's what I was thinking. Except, that camera has some pretty nice lenses already available for it. ;-) -Rob On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 09:16 PM, C.H.Ling wrote: > They can, if you can mount them on C*nt*x AX. > > C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15579 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:22:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:22:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:22:36 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02969 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:22:32 -0800 Received: from user-2init1i.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.116.50] helo=earthlink.net) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OABA-0005ne-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:22:05 -0800 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:21:54 -0800 Subject: [OT]Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) From: Winsor Crosby To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <037d01c2a556$70d1bfc0$9e01a8c0@inspiron> Message-Id: <7480E23F-117F-11D7-BF6D-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 02:56 PM, Tom Scales wrote: > You might want to read this before you trust PDF files. They can also > be > virus infected: > > http://www.techtv.com/news/print/0,23102,3341369,00.html > > Tom > >> There are some of us who do not allow any Microsoft products on-site, > including certain government agencies who are concerned about security. >> Apparently Outlook is the necessary ingredient in the virus chain, again. It is sort of like Dutch Elm disease. When the crop is all the same you get near total destruction. Switch software companies. Make the virus hackers work harder. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15916 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:30:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:30:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:30:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA02976 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:30:09 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-21.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040102935!1159 Received: (qmail 19096 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:28:56 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-21.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:28:56 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH52lu03502 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:02:47 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEB691.C2140B94@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:30:57 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography References: <8770F13A-117E-11D7-878D-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Their lenses are not necessary better, they have different color rendering from the Zuikos. Depends on the personal taste, I like the Zuikos more, especially the one in late 70s' and early 80s'. C.H.Ling "R. Jackson" wrote: > > That's what I was thinking. Except, that camera has some pretty nice > lenses already available for it. ;-) > > -Rob > > On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 09:16 PM, C.H.Ling wrote: > > > They can, if you can mount them on C*nt*x AX. > > > > C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16268 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:39:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:39:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:39:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA03005 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:39:50 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-25.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040103304!1094 Received: (qmail 18579 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:35:05 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-25.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:35:05 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH5CQu03652 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:12:26 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEB8D4.33E49BE@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:40:36 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film References: <200212170314.gBH3E1N28623@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Overall the pictures are over sharpened. C.H.Ling Wayne Harridge wrote: > > > > > Take a look at these and see if you see ugly pixelation... > > > > http://www.jsfotografie.de/zepeople/index.htm > > http://www.jsfotografie.de/portzeland/index.htm > > > > Don't know about ugly pixelation, but definitely some ugly artifacts from what > looks like sharpening. Have a look at the hair across the girl's face. > > Wayne Harridge > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16714 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:57:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:57:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:57:54 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA03030 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:57:49 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh134.interisland.net [12.17.134.134]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBH5sFs08960 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:54:15 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFEBCDE.C44238C5@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:57:50 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] updated FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id VAA03030 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I corrected a few of the glitches and errors in my for sale list so now it looks a little better. Thanks for the suggestions to not use the .doc format. I hadn't thought of some of the issues involved like security and compatibility. I'm running the up to date Norton AV so that part shouldn't be a problem but I understand the concern. Spelling however, now that's something else :>) Now if anyone knows how to format for numbering or bulleting in Netscape Composer I'd appreciate a pointer or two. Mike http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.htm -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16969 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 05:58:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 05:58:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 21:58:27 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA03034 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:58:22 -0800 Received: from [206.170.5.202] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7900LAY1UH7R@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:56:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:58:09 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Oh, I am, huh, well take this! In-reply-to: <3c.291cd4e3.2b2ede7f@aol.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/15/02 11:45 PM, Doggre@aol.com at Doggre@aol.com wrote: > Ian wrote: > snip >> each factory worker is restricted to only 3 litres a shift > snip > > ONLY 3 litres a shift... I' > m workin' in the wrong country.... :-( > > Rich > I make 3 liters to be about a six-pack and another can... if that's an eight-hour shift I'm not sure I'd buy one of their cars...! In any case get one made -early- in the shift... -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17454 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 06:20:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 06:20:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 22:20:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03067 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:20:52 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.158]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021217062000.OIBH19273.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:20:00 -0500 Message-ID: <000701c2a594$4cb0e740$9e2a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Oly List" Subject: [OM] Epson EPX785- HELP! Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:19:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have carefully setup my monitor so it has a wide range of tones from deep black to nearly-white, based on a standard image I found at the digitaldog site. Based on my experience of balancing C-41 printers, I have tweaked the screen's flesh tones based on the National Geo, cnn, and Playboy sites. My judgment at this point is that the monitor is RIGHT. I'm using Windows 98, second edition. I have tried making prints with these settings: ICM, EE153__1, sRGB. I have made all of these test prints with Epson's "PhotoEnhanced" feature turned off. None of them are "fine" prints. The midtones are no where close to the screen values. Worse, I don't know where to go from here. Is this a "color management" topic? I don't even know the name of the topic I need to learn about. I'm using genuine Epson inks. (By the way, after making 2 full-sized test prints, the color cartridge' gauge dropped from 20% to 10% and then gave me a warning after *one* more full-sized print. Does this mean that I can expect to burn up a $40 color cartridge makes about 10 test prints?) I can't afford to work "stupid" anymore. Besides making 4"x6" test images, what else can I do? I don't have ANY setup tools. Does anyone have a tool to make a density "ring-around", and a color ring-around? Do I tweak the Printer> Properties> Main> Custom Settings>Advanced>Color Controls section? Is it possible to create multiple virtual printers, with different settings? I have to write down my settings because after the print is made the OS, or Elements, or the printer driver "throw away" my settings. My experience is so very far from having superior results out-of-the-box, it makes me sick. I've spent a fortune in ink and paper and have no idea how to get out of this! *HELP* Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17815 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 06:32:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 06:32:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 22:32:28 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03083 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:32:22 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:05:49 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEC464.6020108@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:29:56 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> In-Reply-To: <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Adam, wow!! Not only do you inspire the use of B&W, but the use of the 50mm as well! There is some barrelling I can see in the pic of your daughter, but I think that is a great effect for the closeup shots.. Excellent. I see the second eye is a bit blurry and so you shot it wide open and it's still fairly sharp and great lens characteristics.. I'm going to send this one to my friends.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18453 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 06:33:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 06:33:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 22:33:59 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03086 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:33:52 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:08:36 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEC50A.2050204@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:32:42 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. Film, grain References: <20021214035438.27782.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <3DFD999B.4010507@achtung.com> <3DFDA657.25913751@accura.com.hk> In-Reply-To: <3DFDA657.25913751@accura.com.hk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm not saying I always see pixelation, but when I do, it's ugly compared to grain. Sometimes, I WANT the grain for character... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18706 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 06:34:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 06:34:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 22:34:19 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03091 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:34:11 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA03906 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:33:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216222356.02718878@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:34:40 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Epson EPX785- HELP! In-Reply-To: <000701c2a594$4cb0e740$9e2a44d8@lhommedieu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Jim, take a deep breath..... OK. I feel your pain.... I lost much (virtual) hair with similar issues, but I am in good shape now so perhaps I can help. I think your problem is a color management issue. Do you have Photoshop? If so, I can give you some pointers. The general idea though is that every stage of your workflow, it should know about the Color Profile, and when printing, you turn the printer or OS color management off, and then let the printing app know about the color profile and go from there. There is a light at the end of the tunnel. I don't have a scanner profiling done yet, but now I am getting prints fairly close to what I see on the screen. Do expect to spend something like: - ~$300 for monitor calibration. You may get away with Adobe Gamma - ~$200 for a printer/paper/ink profiling package This is assuming you already have Photoshop. It is a rather expensive proposition :-( At 01:19 AM 12/17/2002 -0500, Jim L'Hommedieu wrote: >I have carefully setup my monitor so it has a wide range of tones from deep >black to nearly-white, based on a standard image I found at the digitaldog >site. > >Based on my experience of balancing C-41 printers, I have tweaked the >screen's flesh tones based on the National Geo, cnn, and Playboy sites. My >judgment at this point is that the monitor is RIGHT. > >I'm using Windows 98, second edition. I have tried making prints with these >settings: >ICM, EE153__1, sRGB. I have made all of these test prints with Epson's >"PhotoEnhanced" feature turned off. > >None of them are "fine" prints. The midtones are no where close to the >screen values. Worse, I don't know where to go from here. Is this a "color >management" topic? I don't even know the name of the topic I need to learn >about. > >I'm using genuine Epson inks. (By the way, after making 2 full-sized test >prints, the color cartridge' gauge dropped from 20% to 10% and then gave me >a warning after *one* more full-sized print. Does this mean that I can >expect to burn up a $40 color cartridge makes about 10 test prints?) > >I can't afford to work "stupid" anymore. Besides making 4"x6" test images, >what else can I do? > >I don't have ANY setup tools. Does anyone have a tool to make a density >"ring-around", and a color ring-around? Do I tweak the Printer> Properties> >Main> Custom Settings>Advanced>Color Controls section? > >Is it possible to create multiple virtual printers, with different settings? >I have to write down my settings because after the print is made the OS, or >Elements, or the printer driver "throw away" my settings. > > >My experience is so very far from having superior results out-of-the-box, it >makes me sick. I've spent a fortune in ink and paper and have no idea how >to get out of this! *HELP* > >Lama // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19595 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 07:15:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 07:15:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 23:16:00 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA03463 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:15:55 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.121] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AFA9A1020052; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:18:01 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:42:17 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <3DFEC464.6020108@achtung.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca fantastic stuff adam! /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19945 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 07:24:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 07:24:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 16 23:25:02 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA03501 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:24:57 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh134.interisland.net [12.17.134.134]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBH7LNs12312 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:21:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFED148.8C1E7277@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:24:56 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: re [OM] Epson EPX785- HELP! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I feel your pain. I'm having the same problem with 2000p. Comments in line below are to be taken with a grain of salt :>) Mike. > From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" > > I have carefully setup my monitor so it has a wide range of tones from deep > black to nearly-white, based on a standard image I found at the digitaldog > site. > > Based on my experience of balancing C-41 printers, I have tweaked the > screen's flesh tones based on the National Geo, cnn, and Playboy sites. My > judgment at this point is that the monitor is RIGHT. > RIGHT doesn't matter. I held up a print that was close to what i wanted and tried to adjust the monitor to match that. I do my color matching in my head. i.e. I know I have to add more saturation and less brightness than looks RIGHT on the monitor. > I'm using Windows 98, second edition. I have tried making prints with these > settings: > ICM, EE153__1, sRGB. I have made all of these test prints with Epson's > "PhotoEnhanced" feature turned off. > I think ICM is the one to use for scanned images. And you are right to leave off the so-called Photo Enhanced feature > None of them are "fine" prints. The midtones are no where close to the > screen values. Worse, I don't know where to go from here. Is this a "color > management" topic? I don't even know the name of the topic I need to learn > about. > > I'm using genuine Epson inks. (By the way, after making 2 full-sized test > prints, the color cartridge' gauge dropped from 20% to 10% and then gave me > a warning after *one* more full-sized print. Does this mean that I can > expect to burn up a $40 color cartridge makes about 10 test prints?) > > I can't afford to work "stupid" anymore. Besides making 4"x6" test images, > what else can I do? > Buy the cheap packs of Epson Photo paper at Costco and cut full sheets into four. Go into the printer "Properties" box and under "Layout" choose "User defined" and set up the 1/4 sheet size. Now you have cheap trial material. I do the final print on Archival Matte. And color cartridges should be costing around $25 and give about 40 full size prints or over a hundred of trials. > I don't have ANY setup tools. Does anyone have a tool to make a density > "ring-around", and a color ring-around? Do I tweak the Printer> Properties> > Main> Custom Settings>Advanced>Color Controls section? > > Is it possible to create multiple virtual printers, with different settings? > I have to write down my settings because after the print is made the OS, or > Elements, or the printer driver "throw away" my settings. > > > My experience is so very far from having superior results out-of-the-box, it > makes me sick. I've spent a fortune in ink and paper and have no idea how > to get out of this! *HELP* > > Lama > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20780 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 08:28:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 08:28:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 00:29:01 2002 -0800 Received: from dirf.bris.ac.uk (dirf.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03603 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:28:57 -0800 Received: from gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk by dirf.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:27:12 +0000 Received: from bristol.ac.uk (pn97 [137.222.25.97]) by gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBH8IbZn007458 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:18:37 GMT Message-ID: <3DFEE01C.3060102@bristol.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:28:12 +0000 From: "Gareth.J.Martin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> <3DFEC464.6020108@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I agree about the 50mm lens. I've always loved it, especially for landscape photography and astrophotography, however it seems to come a close second now that I've got the OM 50mm macro. It just seems so much nicer to use and optically, dare I say it, better (well to me anyway!). Best Wishes, Gareth. > Adam, wow!! > > Not only do you inspire the use of B&W, but the use of the 50mm as well! > > There is some barrelling I can see in the pic of your daughter, but I > think that is a great effect for the closeup shots.. Excellent. I > see the second eye is a bit blurry and so you shot it wide open and > it's still fairly sharp and great lens characteristics.. > > I'm going to send this one to my friends.. > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > -- Gareth.J.Martin Research Postgraduate School of Geographical Sciences University of Bristol University Road Bristol BS8 1SS g.j.martin@bristol.ac.uk attackwarningred@yahoo.co.uk eclipsing.binary@bristol.ac.uk NE NLCOG - The amateur NLC observing group: http://freespace.virgin.net/eclipsing.binary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21033 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 08:29:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 08:29:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 00:29:14 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp04.iprimus.com.au (smtp04.iprimus.com.au [210.50.76.52]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03607 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:29:01 -0800 Received: from smtp01.iprimus.net.au (210.50.30.70) by smtp04.iprimus.com.au (6.7.010) id 3DF583C3000E90C0 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:28:34 +1100 Received: from default ([211.26.72.188]) by smtp01.iprimus.net.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:28:29 +1100 Message-ID: <008b01c2a5a6$05cd73e0$bc481ad3@default> From: "Bolty" To: References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> <3DFDA5AC.3040603@bristol.ac.uk> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:26:38 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2002 08:28:29.0747 (UTC) FILETIME=[4732F030:01C2A5A6] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks Guys for your comments. I hope that the images have inspired you to grab your Oly and wack a 50mm on the front and takes some images. Stopped down from f2.8 to f5.6 gets great results and a wonderfully soft background. Cheers Adam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21373 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 08:38:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 08:38:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 00:38:40 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03615 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:38:34 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:12:26 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEE1F9.9050602@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:36:09 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> <3DFDA5AC.3040603@bristol.ac.uk> <008b01c2a5a6$05cd73e0$bc481ad3@default> In-Reply-To: <008b01c2a5a6$05cd73e0$bc481ad3@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I do love the 50mm. My 28mm was always on for my travels, but I found it to not be my favorite lens, expect for a big scenery shot, and I have found that the 50mm f1.8 is very handy, as it can do portraits when I walk up close, and great for street photography. I love it! The fact that it's very bright and sharp past f2.8 helps too.... The focusing is easy and smooth on mine, and those who shoot the "wonderzooms" look though my 50mm and say "WOW!! This thing is bright!" yes it is... Adam, you have inspired me to do more portrait work with my 50mm. Thank you. I saw your "shorts!" picture, probably one of my favorite in your collection.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21697 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 08:47:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 08:47:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 00:47:04 2002 -0800 Received: from dirf.bris.ac.uk (dirf.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03619 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:46:59 -0800 Received: from gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk by dirf.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:45:12 +0000 Received: from bristol.ac.uk (pn97 [137.222.25.97]) by gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBH8b7RS007711 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:37:07 GMT Message-ID: <3DFEE472.1060206@bristol.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:46:42 +0000 From: "Gareth.J.Martin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film References: <200212170314.gBH3E1N28623@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I get the impression that digital vs. film arguments are rather like playground fights e.g. my toy is better that yours etc. It's personal preference who likes what. I will only use digital when film ceases to exist as I much prefer the results I get from film and I also think that digital is very overpriced. For the price of a really good quality digital camera I could buy an Ebony RSW45 and/or further expand my OM gear. However I've used digital cameras before to create time lapse films of some geomorphological experiments and here digital excelled. Why doesn't the argument for digital vs. film concentrate on how the two formats can complement each other instead of grinding each other into the ground? I dare say there are many complementary ways, we've just never heard of them! Sorry if this seems a bit OT but I just had to vent some steam!!! Best Wishes, Gareth. -- Gareth.J.Martin Research Postgraduate School of Geographical Sciences University of Bristol University Road Bristol BS8 1SS g.j.martin@bristol.ac.uk attackwarningred@yahoo.co.uk eclipsing.binary@bristol.ac.uk NE NLCOG - The amateur NLC observing group: http://freespace.virgin.net/eclipsing.binary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22210 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:22:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:22:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 01:22:13 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA03646 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:22:08 -0800 Received: from jjohnso4.attbi.com (c-66-56-1-50.atl.client2.attbi.com[66.56.1.50]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2002121709210005100en98ae>; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:21:00 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217040910.00a00890@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: jjohnso4@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 04:20:43 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Johnny Johnson Subject: Re: [OM] Epson EPX785- HELP! In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216222356.02718878@192.168.100.11> References: <000701c2a594$4cb0e740$9e2a44d8@lhommedieu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:34 PM 12/16/02 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: >Do expect to spend something like: >- ~$300 for monitor calibration. You may get away with Adobe Gamma >- ~$200 for a printer/paper/ink profiling package Hi Richard, You don't need to pay nearly that much for a good monitor calibration and printer profiling package. Profile Prism does a very nice job, especially for Epson printers, at a cost of $69. Of course, that only gives you monitor calibration, not profiling and the printer profiling is scanner based so it does have it's limitations (the quality of the profile will depend on the quality of the scan) but it's probably about as good as it gets unless you want to spend really high dollars. That said, I think a person should really start with a properly profiled monitor and that package will cost a couple of hundred dollars. Later, Johnny __________________________ Johnny Johnson Lilburn, GA mailto:jjohnso4@attbi.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22494 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:27:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:27:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 01:27:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA03650 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:26:59 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-16.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040117144!2405 Received: (qmail 1658 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:25:45 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-16.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:25:45 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH8xPu08171 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:59:26 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEEE08.7FAFDC3@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:27:36 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film References: <200212170314.gBH3E1N28623@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au> <3DFEE472.1060206@bristol.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think it is not accurate to say digital is overpriced, overprice usually means someone is making unreasonable high profit but I think most manufacturers are not. It is the price you have to pay for any front end products, just like the PDA. For the same money you will not get the same quality result as film camera that is for sure. It is the other features that you have to pay just like instant result and no need for scanning when you want to email to a friend. I think there are many list members have digital camera and some of them have mentioned how they complement each other. For me digital is mainly for family and ebay sales :-) Sometime for shows (fashion and other expo) where it is just for fun and I can shoot a lot without worry about film and processing cost. For serious works and travel that is always the job of OM... and my young son will carry my once very expensive toy (C2000) for snap. C.H.Ling "Gareth.J.Martin" wrote: > > I get the impression that digital vs. film arguments are rather like > playground fights e.g. my toy is better that yours etc. It's personal > preference who likes what. I will only use digital when film ceases to > exist as I much prefer the results I get from film and I also think that > digital is very overpriced. For the price of a really good quality > digital camera I could buy an Ebony RSW45 and/or further expand my OM > gear. However I've used digital cameras before to create time lapse > films of some geomorphological experiments and here digital excelled. > Why doesn't the argument for digital vs. film concentrate on how the two > formats can complement each other instead of grinding each other into > the ground? I dare say there are many complementary ways, we've just > never heard of them! Sorry if this seems a bit OT but I just had to vent > some steam!!! > > Best Wishes, > Gareth. > > -- > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22846 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:38:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:38:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 01:38:10 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA03662 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:38:04 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-30.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.30]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH9XXn16590; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:33:33 +1300 Message-Id: <200212170933.gBH9XXn16590@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: boldbolty@iprimus.com.au, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:38:06 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] Need Help on Winder 2 X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Adam wrote, I just fanged a winder 2 for AUS $30 (approx US $17) for my OM-10. The other winder had given the ghost. I know the new one works (have tried it on a couple of bodies) but now for some reason it wont work on my OM-10. Does anyone have info on what the electronics in the OM-10 should be like so I can check mine and make sure that I don't have any loose wires inside my OM-10's body. I found the camera so much easier with the winder working for the type of images that I like to take. Thanks Adam I just checked my winder 2 on an OM10 (no film in :-< ) and it worked OK. According to the version of Shipman I have, MD1 does not work with OM10, but Winder 2's had not been invented when this edition was written, so I don't know what he might have later written. Yes, I also find winders make a nice camera-handle at times, even if I don't actually use the winder feature. Especially with a heavy lens like a 100/2. I also feel my hand-hold is more secure and less likely to drop the valuable handful; the winder gives good grip. BTW, I really enjoyed those shots you just posted. Afterthought; perhaps your winder 1 is OK after all and the fault is in the OM10 circuit? Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23103 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:38:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:38:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 01:38:49 2002 -0800 Received: from dire.bris.ac.uk (dire.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA03666 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:38:44 -0800 Received: from gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk by dire.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:35:13 +0000 Received: from bristol.ac.uk (pn97 [137.222.25.97]) by gsa.ggy.bris.ac.uk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBH9Qmq8009272 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:26:48 GMT Message-ID: <3DFEF018.7020705@bristol.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:36:24 +0000 From: "Gareth.J.Martin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film References: <200212170314.gBH3E1N28623@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au> <3DFEE472.1060206@bristol.ac.uk> <3DFEEE08.7FAFDC3@accura.com.hk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I forgot to mention the cost of printing the images etc in my description. I'm with you though as for serious quality work there is nothing better than film. Digital always seems like painting by numbers to me but with emulsions you've actually got to "paint" the picture. I find a lot of fun in that and the learning experience is much more pleasant. Best Wishes, Gareth. >I think it is not accurate to say digital is overpriced, overprice >usually means someone is making unreasonable high profit but I think >most manufacturers are not. It is the price you have to pay for any >front end products, just like the PDA. For the same money you will not >get the same quality result as film camera that is for sure. It is the >other features that you have to pay just like instant result and no >need for scanning when you want to email to a friend. > >I think there are many list members have digital camera and some of >them have mentioned how they complement each other. For me digital is >mainly for family and ebay sales :-) Sometime for shows (fashion and >other expo) where it is just for fun and I can shoot a lot without >worry about film and processing cost. For serious works and travel >that is always the job of OM... and my young son will carry my once >very expensive toy (C2000) for snap. > >C.H.Ling > > >"Gareth.J.Martin" wrote: > > >>I get the impression that digital vs. film arguments are rather like >>playground fights e.g. my toy is better that yours etc. It's personal >>preference who likes what. I will only use digital when film ceases to >>exist as I much prefer the results I get from film and I also think that >>digital is very overpriced. For the price of a really good quality >>digital camera I could buy an Ebony RSW45 and/or further expand my OM >>gear. However I've used digital cameras before to create time lapse >>films of some geomorphological experiments and here digital excelled. >>Why doesn't the argument for digital vs. film concentrate on how the two >>formats can complement each other instead of grinding each other into >>the ground? I dare say there are many complementary ways, we've just >>never heard of them! Sorry if this seems a bit OT but I just had to vent >>some steam!!! >> >>Best Wishes, >>Gareth. >> >>-- >> >> >> > >________________________________________________________________________ >This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan >service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working >around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com >________________________________________________________________________ > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > -- Gareth.J.Martin Research Postgraduate School of Geographical Sciences University of Bristol University Road Bristol BS8 1SS g.j.martin@bristol.ac.uk attackwarningred@yahoo.co.uk eclipsing.binary@bristol.ac.uk NE NLCOG - The amateur NLC observing group: http://freespace.virgin.net/eclipsing.binary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23384 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:40:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:40:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 01:40:39 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA03670 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:40:35 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA59080; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:39:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217014020.0271cc50@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:41:11 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Epson EPX785- HELP! In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217040910.00a00890@mail.attbi.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021216222356.02718878@192.168.100.11> <000701c2a594$4cb0e740$9e2a44d8@lhommedieu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 04:20 AM 12/17/2002 -0500, Johnny Johnson wrote: >At 10:34 PM 12/16/02 -0800, Richard F. Man wrote: > >>Do expect to spend something like: >>- ~$300 for monitor calibration. You may get away with Adobe Gamma >>- ~$200 for a printer/paper/ink profiling package > > >Hi Richard, > >You don't need to pay nearly that much for a good monitor calibration and >printer profiling package. Profile Prism > does a very nice job, especially for >Epson printers, at a cost of $69. Of course, that only gives you monitor >calibration, not profiling and the printer profiling is scanner based so >it does have it's limitations (the quality of the profile will depend on >the quality of the scan) but it's probably about as good as it gets unless >you want to spend really high dollars. > >That said, I think a person should really start with a properly profiled >monitor and that package will cost a couple of hundred dollars. >... Now you tell me :-) It does look like a good package // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23638 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 09:42:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 09:42:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 01:42:24 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost3.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost3.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA03676 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:42:19 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost3.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18OEEn-000PEG-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:42:05 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:42:59 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD6E6@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:42:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca IanG wrote: > It's not going to take too much arranging, just a date and a place to take > some pix... > > is anybody interested in a meet? Central London may not be the best place > but probably beats Watford Gap services... I've been led to believe that > the > world stops just past there..... > Wasn't Tom Scales intending to visit London? Perhaps we could arrange a meeting to coincide with his trip. Alan Wood http://www.alanwood.net (Unicode, special characters, pesticide names) http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ (macro, under construction) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24105 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 10:06:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 10:06:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 02:06:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA03691 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:06:45 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-18.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040119526!2584 Received: (qmail 10320 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 10:05:27 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-18.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 10:05:27 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBH9dCu09039 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:39:12 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFEF75B.57A6BED1@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:07:23 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film References: <200212170314.gBH3E1N28623@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au> <3DFEE472.1060206@bristol.ac.uk> <3DFEEE08.7FAFDC3@accura.com.hk> <3DFEF018.7020705@bristol.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I also think the printing cost is very high if you do it by inkjet but some people seems have better experience. I also feel the inkjet paper doesn't have the real look and feel as traditional photo paper. Anyway now I only use Fuji Frontier output, the cost is only around $0.13 for each 4x6" and $2 for a 8x10 and it is true photographic paper! C.H.Ling "Gareth.J.Martin" wrote: > > I forgot to mention the cost of printing the images etc in my > description. I'm with you though as for serious quality work there is > nothing better than film. Digital always seems like painting by numbers > to me but with emulsions you've actually got to "paint" the picture. I > find a lot of fun in that and the learning experience is much more pleasant. > > Best Wishes, > Gareth. > > >I think it is not accurate to say digital is overpriced, overprice > >usually means someone is making unreasonable high profit but I think > >most manufacturers are not. It is the price you have to pay for any > >front end products, just like the PDA. For the same money you will not > >get the same quality result as film camera that is for sure. It is the > >other features that you have to pay just like instant result and no > >need for scanning when you want to email to a friend. > > > >I think there are many list members have digital camera and some of > >them have mentioned how they complement each other. For me digital is > >mainly for family and ebay sales :-) Sometime for shows (fashion and > >other expo) where it is just for fun and I can shoot a lot without > >worry about film and processing cost. For serious works and travel > >that is always the job of OM... and my young son will carry my once > >very expensive toy (C2000) for snap. > > > >C.H.Ling > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24359 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 10:07:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 10:07:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 02:07:11 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA03695 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:07:06 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA65343 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:06:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217015934.026ffe08@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:07:37 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] Test results from the OM-4 and the Metz54 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The results are in, much better pictures overall. Several instances I punched in a minus exposure compensation because the background is faaaarrrr away and it seems to have done trick to not over exposing the face. The little diffuser cap also does seem to help to eliminate the flash reflection off the face also, as do the bounce lighting. All in all, I am a happy camper!!!! Another question for the Metz users - does the SCA-321 transmit aperture and asa information to the flash? For testings, I have been careful to manually setting the zoom, aperture, and asa. It would be good to know I don't have to do that. Thanks. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24910 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 10:42:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 10:42:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 02:42:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mta05bw.bigpond.com (mta05bw.bigpond.com [139.134.6.95]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA03719 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:42:00 -0800 Received: from parents ([144.135.24.78]) by mta05bw.bigpond.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 mta05bw Jul 16 2002 22:47:55) with SMTP id H79EZS00.3EB for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:40:40 +1000 Received: from BPH-D2-p-250-171.tmns.net.au ([144.134.250.171]) by bwmam04.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V3.0n 29/22633560); 17 Dec 2002 20:42:14 Message-ID: <012901c2a5b8$be79e420$0100a8c0@parents> From: "Terry and Tracey" To: References: <001401c2a4eb$2ff37770$49e09910@meo.dec.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3753 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:36:01 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've got to try that. Hey, I might even photograph one! Foxy ----- Original Message ----- > I take portraits of my cats all the time. The key is to get far > enough away from to let them > behave like cats, and not so close they'll be relating to you, the > photographer. I thought the method for photographing cats was to put then in the freezer for a while to slow them down, then shoot them before they warm up too much. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25241 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 10:52:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 10:52:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 02:52:14 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA03728 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:52:09 -0800 Received: from modem-1205.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.20.181] helo=skelly) by cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18OFKY-0007vA-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:52:07 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:52:06 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <3DFEF75B.57A6BED1@accura.com.hk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I sent off some files for 10x8 printing on a Fuji Frontier and have not been too impressed.. they are 'better' than I get off my Epson 880 but not enough to really justify the effort. The guy who printed them asked whether the file were interpolated - can anybody explain what that is / how and why it is done please - and also suggested that I leave sharpening to him. I don't doubt the guys sincerity at all, just trying to understand why. Does anybody have an idiot's guide to getting quality prints from digit files? I've got the files to where I want, I need to improve print quality. Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of C.H.Ling Sent: 17 December 2002 10:07 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film I also think the printing cost is very high if you do it by inkjet but some people seems have better experience. I also feel the inkjet paper doesn't have the real look and feel as traditional photo paper. Anyway now I only use Fuji Frontier output, the cost is only around $0.13 for each 4x6" and $2 for a 8x10 and it is true photographic paper! C.H.Ling "Gareth.J.Martin" wrote: > > I forgot to mention the cost of printing the images etc in my > description. I'm with you though as for serious quality work there is > nothing better than film. Digital always seems like painting by numbers > to me but with emulsions you've actually got to "paint" the picture. I > find a lot of fun in that and the learning experience is much more pleasant. > > Best Wishes, > Gareth. > > >I think it is not accurate to say digital is overpriced, overprice > >usually means someone is making unreasonable high profit but I think > >most manufacturers are not. It is the price you have to pay for any > >front end products, just like the PDA. For the same money you will not > >get the same quality result as film camera that is for sure. It is the > >other features that you have to pay just like instant result and no > >need for scanning when you want to email to a friend. > > > >I think there are many list members have digital camera and some of > >them have mentioned how they complement each other. For me digital is > >mainly for family and ebay sales :-) Sometime for shows (fashion and > >other expo) where it is just for fun and I can shoot a lot without > >worry about film and processing cost. For serious works and travel > >that is always the job of OM... and my young son will carry my once > >very expensive toy (C2000) for snap. > > > >C.H.Ling > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25495 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 10:54:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 10:54:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 02:54:15 2002 -0800 Received: from mons.uio.no (mons.uio.no [129.240.130.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA03732 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:54:10 -0800 Received: from lux.uio.no ([129.240.84.15]) by mons.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #7) id 18OFIv-0003fF-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:50:25 +0100 Received: from fyspc-elg061.uio.no ([129.240.84.161]) by lux.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 18OFIu-0003UF-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:50:24 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217113244.038f6b10@tid.uio.no> X-Sender: tbryhn@tid.uio.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:45:38 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Thomas Bryhn Subject: Re: [OM] Test results from the OM-4 and the Metz54 In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217015934.026ffe08@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:07 17.12.02, Richard F. Man wrote: >Another question for the Metz users - does the SCA-321 transmit aperture >and asa information to the flash? For testings, I have been careful to >manually setting the zoom, aperture, and asa. It would be good to know I >don't have to do that. Where should the flash get that information from, other than you? Even the camera don't know anything about zoom or aperture (or distance). The camera knows only ASA, how many stops from full aperture you've set your lens at, and how much light there is. That's enough for the camera, but the flash would need absolute aperture and/or distance to do any useful calculations. Because the camera controls the flash (in TTL mode, that is), there's no need for the flash to know, in other modes you'll have to tell the flash what settings you use. Thomas Bryhn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25866 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 11:07:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 11:07:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 03:07:49 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA03750 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:07:44 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA79679 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:06:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217030412.02761bc0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:08:20 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Test results from the OM-4 and the Metz54 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217113244.038f6b10@tid.uio.no> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217015934.026ffe08@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:45 AM 12/17/2002 +0100, Thomas Bryhn wrote: >At 11:07 17.12.02, Richard F. Man wrote: >>Another question for the Metz users - does the SCA-321 transmit aperture >>and asa information to the flash? For testings, I have been careful to >>manually setting the zoom, aperture, and asa. It would be good to know I >>don't have to do that. > >Where should the flash get that information from, other than you? Even the >camera don't know anything about zoom or aperture (or distance). The >camera knows only ASA, how many stops from full aperture you've set your >lens at, and how much light there is. That's enough for the camera, but >the flash would need absolute aperture and/or distance to do any useful >calculations. Because the camera controls the flash (in TTL mode, that >is), there's no need for the flash to know, in other modes you'll have to >tell the flash what settings you use. >... Well notice I only mentioned ASA and the aperture, which the camera should know about, and not the zoom (or focal length). I guess not the aperture on hindsight since the . OK, it makes sense. Thanks! So looks like - - if the subject and room situation is "normal," shoot away in TTL - if the situation requires exposure compensation, e.g. no back wall, then either use TTL and dial in negative compensation on the camera, or use AUTO and dial in compensation using the flash. Regardless, the zoom should be set. The aperture and ASA only necessary for AUTO mode. I think I got it now.... Thanks all. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26174 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 11:13:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 11:13:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 03:13:54 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA03762 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:13:48 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.101] (u212-239-198-99.adsl.pi.be [212.239.198.99]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56CDA37428 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:13:16 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:13:17 +0100 Subject: [OM] OT twins From: iwert To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just wanted to share this with the list, I became father of twins this morning around 6am. They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours to see if their condition remains stabile. At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant will get his print a bit late. Iwert (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26461 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 11:16:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 11:16:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 03:16:44 2002 -0800 Received: from colossus.systems.pipex.net (colossus.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA03768 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:16:38 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by colossus.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 282FB16000359 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:16:31 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:16:31 -0000 Message-ID: <000001c2a5bd$c0369600$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations to you, and I hope everything works out OK. All the best, Jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca] On Behalf Of iwert Sent: 17 December 2002 11:13 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT twins Just wanted to share this with the list, I became father of twins this morning around 6am. They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours to see if their condition remains stabile. At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant will get his print a bit late. Iwert (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26812 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 11:24:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 11:24:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 03:24:38 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA03786 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:24:33 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.121] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A9BF6A670074; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:25:51 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:23:00 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <000001c2a5bd$c0369600$0800a8c0@reac.local> Message-Id: Subject: Re: RE: [OM] OT twins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca congrats! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27277 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 11:53:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 11:53:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 03:53:41 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com ([194.201.127.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA03808 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 03:53:35 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [OM] The Film counter on my OM1 broke Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:52:41 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: The Film counter on my OM1 broke Thread-Index: AcKlws0ZaGdvZT9kQfS7d+UWbekWoA== From: "Sam Shiell" To: "olympus@zuiko. sls. bc. ca \(E-mail\)" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi The return spring for the film counter on my OM1 has broken. If I = remember I can shake the body to get the counter back to 0 when the back = is open, but not very practical. Is this an easy fix? Something I can do myself or does it need sending = to a repairer? Cheers Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28116 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 12:35:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 12:35:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 04:35:13 2002 -0800 Received: from front3.chartermi.net (24.213.60.109.up.mi.chartermi.net [24.213.60.109]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03921 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 04:35:07 -0800 Received: from [24.247.58.58] (HELO jakeway) by front3.chartermi.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9a) with SMTP id 65695826 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:31:21 -0500 Message-ID: <003501c2a5c8$432c8ab0$9600a8c0@jakeway> From: "Jodi Jakeway" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:31:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations! Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. Jodi Jakeway jjakeway@chartermi.net ********************************************************************** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be legally privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This e-mail and its files are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and their content is the property of Studio J. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication . If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the e-mail administrator at jjakeway@chartermi.net and then delete this e-mail, its files and any copies. ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 6:13 AM Subject: [OM] OT twins > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours > to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28459 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 12:49:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 12:49:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 04:49:20 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03934 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 04:49:15 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.46.329e359e (3956) for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:47:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <46.329e359e.2b3076db@aol.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:47:23 EST Subject: [OM] An Apology To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_46.329e359e.2b3076db_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_46.329e359e.2b3076db_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Wheeler wrote: >G'day Zuiks, >Well, I've just (with much trepidation) placed my first FS item on e*ay. >And, horror of horrors, just realised that in my haste to get everything >right I failed to offer the item, an OM-20, to the list first. My profound >apologies. Turn in your church key, John. No more tinnies for you. Rich --part1_46.329e359e.2b3076db_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Wheeler wrote:

>G'day Zuiks,

>Well, I've just (with much trepidation) placed my first FS item on e*ay.
>And, horror of horrors, just realised that in my haste to get everything
>right I failed to offer the item, an OM-20, to the list first. My profound
>apologies.

Turn in your church key, John.  No more tinnies for you.

Rich


 --part1_46.329e359e.2b3076db_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28791 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 12:59:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 12:59:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 04:59:46 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03942 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 04:59:40 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBHCq8N7003067 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:52:08 +0100 (MET) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:52:08 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Message-Id: <20021217135208.274bea65.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: References: <003901c2a536$c34fd040$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:13:17 +0100 iwert wrote: > Just wanted to share this with the list, Quite allright :) > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next > 72 hours to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 > participant will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did > wonderfully delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) Well, Iwert....better start handing out the virtual cigars, no? :) Congratulations to you and to the mother. I hope that all of you are well, although probably exhausted beyond belif. All the best --thomas < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29084 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 13:04:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 13:04:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 05:04:28 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA03948 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:04:22 -0800 Received: (qmail 4816 invoked by uid 706); 17 Dec 2002 13:03:20 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 13:03:12 -0000 Message-ID: <010301c2a5cd$78ebe740$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:09:01 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I started with 4x6 prints, the first time the technician did a lot of adjustment on the brightness of the files trying to bring up the people's face, it blew out the background and reduce the contrast of the prints, he didn't know the scenes is the object not the people. After that I ask him not to do any adjustment on my files and I got some too dark prints. The third time I check the histogram to make sure I get the brightness I want but it result some low contrast prints. The forth time I know I have to scarify some highlight and shadow details to make the print look more brilliance, that was much better and it is almost under control now. Can't tell exactly how to do, the basic way is to use the prints to calibrate the monitor and note about the histogram, in most case you need to cut some highlight and shadow. But the first thing is to make sure the lab tech will not touch your file. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "IanG" > I sent off some files for 10x8 printing on a Fuji Frontier and have not been > too impressed.. they are 'better' than I get off my Epson 880 but not enough > to really justify the effort. > > The guy who printed them asked whether the file were interpolated - can > anybody explain what that is / how and why it is done please - and also > suggested that I leave sharpening to him. I don't doubt the guys sincerity > at all, just trying to understand why. > > Does anybody have an idiot's guide to getting quality prints from digit > files? I've got the files to where I want, I need to improve print quality. > > Ian > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29395 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 13:08:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 13:08:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 05:08:09 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA03952 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:08:03 -0800 Received: (qmail 7835 invoked by uid 706); 17 Dec 2002 13:06:53 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 13:06:51 -0000 Message-ID: <011a01c2a5cd$fb3f3ee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:12:40 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations for having two new photographic targets :-) C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours > to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30220 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 13:53:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 13:53:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 05:53:17 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA04053 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:53:12 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-188.s1123.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.188] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18OI8o-0003zH-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:52:11 -0500 Message-ID: <000e01c2a5d3$889c6ab0$bce47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:52:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't know. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "IanG" To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:41 PM Subject: RE: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? > How about with a T32 fitted and turned on? I've got to the stage where I > always pack 2 sets of fresh batteries if there is any chance of using the > flash - I know it will kill them. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Hermanson > Sent: 16 December 2002 13:51 > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? > > > 5 ma +- 1 for battery check > 10 ma +-3 for vf illuminator > 4 ma +- 1 for memo indicator > 4 ma +- for color illumination (this may be memo blinking led) > 5 ma +-1 for self timer. > Standby current, up to 35 micro amps, if measured properly. > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > please call 1-800-221-3000 > _________________________________ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Curtis P. Hedman" > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 4:20 PM > Subject: [OM] OM-4 MAXIMUM Current Drain? > > > > I've searched the archives on this without much success... > > > > From what I have picked up here and there, the OM-4 does a 'battery > check' > > before releasing the shutter; does anyone know what level of current drain > > is applied to the batteries during this check? I have a small battery > > tester (made for button cells) that tests at 1 milliampere; when I check > > batteries that my newly acquired OM-4 doesn't like, they test "good" on > > this tester, suggesting that the OM-4 draws a LOT more current during its > > pre-release test, and during an actual firing. I'm not adverse to making > > this little tester "OM Specific" by altering a load resistor or two, if I > > had some idea what load current I should be trying for. Also, does anyone > > know the load currents for other models? I have a 2n, 2s, PC, 4 and 4T; at > > one time or another they've all 'failed' with a set of batteries that > > "pass" the manual in-camera check, but immediately recover when a new set > > of 357's are installed. Generally, said batteries also test "good" on my > > external tester. > > > > Any insights will be greatly appreciated! > > > > Curt > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30556 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 13:59:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 13:59:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 05:59:50 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao06.cox.net (lakemtao06.cox.net [68.1.17.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA04075 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:59:45 -0800 Received: from dhurley ([68.102.135.227]) by lakemtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021217135529.JIDT16191.lakemtao06.cox.net@dhurley> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:55:29 -0500 Message-ID: <007001c2a5d3$7856eb80$8119fea9@dhurley> From: "Daryl Hurley" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:51:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations! Daryl Hurley Topeka, KS ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:13 AM Subject: [OM] OT twins > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31059 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 14:16:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 14:16:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 06:16:45 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA04105 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:16:40 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-188.s1123.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.188] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18OIWU-0001EE-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:16:39 -0500 Message-ID: <00bb01c2a5d6$f3e57200$bce47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <004101c2a585$984223e0$bb481ad3@default> Subject: Re: [OM] Need Help on Winder 2 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:16:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Look at the contacts of the switch with a loop while holding the shutter open with the B setting. Try gently cleaning the contacts of the motor drive switch inside the bottom cover. There are no wires involved. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bolty" To: Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:34 PM Subject: [OM] Need Help on Winder 2 > I just fanged a winder 2 for AUS $30 (approx US $17) for my OM-10. The other > winder had given the ghost. I know the new one works (have tried it on a > couple of bodies) but now for some reason it wont work on my OM-10. Does > anyone have info on what the electronics in the OM-10 should be like so I > can check mine and make sure that I don't have any loose wires inside my > OM-10's body. I found the camera so much easier with the winder working for > the type of images that I like to take. > Thanks Adam > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31648 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 14:40:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 14:40:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 06:41:04 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA04125 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:40:58 -0800 Received: from modem-779.alligator.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.3.11] helo=skelly) by cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18OIu0-0003dd-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:40:56 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:40:55 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of iwert Sent: 17 December 2002 11:13 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT twins Just wanted to share this with the list, I became father of twins this morning around 6am. They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours to see if their condition remains stabile. At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant will get his print a bit late. Iwert (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 688 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 15:54:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 15:54:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 07:54:41 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04227 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:54:36 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021217154158.HKGE148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:41:58 -0500 Message-ID: <015601c2a5e2$f5e961e0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] looking for royer007 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:42:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:41:58 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Is there anyone on this list with the address royer007@yahoo.com? If so, please contact me off list. I have received two or three emails from this person, each with attachments. Today's attachments are href.exe [93.4 kb] and getmsg[2].htm [26.9 kb] neither of which have been opened. Previous attachments have not been opened either. Thanks jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1796 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 16:39:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 16:39:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 08:39:30 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f92.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.92]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04253 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:39:25 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:38:31 -0800 Received: from 65.168.37.103 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:38:31 GMT X-Originating-IP: [65.168.37.103] From: "Jim Johnson" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:38:31 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2002 16:38:31.0942 (UTC) FILETIME=[BC45DA60:01C2A5EA] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations. My twin sons were born six months ago. They are truly a gift from God. It is always nice to hear about someone else enjoying the same good fortune that my wife and I share. I trust that they will progress well and soon be home with their new family. Best wishes, Jim >Congratulations > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >[mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of iwert >Sent: 17 December 2002 11:13 >To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Subject: [OM] OT twins > > >Just wanted to share this with the list, > >I became father of twins this morning around 6am. >They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours >to see if their condition remains stabile. >At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. >I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant >will get his print a bit late. > >Iwert > >(a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully >delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3080 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 17:29:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 17:29:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 09:29:36 2002 -0800 Received: from durendal.skynet.be (durendal.skynet.be [195.238.3.91]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04288 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:29:29 -0800 Received: from marcsimo (220.229-200-80.adsl.skynet.be [80.200.229.220]) by durendal.skynet.be (8.11.6/8.11.6/Skynet-OUT-2.20) with SMTP id gBHHSh011581 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:28:43 +0100 (MET) (envelope-from ) Message-ID: <002b01c2a5f1$ac0c8c00$587ffea9@marcsimo> From: "marc simon" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:28:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > congratulations from another "Belgian" and best wishes for all the family marc namur Belgium < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3989 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:08:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:08:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:08:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04311 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:08:15 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5A133F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:09:10 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:07:57 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Wayne Harridge > >> Jan Steinman wrote: >> > > : Buy My Step Van! > >Looks like a perfect OM carrier ! >Working from the roof would be great for architectural stuff. And with it's stiff, 16,000 pound springs, it makes a decent tripod, er, quadripod. We haul lawn chairs and tripods up there to do fireworks photos! But I'm wanting to do a national art show tour, so I need something big enough for my "darkroom" (Roland FJ-50) and a bunk and galley. (BTW: those photos shot with an Olympus E-20.) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4341 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:18:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:18:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:18:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04319 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:17:48 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBHIGco47028; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:16:38 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.78] (195-74-115-78.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.78]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBHIGZo46975; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:16:36 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:48:51 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Visit to Oz, was [OM] London camera shops Cc: "John Wheeler" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John I have heard only good things about Oz in general and Sydney in particular, so it would do my heart and soul massive amounts of good to visit your country. However, it would do my wallet some degree of bad. I do take issue with your contention that Oz beer is the best in the world, just because they do good adverts. Perhaps you mean that, because Fosters, Castlemaine etc... is as weak as Bud, Millers, Molsom, Labatts, etc, and because it only tastes good cold, it goes well with a hot climate, eating outside and drinking lots :>) OK, I'll go along with that: you can only drink 2 or 3 bottles of decent beer before feeling tired... One day soon, we shall visit. Chris At 13:50 +1100 17/12/02, John Wheeler wrote: >Hey Chris, > >Why don't you blokes pop down to Sydney early in Jan 2003 and join OUR >meeting. The weather's warm (30deg C and 89 percent humidity), you could >catch a little cricket with the Balmy Army (they're welcoming any extra >support), and, as you know, Oz beer is the best in the world! ;-) > >Cheers, >John. -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4802 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:36:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:36:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:36:51 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04328 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:36:43 -0800 Received: from pool0336.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.81] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OMZn-0002Ts-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:36:19 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:36:06 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Digital Review Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There is a newly posted and thorough review of the new Canon EOS-1D at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1ds/ The picture of the beautiful green CMOS through the lens mount is awesome. That, and an OM lens adaptor and your first born sold into a North African slave market will bring photographic bliss. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5097 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:42:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:42:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:42:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04336 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:42:53 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3709C3F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:43:49 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:42:35 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital [Was: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Winsor Crosby > >>Is it possible to do manual focusing on the D60 or D100 cameras with a zuiko >>mounted on it ? > >I would think so. The B&H says that the D60 takes EF lenses and all >of the tilt/shift EF lenses are manual focus. Olympus OM has a 46mm register distance, Canon D60 is 44mm, eliminating one potential problem in making an optics-free converter. However, the 46.5mm register of the D100 means that the OM lens would have to be sunk into the Nikon body by 0.5mm in order to focus at infinity, thus making an optical converter necessary. Optical converters aren't evil simply because they inevitably reduce performance; rather, they seriously constrain the choice of lenses that can be mounted to those that do not extend beyond the mount. For example, if it won't fit on a 2XA, it probably won't fit on an optical converter. This would knock out many of the most desirable, high-end Zuikos. Here's a place in UK that custom-makes various adaptors. They don't list OM-->EOS specifically. Anyone in UK know more about this place? Another starting point for research -- again, not listing OM-->EOS specifically, is: It might make a cool group project to arrange for a group buy of adaptors. These things are pricey because they tend to be made in ones-and-twos, and someone might cut a significant deal to make tens of them. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5813 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:46:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:46:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:47:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04356 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:46:53 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11BF43F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:47:48 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:46:34 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: Re: Reading MS word documents [Was: [OM] FS list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Tom Scales" > >You might want to read this before you trust PDF files. They can also be >virus infected: > >http://www.techtv.com/news/print/0,23102,3341369,00.html But even this one apparently only works in collaboration with Microsloth Outlook. Microsoft free == virus free (at least 99.5% :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6078 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:48:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:48:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:48:19 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc05.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04369 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:48:07 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18OMl7-0000lT-00 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:48:01 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: Visit to Oz, was [OM] London camera shops Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:47:09 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA04369 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've heard lots of arguments about the quality of beer in Oz. Regardless = of the quality of the brew, the quality of the beer-drinkers there is legendary, especially if measured by standards of quantity and speed of consumption. And they have lots of fun doing it. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:49 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: John Wheeler Subject: Visit to Oz, was [OM] London camera shops John I have heard only good things about Oz in general and Sydney in particular, so it would do my heart and soul massive amounts of good to visit your country. However, it would do my wallet some degree of bad. I do take issue with your contention that Oz beer is the best in the world, just because they do good adverts. Perhaps you mean that, because Fosters, Castlemaine etc... is as weak as Bud, Millers, Molsom, Labatts, etc, and because it only tastes good cold, it goes well with a hot climate, eating outside and drinking lots :>) OK, I'll go along with that: you can only drink 2 or 3 bottles of decent beer before feeling tired... One day soon, we shall visit. Chris At 13:50 +1100 17/12/02, John Wheeler wrote: >Hey Chris, > >Why don't you blokes pop down to Sydney early in Jan 2003 and join OUR >meeting. The weather's warm (30deg C and 89 percent humidity), you could >catch a little cricket with the Balmy Army (they're welcoming any extra >support), and, as you know, Oz beer is the best in the world! ;-) > >Cheers, >John. -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6362 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:50:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:50:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:50:07 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04373 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:49:59 -0800 Received: from pool0336.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.81] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OMn0-0005Pj-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:49:59 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:49:49 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Review Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >There is a newly posted and thorough review of the new Canon EOS-1D >at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1ds/ > Just reading it and the size and weight are impressive. The battery alone weighs 11.8 oz. Body with battery aboard is 3 lbs. 8 oz. and no lens. Phew. If I am not mistaken that outdoes Hasselblad and some other medium format cameras. In its favor is the ergonomic shape that helps in holding it. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6645 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 18:52:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 18:52:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 10:52:29 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04381 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:52:23 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C0C93F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:53:19 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:52:05 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "C.H.Ling" > >BTW, I don't think the OM2s or the 2n work in center-weigthed mode >when set to auto... You can tell by looking at the shutter curtain. The OM2 is full-frame averaging, the OM2n is center-weighted. I've seen some evidence that at least some OM2n's also had full-frame, but it may be that the shutter curtain was swapped out in a repair. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7038 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:02:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:02:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:02:54 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04397 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:02:46 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7A001V51UUFK@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:54:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:57:12 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00a701c2a5fe$1c2a36c0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Norm Nadel swas kind enough to send me the instruction sheet for the OM to EOS adapter (he scanned it and put it in two MS Word files). I have converted these two MS Word files into PDF files which can be found here: http://motorsportvisions.com/OM_EOS/OM_EOS1.pdf http://motorsportvisions.com/OM_EOS/OM_EOS2.pdf Note that the above URLs are case sensitive (at least the OM_EOS parts that is). I sent a note to the email address to the source of this adapter in Japan that Norm posted yesterday, in English, but have yet to receive a reply. My hopes are to get one of these before the next time Stephen Scharf and I are shooting at the same place and time (which would be end of January) to test his D-60 with my Zuiko 350/2.8 (assuming he's game to help in this experiment that is). We'll see, time is short and my present equipment budget (what with paying thousands in attorney fees to become a full-time parent and all) is zilch. It would be nice to determine once and for all how this works though. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7370 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:06:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:06:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:06:36 2002 -0800 Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04402 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:06:25 -0800 Received: from pool0336.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.81] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18ON2V-00074X-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:06:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:05:50 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Digital True Lies Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been changed at all even by one pixel. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7712 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:12:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:12:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:12:39 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04415 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:12:21 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18ON8b-0005rc-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:12:17 +0100 Received: from [80.130.166.188] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18ON8b-0005kB-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:12:17 +0100 Message-ID: <3DFF773D.7010007@doro-foto.de> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:13:01 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait shots References: <3DFD7659.9040301@achtung.com> <004701c2a4e9$02003b20$78481ad3@default> <3DFDA5AC.3040603@bristol.ac.uk> <008b01c2a5a6$05cd73e0$bc481ad3@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bolty schrieb: > Thanks Guys for your comments. I hope that the images have inspired you to > grab your Oly and wack a 50mm on the front and takes some images. most definitely so! great shots, wonderful athmosphere! cheers :Doro < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8117 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:20:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:20:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:20:01 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04431 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:15:50 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18ONB9-0006Zk-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:14:55 +0100 Received: from [80.130.166.188] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18ONB9-0005yM-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:14:55 +0100 Message-ID: <3DFF77DC.9010009@doro-foto.de> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:15:40 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA04431 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca iwert schrieb: > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. Congratulations!... > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderf= ully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours)=20 ...to all of you and I keep my fingers crossed for the next days that=20 all goes well. cheers :Doro --=20 Es bedarf nichts als Geschw=E4tz, um beim Volke Eindruck zu machen. Je weniger es begreift, desto mehr bewundert es. (Gregor v. Nazianz, Kirchenlehrer um 390) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8392 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:23:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:23:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:23:10 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04438 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:22:45 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.196.12805478 (15874) for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:18:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from aol.com (mow-d19.webmail.aol.com [205.188.139.135]) by air-id07.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILINID71-1217141800; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:18:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:18:00 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <23C78B92.37BB0314.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/17/2002 1:52:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jan@Bytesmiths.com writes: > The OM2 is full-frame averaging, the OM2n is center-weighted. > I've seen some evidence that at least some OM2n's also had full-frame, > but it may be that the shutter curtain was swapped out in a repair. It's the other way around, the early OM-2's had the center-weighted curtain. Later OM-2's and all OM-2n's had the averaging curtain. I remember reading somewhere (Shipman? Heiberg?) that when they changed the curtain pattern they also changed something in the metering so it was still center-weighted. Some people seem to think that there is an advantage to the old style senter-weighted curtain, but if I understand things correctly the newer OM-2's and OM-2n's are just as center-weighted, but have the advantage that the pattern doesn't slowly revert to full averaging as exposures get longer. With the original curtain as more of the exposure is measured off the film the metering pattern gradually shifts from center-weighted to full averaging. I suppose putting an old style curtain in a newer OM-2 would result in even more heavily center-weighted response in auto mode for shorter exposures. I think the AP specifically ordered some OM-2's like this back in the 70's. Paul Schings < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8398 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:23:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:23:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:23:11 2002 -0800 Received: from mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04439 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:22:45 -0800 From: bsandyman@att.net Received: from mtiwebc09 ([204.127.135.30]) by mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021217192128.KOYI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc09>; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:21:28 +0000 Received: from [199.181.237.2] by mtiwebc09; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:21:28 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:21:28 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 25 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: YnNhbmR5bWFuQGF0dC5uZXQ= Message-Id: <20021217192128.KOYI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc09> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Interpolation is mathmetically filling in missing points from sampled data. For example lets say you go out and measure the position of the moon every 15 minutes. You don't actualy know where the moon was in between those measurements. But you can guess. The simplest interpolation would be a straight line between observed samples. For example if you observe that the moon is at 20 degrees at 2:30 and 22 at 2:45, then you can guess that it was at 21 degrees at 2:37:30. (I am making the measurements up, but you get the point.) When you blow up a digital picture one of your options is to make all the pixels bigger. This generally looks hideous. Another option is to move the pixels you have to where they would be in a larger picture, and then to fill in all the white space by interpolating the values that are in between your original pixels. I don't know what kind of model photo shop or similar would use, but I imagine it would be more sophisticated then a straight line. Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:52:06 -0000 From: "IanG" Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film I sent off some files for 10x8 printing on a Fuji Frontier and have not been too impressed.. they are 'better' than I get off my Epson 880 but not enough to really justify the effort. The guy who printed them asked whether the file were interpolated - can anybody explain what that is / how and why it is done please - and also suggested that I leave sharpening to him. I don't doubt the guys sincerity at all, just trying to understand why. Does anybody have an idiot's guide to getting quality prints from digit files? I've got the files to where I want, I need to improve print quality. Ian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8905 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:24:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:24:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:24:58 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04440 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:22:47 -0800 Received: from 209-122-223-107.s2313.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.223.107] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18ONHY-0004gj-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:21:32 -0500 Message-ID: <000201c2a601$8b620470$6bdf7ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:31:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations! I hope everything goes well. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 6:13 AM Subject: [OM] OT twins > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours > to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9227 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:28:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:28:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:28:24 2002 -0800 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com (gadolinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.111]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04456 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:27:07 -0800 Received: from host213-122-75-139.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.75.139] helo=pii300) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18ONJT-0003DF-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:23:32 +0000 Message-ID: <001a01c2a598$f2ba41a0$8b4b7ad5@pii300> From: "Andrew Elliott" To: Subject: [OM] Amateur photographer article on macro flash Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:53:02 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Last week someone was looking for an "amateur photographer" article on building a macro flash unit. I came across it last night while sorting some old magazines so if you could get in touch off list I may be able to send it to you. Andrew N. Ireland < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9601 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:33:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:33:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:32:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04466 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:32:38 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB203F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:33:18 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217184300.5154.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217184300.5154.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:32:04 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Gareth.J.Martin" > >I get the impression that digital vs. film arguments are rather like >playground fights e.g. my toy is better that yours etc. Canon vs Nikon, Mac vs Wintel, Ford vs Chevy... the more you like one, the more you have to hate the other, no? :-) > It's personal >preference who likes what. I think it's a bit more than that. Digital and film each have strengths and weaknesses. Those who deny that are simply in denial! >I much prefer the results I get from film... It may be that you work with material that better complements film, or it may simply be that you are more comfortable and have more expertise with film. It's good to challenge ourselves by getting out of our comfort zone from time to time! >Why doesn't the argument for digital vs. film concentrate on how the two >formats can complement each other instead of grinding each other into >the ground? But that would mean people who would rather argue would have to agree on something! :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9974 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:41:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:41:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:41:06 2002 -0800 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04478 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:40:57 -0800 Received: from pool0336.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.81] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18ONZw-0005Pi-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:40:32 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217192128.KOYI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc09> References: <20021217192128.KOYI9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc09> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:40:22 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Interpolation is mathmetically filling in missing points from >sampled data. For >example lets say you go out and measure the position of the moon every 15 >minutes. You don't actualy know where the moon was in between those >measurements. But you can guess. The simplest interpolation would be >a straight >line between observed samples. For example if you observe that the >moon is at 20 >degrees at 2:30 and 22 at 2:45, then you can guess that it was at 21 >degrees at >2:37:30. (I am making the measurements up, but you get the point.) > >When you blow up a digital picture one of your options is to make >all the pixels >bigger. This generally looks hideous. Another option is to move the pixels you >have to where they would be in a larger picture, and then to fill in all the >white space by interpolating the values that are in between your >original pixels. > >I don't know what kind of model photo shop or similar would use, but I imagine >it would be more sophisticated then a straight line. I think about the only way that has been successful is to use fractals. Fractal Designs has software that allows enlargement that normally would be offensive because of the digital artifacts. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10265 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:44:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:44:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:44:58 2002 -0800 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04486 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:44:51 -0800 Received: from pool0336.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.177.81] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18ONe5-0003fE-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:44:49 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <00a701c2a5fe$1c2a36c0$1f00a8c0@mike> References: <00a701c2a5fe$1c2a36c0$1f00a8c0@mike> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:44:40 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Norm Nadel swas kind enough to send me the instruction sheet for the OM to >EOS adapter (he scanned it and put it in two MS Word files). I have >converted these two MS Word files into PDF files which can be found here: > >http://motorsportvisions.com/OM_EOS/OM_EOS1.pdf >http://motorsportvisions.com/OM_EOS/OM_EOS2.pdf > >Note that the above URLs are case sensitive (at least the OM_EOS parts that >is). > >I sent a note to the email address to the source of this adapter in Japan >that Norm posted yesterday, in English, but have yet to receive a reply. My >hopes are to get one of these before the next time Stephen Scharf and I are >shooting at the same place and time (which would be end of January) to test >his D-60 with my Zuiko 350/2.8 (assuming he's game to help in this >experiment that is). We'll see, time is short and my present equipment >budget (what with paying thousands in attorney fees to become a full-time >parent and all) is zilch. It would be nice to determine once and for all how >this works though. > >Mike Veglia >Motor Sport Visions Photography >http://www.motorsportvisions.com > Thanks, Mike. I would guess that a used D-60 will not be horribly expensive in about a year and a half. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10615 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 19:50:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 19:50:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 11:50:41 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04495 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:50:35 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-68-0-24.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.68.0.24]) by pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBHJo3J6433118 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:50:03 -0500 Message-ID: <002101c2a604$c0fd4920$18004441@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] get that staple out of my gut! Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:44:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "I would doubt that Playboy is shooting film anymore. In fact, I would be quite surprised if they are...they are probably shooting 645 or 'Blad with a Kodak digital back." We're talking of the centerfold, here. Never have. If they are using digital now, it is just of the last six months or so. The centerfold has always been shot on 8x10 chromes. The process begins with preliminary shots on 35, for approval of the pose and setting by Hef himself. Then, the whole thing is set up again, but with 8x10. the actual shooting takes about two days, but of that I don't know how long the young lady stands there naked. It is, depending on your outlook, impressively opulent, ridiculous overkill, essential for the quality, archaic, etc. It amounts to about a 2x enlargement, and I'll bet it is scanned on a drum scanner, not on a flatbed with transparency adapter. It was and is, remarkable that this ever happened, not to mention continues. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11018 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 20:01:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 20:01:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 12:01:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04505 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:01:12 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7A001KH4RVFG@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:57:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:00:10 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: Trekker Packs was [OM] China suggestions To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00f401c2a606$e805bd20$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/16/2002 Jeff Keller writes: << ... It will hold a 400mm Zuiko but I'm not so sure about a 400mm Tamron. The Mini Trekker will also fit in a desk drawer intended for 8.5"x11" hanging files. >> Mine will hold a Zuiko 350/2.8 with 1.4XA Converter and OM-4T with MD-2 in the middle--tight, but it fits. I don't normally leave the converter on, but if I am transiting between shooting locations where I know I will be using the converter and in a hurry it does fit. I have to believe a Tamron 400/4 would fit the same space. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11292 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 20:04:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 20:04:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 12:04:35 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04513 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:04:28 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-24.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.24]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBHJxmn31819; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:59:49 +1300 Message-Id: <200212171959.gBHJxmn31819@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: zuiko@pi.be, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:04:24 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] OT twins X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Iwert, Congratulations to you both. An exciting few years ahead of you now. I wish lots of energy and endurance. Probably not appropriate to put them in the freezer before "shooting" them - not for 5 years or so anyway :-) Brian > > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11651 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 20:11:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 20:11:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 12:11:33 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04517 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:11:27 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.116.1c17abf0 (15901) for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:06:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from aol.com (mow-m18.webmail.aol.com [64.12.180.134]) by air-id09.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILINID94-1217150646; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:06:46 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:06:45 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Fwd: [OM] Digital vs. film MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <3029F146.2E667BEF.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=-------1fa32e8d8994b331fa32e8d8994b33 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ---------1fa32e8d8994b331fa32e8d8994b33 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline This never seemed to come through. Apologies if it's a repeat post. Paul ---------1fa32e8d8994b331fa32e8d8994b33 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from aol.com (mow-d19.webmail.aol.com [205.188.139.135]) by air-id07.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILINID71-1217141800; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:18:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:18:00 -0500 From: Pschings@aol.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <23C78B92.37BB0314.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In a message dated 12/17/2002 1:52:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jan@Bytesmiths.com writes: > The OM2 is full-frame averaging, the OM2n is center-weighted. > I've seen some evidence that at least some OM2n's also had full-frame, > but it may be that the shutter curtain was swapped out in a repair. It's the other way around, the early OM-2's had the center-weighted curtain. Later OM-2's and all OM-2n's had the averaging curtain. I remember reading somewhere (Shipman? Heiberg?) that when they changed the curtain pattern they also changed something in the metering so it was still center-weighted. Some people seem to think that there is an advantage to the old style senter-weighted curtain, but if I understand things correctly the newer OM-2's and OM-2n's are just as center-weighted, but have the advantage that the pattern doesn't slowly revert to full averaging as exposures get longer. With the original curtain as more of the exposure is measured off the film the metering pattern gradually shifts from center-weighted to full averaging. I suppose putting an old style curtain in a newer OM-2 would result in even more heavily center-weighted response in auto mode for shorter exposures. I think the AP specifically ordered some OM-2's like this back in the 70's. Paul Schings ---------1fa32e8d8994b331fa32e8d8994b33-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12197 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 20:31:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 20:31:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 12:32:05 2002 -0800 Received: from MAIL.syndesis.com (sky.syndesis.com [206.221.244.80]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04543 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:31:58 -0800 Received: by mail.syndesis.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:28:22 -0500 Received: from [192.1.30.79] (192.1.30.79 [192.1.30.79]) by MAIL.syndesis.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id JW0NRXJ5; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:28:13 -0500 From: "Michael R. Collins" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: mcollins@mail.squam.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:30:26 -0500 Subject: [OM] OM-2 shutter curtains [was: Digital vs. film] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You may already have seen this, more on centre-weighting and OM-2, from The Olympus OM SLR FAQ (http://brashear.phys.appstate.edu/lhawkins/photo/olympus.faq.html): B24) Are there two different versions of the OM-2? Yes, there are. Sometime in the late '70s the dot pattern on the first shutter curtain was changed. The effect of this change was to change the metering pattern to be less dramatically center weighted. The only way to tell which version you have is by looking at the first curtain (remove the batteries and fire the shutter to lock up the mirror). If the dots are concentrated near the center, you have the old version. If they are more spread out, you have the new version. See the following web page for pictures of the two different screens: http://brashear.phys.appstate.edu/lhawkins/photo/om2-curtains.shtml To unlock your mirror, replace the batteries and put the manual/auto/off/reset-check switch in the reset-check position. Thanks to "Doug Nowlin" -- Michael R. Collins ... Michael.Collins@squam.org Toronto, Ontario, Canada < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12973 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 21:18:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 21:18:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 13:18:19 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04570 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:18:00 -0800 Received: from 209-122-225-116.s116.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.225.116] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18OP5D-0006q5-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:16:56 -0500 Message-ID: <000801c2a611$aaee1620$74e17ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] OM-2 shutter curtains [was: Digital vs. film] Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:17:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For the original OM-2, resetting is done by turning the shutter speed dial to the B position (don't forget to push the lock button in as you go from "1" to "B". The 2N will reset in the same way but offers the added convenience of doing it by pushing the meter switch up to the battery check / reset position. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael R. Collins" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 3:30 PM Subject: [OM] OM-2 shutter curtains [was: Digital vs. film] > You may already have seen this, more on centre-weighting and OM-2, > from The Olympus OM SLR FAQ > (http://brashear.phys.appstate.edu/lhawkins/photo/olympus.faq.html): > > B24) Are there two different versions of the OM-2? > > Yes, there are. Sometime in the late '70s the dot pattern on > the first shutter curtain was changed. The effect of this > change was to change the metering pattern to be less > dramatically center weighted. The only way to tell which > version you have is by looking at the first curtain (remove the > batteries and fire the shutter to lock up the mirror). If the > dots are concentrated near the center, you have the old version. > If they are more spread out, you have the new version. See > the following web page for pictures of the two different > screens: > > > http://brashear.phys.appstate.edu/lhawkins/photo/om2-curtains.shtml > > > To unlock your mirror, replace the batteries and put the > manual/auto/off/reset-check switch in the reset-check position. > > > Thanks to "Doug Nowlin" > > -- > > Michael R. Collins ... Michael.Collins@squam.org > Toronto, Ontario, Canada > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13621 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 21:57:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 21:57:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 13:57:37 2002 -0800 Received: from greatwhite.cybersurf.com (greatwhite.cybersurf.com [209.197.145.193]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04587 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:57:31 -0800 Received: from localhost (cal-uas-3-209197182251.3web.net [209.197.182.251]) by greatwhite.cybersurf.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBHLtrUN029047 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:56:11 -0700 From: Sean Davis To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:55:37 -0700 Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Zuiks, I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko 85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks! Sean D. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14154 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 22:15:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 22:15:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 14:15:59 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04617 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:15:52 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18OQ0F-0006Og-00 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:15:51 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:14:59 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca They are both great for portraits. The 85mm f-2 gives you a little more light for focusing and composing. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Sean Davis Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 2:56 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Portrait lens Hello Zuiks, I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko 85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks! Sean D. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14444 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 22:19:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 22:19:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 14:19:49 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04621 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:19:39 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.11]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021217221523.BEBL4233.pop016.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:15:23 -0600 Message-ID: <001f01c2a619$ce429b20$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: Subject: [OM] VIRUS ALERT Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:15:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [141.157.94.11] at Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:15:23 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca According to Norton, I have received an email containing the W32.KLEZ.H@MM virus. The subject is: Sep 12 2002 19. The return and from addresses are 'jlind@spitfire.net', but the apparant sender is JAQ50@aol.com. -Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14895 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 22:32:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 22:32:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 14:32:44 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04646 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:32:37 -0800 Received: from 2cust153.tnt9.krk1.da.uu.net ([67.250.79.153] helo=earthlink.net) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OQG5-0004Jp-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:32:13 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFF76A1.7010803@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:10:25 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations. I hope and pray all remains well with your new children. I think you may have the "why my WE 2002 print was late" excuse of the year award rapped up! iwert wrote: > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours > to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > -- Jim Couch Tacoma, WA USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15150 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 22:32:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 22:32:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 14:32:51 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04650 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:32:40 -0800 Received: from 2cust153.tnt9.krk1.da.uu.net ([67.250.79.153] helo=earthlink.net) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OQG7-0004ND-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:32:15 -0800 Message-ID: <3DFF76D9.10206@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:11:21 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations. I hope and pray all remains well with your new children. I think you may have the "why my WE 2002 print was late" excuse of the year award wrapped up! Jim Couch iwert wrote: > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours > to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > -- Jim Couch Tacoma, WA USA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15453 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 22:37:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 22:37:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 14:37:36 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04666 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:37:30 -0800 Received: from default ([62.7.159.60]) by care4free.net ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:33:09 -0000 Message-ID: <002101c2a61c$6fcb8860$3c9f073e@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: [OM] Film vs Digital...what a bore..! Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:27:28 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Now there's a headline..! I don't think we're advancing the cause of human knowledge with this ding-dong about whose pixels are larger than whose grains. Both sides are well entrenched and unlikely to be dissuaded from their point of view. Crossbenchers are few, but have the evangelical zeal of the convert. I love film. I love its immediacy (I shoot transparency, almost exclusively), that is to say I can hold the slide up to the light and see the image. Sure, it is fragile. Nothing lasts forever. I have three years worth of diary on a disk somewhere that won't load anymore. Corrupt files. So what? But I scan. It's a nice, easy way to get images on the web to share with friends (like you lot) and I can make acceptable prints for my wall and for sending to friends using my 300 dpi HP 720C. So I have my big toe in the digital realm, but no further. I have a considerable outlay invested in bodies and lenses, and no spare income. The thought of the demise of film worries me because with no film, I can't use these wonderful tools. But I don't think this is an imminent threat. So I will keep shooting. I'm 46, maybe I don't have to worry about this. Nevertheless, the film side of the divide probably feels threatened by the possible demise of our medium, so we defend film in the trenches to the last cartridge. On the digital side, there are strong, sometimes irrefutable arguments for the new technologies. But objectively, they are not mutually exclusive. My dread is being dependent on secondary devices to view my images, whether it is batteries or some other technology. My archive is my film, I have no confidence in the CDs I burn being viewable much beyond my 50th birthday. Either through deterioration or redundancy. Slides I took in 1974 are still perfect (negatives have fared less well, I treated them appallingly, I repent...). When the CDs fail, I can re-scan. Some of my favourite photographers (I'm a cyclist, so Graham Watson is up there, with a few others) are using digital, and for them it makes sense. For a lot of professional work it is the way to go. Mind you, they are going to have to learn that post-production is important; much of the coverage of the big races this year suffered from poorly reproduced digital images, with lousy colour and low contrast. Film images on the same pages were much better. Watson has produced some stunning digital pictures this year, though. It can be done. But empirical arguments on the list about whether one way of obtaining images is 'better' than the other are just a waste of bandwidth, IMHO. Donald. PS - congratulations, Iwert! Hope all is well. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 25-11-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15840 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 22:47:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 22:47:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 14:47:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04674 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:47:33 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7A00KK3CH09P@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:43:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:46:10 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cc: zuiko@pi.be Message-id: <016501c2a61e$1940c4e0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/17/2002 Iwert writes: << I became father of twins this morning around 6am. They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours to see if their condition remains stabile. At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant will get his print a bit late. >> First off, congratulations to you and Tinne!!! As a parent who went through some tough times early on in my welcome to parenthood, I know how difficult these first few days can be. My first child, Marco, was born 9 weeks early and weighed only 2 pounds and 12 ounces (~1230 grams by my crude calculations). Tiny does not even begin to describe. The first few weeks were very scary times. Today Marco is 12 years old with no problems from his prematurity (except he appears to have very severe color blindness--which could be from the oxygen he was on his first few days) and is a great son who I am very proud of. My hopes are Lars and Simon both grow to become strong healthy boys the same as Marco has. My thoughts are with you... Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16457 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:18:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:18:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 15:18:31 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04699 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:18:25 -0800 From: KFrohling@netscape.net Received: from KFrohling@netscape.net by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1b7.3c32fd7 (16238) for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:14:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from netscape.net (mow-m21.webmail.aol.com [64.12.180.137]) by air-in03.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILININ32-1217181403; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:14:03 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:14:03 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs Digital...what a bore..! MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <39EF9BBD.466AFA9A.023433A8@netscape.net> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well said Donald! "Donald MacDonald" wrote: >Now there's a headline..! > > >But empirical arguments on the list about whether one way of obtaining >images is 'better' than the other are just a waste of bandwidth, IMHO. > __________________________________________________________________ The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16719 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:19:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:19:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 15:19:47 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04703 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:19:41 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.11]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021217231525.TMVW21770.out003.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:15:25 -0600 Message-ID: <005001c2a622$315220c0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: Subject: [OM] Re: twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:15:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [141.157.94.11] at Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:15:25 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Warm congratulations on your family expansion. Best wishes for healthy times to the little ones, and Mom. And special congrats to the new 'big brother'. Take lots of pictures! Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 6:13 AM Subject: [OM] OT twins > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. > They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours > to see if their condition remains stabile. > At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. > I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant > will get his print a bit late. > > Iwert > > (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully > delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16978 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:20:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:20:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 15:20:06 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA04707 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:19:59 -0800 Received: (qmail 11822 invoked by uid 706); 17 Dec 2002 23:18:58 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:18:57 -0000 Message-ID: <009201c2a623$7ee37fe0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:24:48 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Also the close focusing correction mechanism, it make the close shoot much sharper. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "James N. McBride" > They are both great for portraits. The 85mm f-2 gives you a little more > light for focusing and composing. /jim > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17277 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:24:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:24:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 15:24:38 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA04711 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:24:31 -0800 Received: (qmail 13085 invoked by uid 706); 17 Dec 2002 23:23:27 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:23:26 -0000 Message-ID: <00b201c2a624$1f2447a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:29:15 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Get the 85/2 if it is a MC, it worth $250 in ebay and the 100/2.8 is around $130 in ebay. The brighter view and slight shorter focal length make it much better for low light hand held and the close focusing mechanism make a big different. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Davis" > Hello Zuiks, > > I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two > lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the > Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko > 85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). > > I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, > keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. > Any thoughts would be appreciated. > > Thanks! > > Sean D. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17727 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:36:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:36:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 15:36:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04716 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:36:52 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7A00MWMERBD1@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:33:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:35:26 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital [Was: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography] To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <017701c2a624$fa7face0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/17/2002 Jan Steinman writes: << For example, if it won't fit on a 2XA, it probably won't fit on an optical converter. This would knock out many of the most desirable, high-end Zuikos. >> On the wide angle side of things, probably so. Just to avoid the potential hassle going EOS mount makes the most sense. << Here's a place in UK that custom-makes various adaptors. They don't list OM-->EOS specifically. Anyone in UK know more about this place? >> I wrote them in my last search for said elusive adapters and they told me they don't/won't do one "because you won't be able to achieve infinity focus." << It might make a cool group project to arrange for a group buy of adaptors. These things are pricey because they tend to be made in ones-and-twos, and someone might cut a significant deal to make tens of them. >> Hmm, interesting idea here. First step is to find out if it even works on a D-60, etc. Norm Nadel apparently already has the adapter is in search of a body to try it with. I know we have some good mechanical engineering/machinist types here and have to wonder if perhaps making a short run of them may not be such a bad idea if there is enough demand (which is hard to measure, really). The place in Japan Norm forwarded to the list has not yet replied, but if I can get my hands on one I will eventually test it one way or the other. There's a store in Palo Alto, CA that almost certainly rents D-30 and/or D-60 bodies if need be, but since Stephen Scharf just bought a D-60 I imagine he would want to get in on this. How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17994 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:38:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:38:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 15:38:23 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f58.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04723 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:38:18 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:36:56 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:36:56 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital True Lies Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:36:56 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2002 23:36:56.0533 (UTC) FILETIME=[2FC67050:01C2A625] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Winsor wrote: >> One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been changed at all even by one pixel. << Very interesting, indeed. A few companies have sprung up in the past few years that do "digital watermarks" for this and many other legal reasons (i.e. copyright, etc.). It would be interesting to find out what technology they are implementing. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18599 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 00:06:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 00:06:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 16:06:53 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f49.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.49]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04736 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:06:48 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:00:14 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:00:14 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:00:14 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 00:00:14.0441 (UTC) FILETIME=[70FE4590:01C2A628] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Winsor wrote: >> I think about the only way that has been successful is to use fractals. Fractal Designs has software that allows enlargement that normally would be offensive because of the digital artifacts. << Is fractal math being implemented in any photo or enlargement software "package" at this time? (I haven't kept up on fractals, so I am in the dark). John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18854 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 00:07:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 00:07:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 16:08:04 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04740 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:07:58 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <200212180006500010009fipe>; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:06:51 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] get that staple out of my gut! Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:09:17 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <002101c2a604$c0fd4920$18004441@swbell.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca All correct. And, at least in the Chicago studio, it a Deardorf 8x10. Gary Edwards - We're talking of the centerfold, here. Never have. If they are using digital now, it is just of the last six months or so. The centerfold has always been shot on 8x10 chromes. The process begins with preliminary shots on 35, for approval of the pose and setting by Hef himself. Then, the whole thing is set up again, but with 8x10. the actual shooting takes about two days, but of that I don't know how long the young lady stands there naked. It is, depending on your outlook, impressively opulent, ridiculous overkill, essential for the quality, archaic, etc. It amounts to about a 2x enlargement, and I'll bet it is scanned on a drum scanner, not on a flatbed with transparency adapter. It was and is, remarkable that this ever happened, not to mention continues. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19285 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 00:25:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 00:25:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 16:25:08 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04752 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:25:02 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021218001223.JSZ148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:12:23 -0500 Message-ID: <026001c2a629$c59bfec0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <001f01c2a619$ce429b20$0200a8c0@ctx> Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:09:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:12:23 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mickey Trageser" To: Sent: Tuesday, 17 December, 2002 06:15 PM Subject: [OM] VIRUS ALERT > According to Norton, I have received an email containing the W32.KLEZ.H@MM > virus. > The subject is: Sep 12 2002 19. > The return and from addresses are 'jlind@spitfire.net', but the apparant > sender is JAQ50@aol.com. > > -Mickey The apparent sender of the royer007@yahoo.com [Mark Lloyd] message I got today was also JAQ50@aol.com jh > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20016 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 01:19:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 01:19:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 17:19:14 2002 -0800 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04787 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:19:08 -0800 Received: from pool0516.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.178.6] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OSrD-00028r-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:18:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:18:31 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Winsor wrote: > >>> >I think about the only way that has been successful is to use >fractals. Fractal Designs has software that allows enlargement that >normally would be offensive because of the digital artifacts. ><< > >Is fractal math being implemented in any photo or enlargement >software "package" at this time? (I haven't kept up on fractals, so >I am in the dark). > >John Cwiklinski > I got the name wrong. It is Genuine Fractal software which compresses images without loss and which can expand images so you can get a pleasing enlargement beyond what would be available with ordinary digital methods. Yes it uses fractal math. It is described at lizardtech.com. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20452 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 01:38:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 01:38:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 17:38:26 2002 -0800 Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04807 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:38:19 -0800 Received: from pool0516.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.178.6] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OT9m-0002wT-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:37:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:37:45 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Hello Zuiks, > >I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two >lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the >Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko >85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). > >I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, >keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. >Any thoughts would be appreciated. > >Thanks! > >Sean D. Either one is a great lens. The 100 might give you closer view without being in the subject's face. Check out the the group gallery: http://www.millennics.com/olympus/tope/gallery.html -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20849 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 01:50:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 01:50:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 17:50:40 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04817 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:50:34 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA36928 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:49:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217174855.0277c2f8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:51:10 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just got a 85/2 for about ~$180, which is a good price, but it has oily blades :-( So far it doesn't hurt anything. I suspect this will be one of my most used lens, along w/ the 40/2 for its small size. The 85/2 has that nice portrait lens quality not to reveal too much details while remain sharp. The 50/2 is terrible for that. At 02:55 PM 12/17/2002 -0700, Sean Davis wrote: >Hello Zuiks, > >I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two >lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the >Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko >85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). > >I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, >keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. >Any thoughts would be appreciated. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21205 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 02:03:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 02:03:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 18:04:01 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04833 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:03:56 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66905B2A3 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:03:09 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital True Lies In-Reply-To: Message from Winsor Crosby of "Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:05:50 -0800." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:03:09 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021218020309.A66905B2A3@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message , Winsor Crosby writes: Winsor, >One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon >EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write >a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then >be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been >changed at all even by one pixel. Do you have any detailed information about this device? It sounds like they're going to charge a load of money for a glorified checksum calculator. :-) Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21501 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 02:07:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 02:07:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 18:07:34 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04841 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:07:28 -0800 Received: from M2W058.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.58]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:07:01 -0500 Message-ID: <265000-2200212318271590@M2W058.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:07:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 02:07:01.0631 (UTC) FILETIME=[273B58F0:01C2A63A] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I prefer the 85/2, with it's brigher image, abiltiy to work at f/2, and close focusing correction=2E I'm also more comfortable with the 85-90 foc= al length rather than 100=2E My 100/2=2E8 got sold last year in preference t= o the 85/2=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: GPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBXFGGMEPYOQ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:55:37 -0700 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Portrait lens Hello Zuiks, I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the Zuiko 100/2=2E8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko 85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD)=2E I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes=2E Any thoughts would be appreciated=2E Thanks! Sean D=2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21800 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 02:10:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 02:10:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 18:10:48 2002 -0800 Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.139]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04845 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:10:41 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax81-b245.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.75.245]) by mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBI2AdN07972 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:10:39 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT twins Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:09:27 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations Iwert. As grandparents of two we can attest to the delights of twins. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of iwert Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:13 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT twins Just wanted to share this with the list, I became father of twins this morning around 6am. They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours to see if their condition remains stabile. At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant will get his print a bit late. Iwert (a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22149 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 02:21:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 02:21:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 18:21:56 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04853 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:21:50 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA48140 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:21:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217181839.0277fb38@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:22:26 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Review In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:36 AM 12/17/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >There is a newly posted and thorough review of the new Canon EOS-1D at >http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1ds/ > >The picture of the beautiful green CMOS through the lens mount is >awesome. That, and an OM lens adaptor and your first born sold into a >North African slave market will bring photographic bliss. >... It does sound very appealing, except that I will have to work out more to hold the thing (lets see, 3.5 lbs is 2.60f my body weight :-) ), plus may be grow my fingers longer... Oh yeah, and $8K for the body, plus few more $Ks for the lens. I can probably use the Metz 54 though :-) Lets see, that's about 50 more compilers. Anyone wants to buy C compilers? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22869 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:12:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:12:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:12:31 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04898 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:12:24 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:49:45 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFFE702.10005@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:09:54 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Digital True Lies References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As a cryptographer, I can tell you that the algorithm does nothing more then takes a "hash" of the image. Yes, it can tell you someone's changed it and it's not the original, but they can't tell you what's been changed.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23124 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:12:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:12:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:13:00 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04901 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:12:54 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <2002121803114600200eg0joe>; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 03:11:47 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:14:14 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Tough choice, Sean. I have both and I often debate which to take (though now I have an f/2 100 and the f/2.8 gets much less use). For an indoor portrait shoot last summer I was glad that I had the 85 since I was working in very cramped quarters. I think that my first choice would be the 85, at least partly because thae quoted price is a very good buy (if in good condition) though on occassion you may wish for just a little more space that the 100 would give you (a nervous subject, for instance). Gary Edwards -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Sean Davis Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 3:56 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Portrait lens Hello Zuiks, I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko 85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks! Sean D. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23387 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:13:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:13:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:14:03 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04904 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:13:56 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:52:48 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFFE7BE.8030207@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:13:02 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You know we expect pics right? ;-) Congrats. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24217 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:30:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:30:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:30:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04932 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:30:27 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B363F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:31:24 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:30:10 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Winsor Crosby > >One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon >EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write >a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then >be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been >changed at all even by one pixel. What's to keep some software from modifying or deleting the verifiction data? -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24557 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:36:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:36:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:37:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04944 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:36:55 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA4A43F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:37:52 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:36:38 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "IanG" > >Does anybody have an idiot's guide to getting quality prints from digit >files? I've got the files to where I want, I need to improve print quality. I don't know if it could be called "idiot's guide" -- more like "tour de force" -- but check out "Mastering Digital Printing," by Harald Johnson. It's brand new. I only thing review copies are out right now. But Amazon and the usual suspects should have it Any Day Now. (Requisite on-topic content: the photo on page 198 was taken with an OM-4t and 24mm f3.5 shift lens. The bottom photo on page 292 was taken with an OM-4t and 21mm f2. :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24866 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:43:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:43:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:43:12 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04948 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:43:06 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213953F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:44:03 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:42:49 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Mike Veglia > >In a message dated 12/17/2002 Jan Steinman writes: > ><< It might make a cool group project to arrange for a group buy of >adaptors. These things are pricey because they tend to be made in >ones-and-twos, and someone might cut a significant deal to make tens of >them. >> > >How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? Sign me up! -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25163 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:45:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:45:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:45:54 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04956 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:45:48 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33313F23 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:46:45 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:45:32 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "John Cwiklinski" > >Winsor wrote: > >>> >I think about the only way that has been successful is to use >fractals... ><< > >Is fractal math being implemented in any photo or enlargement software >"package" at this time? (I haven't kept up on fractals, so I am in the >dark). Lizard Tech's Genuine Fractals. I use it all the time. I've made 24"x36" prints (from Olympus 35mm) that experienced photographers walk up to, examine closely, then say, "What large format gear are you using?" It isn't magic. It doesn't work on everything. But when it works, it is impressive. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25480 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 03:50:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 03:50:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 19:50:46 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04973 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:50:40 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 977665B2B1 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:50:08 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies In-Reply-To: Message from Jan Steinman of "Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:30:10 -0800." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:50:08 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021218035008.977665B2B1@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message , Jan Steinman writes: >>From: Winsor Crosby >> >>One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon >>EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write >>a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then >>be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been >>changed at all even by one pixel. > >What's to keep some software from modifying or deleting the verifiction data? Hmmm, maybe Canon uses some sort of PKI? Digital certificates? Yes, would be PITA for widespread use, but it would be just the thing for photojournalists and large news companies. The camera has it's own digital certificate, it calculates the hash, signs it, embeds it in the photo file. Photog sends the file to the editor. Editor checks it, sees that it is right and ... It might not be just simple hash routine that saves the hash together with the image. :-) That's why I'd like to see some more information on the device. :-) And yes, seeing that many companies in the InfoSec industry can't get things right, what are the chances that someone that's not primarily in the industry does? Huh? Huh? Soapbox. Off. Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25844 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:00:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:00:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:00:20 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04998 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:00:10 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:37:34 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:57:40 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One thing I will have to say, as far as film getting the advantage. I __OWN__ OM equipment, I bought it used, and it's not going to depreciate (it might even appreciate) and I don't have to cough up any more money for it. Contrast this with a digital camera, which will drop like a rock in price, (20 0.000000e+00very 4 months so far) and might die out alltogether as new models come out. That's one thing to consider... I'm waiting for digital to stablize in price before jumping in. In the meantime, my OM is still on my side... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26139 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:03:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:03:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:03:59 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05010 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:03:51 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:42:53 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFFF372.5010807@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:02:58 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies References: <20021218035008.977665B2B1@yellow3.eunet.si> In-Reply-To: <20021218035008.977665B2B1@yellow3.eunet.si> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was the one that programmed "Amex Blue" each one has an x509 certificate in it, but due to size restrictions, they had requested the use of ECC (elliptic curve cryptography) instead of DH or RSA. This is quite possible. How do you prevent someone from tampering with it? You take a hash of the picture, and then you include that with the picture as supplimental information. You then sign the hash with the digital certificate. The math is such that it's near impossible to fake, but easy to verify. You can also do this for future formats, and be guaranteed that you would know if your picture got ripped off... You can prove in a court that YOUR CAMERA took that picture... This leads to problems of course, I borrow a camera, and I take a few pics. Who owns it? It now becomes, he who holds the camera, owns the pictures... not the photographer. So if I borrow a camera from Samy's or B&H, all the photos I take from it are theirs, which is not correct. Also, if the camera breaks, no way to verify now.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26455 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:08:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:08:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:09:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail15.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.215]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05021 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:08:54 -0800 Received: (qmail 4426 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:09:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail15.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 18 Dec 2002 04:09:05 -0000 Message-ID: <3DFFF83D.7080707@speakeasy.net> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:23:25 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins References: <3DFFE7BE.8030207@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And since it's twins, how about shooting them in stereo... Steve Goss Albert wrote: > You know we expect pics right? ;-) > > Congrats. > > Albert > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26748 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:10:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:10:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:10:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA05025 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:10:48 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040184249!1057 Received: (qmail 31899 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:04:10 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:04:10 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBI3hBu16262 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:43:13 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFFF56B.546D95BA@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:11:23 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote: > > One thing I will have to say, as far as film getting the advantage. I > __OWN__ OM equipment, I bought it used, and it's not going to depreciate > (it might even appreciate) and I don't have to cough up any more money > for it. Contrast this with a digital camera, which will drop like a > rock in price, (20 0.000000e+00very 4 months so far) and might die out alltogether > as new models come out. That's one thing to consider... I'm waiting for > digital to stablize in price before jumping in. > Stablize? I think it will just like computer price/performance, it never happen. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27297 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:38:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:38:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:38:19 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f140.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05052 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:38:14 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:37:21 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:37:20 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:37:20 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 04:37:21.0179 (UTC) FILETIME=[274D26B0:01C2A64F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote: >> This is quite possible. How do you prevent someone from tampering with it? You take a hash of the picture, and then you include that with the picture as supplimental information. You then sign the hash with the digital certificate. The math is such that it's near impossible to fake, but easy to verify. You can also do this for future formats, and be guaranteed that you would know if your picture got ripped off... You can prove in a court that YOUR CAMERA took that picture... << No, No! The problem is that upon examination you "could" find multiple certificates (watermarks) residing on the digi photo or file or mp3. Therefore, who's certificate is the authentic one? I don't think Canon has solved this problem. Very difficult. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27652 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:49:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:49:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:49:18 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f159.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.159]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05069 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:49:12 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:40:56 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:40:56 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:40:56 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 04:40:56.0721 (UTC) FILETIME=[A7C64010:01C2A64F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Albert wrote: >> That's one thing to consider... I'm waiting for digital to stablize in price before jumping in. << >> C. H. Ling wrote: Stablize? I think it will just like computer price/performance, it never happen. << Albert, I'm afraid you are going to wait a very long time. I agree with CH. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27971 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:55:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:55:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:55:26 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05073 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:55:19 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:32:59 +0800 Message-ID: <3DFFFF26.1020502@achtung.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:52:54 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's really not that difficult. The signature is done to the hash, not the file. Subsequent signatures will sign against the inclusion of the first hash as well. "Stacking" happens and we can peel the layers and see who was first.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28235 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:56:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:56:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:56:43 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05077 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:56:37 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBI4mZU22691 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:48:35 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:55:21 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F569F@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:55:19 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > James N. McBride [mailto:jnmcbr@srv.net] wrote: > I've heard lots of arguments about the quality of beer in Oz. I hate to admit it, but trying to get me to knock the top off a coldie is like trying to shove a pound of butter up a cocky's a**e with a hot needle. Not gonna happen. Of course, I'm not sure if the Australian authorities are as forgiving about my beer-dislike (I'm a bourbon - mmmm, Wild Turkey, arrrrgllll - or gin - mmmmm, Bombay Sapphire, arrgglll - man myself) as you zuikoholics are about my C*n*n-fetish, so I'd appreciate it if you don't mention it to them. I might be banished! Doesn't mean I won't shout you all a beer though! As John suggests, come on down! Cheers, and you *do* forgive me the C*n*n thing, yes? :-) Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28495 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:58:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:58:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 20:58:21 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m08.mx.aol.com (imo-m08.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.163]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05081 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:58:15 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.191.1222f939 (4560) for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:56:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <191.1222f939.2b3159f1@aol.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:56:17 EST Subject: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_191.1222f939.2b3159f1_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_191.1222f939.2b3159f1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I use a Bogen 3221 with the 3030 head, which is good and sturdy. Much of what I do is macro or close up and am interested in something that will allow me to get up close and personal with the flora and the fauna a little easier. Because I also travel a bit, it would be nice to have something a bit lighter. A ball head might also be nice. So I'm looking for advice. What I probably need is something in carbon fiber, with a good ball head that will set up 2" off the ground, extend to 6', weigh 12 1/2 ounces and cost about $100. I haven't been all that good this year so Santa probably didn't have the elves make me one like this but I would like to hear from the list about what they might suggest. Bill Barber --part1_191.1222f939.2b3159f1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I use a Bogen 3221 with the 3030 head, which is good and sturdy.  Much of what I do is macro or close up and am interested in something that will allow me to get up close and personal with the flora and the fauna a little easier.  Because I also travel a bit, it would be nice to have something a bit lighter.  A ball head might also be nice.  So I'm looking for advice.  What I probably need is something in carbon fiber, with a good ball head that will set up 2" off the ground, extend to 6', weigh 12 1/2 ounces and cost about $100.  I haven't been all that good this year so Santa probably didn't have the elves make me one like this but I would like to hear from the list about what they might suggest.  Bill Barber --part1_191.1222f939.2b3159f1_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28853 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:09:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:09:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:09:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA05092 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:09:19 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-33.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040187546!1272 Received: (qmail 3028 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 04:59:08 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-33.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 04:59:08 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBI4fku17155 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:41:46 +0800 Message-ID: <3E000328.8C35790A@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:10:00 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies References: <3DFFFF26.1020502@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Can someone just save the file as BMP and you lost all signatures then they can put on their own one? C.H.ling Albert wrote: > > It's really not that difficult. > > The signature is done to the hash, not the file. Subsequent signatures > will sign against the inclusion of the first hash as well. "Stacking" > happens and we can peel the layers and see who was first.. > > Albert ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29356 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:36:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:36:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:36:54 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.datasync.com (root@mail.datasync.com [205.216.82.35]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05119 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:36:47 -0800 Received: from me (msp1-316.datasync.com [209.205.139.68]) by mail.datasync.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBI5ajo32433 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:36:45 -0600 Message-ID: <008101c2a658$162d5e00$448bcdd1@datasync.com> From: "Paul D. Farrar" To: References: <3DFFFF26.1020502@achtung.com> <3E000328.8C35790A@accura.com.hk> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:40:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The device would be used for evidence photography. If there is secure confirmation that the original picture has not been changed in way whatsoever, the digital photograph can be entered as evidence in court. Without such a "seal", digital photography is pretty much useless legally. Paul Farrar ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 11:10 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies > Can someone just save the file as BMP and you lost all signatures then > they can put on their own one? > > C.H.ling > > Albert wrote: > > > > It's really not that difficult. > > > > The signature is done to the hash, not the file. Subsequent signatures > > will sign against the inclusion of the first hash as well. "Stacking" > > happens and we can peel the layers and see who was first.. > > > > Albert > > ________________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan > service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working > around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com > ________________________________________________________________________ > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29619 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:39:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:39:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:39:37 2002 -0800 Received: from maynard.mail.mindspring.net (maynard.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.243]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05123 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:39:31 -0800 Received: from user-38ldvfc.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.253.236]) by maynard.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OWv5-0007VX-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:38:59 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021216213542.32639.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021216213542.32639.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:39:12 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3765 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:24:08 -0800 >From: Mike Veglia >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > >If anyone comes up with a real source (beyond urban legend) for an OM lens >to EOS body adapter, please post it and also let me know :) > >Much as I hold out hope for the 4/3 system, my "ace in the hole" will be to >go to the dark side...eventually. > >Mike Veglia >Motor Sport Visions Photography >http://www.motorsportvisions.com Mike, I will investigate this as well and let you know. >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:36:13 -0800 >From: "Richard F. Man" >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > >At 01:24 PM 12/16/2002 -0800, Mike wrote: >>If anyone comes up with a real source (beyond urban legend) for an OM lens >>to EOS body adapter, please post it and also let me know :) >> >>Much as I hold out hope for the 4/3 system, my "ace in the hole" will be to >>go to the dark side...eventually. >>... > >Did you just miss Norman's post? This is my thinking also. For our >"business," we will need to get a digital system some times next year. >Looking at the current crop, the Sigma still has a way to go, so it is >still down to either the Nik*n D100 or the Can*n D60. The Can*n 1Ds and the >Kod*k DCS-14n is just out of the budget. If either Pent*x or the Olydak 4/3 >comes out a 6+MP system w/ good selection of lens in a form factor that I >like, then great. Otherwise, then it will have to be either the D100 or the >D60, with the D60 has the potential advantage of able to use the Zuiko with >an adapter. I think the D100 is much lighter though, being based on the >lighter F100/F80 film body. > Richard, The D100 is 77 grams lighter than the D60. I don't how this would change if you put a battery grip on either camera. DPreview has a good comparison of the D100 vs. the D60. For a side by side, find the D100 review; it has a fairly detailed comparison of the D100 vs. D60. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond100/ The D100 was rated better for autofocus performance, and the color of the Nikkor lenses was more contrasty, but the D60 outscored it on resoluton and image quality by a skosh. Both are excellent cameras, though. -Stephen. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29934 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:45:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:45:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:45:12 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05127 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:45:06 -0800 Received: from mom ([4.65.20.187]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021218054051.ELQI4233.pop016.verizon.net@mom> for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:40:51 -0600 Message-ID: <000601c2a657$fe8834a0$6601a8c0@dslverizon.net> From: "Jim Hinken" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:40:37 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [4.65.20.187] at Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:40:51 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congratulations. I hope your twins bring as much pleasure to you as mine have to me Jim Hinken ----- Original Message ----- From: "iwert" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 3:13 AM Subject: [OM] OT twins > Just wanted to share this with the list, > > I became father of twins this morning around 6am. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30203 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:45:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:45:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:45:46 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05131 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:45:40 -0800 Received: from pool1075.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.55] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OX16-0000YA-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:45:12 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218020309.A66905B2A3@yellow3.eunet.si> References: <20021218020309.A66905B2A3@yellow3.eunet.si> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:45:03 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Digital True Lies Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >In message , Winsor Crosby writes: > >Winsor, > >>One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon >>EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write >>a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then >>be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been >>changed at all even by one pixel. > >Do you have any detailed information about this device? It sounds like >they're going to charge a load of money for a glorified checksum >calculator. :-) > >Cheers, > >Saso No info, no idea. Only what was said on the dpreview.com review. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30465 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:48:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:48:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:48:16 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05136 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:48:10 -0800 Received: from pool1075.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.55] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OX3u-0003L1-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:48:07 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:47:54 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >From: Winsor Crosby >> >>One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon >>EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write >>a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then >>be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been >>changed at all even by one pixel. > >What's to keep some software from modifying or deleting the verifiction data? Ah well. The thought of digital image hackers crossed my mind, but that seemed too silly. Or, God forbid, a digicam virus waiting to infect your camera the minute you connect it to something. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30757 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:51:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:51:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:51:32 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05148 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:51:26 -0800 Received: from pool1075.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.55] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OX76-0006PZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:51:24 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DFFF372.5010807@achtung.com> References: <20021218035008.977665B2B1@yellow3.eunet.si> <3DFFF372.5010807@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:51:15 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I was the one that programmed "Amex Blue" each one has an x509 >certificate in it, but due to size restrictions, they had requested >the use of ECC (elliptic curve cryptography) instead of DH or RSA. > >This is quite possible. How do you prevent someone from tampering >with it? You take a hash of the picture, and then you include that >with the picture as supplimental information. You then sign the >hash with the digital certificate. The math is such that it's near >impossible to fake, but easy to verify. > >You can also do this for future formats, and be guaranteed that you >would know if your picture got ripped off... You can prove in a >court that YOUR CAMERA took that picture... > >This leads to problems of course, I borrow a camera, and I take a >few pics. Who owns it? It now becomes, he who holds the camera, >owns the pictures... not the photographer. So if I borrow a camera >from Samy's or B&H, all the photos I take from it are theirs, which >is not correct. Also, if the camera breaks, no way to verify now.. > >Albert > Of course the next step is a built in retinal scanner in the eyepiece which will add the photographers retinal info to the code. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31064 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:55:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:55:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:55:32 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05152 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:55:26 -0800 Received: from pool1075.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.55] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OXAz-0002Nj-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:55:25 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:55:16 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >One thing I will have to say, as far as film getting the advantage. >I __OWN__ OM equipment, I bought it used, and it's not going to >depreciate (it might even appreciate) and I don't have to cough up >any more money for it. Contrast this with a digital camera, which >will drop like a rock in price, (20 0.000000e+00very 4 months so far) and >might die out alltogether as new models come out. That's one thing >to consider... I'm waiting for digital to stablize in price before >jumping in. > >In the meantime, my OM is still on my side... > >Albert Have you seen computers stabilize? Same thing. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31351 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 05:57:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 05:57:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 21:57:51 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05160 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:57:45 -0800 Received: from pool1075.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.55] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OXDE-0004cI-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:57:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:57:35 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >From: Mike Veglia >> >>In a message dated 12/17/2002 Jan Steinman writes: >> >><< It might make a cool group project to arrange for a group buy of >>adaptors. These things are pricey because they tend to be made in >>ones-and-twos, and someone might cut a significant deal to make tens of >>them. >> >> >>How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short > >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? If it is reasonable in cost, I would be interested. Winsor -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31676 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 06:01:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 06:01:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 22:01:21 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05170 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:01:14 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBI603r99126; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:00:03 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.235] (195-74-115-235.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.235]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBI5xwo99048; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 05:59:58 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:38:55 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins Cc: iwert Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca All the best of luck to the 5 of you Iwert - that's a tribe I reckon! Chris At 12:13 +0100 17/12/02, iwert wrote: >Just wanted to share this with the list, > >I became father of twins this morning around 6am. >They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours >to see if their condition remains stabile. >At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. >I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant >will get his print a bit late. > >Iwert > >(a very happy father of three sons and husband of Tinne who did wonderfully >delivering the twins in just under 3 hours) > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31947 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 06:03:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 06:03:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 22:03:25 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05178 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:03:19 -0800 Received: from pool1075.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.138.55] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OXIc-0002RR-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:03:19 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <191.1222f939.2b3159f1@aol.com> References: <191.1222f939.2b3159f1@aol.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:03:06 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >I use a Bogen 3221 with the 3030 head, which is good and sturdy. >Much of what I do is macro or close up and am interested in >something that will allow me to get up close and personal with the >flora and the fauna a little easier. Because I also travel a bit, >it would be nice to have something a bit lighter. A ball head might >also be nice. So I'm looking for advice. What I probably need is >something in carbon fiber, with a good ball head that will set up 2" >off the ground, extend to 6', weigh 12 1/2 ounces and cost about >$100. I haven't been all that good this year so Santa probably >didn't have the elves make me one like this but I would like to hear >from the list about what they might suggest. Bill Barber Santa says it is on its way. He says that when you're bad you're good. You believe me, don't you? -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32397 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 06:20:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 06:20:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 22:21:01 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05182 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:20:54 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18OXZd-00011z-00 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:20:53 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:20:04 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_009E_01C2A622.D4791880" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <191.1222f939.2b3159f1@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_009E_01C2A622.D4791880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeez Bill, To meet those specs it would have to be homemade from donated unobtainium. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 9:56 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? I use a Bogen 3221 with the 3030 head, which is good and sturdy. Much of what I do is macro or close up and am interested in something that will allow me to get up close and personal with the flora and the fauna a little easier. Because I also travel a bit, it would be nice to have something a bit lighter. A ball head might also be nice. So I'm looking for advice. What I probably need is something in carbon fiber, with a good ball head that will set up 2" off the ground, extend to 6', weigh 12 1/2 ounces and cost about $100. I haven't been all that good this year so Santa probably didn't have the elves make me one like this but I would like to hear from the list about what they might suggest. Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_009E_01C2A622.D4791880 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jeez=20 Bill,  To meet those specs it would have to be homemade from = donated=20 unobtainium. /jim
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, = 2002 9:56=20 PM
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: [OM] The = Perfect=20 Tripod?

I use a Bogen 3221 with the 3030 head, = which is good=20 and sturdy.  Much of what I do is macro or close up and am = interested in=20 something that will allow me to get up close and personal with the = flora and=20 the fauna a little easier.  Because I also travel a bit, it would = be nice=20 to have something a bit lighter.  A ball head might also be = nice. =20 So I'm looking for advice.  What I probably need is something in = carbon=20 fiber, with a good ball head that will set up 2" off the ground, = extend to 6',=20 weigh 12 1/2 ounces and cost about $100.  I haven't been all that = good=20 this year so Santa probably didn't have the elves make me one like = this but I=20 would like to hear from the list about what they might suggest.  = Bill=20 Barber
------=_NextPart_000_009E_01C2A622.D4791880-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 528 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 06:59:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 06:59:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 22:59:15 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05198 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:59:09 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.75] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AD0B933C00F4; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:00:27 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:38:27 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: Re: RE: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca heck my 3221/3030 combo cost me 120 USED! sure hope you find that ideal tripod, looks like it will have to be a custom labor of love. /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1109 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 07:37:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 07:37:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 23:37:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05216 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:37:32 -0800 Received: from [207.214.213.213] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7B00DJR13RAZ@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:35:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:37:21 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters In-reply-to: To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/17/02 11:44 AM, Winsor Crosby at wincros@earthlink.net wrote: > Thanks, Mike. I would guess that a used D-60 will not be horribly > expensive in about a year and a half. > -- > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California I expect to start finding them in thrift stores in a couple years... I already found a Jam Cam -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1121 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 07:37:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 07:37:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 23:37:41 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05220 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:37:34 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA46498 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:36:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021217232852.02786b80@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:38:09 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ In-Reply-To: <3DFFF56B.546D95BA@accura.com.hk> References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:11 PM 12/18/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: >Stablize? I think it will just like computer price/performance, it >never happen. >... Actually, I don't think it will be that bad. I don't see it will be that much difference between the evolution of digital cameras and the film cameras, starting say, in 2005. We will have lots of new technologies being introduced in the next 3 years or so, but it will stabilize. Once that happens, then new camera models will be introduced with this and that new and better features, but there is a limit, unless the nature of photography changes. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:15 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1657 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 07:40:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 07:40:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 23:40:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05224 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:40:33 -0800 Received: from [207.214.213.213] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7B00DE618SAM@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:38:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:40:22 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens In-reply-to: To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/17/02 1:55 PM, Sean Davis at sfdavis@3web.net wrote: > Hello Zuiks, > > I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two > lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the > Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko > 85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). > > I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, > keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. > Any thoughts would be appreciated. > > Thanks! > > Sean D. > Either would be a good choice for portraits... the price of the 100/2.8 is about average, but the 85/2.0 for ~$185 sounds like a good deal if it is in good to excellent condition. -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2019 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 07:50:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 07:50:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 23:50:55 2002 -0800 Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05233 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:50:48 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfieh.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.201.209]) by barry.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OYy8-0000q5-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 02:50:16 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:50:27 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3766 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:05:55 -0800 >From: Winsor Crosby >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > >>Is it possible to do manual focusing on the D60 or D100 cameras with a zuiko >>mounted on it ? > >I would think so. The B&H says that the D60 takes EF lenses and all >of the tilt/shift EF lenses are manual focus. >- -- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California > yeah, Sure can...if you switch off the AF on an AF lens body, the lens and camera will focus wherever the photographer manually focuses the lens. Same would be true for a manual focus only lens. >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:29:07 -0800 >From: Mike Veglia >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > > >I would add the Fuji S2 to that list...if you get one that works reliably it >may be the best of the three. > I've read that the Fuji has some unorthodox battery requirements. > >That's pretty much the holding pattern I'm in too (besides having no >equipment budget that is). > > >So is the Fuji S2, and from what I gather it offers pretty amazing image >quality. However, I would really like to test a Can*n D60 with the Zuiko >350/2.8 (Stephen, I'm guessing you're game to help me test this if we can >score an adapter????) to see how well it works out. One place that does >adapters, in the UK, told me they do not do an OM to EOS adapter because >lenses won't focus out to infinity (and they could be wrong). The 350/2.8 >focuses beyond infinity anyway so that wouldn't be an issue for me. Yes, we can sure do that. I would love to try that experiment. > > >Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:50:34 -0500 >From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography > >Popular Photography says gives the nod to the Nikon D100 for faster focusing >especially under low light. (That's not important to everyone, admittedly.) >For what it's worth, Pop Photo says the D100 is not based on a film camera >but they may be in denial. Never having held the D100, it sure looks like >the N80 to me. That might be true, but the D60 had better resolution and sharpness, less noise than the Nikon acc. to DPReview. I guess you decide what's more important for you. DPReview did say the D100 had better autofocus performance than the D60, however, the CMOS sensors in Canons represent a big advantage over CCD's IMHO. > > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:14:01 +1100 >From: Wayne Harridge >Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film > > > Stephen Scharf wrote: >> > > > Take a look at these and see if you see ugly pixelation... >> >> http://www.jsfotografie.de/zepeople/index.htm > > http://www.jsfotografie.de/portzeland/index.htm > > > >Don't know about ugly pixelation, but definitely some ugly artifacts from what >looks like sharpening. Have a look at the hair across the girl's face. > >Wayne Harridge > > > > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:40:36 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film > >Overall the pictures are over sharpened. > >C.H.Ling > One shouldn't blame the camera for sharpening artifacts induced by the end-user. In this case, the photographer probably used Unsharp Mask in Photoshop in a fairly unsophisticated way. The D30 and D60 do very little in-camera sharpening, with the intent that it is better to do too little, than do too much, sharpening in-camera, which would be a lot harder to correct. As such, D30 and D60 images often look a little soft right out of the camera. Canon leaves it to the end-user to provide the level of sharpening desired. The fact is that both of these cameras provide a great deal of picture detail that can be brought out to produce superb results using proper workflow and sophisticated sharpening techniques. Check out www.fredmiranda.com for examples of what D30's and D60's can do. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2341 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 07:57:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 07:57:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 17 23:57:25 2002 -0800 Received: from web20009.mail.yahoo.com (web20009.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA05253 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:57:19 -0800 Message-ID: <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20009.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:57:05 PST Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:57:05 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The problem with thinking digital will stablize is that except for the pro SLR digitals the cameras pretty much have stabilized. I don't think we are going to see consumer or even prosumer cameras leap from 4-6MP to 9-10 or higher because for MOST of the picture taking population 4-6 MP is enough. I think camera and electronics manufacturers will for the most part just relase a new model with a few new gimmicks every year to keep the price up. The only cameras that will see resolution improvement will be the pro bodies, maybe the prosumer will get up to 7-10MP but I'm not so sure since lenses won't be able to resolve that fine of detail and it will basically be diminishing returns. The lens thing will be he biggest issue I believe. I mean why would a camera company spend $200-400 to grind a lens for a 10MP camera that's only gonna cost $800 when the competition is using a $50 lens for a 6MP camera that maybe costs only $600 for the vast majority of users will look just as good on screen or printed 8x10 off an inkjet? Sure you would do it for pros who will pay for the markup but not for a camera targeted at consumers. I think that is what OLympus is trying to do with the 4/3 system if it ever gets off the ground. Provide a light, compact and economical choice for consumers and advanced ametures to use a digital interchangeable lens SLR that while it might not be 8 billion MP it would have other advantages. I'm afraid the pro digital market is lost to C*non and N*kon. It's kinda like film in that way. I've been looking at 4x5 and 8x10 transparencies and stuff over at the George Eastman house (it was there that I really got my desire to get a LF camera and play around). I'll tell you even with 140 year old brass barrel lenses that had massive astigmatism and every type of flaw one might imagine the images were still beutiful and amazingly some had even been enlarged and still looked incredible. If you used those 140 year old lenses for 35mm well forget about it! Mark Lloyd --- John Cwiklinski wrote: > Albert wrote: > > >> > That's one thing to consider... I'm waiting for > digital to stablize in > price before jumping in. > << > > >> > C. H. Ling wrote: > > Stablize? I think it will just like computer > price/performance, it > never happen. > << > > Albert, I'm afraid you are going to wait a very long > time. I agree with CH. > > John Cwiklinski __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2796 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 08:22:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 08:22:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 00:22:17 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05259 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:22:10 -0800 Received: from modem-2194.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.56.146] helo=skelly) by cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18OZSx-0002uX-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:22:08 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:22:10 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A logical and pragmatic assessment of needs... or as Bill G*tes once pointed out 640K is more memory than anybody can ever possibly need. Market forces will continue to push memory sizes higher and prices lower regardless of perceived need and that push will also be for smaller lighter faster.... after all how else are they going to convince you to dump last months model for this months new, all singing all dancing profit making wunder machine. We as a group must be a nightmare for Olympus - when was the last time any of use bought anything new and added to the profitability of the Olympus group. Give it a few year - maybe five - and we'll all have gone digital. Performance in all areas will have substantially improved, entry level performances will be way up there, interfaces standardised and Windows will still crash. Either that or the whole camera manufacturing market will have collapsed with no buyers of new kit. And me, I'll love to be able to get 4x5 quality straight from a digital camera onto my PC based 'darkroom' to manipulate and finish the images in daylight. I'm pushing the limits of home 35mm to digital processing at the moment. I want 500mb files to play with... I can then crop without losing quality. Even now the work I'm producing can't be farmed out with the 35mm negative for processing, stuff I'm doing easily and quickly with Photoshop can't be done to commercial times scales..... 1gb image files, I can't wait. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of M. Lloyd Sent: 18 December 2002 07:57 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) The problem with thinking digital will stablize is that except for the pro SLR digitals the cameras pretty much have stabilized. I don't think we are going to see consumer or even prosumer cameras leap from 4-6MP to 9-10 or higher because for MOST of the picture taking population 4-6 MP is enough. I think camera and electronics manufacturers will for the most part just relase a new model with a few new gimmicks every year to keep the price up. The only cameras that will see resolution improvement will be the pro bodies, maybe the prosumer will get up to 7-10MP but I'm not so sure since lenses won't be able to resolve that fine of detail and it will basically be diminishing returns. The lens thing will be he biggest issue I believe. I mean why would a camera company spend $200-400 to grind a lens for a 10MP camera that's only gonna cost $800 when the competition is using a $50 lens for a 6MP camera that maybe costs only $600 for the vast majority of users will look just as good on screen or printed 8x10 off an inkjet? Sure you would do it for pros who will pay for the markup but not for a camera targeted at consumers. I think that is what OLympus is trying to do with the 4/3 system if it ever gets off the ground. Provide a light, compact and economical choice for consumers and advanced ametures to use a digital interchangeable lens SLR that while it might not be 8 billion MP it would have other advantages. I'm afraid the pro digital market is lost to C*non and N*kon. It's kinda like film in that way. I've been looking at 4x5 and 8x10 transparencies and stuff over at the George Eastman house (it was there that I really got my desire to get a LF camera and play around). I'll tell you even with 140 year old brass barrel lenses that had massive astigmatism and every type of flaw one might imagine the images were still beutiful and amazingly some had even been enlarged and still looked incredible. If you used those 140 year old lenses for 35mm well forget about it! Mark Lloyd --- John Cwiklinski wrote: > Albert wrote: > > >> > That's one thing to consider... I'm waiting for > digital to stablize in > price before jumping in. > << > > >> > C. H. Ling wrote: > > Stablize? I think it will just like computer > price/performance, it > never happen. > << > > Albert, I'm afraid you are going to wait a very long > time. I agree with CH. > > John Cwiklinski __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3059 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 08:24:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 08:24:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 00:24:43 2002 -0800 Received: from yoda.planetinternet.be (anvers-smtp.planetinternet.be [195.95.30.152]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05263 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:24:36 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.101] (u212-239-169-235.adsl.pi.be [212.239.169.235]) by yoda.planetinternet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1682F36CC4 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:24:05 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:24:07 +0100 Subject: [OM] OT twins II From: iwert bernakiewicz To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Many thanks for the support and congratulations, they are very welcome. Both came well through the night, and are now 24h+. Hopefully we'll be able to hold Simon today. It is such a strange feeling to see them behind the plexi and not being able to take them. They look very quiet and at ease however. (for the severe zuikoholics: this is as having a BIN of 400$ on a mint OM3ti, but you have to wait 7 weeks to get it, to start fumbling and admiring). Tinne was working on a website, which should be up in a few weeks. By then I hope I can show them to you all .) Iwert. > Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:13:02 +0800 > From: Albert > Subject: Re: [OM] OT twins > > You know we expect pics right? ;-) > > Congrats. > > Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3407 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 08:33:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 08:33:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 00:33:19 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA05274 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:33:13 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-18.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040200322!2410 Received: (qmail 28380 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 08:32:03 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-18.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 08:32:03 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBI85bu20557 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:05:37 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0032EF.BAC18147@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:33:51 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3766 References: <20021217063228.17857.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No one ever blame the problem is from the DC, I love the picture from my E-10 and even the C2000, we were just talking about the links which show the sample pictures that were expect to be some good DC samples. C.H.Ling Stephen Scharf wrote: > > > One shouldn't blame the camera for sharpening artifacts induced by > the end-user. In this case, the photographer probably used Unsharp > Mask in Photoshop in a fairly unsophisticated way. The D30 and D60 > do very little in-camera sharpening, with the intent that it is > better to do too little, than do too much, sharpening in-camera, > which would be a lot harder to correct. As such, D30 and D60 images > often look a little soft right out of the camera. Canon leaves it to > the end-user to provide the level of sharpening desired. The fact is > that both of these cameras provide a great deal of picture detail > that can be brought out to produce superb results using proper > workflow and sophisticated sharpening techniques. Check out > www.fredmiranda.com for examples of what D30's and D60's can do. > -- ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3664 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 08:34:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 08:34:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 00:34:37 2002 -0800 Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05278 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:34:31 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfieh.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.201.209]) by barry.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OZeS-0006TO-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 03:34:00 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021217184300.5154.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021217184300.5154.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:34:13 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3767 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:46:42 +0000 >From: "Gareth.J.Martin" >Subject: Re: [OM] Digital vs. film > >I get the impression that digital vs. film arguments are rather like >playground fights e.g. my toy is better that yours etc. It's personal >preference who likes what. I will only use digital when film ceases to >exist as I much prefer the results I get from film and I also think that >digital is very overpriced. For the price of a really good quality >digital camera I could buy an Ebony RSW45 and/or further expand my OM >gear. However I've used digital cameras before to create time lapse >films of some geomorphological experiments and here digital excelled. >Why doesn't the argument for digital vs. film concentrate on how the two >formats can complement each other instead of grinding each other into >the ground? I dare say there are many complementary ways, we've just >never heard of them! Sorry if this seems a bit OT but I just had to vent >some steam!!! > >Best Wishes, >Gareth. Gareth, I completely agree with you. I certainly wasn't slamming film in favor of digital. I just didn't agree with what Albert was saying about digital. I've said all along that these are all tools in our arsenal, and the fun and challenge of using them is to make the most of their strengths and learn how to work with their shortcomings. As an example, the camera I always carry with me at all times is a 35 mm P&S. I still love looking at slides through a loop. A nice little digital like the C-50Z is great for uploading pics for friends to view on common websites, though. For example, for sharing ride photos with the group I ride motorcycles with regularly. It's way less trouble than scanning slides. But when you get a really nice slide of a good shot, then the trouble of getting a good scan can be very worthwhile. -Stephen. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4192 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 09:06:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 09:06:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 01:06:40 2002 -0800 Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA05289 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:06:34 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfieh.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.201.209]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Oa9R-0001Pt-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:06:01 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:06:14 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3768 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:49:49 -0800 >From: Winsor Crosby >Subject: Re: [OM] Digital Review > > >Just reading it and the size and weight are impressive. The battery >alone weighs 11.8 oz. Body with battery aboard is 3 lbs. 8 oz. and no >lens. Phew. If I am not mistaken that outdoes Hasselblad and some >other medium format cameras. In its favor is the ergonomic shape that >helps in holding it. >- -- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California > Yeah, they sure are heavy all right. They're not Oly 35 mm gear. I was shooting with a D30 with battery grip and a big beefy 70-200L IS USM during my go-kart motorsports tryout. It was wearing my arms out! The only upside is that I will be able to wield my OM-2S and CH's beautiful 300 mm Zuiko that much more easily from all that "weight" training! ;-) -Stephen. > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:57:12 -0800 >From: Mike Veglia >Subject: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters > >Norm Nadel swas kind enough to send me the instruction sheet for the OM to >EOS adapter (he scanned it and put it in two MS Word files). I have >converted these two MS Word files into PDF files which can be found here: > >http://motorsportvisions.com/OM_EOS/OM_EOS1.pdf >http://motorsportvisions.com/OM_EOS/OM_EOS2.pdf > >Note that the above URLs are case sensitive (at least the OM_EOS parts that >is). > >I sent a note to the email address to the source of this adapter in Japan >that Norm posted yesterday, in English, but have yet to receive a reply. My >hopes are to get one of these before the next time Stephen Scharf and I are >shooting at the same place and time (which would be end of January) to test >his D-60 with my Zuiko 350/2.8 (assuming he's game to help in this >experiment that is). Yup. I'm game! I am looking forward to meeting up with you on the "inside of the fence" for Indy Car testing at Laguna on the 25th and 26th! MIke Doran says I will have paper credentials for that. If my D30 hasn't sold by then (it's on Ebay right now), I'll just lend you the D30! *That* will really wear your arms out with the mighty Zuiko! > > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:05:50 -0800 >From: Winsor Crosby >Subject: [OM] Digital True Lies > >One of the interesting new devices that is optional on the Canon >EOS-1D is a data verification device. The camera can be set to write >a code into the header of the digital file. The image file can then >be read by a device that will verify whether the image has been >changed at all even by one pixel. >- -- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California > Cool. Thanks for the info. The other thing about it that is neat is that will write both a RAW and JPEG file of each image. > > >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:21:28 +0000 >From: bsandyman@att.net >Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film > >Interpolation is mathmetically filling in missing points from >sampled data. For >example lets say you go out and measure the position of the moon every 15 >minutes. You don't actualy know where the moon was in between those >measurements. But you can guess. The simplest interpolation would be >a straight >line between observed samples. For example if you observe that the >moon is at 20 >degrees at 2:30 and 22 at 2:45, then you can guess that it was at 21 >degrees at >2:37:30. (I am making the measurements up, but you get the point.) > > > >I don't know what kind of model photo shop or similar would use, but I imagine >it would be more sophisticated then a straight line. The best interpolation algorithm I have seen is Fred Miranda's "stair interpolation" Check it out at www.fredmiranda.com in his "Actions/Workflows" section. Quite impressive. > >I think about the only way that has been successful is to use >fractals. Fractal Designs has software that allows enlargement that >normally would be offensive because of the digital artifacts. >- -- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California Fractal Designs has some good stuff. See my comment above re: Fred Miranda's stair interpolation. > >There's a store in Palo Alto, CA that almost certainly rents D-30 and/or >D-60 bodies if need be, but since Stephen Scharf just bought a D-60 I >imagine he would want to get in on this. > >How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? > >Mike Veglia >Motor Sport Visions Photography >http://www.motorsportvisions.com Mike, You can count me in as being interested, for sure. If we can get one in before my D30 sells, we can also use that as the "test hack". I could even lend it to you for a time to play with....(though I may never get it back if I do! ). -Stephen. > >From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >[mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of iwert >Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:13 PM >To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Subject: [OM] OT twins > > >Just wanted to share this with the list, > >I became father of twins this morning around 6am. >They are early at 32 weeks, so we are anxiously awaiting the next 72 hours >to see if their condition remains stabile. >At the moment Lars is about 2240 grams, Simon is about 1860 grams. >I'll be off list for a while, and most probably another WE 2002 participant >will get his print a bit late. > >Iwert Congratulations, Iwert! -Stephen. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4844 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 09:08:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 09:08:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 01:08:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA05297 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:08:19 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-25.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040202154!2409 Received: (qmail 30367 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 09:02:35 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-25.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 09:02:35 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBI8dnu21107 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:39:49 +0800 Message-ID: <3E003AF2.9C4FE85@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:08:02 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20021217232852.02786b80@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > At 12:11 PM 12/18/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: > >Stablize? I think it will just like computer price/performance, it > >never happen. > >... > > Actually, I don't think it will be that bad. I don't see it will be that > much difference between the evolution of digital cameras and the film > cameras, starting say, in 2005. We will have lots of new technologies being > introduced in the next 3 years or so, but it will stabilize. > Depends on your standard of "stabilize", see how the AF camera stabilized in this 17 years since 1985. They were only paying at very limited features like AF speed, frame rate and some additional control... but there were still lots of new generations that pushing you to make changes. I know some still paying with the Minolta 7000 and Nikon AF501 but they are not the average people, if you are belong to that group you properly will not change to DC until film is not available. DC has much more improvement to be done in coming years, noise is one of the issue, ever think of using a ISO6400 DC with noise level of current ISO100? Ever think of continue shooting without stop until you memory card full? Just two examples and there are much more you may never even dream about. Don't expect it will close to stabilize in 5 years. Unless you are the one that is easy satisfied, if so you can now get one with everything you want with less than $1000 and enjoy the fun, why bother with the price drop in a few months or a year? > Once that happens, then new camera models will be introduced with this and > that new and better features, but there is a limit, unless the nature of > photography changes. May be the OM users are a bit special, they are still using a 30 years old OM-1 so they don't think the new features a really interesting one :-) C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5207 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 09:19:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 09:19:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 01:19:50 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA05317 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:19:44 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA87172 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:18:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021218011249.027a2eb0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:20:19 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ In-Reply-To: <3E003AF2.9C4FE85@accura.com.hk> References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20021217232852.02786b80@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 05:08 PM 12/18/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: >...DC has much more improvement to be done in coming years, noise is one >of the issue, ever think of using a ISO6400 DC with noise level of >current ISO100? Ever think of continue shooting without stop until you >memory card full? Just two examples and there are much more you may >never even dream about. Don't expect it will close to stabilize in 5 >years. Unless you are the one that is easy satisfied, if so you can >now get one with everything you want with less than $1000 and enjoy >the fun, why bother with the price drop in a few months or a year? >... Heh, *I* think of it all the time, but the point being discussed, if I am not mistaken, is when is time to move. I am saying that in about 2-3 years, the top of the line DSLR will be similarly priced as the top of the line SLR right now, with same or better features, for similar price point. Therefore, 2-3 years would be the timeframe for mass migration. In terms of IS06400 with low noise, or infinite memory, most people don't care about that. If they are available, people will use them, but there's no pull for them per se. They are push technology. There are already 1GB microdrive CF. So for example, further improvement in storage is not so important in the camera (except in the areas of other storage devices catching up to 1BG and beyond), but in the PC processing stage. Of course, for consumers, the whole issues of the output stage has to resolved etc. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6014 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 10:15:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 10:15:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 02:15:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA05356 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 02:15:30 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-14.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040206462!2690 Received: (qmail 19304 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 10:14:23 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-14.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 10:14:23 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBI9lpu22502 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:47:51 +0800 Message-ID: <3E004AE3.A63B35FB@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:16:03 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20021217232852.02786b80@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021218011249.027a2eb0@192.168.100.11> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ok, I understand your point, but the thread was start with worry about price drop and wait until stable before buy. My point is the price will still drop even it is "stable" at your target year 2005 and probably will be in similar rate as today. You just can reach a stable day in few years. Life is short, get what you can afford. Talking about noise and storage speed they are the most concern items today, I don't think the "problem" can be solved in two or three years. The target is to eliminate tripod for night scenes and magic hour shoots, tripod is too heavy and annoying to setup. The target is to shoot like E-100RS with at least 6M pixels, the more the better. C.H.Ling "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > > Heh, *I* think of it all the time, but the point being discussed, if I am > not mistaken, is when is time to move. I am saying that in about 2-3 years, > the top of the line DSLR will be similarly priced as the top of the line > SLR right now, with same or better features, for similar price point. > Therefore, 2-3 years would be the timeframe for mass migration. In terms of > IS06400 with low noise, or infinite memory, most people don't care about > that. If they are available, people will use them, but there's no pull for > them per se. They are push technology. There are already 1GB microdrive CF. > So for example, further improvement in storage is not so important in the > camera (except in the areas of other storage devices catching up to 1BG and > beyond), but in the PC processing stage. Of course, for consumers, the > whole issues of the output stage has to resolved etc. > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7435 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 12:17:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 12:17:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 04:17:53 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts4.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05488 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:17:47 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([198.164.98.220]) by simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021218121330.QKJL17866.simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:13:30 -0500 Message-ID: <002301c2a68e$fc382520$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <3DFFF56B.546D95BA@accura.com.hk> Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:14:14 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I'm waiting for > digital to stablize in price before jumping in. Prepare for a long wait. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8235 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 13:39:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 13:39:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 05:39:54 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05541 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 05:39:48 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.2b.33c43846 (4214) for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:37:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <2b.33c43846.2b31d42c@aol.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:37:48 EST Subject: Re: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_2b.33c43846.2b31d42c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_2b.33c43846.2b31d42c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/2002 5:30:28 AM Central Standard Time, wincros@earthlink.net writes: > Santa says it is on its way. He says that when you're bad you're > good. You believe me, don't you? At least I understand or I think I do. Bill Barber --part1_2b.33c43846.2b31d42c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/18/2002 5:30:28 AM Central Standard Time, wincros@earthlink.net writes:

Santa says it is on its way.  He says that when you're bad you're
good. You believe me, don't you?


At least I understand or I think I do.  Bill Barber --part1_2b.33c43846.2b31d42c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8561 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 13:49:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 13:49:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 05:49:30 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05554 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 05:49:24 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-239.s493.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.239] helo=hppav) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18OeYg-000162-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:48:23 -0500 Message-ID: <004a01c2a69c$2d84ebb0$efe27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <001f01c2a619$ce429b20$0200a8c0@ctx> Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:48:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I used to get 2-3 klez emails a day, don't get any now. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mickey Trageser" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:15 PM Subject: [OM] VIRUS ALERT > According to Norton, I have received an email containing the W32.KLEZ.H@MM > virus. > The subject is: Sep 12 2002 19. > The return and from addresses are 'jlind@spitfire.net', but the apparant > sender is JAQ50@aol.com. > > -Mickey > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8862 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 13:55:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 13:55:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 05:55:24 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp001.nwlink.com (smtp001.nwlink.com [209.20.130.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05562 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 05:55:17 -0800 Received: from miracler64ly0o (ip238.focal.du.nwlink.com [209.20.135.238] (may be forged)) by smtp001.nwlink.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBIDtFhI023137 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 05:55:16 -0800 Message-ID: <1e7101c2a69d$259233d0$ee8714d1@miracler64ly0o> From: "William Sommerwerck" To: "Olympus group" Subject: [OM] Digital True Lies Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 05:55:36 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "What's to keep some software from modifying or deleting the verifiction data?" Now, _there_ is a beautiful typo -- or a very clever coinage. Bravo! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9270 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 14:15:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 14:15:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 06:15:26 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05589 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:15:20 -0800 Received: from 216-164-199-231.s231.tnt4.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([216.164.199.231] helo=bri_acct_sct) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Oexm-0001tB-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:14:18 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20021218091413.011f6008@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:14:13 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital In-Reply-To: <20021218031402.23442.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Mike Veglia > >How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? > This would be of great interest to me also. How about the guy who makes the OM-1/2 MD and battery covers and tool kit? He does excellent work and is an OM fan (obviously). I have his info around here somewhere... Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9710 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 14:44:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 14:44:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 06:44:43 2002 -0800 Received: from rly-ip02.mx.aol.com (rly-ip02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.160]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05604 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:44:36 -0800 Received: from logs-tr.proxy.aol.com (logs-tr.proxy.aol.com [152.163.201.132]) by rly-ip02.mx.aol.com (v83.35) with ESMTP id RELAYIN3-1218094216; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:42:16 -0500 Received: from enterprise.SoftHome.net (AC919244.ipt.aol.com [172.145.146.68]) by logs-tr.proxy.aol.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id gBIEePT70155 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:40:25 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217114220.00a1a270@pop.softhome.net> X-Sender: csdunek@pop.softhome.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:43:25 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Charles Sdunek Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Apparently-From: Pookasdad@aol.com Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I certainly love my 85/2. 100 is just a bit tight for my taste. Charles At 04:55 PM 12/17/02, you wrote: >Hello Zuiks, > >I'm hoping to buy a "portrait length" lens and am wondering about two >lenses in particular, both of which i've found available locally: the >Zuiko 100/2.8 (with hood, $225 CAD or about $140 USD), and the Zuiko >85/2 ($295 CAD or about $185 USD). < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10007 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 14:49:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 14:49:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 06:49:34 2002 -0800 Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05624 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:49:27 -0800 Received: from pool0341.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.211.86] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OfVO-0001lI-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:49:03 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:42:28 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It occurred to me that Olympus might be introducing a digital Pen series with the 4/3 chip. History repeating itself? -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10018 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 14:49:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 14:49:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 06:49:37 2002 -0800 Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05630 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:49:29 -0800 Received: from pool0341.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.211.86] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OfVQ-0001lI-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:49:04 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <002301c2a68e$fc382520$7212a20a@waynecul> References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <3DFFF56B.546D95BA@accura.com.hk> <002301c2a68e$fc382520$7212a20a@waynecul> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:48:47 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > I'm waiting for > > digital to stablize in price before jumping in. > That is like waiting for Dell to stop offering new models and features. Really, a 5 pound hand holdable digital camera with lens is ridiculous. I see two directions from here: a smaller lighter digicam with about 10 megapixels equivalent to 35mm film and a 5 pound camera that will replace medium format. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11309 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 16:24:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 16:24:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 08:24:19 2002 -0800 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05886 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:24:10 -0800 Received: from 1cust175.tnt7.sfo8.da.uu.net ([67.192.100.175] helo=earthlink.net) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Ogz4-0000xk-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:23:46 -0800 Message-ID: <3E00A24A.D296D824@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:28:59 -0800 From: Mike Butler X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus Mailing List Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >From: Mike Veglia >> >>In a message dated 12/17/2002 Jan Steinman writes: >> >><< It might make a cool group project to arrange for a group buy of >>adaptors. These things are pricey because they tend to be made in >>ones-and-twos, and someone might cut a significant deal to make tens of >>them. >> >> >>How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short > >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? Mike, If you can bear to part with it for a few days I'll volunteer the CAD services to reverse engineer it and make the drawings available to the list. Maybe Belijan (sp?) Manufacturing would be interested if there were enough firm orders... Mike Butler Dublin, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11926 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 17:04:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 17:04:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 09:04:22 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA05959 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:04:14 -0800 Received: from modem-3744.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.62.160] helo=skelly) by cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18OhcC-000293-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:04:12 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:04:15 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20021218091413.011f6008@pop.erols.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you can let me have some design info I know a man who would be able to make them... he's currently very busiy producing munition parts for...... err, yep he's very good, generally specialises in low volume high precision machine parts on state of the art CNC I'd be interested in one. Assuming very low volume primary cost will be in machine setup I'd imagine. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Stephen Troy Sent: 18 December 2002 14:14 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital >From: Mike Veglia > >How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? > This would be of great interest to me also. How about the guy who makes the OM-1/2 MD and battery covers and tool kit? He does excellent work and is an OM fan (obviously). I have his info around here somewhere... Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12322 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 17:17:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 17:17:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 09:17:10 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA05971 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:17:03 -0800 Received: from modem-2113.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.24.65] helo=skelly) by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18OhoF-0002La-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:16:40 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:16:42 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry, that sounded even more frivolous than my usual drivel. I would like to buy into one of these. I have a friend with the capability to produce them. If there is technical spec available I can get him to check it out and quote for a short run. An idea of volume would be good although for very low volume (10s not 100s) I'd imagine setup would be a major cost factor. Regards Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of IanG Sent: 18 December 2002 17:04 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital If you can let me have some design info I know a man who would be able to make them... he's currently very busiy producing munition parts for...... err, yep he's very good, generally specialises in low volume high precision machine parts on state of the art CNC I'd be interested in one. Assuming very low volume primary cost will be in machine setup I'd imagine. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Stephen Troy Sent: 18 December 2002 14:14 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital >From: Mike Veglia > >How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to make a short >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? > This would be of great interest to me also. How about the guy who makes the OM-1/2 MD and battery covers and tool kit? He does excellent work and is an OM fan (obviously). I have his info around here somewhere... Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12884 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 17:46:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 17:46:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 09:46:21 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06012 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:46:14 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-20.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.20] helo=earthlink.net) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OiGU-0003CL-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:45:50 -0800 Message-ID: <3E00B5F4.2070508@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:52:52 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am actually waiting or a number of things. One is for digital cameras that really utilize the inherent advantages. One advantage is the ability to make smaller more compact lenses. As most on this list know, rumor has it that Olympus is working on that front. The other thing is the ability to change the CCDs sensitivity. While this is available now, I see room for improvements in automation in this area. Imagine a camera where the photographer could select BOTH the "shutter speed" and the aperture and the camera would automatically set the "film speed". Talk about creative control! The other thing I am waiting for is improved battery life. Since I do a lot of photography while on long cycle, climbing, or backpacking trips this is a MAJOR stumbling block with digital. With most digital cameras I would need a ton of batteries, and of course chargers don't help in this situation. Jim Couch Albert wrote: > alltogether as new models come out. That's one thing to consider... > I'm waiting for digital to stablize in price before jumping in. > > In the meantime, my OM is still on my side... > > Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14225 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 19:52:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 19:52:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 11:53:04 2002 -0800 Received: from siaag2ae.compuserve.com (siaag2ae.compuserve.com [149.174.40.135]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA06133 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:52:57 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaag2ae.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.18) id OAA06871 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:48:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:48:12 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yo, Gang, I haven=92t posted much lately, mostly because there's been nothing under= discussion of real interest to me or regarding which I had a relevant contribution -- too much digital crap. There hasn't even been a minor brouhaha going, much less a major controversy. Too much agreement makes Zuikoholics dull boys (and girls). So, consider this: I've had my fabled, much desired, jewel-in-the-crown of Zuikos, the 35-80/2.8, for a few months now, and I am definitely underwhelmed. My 28-105/2.8 Tamron kicks its butt in zoom range, is at least its equal in sharpness and contrast, and, for those who really concern themselves abou= t such esoteric BS, gives bokeh every bit as good. (If you perceive a need= for the imagined magic of mystical and ethereal bokeh so as not to distra= ct from the subject of the picture you've taken, maybe you should've chosen = a better subject and/or been a better photographer. If folks' attention wanders off into the background of your pictures, you've been wasting film.) Further, unless always shooting from a tripod with mirror and diaphragm pre-fire, as long as there's a reasonable amount of light, the 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko is every bit as good, has more range, weighs and cos= ts considerably less, being a one-touch is quicker and easier to use, and it= doesn't need weird-sized filters that fit none (?) of the other Zuikos. So why am I disparaging this lens, especially since I may be offering it = to the highest bidder any day now, either here or elsewhere? Beats me. May= be it has something to do with the Christmas spirit. Or perhaps it's the Christmas spirits. Just finished a two-week medical malpractice case, during which I learned a hell of a lot more about fetal= macrosomia than I ever wanted to know, and I am ready to kick back. Exce= pt for a party, or five or six, I'm free until next year! Ho, ho, ho! = Seasons greetings and peace on you all! There's another party just aroun= d the corner, so those who take issue with what I say here will have to wai= t a bit for my rebuttal. Or you can kiss my rebuttal, or rekiss my -- oh,= never mind! Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14775 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 20:30:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 20:30:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 12:30:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA06163 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:30:15 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBIKMhOd020621 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:22:43 +0100 (MET) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:22:42 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital Message-Id: <20021218212242.02e90e03.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <3E00A24A.D296D824@earthlink.net> References: <3E00A24A.D296D824@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id MAA06163 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:28:59 -0800 Mike Butler wrote: > > >From: Mike Veglia > >> > >>In a message dated 12/17/2002 Jan Steinman writes: > >> > >><< It might make a cool group project to arrange for a group buy > >of>adaptors. These things are pricey because they tend to be made > >in>ones-and-twos, and someone might cut a significant deal to make > >tens > of > >>them. >> > >> > >>How much interest is there in a group buy, and how difficult to > >make a > short > > >run of these be for a good machinist to pull off???? >=20 Humm...OM-lenses to which mount (yeah, I missed the start of the thread)? I would actually be interrested in an OM-to Pentax mount...:) --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15076 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 20:39:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 20:39:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 12:40:07 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA06175 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:40:00 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.105]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021218203545.XUFX4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:35:45 -0600 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:33:12 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [OM] Digital vs. film X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.121.105] at Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:35:45 -0600 Message-Id: <20021218203545.XUFX4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In , on 12/17/02 at 07:45 PM, Jan Steinman said: >Lizard Tech's Genuine Fractals. I use it all the time. The high-priced spread, or the LE version? It's amazing that software that used to be really rare and expensive has become affordable by so many. There are even morphing programs for about fifty dollars that allow you to see the changes as a child ages into adulthood. Not so long ago, these two kinds of programs could only be found in university laboratories. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15458 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 20:52:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 20:52:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 12:52:46 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA06199 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:52:37 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.105]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021218204821.QRHA4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:48:21 -0600 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:48:20 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [151.198.121.105] at Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:48:21 -0600 Message-Id: <20021218204821.QRHA4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com>, on 12/18/02 at 02:48 PM, Walt Wayman said: >Seasons greetings and peace on you all! There's another party just >around the corner, so those who take issue with what I say here will >have to wait a bit for my rebuttal. Or you can kiss my rebuttal, or >rekiss my -- oh, never mind! Have a merry, Walt. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15850 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:08:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:08:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:08:17 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06223 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:08:10 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.105]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021218210355.PPD21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:03:55 -0600 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:03:18 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F569F@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> Subject: Re: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [151.198.121.105] at Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:03:55 -0600 Message-Id: <20021218210355.PPD21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F569F@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au>, on 12/18/02 at 03:55 PM, Marc Lawrence said: >Doesn't mean I won't shout you all a beer though! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Translate this, would you? Is it Aussie argot? ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16105 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:09:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:09:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:10:05 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06228 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:09:58 -0800 Received: from M2W063.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.63]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:09:36 -0500 Message-ID: <293580-220021231821936814@M2W063.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:09:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 21:09:36.0824 (UTC) FILETIME=[C54FA380:01C2A6D9] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There's too much agreement because we're all stick-in-the-muds who know what we like=2E And we all pretty much like the same thing, which can mak= e for uninteresting discussion threads=2E Yep, I agree with you that the 28-105/2=2E8 Tamron SP equals the 35-80/2=2E= 8 in the sharpness and contrast category=2E But I sold my Tamron in preference= of the 35-80 because:=20 1=2E I didn't like the width/girth (don't complain about the 35-80's 62mm filters, as the Tamron takes 82mm!) 2=2E I didnt' like how much it grew when zoomed all the way to 105mm=2E I= felt like my lens had gotten very excited and I was a bit embarressed to use it= often=2E 3=2E I didn't like the small manual focusing ring=2E The lens was obvious= ly designed to be an AF lens, and it shows in that design aspect=2E But it took great pictures, every bit the equal of the 35-80 in the sharpness and snap categories=2E I didn't test the distortion, but not ma= ny fast zooms do well there=2E The Zuiko is no exception, exhibiting distort= ion at both ends=2E =20 I loved the extra range on the zoom=2E =20 But I've gotten by just fine with my 35-80=2E When shooting with it, I typically carry a 2nd body with a 21 or 24 and either a 135/2=2E8 or the =2E=2Egulp=2E=2E 80-200/2=2E8 Tamron monster as it's companion=2E I didn't investigate the bokeh, but it can be an issue with some lenses=2E= =20 It's not imaginary, by any measure=2E And it is elusive to describe and confirm=2E Don't underestimate the bokeh quality to make or break the sam= e shot taken with different lenses=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Walt Wayman hiwayman@compuserve=2Ecom Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:48:12 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Yo, Gang, I haven=92t posted much lately, mostly because there's been nothing under discussion of real interest to me or regarding which I had a relevant contribution -- too much digital crap=2E There hasn't even been a minor brouhaha going, much less a major controversy=2E Too much agreement makes= Zuikoholics dull boys (and girls)=2E So, consider this: I've had my fabled, much desired, jewel-in-the-crown of Zuikos, the 35-80/2=2E8, for a few months now, and I am definitely underwhelmed=2E My= 28-105/2=2E8 Tamron kicks its butt in zoom range, is at least its equal in= sharpness and contrast, and, for those who really concern themselves about= such esoteric BS, gives bokeh every bit as good=2E (If you perceive a nee= d for the imagined magic of mystical and ethereal bokeh so as not to distrac= t from the subject of the picture you've taken, maybe you should've chosen a= better subject and/or been a better photographer=2E If folks' attention wanders off into the background of your pictures, you've been wasting film=2E) -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16461 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:16:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:16:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:16:29 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06238 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:16:22 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7C00KE830H5G@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:14:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:17:20 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: [OM] Olympus OM Lens to Canon EOS Body Adapter To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00cc01c2a6da$da090220$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The following is the reply I received from the company in Japan that Norm suggested: Dear Mr. Mike Veglia, Thank you for your interest in our adapters. Unfortunately we have no OM/EOS adapters in stock. They will not be available before the end of January. But if we get them earlier, we will let you know at once. The prices for OM/EOS adapter : Yen18,700 Postage by EMS : Yen 1,200 / 1pc. Payment by Credit Card So, someday for around $164 they will have them... Not much hope for an end of January test, but, nice to know they can be obtained. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16865 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:30:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:30:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:30:16 2002 -0800 Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.84]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06247 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:30:09 -0800 Received: from pool0703.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.193] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Oll9-00054K-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:29:43 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <293580-220021231821936814@M2W063.mail2web.com> References: <293580-220021231821936814@M2W063.mail2web.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:29:33 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >But it took great pictures, every bit the equal of the 35-80 in the >sharpness and snap categories. I didn't test the distortion, but not many >fast zooms do well there. The Zuiko is no exception, exhibiting distortion >at both ends. > >I loved the extra range on the zoom. > >But I've gotten by just fine with my 35-80. When shooting with it, I >typically carry a 2nd body with a 21 or 24 and either a 135/2.8 or the >..gulp.. 80-200/2.8 Tamron monster as it's companion. > >I didn't investigate the bokeh, but it can be an issue with some lenses. >It's not imaginary, by any measure. And it is elusive to describe and >confirm. Don't underestimate the bokeh quality to make or break the same >shot taken with different lenses. > >Skip But does it have that elusive, legendary Zuiko glow? :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17135 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:31:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:31:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:31:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06254 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:31:50 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7C00K4R3QA53@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:30:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:32:47 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00df01c2a6dd$02968f80$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This feature will also be of use by editorial shooters. Imagine a group of photographers all getting pretty much the same shot (as one of that group sometimes I can easily imagine it). This feature will help you add to the proof this shot was yours come copyright and publication time if need be. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17391 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:34:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:34:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:34:19 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06262 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:34:10 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA48707 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:33:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021218133042.0265c3f8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:34:32 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? In-Reply-To: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 02:48 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Walt Wayman wrote: >Yo, Gang, >... [blah blah blah, how bad the 35-80 is] This is the reason why I haven't bought the 35-80 yet. I *know* it is a piece of junk. Since it is Xmas and all, I'll take this worthless pile of glass off you. I won't even charge you disposal fee. How's that? I can even offer you in exchange, a two piece TAMron 35-70 zoom that I have totally forgotten that I have. I'm sure your faith in Zuikohood will be much restored after disposing the stuff in your possession, so do it NOW. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17691 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:37:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:37:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:38:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06266 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:38:02 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7C00KVO40M5C@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:36:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:38:59 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00e501c2a6dd$dffedbc0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/18/2002 IanG writes: << We as a group must be a nightmare for Olympus - when was the last time any of use bought anything new and added to the profitability of the Olympus group. >> In the last two years I have bought the following items from Olympus new: Stylus Epic E-10 TCON-14b converter FL-40 flash That's a pretty sizeable chunk of change worth of stuff for someone who is struggling to raise a family of 5 in the highest cost of living area in the US, and perhaps the world. If 4/3 pans out, I will almost certainly buy much more from them someday... Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18187 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 21:57:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 21:57:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 13:57:24 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06290 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:57:16 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18OmBn-0001AJ-00 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:57:15 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:56:25 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA06290 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nice to see you into the Christmas spirits you ornery ole cuss! I don't have a 35-80 so can't compare but do like the 35-105 a lot. Come back aga= in with something I can get stirred up about. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Walt Wayman Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 12:48 PM To: INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Yo, Gang, I haven=92t posted much lately, mostly because there's been nothing under discussion of real interest to me or regarding which I had a relevant contribution -- too much digital crap. There hasn't even been a minor brouhaha going, much less a major controversy. Too much agreement makes Zuikoholics dull boys (and girls). So, consider this: I've had my fabled, much desired, jewel-in-the-crown of Zuikos, the 35-80/2.8, for a few months now, and I am definitely underwhelmed. My 28-105/2.8 Tamron kicks its butt in zoom range, is at least its equal in sharpness and contrast, and, for those who really concern themselves abou= t such esoteric BS, gives bokeh every bit as good. (If you perceive a need for the imagined magic of mystical and ethereal bokeh so as not to distra= ct from the subject of the picture you've taken, maybe you should've chosen = a better subject and/or been a better photographer. If folks' attention wanders off into the background of your pictures, you've been wasting film.) Further, unless always shooting from a tripod with mirror and diaphragm pre-fire, as long as there's a reasonable amount of light, the 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko is every bit as good, has more range, weighs and cos= ts considerably less, being a one-touch is quicker and easier to use, and it doesn't need weird-sized filters that fit none (?) of the other Zuikos. So why am I disparaging this lens, especially since I may be offering it = to the highest bidder any day now, either here or elsewhere? Beats me. May= be it has something to do with the Christmas spirit. Or perhaps it's the Christmas spirits. Just finished a two-week medical malpractice case, during which I learned a hell of a lot more about fetal macrosomia than I ever wanted to know, and I am ready to kick back. Exce= pt for a party, or five or six, I'm free until next year! Ho, ho, ho! Seasons greetings and peace on you all! There's another party just aroun= d the corner, so those who take issue with what I say here will have to wai= t a bit for my rebuttal. Or you can kiss my rebuttal, or rekiss my -- oh, never mind! Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18662 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 22:18:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 22:18:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 14:18:40 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06312 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:18:33 -0800 Received: from pool0703.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.193] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OmW1-0004yI-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:18:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E004AE3.A63B35FB@accura.com.hk> References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20021217232852.02786b80@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021218011249.027a2eb0@192.168.100.11> <3E004AE3.A63B35FB@accura.com.hk> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:18:06 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Film Emulation Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think I predicted this. First I got a subscription offer from a Photoshop magazine with a reprint of an article on how to emulate Polaroid emulsion transfers with digital images in Photoshop. Then the suggestion by someone on the list to look at the Fred Miranda site revealed a photoshop method which you can purchase for $8.95 that will show you how to emulate Fuji Velvia FILM with your digicam image. Early photography tried to imitate painting and now digital has the stirrings of trying to imitate film. Amusing to say the least. The next step? Selectable film profiles built into the camera software, assuming they can be licensed. Of course Fuji and Kodak cameras will have a lock on that. http://www.fredmiranda.com/DV/index.html -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19019 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 22:25:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 22:25:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 14:25:20 2002 -0800 Received: from phred.org (dsl231-048-114.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net [216.231.48.114]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06326 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:25:13 -0800 Received: by phred.org (Postfix, from userid 1096) id 8FBD05E54; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:24:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:24:30 -0800 From: Josh Putnam To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film Emulation Message-ID: <20021218142430.A3144@phred.org> References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20021217232852.02786b80@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021218011249.027a2eb0@192.168.100.11> <3E004AE3.A63B35FB@accura.com.hk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from wincros@earthlink.net on Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 02:18:06PM -0800 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Winsor Crosby writes: >I think I predicted this. First I got a subscription offer from a >Photoshop magazine with a reprint of an article on how to emulate >Polaroid emulsion transfers with digital images in Photoshop. Then >the suggestion by someone on the list to look at the Fred Miranda >site revealed a photoshop method which you can purchase for $8.95 >that will show you how to emulate Fuji Velvia FILM with your digicam >image. There are several popular Photoshop plug-ins for emulating Kodak High Speed Infrared with digital images -- not quite right, of course, since they use visible red instead of IR as the starting point, but they add in grain and halation, make blue skies black, etc. The images do have much the same mood as real HIE, but the red vs. IR distinction does make it easy to tell real IR from digital emulation. -- josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam Putnam Financial Services A FARMERS Insurance and Financial Services Agency Voice: 206/992-2296 Fax: 425/793-3623 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19269 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 22:25:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 22:25:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 14:25:45 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06330 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:25:38 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA70278 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:24:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021218142326.026d35c0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:26:15 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) In-Reply-To: <00e501c2a6dd$dffedbc0$1f00a8c0@mike> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 01:38 PM 12/18/2002 -0800, Mike Veglia wrote: >..That's a pretty sizeable chunk of change worth of stuff for someone who is >struggling to raise a family of 5 in the highest cost of living area in the >US, and perhaps the world. If 4/3 pans out, I will almost certainly buy much >more from them someday... >.. But Mike, if you sell your kids, your house, and move to Iowa cornfield from your (high cost of living? must be local in the Silicon Valley :-) ) place, you could have bought every single Zuikos ever made, and *may* just make that difference to Olympus that they would have made the OM remain in production! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19526 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 22:27:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 22:27:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 14:27:27 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06334 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:27:20 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA70905 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:26:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021218142622.02645b90@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:27:57 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) In-Reply-To: References: <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 06:42 AM 12/18/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >It occurred to me that Olympus might be introducing a digital Pen series >with the 4/3 chip. History repeating itself? >-- Winsor, can you clarify this? Do you mean that w/ the smaller 4/3 sensor size, the new system when and if it comes out (and not stillborn), is similar to what the Pen F did to the photography world then? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19991 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 22:46:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 22:46:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 14:46:36 2002 -0800 Received: from web20005.mail.yahoo.com (web20005.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA06371 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:46:27 -0800 Message-ID: <20021218224610.29587.qmail@web20005.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20005.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:46:10 PST Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:46:10 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well I got my first batch of 4x5 Provia back and it was stunning. I go back to the pro lab with another set of 8 with the instructions to develop Provia 100 film. I come back today and look at the slides and immediatly notice something very wrong, namely that everything is rendered dark blue. I'm like WTF! and ask the lady behind the counter what happened. She doesn't know and calls the guy from the darkroom in. Apparently some idiot filer at the lab doesn't know what Provia is and filed it under C-41 processing! They didn't charge me for the mixup but still it's disappointing to see pictures that I REALLY worked on basically ruined. If it had been my fault with focusing or exposure sure I could chalk it up to my own bone headedness but I guess after having so many 35mm rolls and my initial efforts at 4x5 come out properly developed it's just a let down. My question to the list is this; can I rescue these photos in any way? I'm not so disapponited by the landscapes they actually look kinda cool but there is one shot of my family that I would really like to try and save if I can. Thnaks for your time and reading through this long winded post. Mark Lloyd __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20403 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:03:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:03:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:03:32 2002 -0800 Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06385 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:03:25 -0800 Received: from pool0704.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.178.194] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OnDR-00036W-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:03:01 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> References: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:37:10 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Further, unless always shooting from a tripod with mirror and diaphragm >pre-fire, as long as there's a reasonable amount of light, the >35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko is every bit as good, has more range, weighs and costs >considerably less, being a one-touch is quicker and easier to use, and it >doesn't need weird-sized filters that fit none (?) of the other Zuikos. -snip > >Walt Here is the key to the argument. If it is a bright, sunny day and you shake them around while taking a picture the 35-80/2.8 is no better than anything else. Sheesh. Pop Phot said it was the best zoom they had ever tested. They did not say that about the Tamron or the 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko. As for light my experience is that when you are on a trip and it rains or is clouded over it is nice to get an image with F2.8 and a little bracing with 100 ASA than to get no image with a slower lens or the degraded image of a faster film. I encountered a low light situation at the UCLA Japanese Garden recently on a sunny day, but tree shade so deep I would not have gotten any pictures without 2.8. People get depressed or testy during the holidays. Hope Walt feels better after the new year. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20699 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:08:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:08:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:08:47 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06389 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:08:40 -0800 Received: from pool0704.cvx9-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.178.194] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OnIt-0005Iu-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:08:39 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021218142622.02645b90@192.168.100.11> References: <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> <20021218075705.98184.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20021218142622.02645b90@192.168.100.11> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:08:37 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >At 06:42 AM 12/18/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >>It occurred to me that Olympus might be introducing a digital Pen >>series with the 4/3 chip. History repeating itself? >>-- > >Winsor, can you clarify this? Do you mean that w/ the smaller 4/3 >sensor size, the new system when and if it comes out (and not >stillborn), is similar to what the Pen F did to the photography >world then? > >// richard Funny. I did not think of the global repercussions. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20973 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:10:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:10:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:10:11 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06400 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:10:03 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBIN8knh020468 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:08:46 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:11:05 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 19-12-2002 00:11:06 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Walt wrote: ........ >Further, unless always shooting from a tripod with mirror and diaphragm >pre-fire, as long as there's a reasonable amount of light, the >35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko is every bit as good, has more range, weighs and costs >considerably less, being a one-touch is quicker and easier to use, and it >doesn't need weird-sized filters that fit none (?) of the other Zuikos. ...... That bit about 'reasonable amount of light' is the reason that I prefer my Tamron SP 35-105 Aspheric f2.8 to the Zuiko 3.5 - 4.5. Right now in Denmark we have very poor light most of the time; the sun, if it shows itself, rises at 8:45a.m. and sets at 3:15 p.m. and does not rise very high up anyway! I think that age is also creeping up on my eyesight, so I mostly prefer the bigger aperture lenses. I believe that the Tamron 35-105 would give the Zuiko 35-80 a pretty good contest too; shorter, a bit lighter, 67mm filters, and more range. Roger Key < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21509 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:30:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:30:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:30:28 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06427 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:30:20 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Onds-0003JU-00 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:30:20 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:29:31 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021218142326.026d35c0@192.168.100.11> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca But what would you photograph in Iowa besides nubile farm girls cavorting in corn fields or, perhaps, other places? Well hell, I guess that's enough. I had a very pretty cousin in Council Bluffs....but never got her on film. Too bad. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Richard F. Man Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:26 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) At 01:38 PM 12/18/2002 -0800, Mike Veglia wrote: >..That's a pretty sizeable chunk of change worth of stuff for someone who is >struggling to raise a family of 5 in the highest cost of living area in the >US, and perhaps the world. If 4/3 pans out, I will almost certainly buy much >more from them someday... >.. But Mike, if you sell your kids, your house, and move to Iowa cornfield from your (high cost of living? must be local in the Silicon Valley :-) ) place, you could have bought every single Zuikos ever made, and *may* just make that difference to Olympus that they would have made the OM remain in production! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21810 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:36:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:36:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:36:59 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06436 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:36:50 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBINSxU21558 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:28:59 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:35:48 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F56A2@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:35:47 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > ll.clark@verizon.net [mailto:ll.clark@verizon.net] wrote: > >at 03:55 PM, Marc Lawrence said: > >Doesn't mean I won't shout you all a beer though! > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Translate this, would you? Is it Aussie argot? Should any zuikoholic make it all the way down to this side of the hemisphere (where I promise you won't fall off), then, despite the fact that I am not partial to one, I will most assuredly be willing and pleased to purchase an available, hop-related beverage of your choice as a gesture of camaraderie (or several, but then it becomes possible that you just *might* "fall off")...or any other available, liquid refreshment for that matter. FWIW, llclark (apologies for not knowing your name), I once had a flying visit to your State, NJ, involved in a week of dogshows (actually mostly in Montgomery, PA) taking photos for myself and friends (one in particular who was showing her Airedale). I wish I had much more "proper" time to visit the area, as it was beautiful. I was in a carload of American friends, and it amazed me that they flew throught stunning Valley Forge at 60mph with nary a sideways glance, while I drooled at the passing scenery and that strong, intangible sense of "history" you get in such places...knowing that it would be a long time before I'd get to see it all again and actually *see* it properly [sigh]. "America, the beautiful" and all that, but places like Seattle, Michigan (a few hours north of Detroit), Pennsylvania and New Jersey showed me in brief that there's far more to it than the LA/NY/Grand Canyon/Yosemite/Rockies that dominates the tourist brochures I've seen. That, and the photos that events and common interest have us all share here of our own places. Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21847 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:36:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:36:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:37:03 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06439 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:36:54 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:17:58 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0105FE.1000400@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:34:22 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies References: <3DFFFF26.1020502@achtung.com> <3E000328.8C35790A@accura.com.hk> In-Reply-To: <3E000328.8C35790A@accura.com.hk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You don't even need to go that far.. Press Alt-Print Screen, and you've screen captured it. Forensics is the only time you need digital signatures; for courts as proof. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22330 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:38:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:38:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:38:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06443 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:38:40 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax80-b011.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.8.11]) by mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBINcbi26274 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:38:37 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:37:23 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA06443 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hear hear! (or should it be 'here here', I'm never sure). John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Walt Wayman Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 6:48 AM To: INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Yo, Gang, I haven=92t posted much lately, mostly because there's been nothing under discussion of real interest to me or regarding which I had a relevant contribution -- too much digital crap. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22612 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:40:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:40:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:40:20 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06453 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:40:11 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:22:54 +0800 Message-ID: <3E010725.3090408@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:39:17 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ References: <3DFFF234.3010303@achtung.com> <3DFFF56B.546D95BA@accura.com.hk> <002301c2a68e$fc382520$7212a20a@waynecul> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was just about to say, that there are two roads to go, and I think both will get filled... eventually. But I think a lighter, smaller, more portable 35mm replacement will be first; and the second will be a gradual replacement of the studio medium formats. I for one would love to have sharper lenses and something like 6-8MP in a package smaller then my current OM.. Olympus is slow, and they don't do things by the book, but every once in a while, God smiles on them... Pen F series of the digital world, I can't wait.. But the problem is I might have to wait..and wait...and wait... Albert > > Really, a 5 pound hand holdable digital camera with lens is > ridiculous. I see two directions from here: a smaller lighter digicam > with about 10 megapixels equivalent to 35mm film and a 5 pound camera > that will replace medium format. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22895 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:42:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:42:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:43:09 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06458 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:43:00 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:25:44 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0107CD.6010108@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:42:05 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies References: <20021218035008.977665B2B1@yellow3.eunet.si> <3DFFF372.5010807@achtung.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Retinal scanners already exist, I use them sometimes to go to certain co-lo stations; They don't help. They are stupid. What you want is what we call "two factor authentication", something you HAVE with something you KNOW. So what will happen later is your camera will take a small card that has your digital X509 certificate on it; and so you can swap cameras and it's still YOUR image. It's like SIM cards for cell phones...or it will be, but a lot more secure. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23202 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:45:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:45:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:45:29 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06461 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:45:19 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:28:03 +0800 Message-ID: <3E010851.6060502@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:44:17 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know they aren't Zuiko's, but don't overlook a used Tamron 90mm with an adaptall. I own a 90mm Tokina f2.5, and it's a tack. I have seen pics from the Tamrons, and the newer 90mmf2.8's go all the way down to 1:1 ratio for macro, very handy, and the images from it are razor sharp, I think the sharpest lens in the Tamron lineup IMHO. The 100/f2.8 is great, as is the 85mmf2 Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23508 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:50:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:50:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:50:15 2002 -0800 Received: from mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06476 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:50:07 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax80-b011.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.8.11]) by mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBINo5j12496 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:50:05 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:48:51 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20021218210355.PPD21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, it's about as argot as you'll get! In an Oz pub a group of mates will adhere strictly to a cardinal rule. That is, each and every member of the group will, in rotation, buy a round of drinks for the group. So, if one is a little tardy in finishing his beer he will generally receive a well articulated, "Hurry up, mate its your shout!", probably with some inserted missives of a purely colloquial nature. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of ll.clark@verizon.net Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:03 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) In <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F569F@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au>, on 12/18/02 at 03:55 PM, Marc Lawrence said: >Doesn't mean I won't shout you all a beer though! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Translate this, would you? Is it Aussie argot? ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23751 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:50:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:50:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:50:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06480 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:50:26 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBINoOt17098 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:50:24 +1100 Message-Id: <200212182350.gBINoOt17098@mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:50:24 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > M. Lloyd wrote: > > > They didn't charge me for the mixup but still it's How generous ! Did they replace the film ? > My question to the list is this; can I rescue these > photos in any way? I'm not so disapponited by the > landscapes they actually look kinda cool but there is > one shot of my family that I would really like to try > and save if I can. Thnaks for your time and reading > through this long winded post. What I believe you should have is essentially a negative without the orange mask. My guess is that you could probably scan the film, reverse it, and massage the colours to get "something". Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24059 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:52:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:52:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:52:36 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06487 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:52:28 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:35:13 +0800 Message-ID: <3E010A06.8030305@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:51:34 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] New 4/3, deep zoom range, wide end? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am too young to remember when the zoom ranges all started at 35mm, I got into photography when the 28mm was the wide end of zooms. Now, I am starting to see more and more 24mm as the wide end (Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina as 3rd parties, C*non and N*kon all have them now also) and that makes me very happy. If the 4/3 brings what it promises, then I have a feeling that a 24mm-200mm zoom lens will be the norm, and it will be ultra compact also. The Tokina 24mm-200mm tempts me enough to consider buying a N*kon just to have that lens for travel, but I am not too sure of the optical quality as I have seen pics from it and distortion is noticable. The new Tamron 28mm-300mm is amazing; and if Tamron in a few years works more magic and gets it to a 24mm starting point, then you can call me impressed. I'm hoping that the 4/3's is aimed at people like me, a part time photographer and a fulltime vacationer and traveller, who likes to snap pictures, carry the smallest amount of gear to get the job done, in a small and convient format. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24743 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 23:55:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 23:55:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 15:55:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06503 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:55:30 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBINlwOd007736 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:47:59 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:47:58 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus OM Lens to Canon EOS Body Adapter Message-Id: <20021219004758.5834d992.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <00cc01c2a6da$da090220$1f00a8c0@mike> References: <00cc01c2a6da$da090220$1f00a8c0@mike> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA06503 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mike, What was the company? Do they do OM-to-something-else adaptors as well? --thomas On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:17:20 -0800 Mike Veglia wrote: > The following is the reply I received from the company in Japan > that Norm suggested: >=20 > Dear Mr. Mike Veglia, >=20 > Thank you for your interest in our adapters. > Unfortunately we have no OM/EOS adapters in stock. > They will not be available before the end of January. > But if we get them earlier, we will let you know at once. >=20 > The prices for OM/EOS adapter : Yen18,700 > Postage by EMS : Yen 1,200 / 1pc. > Payment by Credit Card >=20 > So, someday for around $164 they will have them... Not much hope > for an end of January test, but, nice to know they can be obtained. >=20 > Mike Veglia > Motor Sport Visions Photography > http://www.motorsportvisions.com >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25190 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:04:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:04:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:04:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06528 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:04:52 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A7473F27 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:05:51 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:04:35 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Digital True Lies Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "William Sommerwerck" > >"What's to keep some software from modifying or deleting the verifiction >data?" > >Now, _there_ is a beautiful typo -- or a very clever coinage. Bravo! I had to read it four times before I understood what you meant! I wish I could claim it was intentional -- "just one of those lucky shots!" -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25570 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:12:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:12:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:12:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06536 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:12:45 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7C00K9XB4H59@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:09:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:12:16 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: [OM] Re: On Re-using Our Beloved Zuikos For Digital To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <014001c2a6f3$49efa0e0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/18/2002 Mike Butler writes: << Mike, If you can bear to part with it for a few days I'll volunteer the CAD services to reverse engineer it and make the drawings available to the list. Maybe Belijan (sp?) Manufacturing would be interested if there were enough firm orders... >> Mike, I would be happy to. Except for one minor detail, I don't have one yet. Norm does though ;-) (Big hint.) It sounds like the source in Japan won't have any for a while either...meanwhile Stephen Scharf and I are chomping at the bit for one to see how well a D-30 and/or D-60 with Zuiko 350/2.8 (or Zuiko 300/4.5 for that matter) combo really would work in real world field use. BTW, I'll call you soon Mike. The whole family is sick right now and we're trying to get well and sorta organized before the holiday. Keep me posted on that San Jose area camera show... It would not surprise me if Arcatech would do a short run of them if we provided the CAD drawings...I can ask Scott and see what he says. I have to believe this adapter would be at least as marketable as an OM to 4/3 adapter he plans to do a prototype of, maybe even more so. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25850 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:16:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:16:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:16:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06540 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:16:20 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.153]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H7CC6602.IYJ for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:32:30 +0800 Message-ID: <004901c2a6f3$5cae8480$995b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:12:46 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Is it really easy enough to focus manually with zuikos on the EOS bodies? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Brokaw" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:37 PM Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters > on 12/17/02 11:44 AM, Winsor Crosby at wincros@earthlink.net wrote: > > > Thanks, Mike. I would guess that a used D-60 will not be horribly > > expensive in about a year and a half. > > -- > > Winsor Crosby > > Long Beach, California > > I expect to start finding them in thrift stores in a couple years... I > already found a Jam Cam > -- > > Jim Brokaw > OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26113 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:16:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:16:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:17:06 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06544 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:16:59 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDAC33F23 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:17:57 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:16:41 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Film vs Digital: DON'T WAIT! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca To all you who are "waiting" for this or that, I'd encourage you to stay a bit ahead of the learning curve by sticking your toe in the water, at least. The best way to do this is to buy yesterday's technology, which is available for a fraction of what it originally cost. For example, you can get a factory refurb Olympus D-600L for under $200. It has the trusty through-lens viewing that SLR shooters are used to, and was THE camera to have just a few short years ago, when my dad paid almost $1600 for one. It's still as useful a camera now as it was when it cost $1600! To best understand what digital can or cannot do, you have to play with it. This will also allow you to make a better purchasing decision when you do decide to jump full into the water. I'm on my 4th digital. I started with an Apple QuickTake. Even though I still shoot a lot of film, my latest digital (an E-20) paid for itself within weeks of purchase for a specific client. At each step, I've learned stuff I couldn't have learned just by reading magazines. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26451 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:22:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:22:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:22:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06552 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:22:06 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5742D3F23 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:23:04 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:21:48 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Digital vs. film Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: ll.clark@verizon.net > >In , on 12/17/02 > at 07:45 PM, Jan Steinman said: > >>Lizard Tech's Genuine Fractals. I use it all the time. > >The high-priced spread, or the LE version? I use the full version. I don't know anything about the LE version. It comes free with some scanners, no? There is an even-higher-priced version whose only claim to fame is dealing with CMYK. Don't waste your money on that version (Print Pro?) unless you'll be dealing with traditional offset printing. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26831 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:30:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:30:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:30:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06567 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:30:42 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDBB3F23 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:31:40 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:30:25 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Film Emulation Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Josh Putnam > >There are several popular Photoshop plug-ins for emulating Kodak >High Speed Infrared with digital images -- not quite right, of >course, since they use visible red instead of IR as the starting >point... Actually, most digicams are quite sensitive to near IR, out at least to 740nm or so. I've been playing with Wratten 25 and Ilford SFX filters on the front of my E-20. This ends up looking more like B&W IR, but the point is that the IR information IS available from the camera. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27081 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 00:31:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 00:31:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 16:31:41 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06571 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:31:34 -0800 Received: from bspearce (ppp-66-138-122-151.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [66.138.122.151]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBJ0V29F114782 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:31:03 -0500 Message-ID: <001001c2a6f4$b8a446c0$977a8a42@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] what will be next? Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:22:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "They didn't charge me for the mixup but still it's disappointing to see pictures that I REALLY worked on basically ruined. " Welcome to the world of cross processing, a technique used by some "fine arts" photographers. I would ask them if, as a payback for the screwup, to scan them for free. You might get something, not what you had in mind, but equally good, after some PS time. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28087 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 01:36:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 01:36:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 17:36:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA06646 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:36:31 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040261388!100 Received: (qmail 19317 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 01:29:50 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 01:29:50 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBJ18lu26319 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:08:47 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0122BD.F9F6ADCF@accura.com.hk> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:37:01 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters References: <004901c2a6f3$5cae8480$995b68cb@titoy> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you are not use to ground glass focusing, forget about it, if you already using a 2-4 on your camera with good success then there will be no problem on D-60. C.H.Ling Clemente Colayco wrote: > > Is it really easy enough to focus manually with zuikos on the EOS bodies? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Brokaw" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:37 PM > Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters > > > on 12/17/02 11:44 AM, Winsor Crosby at wincros@earthlink.net wrote: > > > > > Thanks, Mike. I would guess that a used D-60 will not be horribly > > > expensive in about a year and a half. > > > -- > > > Winsor Crosby > > > Long Beach, California > > > > I expect to start finding them in thrift stores in a couple years... I > > already found a Jam Cam > > -- > > > > Jim Brokaw > > OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... > > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28569 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 02:03:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 02:03:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 18:03:39 2002 -0800 Received: from out006.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06664 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:03:32 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.105]) by out006.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021219015916.DQCG19982.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:59:16 -0600 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:50:16 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F56A2@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> Subject: RE: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out006.verizon.net from [151.198.121.105] at Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:59:16 -0600 Message-Id: <20021219015916.DQCG19982.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F56A2@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au>, on 12/19/02 at 10:35 AM, Marc Lawrence said: >I will most assuredly be willing and pleased to >purchase an available, hop-related beverage of your choice as a gesture >of camaraderie (or several, but then it becomes possible that you just >*might* "fall off")...or any other available, liquid refreshment for >that matter. Nice gesture. I wish I could take you up on it. Now, just to show you how ungrateful I am: you still didn't enlighten me. By saying that you will "shout" us a beverage, did you refer to a large, crowded beer hall or tavern, smokey and noisy, in which you have literally to shout your beer order to receive that well-earned beverage? Or does "shout" have some other meaning? Aren't we Americans dense, though? >FWIW, llclark (apologies for not knowing your name), I once had a >flying visit to your State, NJ, involved in a week of dogshows >(actually mostly in Montgomery, It's Les, and it's nice to hear compliments about this state. Most people dismiss it, especially if they're from New York, as being "...somewhere West of the Hudson River." I know, as one who grew up in Manhattan, that we shared the view of the New Yorker magazine in their famous map which ended with detail at the edge of the Hudson River, and a vague swipe to the wilderness beyond... We have some awfully ugly places in the state as well, but we're working on it. What has happened to our Hudson River coastline in the last twenty years is remarkable -- a transformation from an industrial strip of waste to a "Gold Coast," so-called, where condos and rich commuters throng. I've seen it over a 40-year residence in the same town [actually, a borough]. Sorry, old timers on the list, for ruining my reputation of non-prolixity. A lack due entirely to the giddiness of the season, no doubt. I shall return to laconic shortly. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28903 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 02:11:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 02:11:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 18:11:29 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA06679 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:11:21 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040263797!300 Received: (qmail 17222 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 02:09:59 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-3.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 02:09:59 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBJ1hUu27510 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:43:30 +0800 Message-ID: <3E012AE1.38550EB7@accura.com.hk> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:11:45 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? References: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I remember Pop photo retested the F2.8 Tamron zoom (can't remember 28-105 or 35-105) at close distance, not really close but just half length portrait, the result was poor, they compared it to a Sigma cheap 3.5-4.5 zoom at same aperture and it lost. BTW, sharpness is not everything, most Zuikos has excellent color rendering including the 35-80. C.H.Ling Winsor Crosby wrote: > > > >Walt > > Here is the key to the argument. If it is a bright, sunny day and > you shake them around while taking a picture the 35-80/2.8 is no > better than anything else. Sheesh. Pop Phot said it was the best zoom > they had ever tested. They did not say that about the Tamron or the > 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko. > > As for light my experience is that when you are on a trip and it > rains or is clouded over it is nice to get an image with F2.8 and a > little bracing with 100 ASA than to get no image with a slower lens > or the degraded image of a faster film. I encountered a low light > situation at the UCLA Japanese Garden recently on a sunny day, but > tree shade so deep I would not have gotten any pictures without 2.8. > > People get depressed or testy during the holidays. Hope Walt feels > better after the new year. > -- > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29258 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 02:21:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 02:21:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 18:21:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA06692 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:21:40 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-7.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040264424!266 Received: (qmail 30475 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 02:20:29 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-7.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 02:20:29 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBJ1rhu27818 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:53:43 +0800 Message-ID: <3E012D45.7451E6C@accura.com.hk> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:21:57 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) References: <00e501c2a6dd$dffedbc0$1f00a8c0@mike> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mike Veglia wrote: > > In a message dated 12/18/2002 IanG writes: > > << We as a group must be a nightmare for Olympus - when was the last time > any > of use bought anything new and added to the profitability of the Olympus > group. >> > > In the last two years I have bought the following items from Olympus new: > > Stylus Epic > E-10 > TCON-14b converter > FL-40 flash > > That's a pretty sizeable chunk of change worth of stuff for someone who is > struggling to raise a family of 5 in the highest cost of living area in the > US, and perhaps the world. If 4/3 pans out, I will almost certainly buy much > more from them someday... I did quite a lot of help also, I bought a C2000 three years ago and it was priced as current Nikon 5000 and I bought a E-10 two years ago and with the money today I can buy a D100. I'm sure I will buy the Olympus SLR DC if they carry the tradition of OM size but this time I will wait a bit until the price come to a more stable level. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29507 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 02:21:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 02:21:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 18:22:02 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts3.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06695 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:21:46 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.155]) by simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021219021728.CMXV19141.simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:17:28 -0500 Message-ID: <003201c2a704$e4da1340$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> <3E012AE1.38550EB7@accura.com.hk> Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:18:15 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You guys are going to drive the price of Walt's lens back up. Give it a rest. :-) Wayne > I remember Pop photo retested the F2.8 Tamron zoom (can't remember > 28-105 or 35-105) at close distance, not really close but just half > length portrait, the result was poor, they compared it to a Sigma > cheap 3.5-4.5 zoom at same aperture and it lost. BTW, sharpness is not > everything, most Zuikos has excellent color rendering including the > 35-80. > > C.H.Ling > > Winsor Crosby wrote: > > > > > > >Walt > > > > Here is the key to the argument. If it is a bright, sunny day and > > you shake them around while taking a picture the 35-80/2.8 is no > > better than anything else. Sheesh. Pop Phot said it was the best zoom > > they had ever tested. They did not say that about the Tamron or the > > 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko. > > > > As for light my experience is that when you are on a trip and it > > rains or is clouded over it is nice to get an image with F2.8 and a > > little bracing with 100 ASA than to get no image with a slower lens > > or the degraded image of a faster film. I encountered a low light > > situation at the UCLA Japanese Garden recently on a sunny day, but > > tree shade so deep I would not have gotten any pictures without 2.8. > > > > People get depressed or testy during the holidays. Hope Walt feels > > better after the new year. > > -- > > Winsor Crosby > > Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30442 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 03:42:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 03:42:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 19:42:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06752 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:42:27 -0800 Received: from [207.214.212.7] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7C00L0BKVXI8@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:40:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:42:16 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) In-reply-to: <20021218224610.29587.qmail@web20005.mail.yahoo.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/18/02 2:46 PM, M. Lloyd at royer007@yahoo.com wrote: > Well I got my first batch of 4x5 Provia back and it > was stunning. I go back to the pro lab with another > set of 8 with the instructions to develop Provia 100 > film. I come back today and look at the slides and > immediatly notice something very wrong, namely that > everything is rendered dark blue. I'm like WTF! and > ask the lady behind the counter what happened. She > doesn't know and calls the guy from the darkroom in. > Apparently some idiot filer at the lab doesn't know > what Provia is and filed it under C-41 processing! > > They didn't charge me for the mixup but still it's > disappointing to see pictures that I REALLY worked on > basically ruined. If it had been my fault with > focusing or exposure sure I could chalk it up to my > own bone headedness but I guess after having so many > 35mm rolls and my initial efforts at 4x5 come out > properly developed it's just a let down. > > My question to the list is this; can I rescue these > photos in any way? I'm not so disapponited by the > landscapes they actually look kinda cool but there is > one shot of my family that I would really like to try > and save if I can. Thnaks for your time and reading > through this long winded post. > > Mark Lloyd > Mark -- I'm sure someone else will know for real, but if there is image there it seems like you could scan the film and convert to grayscale... at least you'd get something. -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30859 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 04:00:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 04:00:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 20:00:42 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06767 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:00:34 -0800 Received: from [207.214.212.7] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7C00MUSLQ5EV@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:58:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:00:23 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Less than wonderful Zuiko? In-reply-to: <200212181448_MC3-1-2034-EDBE@compuserve.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/18/02 11:48 AM, Walt Wayman at hiwayman@compuserve.com wrote: > Yo, Gang, >=20 > I haven=92t posted much lately, mostly because there's been nothing under > discussion of real interest to me or regarding which I had a relevant > contribution -- too much digital crap. There hasn't even been a minor > brouhaha going, much less a major controversy. Too much agreement makes > Zuikoholics dull boys (and girls). Walt, you're a rabble-rousing rabble-rouser, fits right in here... >So, consider this: >=20 > I've had my fabled, much desired, jewel-in-the-crown of Zuikos, the > 35-80/2.8, for a few months now, and I am definitely underwhelmed. I'll give you $30 for it... > My 28-105/2.8 Tamron kicks its butt in zoom range, is at least its equal = in > sharpness and contrast, and, for those who really concern themselves abou= t > such esoteric BS, gives bokeh every bit as good. (If you perceive a need= for > the imagined magic of mystical and ethereal bokeh so as not to distract f= rom > the subject of the picture you've taken, maybe you should've chosen a bet= ter > subject and/or been a better photographer. If folks' attention wanders o= ff > into the background of your pictures, you've been wasting film.) >=20 > Further, unless always shooting from a tripod with mirror and diaphragm > pre-fire, as long as there's a reasonable amount of light, the > 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko is every bit as good, has more range, weighs and cos= ts > considerably less, being a one-touch is quicker and easier to use, and it > doesn't need weird-sized filters that fit none (?) of the other Zuikos. OK, I'll give you $25 for it... >=20 > So why am I disparaging this lens, especially since I may be offering it = to > the highest bidder any day now, either here or elsewhere? Beats me. May= be > it has something to do with the Christmas spirit. >=20 > Or perhaps it's the Christmas spirits. Just finished a two-week medical > malpractice case, during which I learned a hell of a lot more about fetal > macrosomia than I ever wanted to know, and I am ready to kick back. Exce= pt > for a party, or five or six, I'm free until next year! Ho, ho, ho! > Seasons greetings and peace on you all! There's another party just aroun= d > the corner, so those who take issue with what I say here will have to wai= t > a bit for my rebuttal. Or you can kiss my rebuttal, or rekiss my -- oh, > never mind! OK, I'll give you $20 for it... will you take a check? >=20 > Walt Merry Christmas to you, too! --=20 Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... As for the rest of youse rabble, the same's to you too! JB new sig coming soon... 8*) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31238 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 04:11:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 04:11:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 20:11:16 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06799 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:11:08 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-238-49-232.client.attbi.com[12.238.49.232]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021219040955002000j6l7e>; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 04:09:55 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:12:29 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021218224610.29587.qmail@web20005.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mark, Last year the Army processed my Provia from a missile launch in C-41 (it was an accident, really, sez they). I scanned the results and tried to correct the colors but it was essentially hopeless. The Army lab also printed it to motion picture negative film, but that didn't work either (very soft). I think that you're out of luck as far as making anything usable out of those shots. They did replace your film, didn't they? 4x5 Provia comes dear. I hope there is another pro lab processing 4x5 in your area, so that you can tell that lab they'll never see your money again. I, unfortunately, have no such recourse since the Army owns the Range. . . Gary Edwards -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of M. Lloyd Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 4:46 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) Well I got my first batch of 4x5 Provia back and it was stunning. I go back to the pro lab with another set of 8 with the instructions to develop Provia 100 film. I come back today and look at the slides and immediatly notice something very wrong, namely that everything is rendered dark blue. I'm like WTF! and ask the lady behind the counter what happened. She doesn't know and calls the guy from the darkroom in. Apparently some idiot filer at the lab doesn't know what Provia is and filed it under C-41 processing! They didn't charge me for the mixup but still it's disappointing to see pictures that I REALLY worked on basically ruined. If it had been my fault with focusing or exposure sure I could chalk it up to my own bone headedness but I guess after having so many 35mm rolls and my initial efforts at 4x5 come out properly developed it's just a let down. My question to the list is this; can I rescue these photos in any way? I'm not so disapponited by the landscapes they actually look kinda cool but there is one shot of my family that I would really like to try and save if I can. Thnaks for your time and reading through this long winded post. Mark Lloyd __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31666 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 04:32:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 04:32:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 20:32:44 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06823 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:32:36 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18OsMO-0002RW-00 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:32:36 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs Digital: DON'T WAIT! Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:31:47 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sound and logical thoughts Jan and not just because I happen to agree. You can certainly wait too long to get your feet wet. Rushing to the latest toy is very expensive but buying year-old things costs a lot less. If you don't start someplace you will be left behind like the people that refused to use a computer. They have missed so much. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Jan Steinman Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:17 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Film vs Digital: DON'T WAIT! To all you who are "waiting" for this or that, I'd encourage you to stay a bit ahead of the learning curve by sticking your toe in the water, at least. The best way to do this is to buy yesterday's technology, which is available for a fraction of what it originally cost. For example, you can get a factory refurb Olympus D-600L for under $200. It has the trusty through-lens viewing that SLR shooters are used to, and was THE camera to have just a few short years ago, when my dad paid almost $1600 for one. It's still as useful a camera now as it was when it cost $1600! To best understand what digital can or cannot do, you have to play with it. This will also allow you to make a better purchasing decision when you do decide to jump full into the water. I'm on my 4th digital. I started with an Apple QuickTake. Even though I still shoot a lot of film, my latest digital (an E-20) paid for itself within weeks of purchase for a specific client. At each step, I've learned stuff I couldn't have learned just by reading magazines. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32039 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 04:45:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 04:45:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 20:45:47 2002 -0800 Received: from web20007.mail.yahoo.com (web20007.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA06835 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:45:39 -0800 Message-ID: <20021219044526.12301.qmail@web20007.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20007.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:45:26 PST Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:45:26 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT)(Rant) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Heh. I thought I was lucky to get out there without paying for the processing. I've had bad prints and such which I've gotten redone but nothing close to the shock of seeing what my 4x5 slides came out to. I was really annoyed though that they didn't seem to have a clue what Provia was! I mean geez, this may be Rochester, home of Kodak, but at least I think they should know Fuji film considering they are a pro lab! I don't think I'll be going back there. If they had made and honest, "Sorry we put it in the wrong bin and the darkroom guy never sees what film it is anyway since it's... well... dark. Here is a refund" I might forgive. But they said, "Provia? Never heard of the stuff." Note they had already processed 8 sheets before well, and granted it was a different sales clerk but it shouldn't have made a difference! I mean they are a big pro film lab where I've seen people walk out with stacks of processed orders 2 ft. high and someone there doesn't know what Provia is! I mean if I was a manager the first thing I would do for employees working in a FILM PROCESSING LAB is get everyone up to speed as to what films are what. Thanks for clearing my head about this matter. Mark Lloyd --- "Gary L. Edwards" wrote: > Mark, > > Last year the Army processed my Provia from a > missile launch in C-41 (it was > an accident, really, sez they). I scanned the > results and tried to correct > the colors but it was essentially hopeless. The > Army lab also printed it to > motion picture negative film, but that didn't work > either (very soft). I > think that you're out of luck as far as making > anything usable out of those > shots. They did replace your film, didn't they? > 4x5 Provia comes dear. I > hope there is another pro lab processing 4x5 in your > area, so that you can > tell that lab they'll never see your money again. > I, unfortunately, have no > such recourse since the Army owns the Range. . . > > > Gary Edwards __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32628 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 05:26:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 05:26:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 21:26:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.136]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06862 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:26:09 -0800 Received: from webmail09.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail09.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.126]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBJ5Q2c06719 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:26:02 +1100 Message-Id: <200212190526.gBJ5Q2c06719@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:26:02 +1100 Subject: Re: RE: [OM] Film vs Digital: DON'T WAIT! Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > James N. McBride wrote: > > start someplace you will be left behind like the people that refused > to use > a computer. They have missed so much. /jim > Maybe, but some of us who have been stuffing around with computers for the last 25 years have probably missed out on a lot of other good stuff happening in different areas. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 837 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 06:10:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 06:10:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 22:10:57 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06921 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:10:50 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18OttR-0004l2-00 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:10:49 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: RE: [OM] Film vs Digital: DON'T WAIT! Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:10:00 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200212190526.gBJ5Q2c06719@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We all must miss out on some things because nobody can do everything but there are some things that become pivotal experiences. Missing out on those things can really limit the quality of your life. I see computer literacy as one of those pivotal experiences. Music and the study of other languages are two pivotal experiences where I have been weak. I know it's not too late but there is just so little time available. Digital photography may just be one of those experiences too and you don't know unless you try it. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Harridge Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:26 PM To: olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca Subject: Re: RE: [OM] Film vs Digital: DON'T WAIT! > James N. McBride wrote: > > start someplace you will be left behind like the people that refused > to use > a computer. They have missed so much. /jim > Maybe, but some of us who have been stuffing around with computers for the last 25 years have probably missed out on a lot of other good stuff happening in different areas. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1208 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 06:28:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 06:28:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 22:28:51 2002 -0800 Received: from web80007.mail.yahoo.com (web80007.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.168.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA06933 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:28:44 -0800 Message-ID: <20021219062831.91556.qmail@web80007.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.100.136.82] by web80007.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:28:31 PST Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:28:31 -0800 (PST) From: Oly Moose Subject: [OM] Canon FS2710 Scanner, SCSI and Win XP To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217114220.00a1a270@pop.softhome.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I haven't been very active on the list because I'm moving my rather complex computer life from a 333mz Win98 box to a 2.8gz XP Pro box (old car to rocket ship!). I believe someone posted before that the Canoscan FS2710 can't be used under XP. THAT IS NOT TRUE!! The solution I found may be of interest beyond just my specific problem as it would seem to apply generally for SCSI under Win2000 & XP. Canon USA says it is not supported under XP and the latest version of their scanning software, 3.6.2 isn't XP ready. Canon Europe has a version of the CanoCraft software (3.6.6) available for download that expressly supports XP. XP has a driver for the Adaptec AIC-7850 PCI SCSI card that Canon supplied, but, as the Canon manual says for earlier versions of Windoz, it doesn't work. The new version of Canoscan runs, but can't find the card/scanner. All kinds of searching didn't find an XP driver for the card and the old drivers don't work. I don't use the Canon software anyway, so I tried Vuescan. It also couldn't find the SCSI card, but said "If you're using Windows 2000 or Windows XP and a SCSI scanner and if VueScan doesn't find your SCSI scanner, you may need to download and install ASPI" The Hamrick.com site has 2 different links to Adaptec sites (Neither of which I found directly on the Adaptec support site.) for downloading ASPI (different file names at each location). One wasn't working at that moment, although it seems to now. I used http://download.adaptec.com/software_pc/aspi/aspi_v472a2.exe One of the docs explains "The Advanced SCSI Programming Interface (ASPI) for Win32 was designed to increase compatibility and simplify the connection of SCSI peripheral devices like tape, CD-ROM, WORM, magneto-optical, scanners, and other devices. It defines a protocol for SCSI applications (called ASPI modules) to submit I/O requests to a single operating system driver (called the ASPI manager). Access to the operating system driver is made through a Dynamic Link Library named WNASPI32.DLL." So it's like a layer that mediates between Win2000/XP and SCSI devices. In any case, it works! Both CanoCraft and Vuescan can now scan sucessfully. One more XP compatability solved! Moose < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1545 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 06:38:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 06:38:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 22:39:02 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06945 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:38:53 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:21:19 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0168E8.2030708@achtung.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:36:24 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Arrg! Non-photographer giving camera advice! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Arrg! My gf and all her friends are looking to get a digital camera and one of her friends who has never taken a picture in his life and doesn't own a single camera; he is now giving digital camera advice... (rolling eyes) He says that ISO has little to do with anything, and you want as low of an ISO as possible as it gives the best quality... Sure... but if your hands are as unsteady as my gf's, and it's low light situation, a higher ISO is a consideration. He says ISO is just picking how grainy you want your pictures, that's it... Ug! He has no idea what ISO selection is, yet he is an expert on cameras! I'm soooo annoyed by this. Also, the store clerks seem to be clueless as well. "Oh, this camera, it is so wonderful it might even cure AIDS!" Right, whatever.. That is one thing I do miss, shopping at Samy's. Most shoot more rolls in a week then I do in a year. They can personally attest to why they like certain things, and what things sound good, but never get used in the field.. They only care about the megapixel count. It can be a coke bottle for a lens, and they don't care, as long as the pixel count is high.. The dumming down of consumers at its lowest point. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1981 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 07:01:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 07:01:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 23:01:15 2002 -0800 Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06969 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:01:06 -0800 Received: from user-38ldvfr.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.253.251]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OufY-0003n4-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 02:00:33 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:00:46 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] One last digital topic...then that's it... Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca for the time being, anyway...(I promise) [OT] content: The November issue of PDN (Photo District News) has an article on pros that turned digital and why. Of course, the reasons are as varied as the photographer but there were some common threads that were of interest. One was the immediacy; being able to try things, look at the result, and then change if necesary, and not have to wait for the film to come back. Another that was almost always mentioned mentioned was improved workflow, despite increased time at the computer doing postprocessing. And a no. of them mentioned not having to worry about the lab screwing up or losing their film during processing. Here's a couple of interesting comments and the type of pro service they provide: Tim Stahl: "I get instant gratification in knowing I have the shot. It's like a 47-megabyte Polaroid, only it becomes my final image. With digital, your level freedom and creativity opens up because you can make subtle lighting adjustments, or shoot three stops open to see the results on the screen-not fumble with film holders or keep track of snips, pushes, pulls, film emulsions." -------- Stahl Photographics Advertising, commercial Here's a comment Albert will find of interest regarding film vs digital using a view camera: Paul Hartley: I shoot mainly with a Phase One H20 on a Rollei Xact, and the quality just blows film away. I've not shot a sheet of film since I made the move, and its probably the best investment since I bought my first view camera. -------- Paul Hartley, London Diamond jewelry, watches, still life, etc. There's also an awesome digital imaging contest section...including some photos from "A Day in Africa", which was shot exclusively with Oly Digitals (E10 and E20, I think). [OM] content (finally!) Just picked up the latest Popular Photography (and Imaging..whoops, there's the D-word association again), and two of the photos that won in their best photos of the year issue were taken with OM's. One was taken with an OM-2 and one with the venerable OM-1. Pretty dang cool. -Stephen. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2009 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 07:01:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 07:01:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 23:01:18 2002 -0800 Received: from web40604.mail.yahoo.com (web40604.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.78.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA06972 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:01:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20021219070025.54529.qmail@web40604.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.130.155.201] by web40604.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:00:25 PST Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:00:25 -0800 (PST) From: Andre Goforth Subject: Re: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Try this snafu for size: 8 rolls of Tech Pan shot in Death Valley sent to Kodak instead of processing it in-house by a clerk at a custom lab near me and Kodah processed like it was TMAX film. The owner was apologetic and said she can't afford to pay much over minimum wage for sales help. Roughly 8 stops over developed. Kinda contrasty .... abstract. Last time I was in that part of DV was 10 years ago. So wait another 10 for another chance. Andre --- Jim Brokaw wrote: > on 12/18/02 2:46 PM, M. Lloyd at royer007@yahoo.com > wrote: > > > Well I got my first batch of 4x5 Provia back and > it > > was stunning. I go back to the pro lab with > another > > set of 8 with the instructions to develop Provia > 100 > > film. I come back today and look at the slides and > > immediatly notice something very wrong, namely > that > > everything is rendered dark blue. I'm like WTF! > and > > ask the lady behind the counter what happened. She > > doesn't know and calls the guy from the darkroom > in. > > Apparently some idiot filer at the lab doesn't > know > > what Provia is and filed it under C-41 processing! > > > > They didn't charge me for the mixup but still it's > > disappointing to see pictures that I REALLY worked > on > > basically ruined. If it had been my fault with > > focusing or exposure sure I could chalk it up to > my > > own bone headedness but I guess after having so > many > > 35mm rolls and my initial efforts at 4x5 come out > > properly developed it's just a let down. > > > > My question to the list is this; can I rescue > these > > photos in any way? I'm not so disapponited by the > > landscapes they actually look kinda cool but there > is > > one shot of my family that I would really like to > try > > and save if I can. Thnaks for your time and > reading > > through this long winded post. > > > > Mark Lloyd > > > > Mark -- I'm sure someone else will know for real, > but if there is image > there it seems like you could scan the film and > convert to grayscale... at > least you'd get something. > -- > > Jim Brokaw > OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing > List > > < For questions, > mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: > http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2586 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 07:11:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 07:11:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 23:11:46 2002 -0800 Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.226]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06981 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:11:38 -0800 Received: from user-38ldvfr.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.253.251]) by blount.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Oupm-0001TH-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 02:11:07 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218090638.4248.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021218090638.4248.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:11:20 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3769 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:33:51 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3766 > >No one ever blame the problem is from the DC, I love the picture from >my E-10 and even the C2000, we were just talking about the links which >show the sample pictures that were expect to be some good DC samples. > >C.H.Ling Well, I for one thought that Jan Simon had some very nice DC images on his web site, even if no one else did.... -Stephen Scharf -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3006 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 07:31:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 07:31:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 18 23:31:16 2002 -0800 Received: from web20005.mail.yahoo.com (web20005.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA06997 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:31:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20021219073056.23213.qmail@web20005.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20005.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:30:56 PST Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:30:56 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021219070025.54529.qmail@web40604.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca With 8 stop overdevelopment I would think there wouldn't be anything there at all! Still the landscapes are kinda cool, very abstract and shiny, it's that one family shot that I'm steamed over I only see the particular relatives in that pic twice a year at Thnaksgiving and Christmas and I was planning on giving them the chrome as a present since they were tickled pink by the several B&W Polaroids I shot. B&W Polaroid is neat. Mark Lloyd --- Andre Goforth wrote: > Try this snafu for size: 8 rolls of Tech Pan shot in > Death Valley sent to Kodak instead of processing it > in-house by a clerk at a custom lab near me and > Kodah > processed like it was TMAX film. The owner was > apologetic and said she can't afford to pay much > over > minimum wage for sales help. Roughly 8 stops over > developed. Kinda contrasty .... abstract. Last time > I > was in that part of DV was 10 years ago. So wait > another 10 for another chance. > > Andre __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3592 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 08:06:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 08:06:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 00:06:42 2002 -0800 Received: from mta07ps.bigpond.com ([144.135.25.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07036 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:06:34 -0800 Received: from parents ([144.135.25.75]) by mta07ps.bigpond.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 mta07ps Jul 16 2002 22:47:55) with SMTP id H7CX3X00.CVR for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:04:45 +1000 Received: from BPH-D2-p-250-158.tmns.net.au ([144.134.250.158]) by PSMAM03.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V3.0n 83/27516218); 19 Dec 2002 18:04:45 Message-ID: <00e901c2a735$4acdecf0$0100a8c0@parents> From: "Terry and Tracey" To: References: <20021219015916.DQCG19982.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Subject: Re: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 19:04:27 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A shout is the round of beers. There are five mates in a pub. You go and get 5 beers. then the next bloke gets the next round. This is a shout. The worse part is after 5 beers you may need one more. So you go and get another round. And you can't leave until that shout is finished. By the time it is finished, so are you. Shouting is the norm in Australia. If you don't shout, well it just isn't worth the consequences. Foxy ----- Original Message ----- Nice gesture. I wish I could take you up on it. Now, just to show you how ungrateful I am: you still didn't enlighten me. By saying that you will "shout" us a beverage, did you refer to a large, crowded beer hall or tavern, smokey and noisy, in which you have literally to shout your beer order to receive that well-earned beverage? Or does "shout" have some other meaning? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4401 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 09:30:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 09:30:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 01:30:14 2002 -0800 Received: from dupont.dannet.dk (dupont.dannet.dk [131.166.12.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07066 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 01:30:06 -0800 Received: from birn01_mail1.ilan.dannet.dk (birn01-mail1.ilan.dannet.dk [172.30.107.101]) by dupont.dannet.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gBJ9Snnh027158 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:28:49 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.6a January 17, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Roger D. Key" Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:31:08 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BIRN01_Mail1/Dan Net(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 19-12-2002 10:31:09 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca An expression common in Canada and the UK now too I believe. Necessary in Canada, as you are meant to be seated to get any beers, so you have to shout! Not the same rules in the UK, so most people fetch their own beers from the bar - no shouting necessary (except when the pub is very full). Roger Key Foxy wrote: A shout is the round of beers. There are five mates in a pub. You go and get 5 beers. then the next bloke gets the next round. This is a shout. The worse part is after 5 beers you may need one more. So you go and get another round. And you can't leave until that shout is finished. By the time it is finished, so are you. Shouting is the norm in Australia. If you don't shout, well it just isn't worth the consequences. Foxy ----- Original Message ----- Nice gesture. I wish I could take you up on it. Now, just to show you how ungrateful I am: you still didn't enlighten me. By saying that you will "shout" us a beverage, did you refer to a large, crowded beer hall or tavern, smokey and noisy, in which you have literally to shout your beer order to receive that well-earned beverage? Or does "shout" have some other meaning? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5343 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 10:56:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 10:56:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 02:56:57 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07119 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 02:56:50 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA07260 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 02:56:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219025439.026e9970@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 02:57:26 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] Timely picture from LoTR: The Two Towers Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For the kiwi Olympus listers - you folks sure live in a beautiful country! We went to the opening show tonight, with friends in costumes! This pic is taken with the C-3000, not quite an OM. My OM pictures will be developed tomorrow/today. http://www.dragonsgate.net/cosplay/Costume_Studio/LOTRgang.jpg // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7437 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 14:53:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 14:53:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 06:53:38 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07366 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 06:53:30 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA00490 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:53:29 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:49:57 -0600 Message-ID: <000e01c2a76d$e7d2a210$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As I was without my trusty 28mm lens the other day, I used my 18/3.5 instead. The results are better than I expected. The distortion isn't as bad as I would have thought, and the DOF is amazing! Almost all of the shots were wide open! Any and all comments welcome. Bob http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7761 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:02:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:02:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:02:13 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07384 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:02:05 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA01700 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:02:05 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] favor Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:58:33 -0600 Message-ID: <000f01c2a76f$1b5774c0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Could one of the listees who sees this e-mail confirm that my e-mail is working OK? I guess there was some problems with my subscription. Thanks! Bob Gries < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8013 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:04:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:04:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:04:20 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07388 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:04:12 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:03:49 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:03:49 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:07:38 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 15:03:49.0475 (UTC) FILETIME=[D615B330:01C2A76F] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I love the perspective. And you're right, there's not an uncomfortable amount of distortion. Mom and grand-mom I assume? Cute kid. A lady killer in training.... -----Original Message----- From: gries Any and all comments welcome. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8264 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:04:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:04:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:04:42 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07392 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:04:34 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:09:21 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:04:11 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] favor Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:08:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 15:09:21.0796 (UTC) FILETIME=[9C29DC40:01C2A770] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Working here. -----Original Message----- From: gries [mailto:gries@nothingrhymeswithorange.com] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 6:59 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] favor Could one of the listees who sees this e-mail confirm that my e-mail is working OK? I guess there was some problems with my subscription. Thanks! Bob Gries < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8552 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:08:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:08:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:08:19 2002 -0800 Received: from lonn000937.uk.grp.intra (mail1.bnpparibas.com [155.140.128.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07400 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:08:11 -0800 From: john.oregan@bnpparibas.com Received: from lonn000662.bnpparibas.com (unverified) by lonn000937.uk.grp.intra (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:59:18 +0000 Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [OM] favor To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:06:42 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on LONSMTP001/SERVERS/SMTP(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 19/12/2002 14:52:08 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bob asked.......... >>>>>>>>>>>> confirm that my e-mail is working OK? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> works fine for me JOhnOR (scuse the sig) This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. --------------------------------------------- Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8869 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:11:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:11:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:11:42 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07404 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:11:34 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA02887 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:11:33 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] I'm back! Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:08:01 -0600 Message-ID: <001401c2a770$6e08c740$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Also lost to the bounce: ...here are some shots that I did recently at my parish. After some convincing from Ken Norton, I thought that I would try some PanF. I am very pleased with the results, and as always, scans can never do the original prints justice. I'd also recommend Ken's services as he takes great care in achieving the best results. The church is one of two basilicas here in Chicago, although our pastor says that the other one isn't the *real* basilica. ;) the church was founded in the late 1800's and I believe the present structure was completed in 1897. the servites are a small order founded in Florence in 13th century (more info can be found at: http://www.servite.org/ )who have a special devotion to Mary. The alter featured here is devoted to the seven founders and is surrounded by frescos describing the church's status as a basilica. The fresco immediately behind the alter shows the church during its inauguration by Pope Pius the V (I think). If one looks closely, many of the city's landmarks of the time, can be seen depicted as the context of this looming structure - the Chicago board of trade, Wrigley building, and industrial factories. As always, any comments are most welcome. Enjoy! http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/OLS.htm http://ols-chicago.org/index.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9121 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:13:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:13:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:13:30 2002 -0800 Received: from web13703.mail.yahoo.com (web13703.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.136]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA07409 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:13:22 -0800 Message-ID: <20021219151310.67469.qmail@web13703.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.127] by web13703.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:13:10 PST Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:13:10 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >But Mike, if you sell your kids, your house, and move to Iowa >cornfield from your (high cost of living? must be local in the >Silicon Valley :-) ) place, you could have bought every single >Zuikos ever made, and *may* just make that difference to >Olympus that they would have made the OM remain in production! Well, let's see, I moved to the Iowa cornfields, have only two offspring and have a decent paying gig. But I still can't afford USED Olympus stuff much less new! Iowa ain't that cheap. We spend similar amounts on housing and cars. It's just that both are a whole lot bigger. AG __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9383 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:13:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:13:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:13:50 2002 -0800 Received: from siaab1aa.compuserve.com (siaab1aa.compuserve.com [149.174.40.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07412 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:13:42 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaab1aa.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.18) id KAA04469 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:09:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:09:08 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: Re: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 (semi-OT) To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212191009_MC3-1-207C-DEB3@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Some folks -- those of the astronomy persuasion -- do cross processing deliberately. http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/POSASNEG.HTM Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9676 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:15:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:15:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:16:02 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07416 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:15:54 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:20:41 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:14:29 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:19:20 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 15:20:41.0562 (UTC) FILETIME=[3155EBA0:01C2A772] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What... traded the MPV on a Hummer???? -----Original Message----- From: AG Schnozz Iowa ain't that cheap. We spend similar amounts on housing and cars. It's just that both are a whole lot bigger. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9928 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:17:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:17:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:17:25 2002 -0800 Received: from hpc-hamburg.de (mail.hpc-hamburg.de [212.18.79.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07420 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:17:17 -0800 Received: from [130.30.140.100] (helo=hpc-user-hew) by hpc-hamburg.de with smtp (Exim 1.92 #2) for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca id 18P3R9-00043B-00; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 17:21:55 +0059 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:12:55 +0100 Message-ID: <01C2A779.7D1A1D20.h.wiechel@hpc-hamburg.de> From: Harry Wiechel To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] favor Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:12:47 +0100 Organization: HPC X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca yes Bob, your mail looks fine. -----Original Message----- From: gries [SMTP:gries@nothingrhymeswithorange.com] Sent: Donnerstag, 19. Dezember 2002 15:59 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] favor Could one of the listees who sees this e-mail confirm that my e-mail is working OK? I guess there was some problems with my subscription. Thanks! Bob Gries < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10201 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:19:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:19:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:19:24 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07428 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:19:16 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:24:03 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:18:52 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] favor Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:22:42 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 15:24:03.0312 (UTC) FILETIME=[A9968700:01C2A772] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And your Jr. Male is, like I said, a lady killer in the making.... -----Original Message----- From: Harry Wiechel yes Bob, your mail looks fine. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10485 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:22:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:22:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:22:20 2002 -0800 Received: from hpc-hamburg.de (mail.hpc-hamburg.de [212.18.79.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07432 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:22:11 -0800 Received: from [130.30.140.100] (helo=hpc-user-hew) by hpc-hamburg.de with smtp (Exim 1.92 #2) for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca id 18P3W8-00043j-00; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 17:27:04 +0100 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:18:11 +0100 Message-ID: <01C2A77A.39E8C500.h.wiechel@hpc-hamburg.de> From: Harry Wiechel To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:17:53 +0100 Organization: HPC X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Great pictures of a cute little boy. I suppose you bounced the flash off the ceiling right? Harry -----Original Message----- From: gries [SMTP:gries@nothingrhymeswithorange.com] Sent: Donnerstag, 19. Dezember 2002 15:50 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... As I was without my trusty 28mm lens the other day, I used my 18/3.5 instead. The results are better than I expected. The distortion isn't as bad as I would have thought, and the DOF is amazing! Almost all of the shots were wide open! Any and all comments welcome. Bob http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11159 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:24:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:24:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:25:02 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07440 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:24:54 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04497 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:24:54 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] 6 entries and counting. Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:21:21 -0600 Message-ID: <001701c2a772$4b3107d0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There are 6 of us who have submitted images to the WE 2002 site. If I have 4 more by noon CST, I might launch the site early! ;) Also, I will be out of town from noon today until Dec. 28th. I may not have access to a computer for a while after that, but will try to answer e-mails as best I can. Hope everyone has a great holiday! Bob Gries < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11628 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:36:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:36:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:36:54 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07479 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:36:46 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA06276 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:36:46 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] OT ladykiller Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:33:13 -0600 Message-ID: <001901c2a773$f37f5080$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <20021219152212.10536.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, he must get it all from his mom. Those eyelashes are like a camel's! Anyway, thanks for all the compliments. The kid is way too photogenic, and I am spending more than I should on film... :( oh, well! You only live once! Have a great holiday everyone! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12113 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:51:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:51:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:51:55 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com ([194.201.127.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07501 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:51:47 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [OM] F Collectable? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:48:28 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Collectable? Thread-Index: AcKndfWuoQAI/TYNTcSRQd+na5d+5QAAAb8Q From: "Sam Shiell" To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Have a look at this on e*bay??? 1946447811 Anyone a serious collector ? (yes I know it's a stoopid question) Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12364 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 15:52:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 15:52:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 07:52:21 2002 -0800 Received: from orngca-mls02.socal.rr.com (orngca-mls02.socal.rr.com [66.75.160.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07505 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:52:13 -0800 Received: from davegael (66-74-234-209.san.rr.com [66.74.234.209]) by orngca-mls02.socal.rr.com (8.11.4/8.11.3) with SMTP id gBJFoQA00047 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:50:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <001201c2a776$910971d0$d1ea4a42@davegael> From: "Dave Dougherty" To: "OLYMPUS" Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:51:59 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For the most part I have stayed on the sidelines of the discussions of the pros and cons of Digital vs. Film. I feel, however, that the suggestion that one get involved in Digital or be left behind is valid. For sometime I have held the position that Digital is a fact of life and that the "train has left the station." I first got into Digital out of frustration with the lack of affordable and consistent processing of my efforts on film. That frustration is shared by many on this list. I purchased an Olympus C4040, intending to shoot digital as a supplement to my film efforts. The immediacy and overall high quality of the photos made with the C4040 exceeded my expectations. The C4040 has some serious limitations in terms of shutter lag and low light auto focus; and it is not an SLR. I sold off some OM equipment to fund the purchase of an E-20 and have also acquired the FL-40 flash for it. In conjunction with an Epson Inkjet printer and Photoshop Elements I have some wonderful flower macros and beautiful photos of family events. I feel that the rewards of using digital are different, not better or worse than using film. The E-20 also has limitations. However, as I have stated in past posts, if you don't try to use it as a $1700 point and shoot camera and take the time to learn how to use it's many capabilities the results are beautiful. At 5 MP the E-20 will not produce a photo with the same sharpness as film when subjected to high magnification or enlargement. But in the "real" world of photo prints that I feel that I am part of the photos are wonderful and more than acceptable. Rather than argue how many pixels can dance on the head of a pin, I just decided to go ahead and get involved. The results speak for themselves and I am better off for having started the journey. Here is a link to a gallery of macros done with the E-20 with modification in Photoshop Elements. Some are better than others of course. But I feel that the photos speak for themselves. As always, any critique is welcome. http://www.pbase.com/davehugh/macro_florals Dave Dougherty < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13143 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 16:38:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 16:38:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 08:38:13 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA07573 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:38:05 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021219162513.WSPN214174.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:25:13 -0500 Message-ID: <052901c2a775$0cb20240$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] F Collectable? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:41:07 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:25:13 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ............. how many engraving shops are there in Manchester? jh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Shiell" To: Sent: Thursday, 19 December, 2002 11:48 AM Subject: [OM] F Collectable? Have a look at this on e*bay??? 1946447811 Anyone a serious collector ? (yes I know it's a stoopid question) Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14280 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:02:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:02:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:02:27 2002 -0800 Received: from greatwhite.cybersurf.com (greatwhite.cybersurf.com [209.197.145.193]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07680 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:02:19 -0800 Received: from localhost (cal-uas-2-209197182176.3web.net [209.197.182.176]) by greatwhite.cybersurf.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBJI0LUN022387 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:00:55 -0700 From: Sean Davis To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:00:06 -0700 Message-ID: <21240v8m7vv789hr9adclb5t5dpgkh5cjf@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for the thoughts on the lenses - it looks like the 85/2 takes it hands down... second question, slightly OT: i have a Tamron SP 35-80/2.8-3.8 which has performed beautifully for me - it recently began to have a "catch" in the zoom. when you turn the zoom ring, there is strong resistance right around the 60mm length; it takes quite a bit of pressure to turn it past 60 to the 80mm, and the same going back. Anybody have any idea what might be wrong inside? Thanks, Sean D. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14602 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:09:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:09:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:09:30 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07688 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:09:22 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBJI8AE88281; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:08:10 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.186] (195-74-112-186.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.186]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBJI88o88227; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:08:09 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021218210355.PPD21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> References: <20021218210355.PPD21770.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:32:53 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) Cc: ll.clark@verizon.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca He's offering to buy us all a beer Les. Sounds like a generous chap to me := >). Chris At 16:03 -0500 18/12/02, ll.clark@verizon.net wrote: >In <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F569F@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au>, on >12/18/02 > at 03:55 PM, Marc Lawrence said: > >>Doesn't mean I won't shout you all a beer though! > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Translate this, would you? Is it Aussie argot? > >----------------------------------------------------------- >llclark / edgewater, nj / usa >-------------------------------------------------------- -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14628 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:09:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:09:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:09:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07692 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:09:25 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBJI8Ct88393; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:08:12 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.186] (195-74-112-186.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.186]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBJI8Ao88286; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:08:10 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <00cc01c2a6da$da090220$1f00a8c0@mike> References: <00cc01c2a6da$da090220$1f00a8c0@mike> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:41:51 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus OM Lens to Canon EOS Body Adapter Cc: Mike Veglia Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Has anyone tried SRB Film in Luton, UK? They make this sort of thing; their email address is srbfilm@aol.com. Chris At 13:17 -0800 18/12/02, Mike Veglia wrote: >The following is the reply I received from the company in Japan that Norm >suggested: > >Dear Mr. Mike Veglia, > >Thank you for your interest in our adapters. >Unfortunately we have no OM/EOS adapters in stock. >They will not be available before the end of January. >But if we get them earlier, we will let you know at once. > >The prices for OM/EOS adapter : Yen18,700 >Postage by EMS : Yen 1,200 / 1pc. >Payment by Credit Card > >So, someday for around $164 they will have them... Not much hope for an end >of January test, but, nice to know they can be obtained. > >Mike Veglia >Motor Sport Visions Photography >http://www.motorsportvisions.com -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15347 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:38:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:38:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:38:26 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07708 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:38:18 -0800 Received: from M2W083.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.83]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:37:56 -0500 Message-ID: <232810-2200212419183756149@M2W083.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] F Collectable? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:37:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 18:37:56.0522 (UTC) FILETIME=[BF8580A0:01C2A78D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ha! $800! Yea, right! I could see $4-500, if you were particularly rabid, But I'd be surprised a= t a much higher figure=2E =20 Of course, I could be wrong? Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Sam Shiell Sam=2EShiell@skybridgegroup=2Ecom Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:48:28 -0000 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] F Collectable? Have a look at this on e*bay??? 1946447811 Anyone a serious collector ? (yes I know it's a stoopid question) Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15611 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:39:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:39:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:40:07 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07712 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:39:58 -0800 Received: from M2W035.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.35]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:39:37 -0500 Message-ID: <191690-2200212419183937234@M2W035.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:39:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 18:39:37.0242 (UTC) FILETIME=[FB8E27A0:01C2A78D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Perhaps dried or stiff lubricant? Perhaps a "foreign object" I'd send it in to the doctor before you mess it up=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Sean Davis sfdavis@3web=2Enet Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:00:06 -0700 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Thanks for the thoughts on the lenses - it looks like the 85/2 takes it hands down=2E=2E=2E second question, slightly OT: i have a Tamron SP 35-80/2=2E8-3=2E8 which has performed beautifully for me - it recently began to have a "catch" in the zoom=2E when you turn the zoom ring, there is strong resistance right around the 60mm length; it takes quite a bit of pressure to turn it past 60 to the 80mm, and the same going back=2E Anybody have any idea what might be wrong inside? Thanks, Sean D=2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15889 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:40:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:40:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:41:03 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07716 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:40:55 -0800 Received: from M2W072.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.72]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:40:33 -0500 Message-ID: <63340-2200212419184033819@M2W072.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] F Collectable? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:40:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 18:40:34.0008 (UTC) FILETIME=[1D63F580:01C2A78E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OH, I forgot - He doesn't seem to have any provonance (sp?) or documentation to support the assumption that the camera was in-fact from Olympus in Japan=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Sam Shiell Sam=2EShiell@skybridgegroup=2Ecom Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:48:28 -0000 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] F Collectable? Have a look at this on e*bay??? 1946447811 Anyone a serious collector ? (yes I know it's a stoopid question) Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16250 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 18:53:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 18:53:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 10:53:12 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07729 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:53:04 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7D00AFJR1O6A@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:51:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:54:08 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus OM Lens to Canon EOS Body Adapter To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00a901c2a790$02e3adc0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/18/2002 Thomas Heide Clausen writes: << What was the company? Do they do OM-to-something-else adaptors as well? >> Here's the contact info: H. Masuda Kindai International Inc. E-mail : h.masuda@kindai-inc.co.jp The company is called Kindai. The website is in Japanese, which I am not able to read, so I am not sure what all they offer. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16599 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 19:00:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 19:00:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 11:01:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07733 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:00:53 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7D00A8ZREO6A@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:59:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:01:56 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <00af01c2a791$1a262840$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/18/2002 C.H.Ling writes: << If you are not use to ground glass focusing, forget about it, if you already using a 2-4 on your camera with good success then there will be no problem on D-60. >> Good to know. I have used a 2-4 for a while now in my OM-4t and find the 1 series screens in my other bodies nearly worthless in comparison now. I shoot mostly telephoto, but I find the 2-4 seems to work well for me with my 21/3.5 as well. With the 350/2.8 the difference is night and day. With the old screen (a 1-13 I think) it was okay, but with the 2-4 cars simply snap into (and out of) focus as they come into the frame. Makes my job of timing the shutter release point when something is coming at me at 150mph+ with next to no DOF much easier. Even moreso with the 1.4XA mounted. Is a D-60 viewfinder really that bright? I'll have to check this out... Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17191 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 19:35:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 19:35:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 11:35:16 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07788 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:35:08 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA72013 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:34:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219113417.0266f598@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:35:44 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] in case you want that junker of a 35-80... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The description says "new" and the seller seems to be a store in Brooklyn? (hope it's not one of those evil ones). Anyway, no connection, etc. ~$1100 seems to be a very good price is it is truly new, isn't it? http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1946630022 // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17676 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 19:57:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 19:57:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 11:57:25 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07823 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:57:16 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-46.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.46]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBJJpxU11564; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:52:00 +1300 Message-Id: <200212191952.gBJJpxU11564@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: gries@nothingrhymeswithorange.com, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:57:00 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... (really Luis) X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Bob, Great shots and thanks for sharing. And it's always interesting to have an insight into family life on another part of the globe. You are blessed with a very nice son; and mother seems very happy with the results of her efforts as well. Remarkable performance from the Zuiko 18mm. Thanks also for the examples of what it can do. Brian > As I was without my trusty 28mm lens the other day, I used my 18/3.5 > instead. The results are better than I expected. The distortion isn't > as bad as I would have thought, and the DOF is amazing! Almost all of > the shots were wide open! > > Any and all comments welcome. > > Bob > http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17926 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 19:57:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 19:57:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 11:57:48 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.186]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07827 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:57:39 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.162] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18P6na-0000LC-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:57:38 +0100 Received: from [80.130.167.189] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18P6nZ-0001vP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:57:37 +0100 Message-ID: <3E0224C3.8050908@doro-foto.de> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:57:55 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... References: <000e01c2a76d$e7d2a210$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id LAA07827 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca gries schrieb: > http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm great shots. These eyes are incredible! cheers :Doro --=20 Pers=F6nlichkeiten werden nicht durch sch=F6ne Reden geformt, sondern durch Arbeit und eigene Leistung. Albert Einstein < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18221 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 20:01:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 20:01:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 12:01:30 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr (postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07834 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:01:21 -0800 Received: from min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (strasbourg-1-a7-62-147-8-88.dial.proxad.net [62.147.8.88]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 90F18C198 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:01:18 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:31:08 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <3E010851.6060502@achtung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02121920595100.00777@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello everybody, I dont post very much. I am affraid my english may not be correct. Has anybody used or made tests of Voigtlander/Cosina 75mm ?=20 I have the 100/2.8 and 50/3.5, think the 85/2 to close from the 100mm.=20 I am interested with this 75mm.=20 An other possibility is to trade the 100 for 85 ;-)=20 I own also : OM1N 35/2.8 28/3.5 21/3.5.=20 The last, the more recent. Use of WA, first experience, was very impressing for me.=20 Now I am still to far from the subject but I am learning... =20 fischerchristian@free.fr Le jeu, 19 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > I know they aren't Zuiko's, but don't overlook a used Tamron 90mm with=20 > an adaptall. I own a 90mm Tokina f2.5, and it's a tack. >=20 > I have seen pics from the Tamrons, and the newer 90mmf2.8's go all the=20 > way down to 1:1 ratio for macro, very handy, and the images from it are= =20 > razor sharp, I think the sharpest lens in the Tamron lineup IMHO. >=20 > The 100/f2.8 is great, as is the 85mmf2 >=20 > Albert >=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19051 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 20:52:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 20:52:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 12:52:38 2002 -0800 Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.84]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07917 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:52:30 -0800 Received: from pool0458.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.135.203] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18P7eH-0003tZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:52:06 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <02121920595100.00777@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> References: <3E010851.6060502@achtung.com> <02121920595100.00777@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:51:12 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Hello everybody, > >I dont post very much. >I am affraid my english may not be correct. > >Has anybody used or made tests of Voigtlander/Cosina 75mm ? >I have the 100/2.8 and 50/3.5, think the 85/2 to close from the 100mm. >I am interested with this 75mm. >An other possibility is to trade the 100 for 85 ;-) > >I own also : OM1N 35/2.8 28/3.5 21/3.5. >The last, the more recent. >Use of WA, first experience, was very impressing for me. >Now I am still to far from the subject but I am learning... > >fischerchristian@free.fr Your English is welcome on the list. Much better than the French on the list. :-) There seem to be two philosophies for collecting lens of different focal lengths. One schools thinks that you should be able to stand in one place and get continuous coverage with the long dimension of the frame approximating the short dimension of the frame for the previous lens. For instance going from the 50 mm to the 85, what is gathered in the height of the 50 mm frame will approximate what is gather in the width of the 85 mm frame. That is how you get the common sequence where each focal length is about 2/3 of the next such as 21, 35, 50, 85(a little jump here), 135, 200, 300, 500 and so on. Other people who like more of a difference when they change lenses tend to go for a 50% ratio. They don't worry if there is a little gap in coverage because they can always move around. Typical sequence is 24, 50, 100, 200, 400. Others just buy lenses they think they will like and will be really useful for the kind of shooting they do. So many of us have a 50mm or two, a 50 mm macro, and a zoom that covers 50mm. Not too rational, but a history of our enthusiasms. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19340 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 20:56:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 20:56:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 12:56:25 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07929 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:56:17 -0800 Received: from M2W090.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.90]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:55:56 -0500 Message-ID: <1530-2200212419205555805@M2W090.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:55:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 20:55:56.0290 (UTC) FILETIME=[06A5D620:01C2A7A1] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Your english is fine, and don't lurk so much=2E We love to see new voices= =2E I'd expect the 75/2=2E5 to be a very good lens, as good or better than the= 85/2=2E It's not readily available here in the US though=2E It costs $47= 5 here, if you can find it=2E You could buy an 85/2 from KEH for $300=2E Personnaly, I'd rather have the 85/2=2E There isn't very much difference between the 75mm and 85mm focal lengths=2E And you get 1/2 stop more ligh= t with the 85/2=2E =20 If you don't need the reach of the 100, sell it and buy an 85 and a 135/3=2E5=2E That would be $300 for the 85 and $75 for the 135/3=2E5=2E = You could sell the 100/2=2E8 for $125=2E So the whole change from 100 to 85+135 wou= ld cost ~$250=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: fischerchristian fischerchristian@free=2Efr Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:31:08 +0100 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Hello everybody, I dont post very much=2E I am affraid my english may not be correct=2E Has anybody used or made tests of Voigtlander/Cosina 75mm ?=20 I have the 100/2=2E8 and 50/3=2E5, think the 85/2 to close from the 100mm=2E= =20 I am interested with this 75mm=2E=20 An other possibility is to trade the 100 for 85 ;-)=20 I own also : OM1N 35/2=2E8 28/3=2E5 21/3=2E5=2E=20 The last, the more recent=2E Use of WA, first experience, was very impressing for me=2E=20 Now I am still to far from the subject but I am learning=2E=2E=2E =20 fischerchristian@free=2Efr Le jeu, 19 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > I know they aren't Zuiko's, but don't overlook a used Tamron 90mm with=20= > an adaptall=2E I own a 90mm Tokina f2=2E5, and it's a tack=2E >=20 > I have seen pics from the Tamrons, and the newer 90mmf2=2E8's go all the= =20 > way down to 1:1 ratio for macro, very handy, and the images from it are=20= > razor sharp, I think the sharpest lens in the Tamron lineup IMHO=2E >=20 > The 100/f2=2E8 is great, as is the 85mmf2 >=20 > Albert >=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19604 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 20:57:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 20:57:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 12:58:06 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07933 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:57:58 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.76]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021219205706.OKQO13938.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:57:06 -0500 Message-ID: <00f401c2a7a1$243ac600$4c2a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: Subject: Re: RE: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:56:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you buy a used tripod, be careful. I bought used 3030 legs without a head. I didn't check it out carefully until months later when I "found" a used 3047 head. One of the legs will slide right out instead of stopping at the end of its travel. The 3047 head says I'm perfectly level but if I rotate the head and read it from the other side of the tripod, it says I'm about 10 degrees off. Maybe they drilled the hole crooked in the head? Burned badly in Cincinnati (It rhymes but I'm not smiling) Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19936 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 21:04:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 21:04:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 13:04:41 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA07951 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:04:34 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:09:21 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:03:08 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: RE: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:08:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2002 21:09:21.0281 (UTC) FILETIME=[E675B710:01C2A7A2] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So you're saying the seller wasn't completely 'on the level' with you......... ??? We have to keep laughing...... -----Original Message----- From: Jim L'Hommedieu The 3047 head says I'm perfectly level but if I rotate the head and read it from the other side of the tripod, it says I'm about 10 degrees off. Maybe they drilled the hole crooked in the head? Burned badly in Cincinnati (It rhymes but I'm not smiling) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20298 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 21:10:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 21:10:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 13:10:47 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA07967 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:10:39 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.44.2b15e14f (4568) for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:08:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <44.2b15e14f.2b338f62@aol.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:08:50 EST Subject: Re: [OM] The Perfect Tripod? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_44.2b15e14f.2b338f62_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_44.2b15e14f.2b338f62_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/19/02 3:05:09 PM Central Standard Time, Jim.Timpe@Fluke.com writes: > So you're saying the seller wasn't completely 'on the level' with > you......... ??? > > We have to keep laughing...... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim L'Hommedieu > > The 3047 head says I'm perfectly level but if I rotate the head and read it > from the other side of the tripod, it says I'm > about 10 degrees off. Maybe they drilled the hole crooked in the head Or you could say he was one leg up on you. Bill Barber --part1_44.2b15e14f.2b338f62_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/19/02 3:05:09 PM Central Standard Time, Jim.Timpe@Fluke.com writes:


So you're saying the seller wasn't completely 'on the level' with
you.........  ???

We have to keep laughing......

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim L'Hommedieu

The 3047 head says I'm perfectly level but if I rotate the head and read it
from the other side of the tripod, it says I'm
about 10 degrees off.  Maybe they drilled the hole crooked in the head


Or you could say he was one leg up on you.  Bill Barber --part1_44.2b15e14f.2b338f62_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20557 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 21:11:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 21:11:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 13:11:16 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA07971 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:11:08 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-68-1-114.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.68.1.114]) by pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBJLAakD054966 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:10:37 -0500 Message-ID: <001301c2a7a1$985cff80$72014441@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021219152212.10536.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] reactions to bob's photos Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:59:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bob, The baby photos are a good example of thow useful the 18 can be if you are careful to not let straight lines get out of hand. Also, am I missing something, or does little Luis get especially clean when boiled on the stove? Also, I continue to be appalled at photos of grandparents who look younger than I. Thanks to your fine abilities, grandma looks about 22. The B&W looks good, but with silver nose and silver film, what else can you expect. I remain jealous of the person who got your contribution to the exchange. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20818 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 21:11:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 21:11:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 13:11:32 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA07975 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:11:23 -0800 Received: from pool0458.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.135.203] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18P7wQ-0001Kd-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:10:51 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:10:48 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] [OT]Digital Theater Pix Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For you theater/stadium shooters this might be of interest. Digital shot at 1600 ISO. >...the Dickens' classic, 'A Christmas >Carol'. Performed by the East coast tour of the Nebraska Theatre >Caravan. The photos were all taken with the 1D, manual exposure >at ISO1600, on the Canon 70-200L IS lens. > >Enjoy! >http://ckuiphoff.com/bardavon/christmas_carol/ > -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21586 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 21:58:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 21:58:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 13:58:23 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.comcast.net (smtp.comcast.net [24.153.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08046 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 13:58:15 -0800 Received: from George Sears (pcp452738pcs.abrcrn01.ga.comcast.net [68.51.172.228]) by mtaout05.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.07 (built Nov 25 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7D00JP5ZED0S@mtaout05.icomcast.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:51:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:52:28 -0500 From: George Sears Subject: RE: [OM] F Collectable? In-reply-to: <63340-2200212419184033819@M2W072.mail2web.com> To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3E01F94C.698.214CA15@localhost> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Guess they all were Property of Olympus at one time GeoW On 19 Dec 2002 at 13:40, om@skipwilliams.com wrote: > OH, I forgot - He doesn't seem to have any provonance (sp?) or > documentation to support the assumption that the camera was in-fact > from Olympus in Japan. > > Skip > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21971 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 22:12:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 22:12:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 14:12:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08064 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:12:08 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax84-b174.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.25.174]) by mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBJMC6F07763 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:12:06 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:10:47 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <000e01c2a76d$e7d2a210$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bob, Great shots. I'm surprised at the lack of distortion. I took a shot of my sister-in-law with the 28/2.8 with her towards the side of the image. It so distorted her face that I've been loathe to show it to her. BTW that's a pretty switched-on little bloke you've got there. Obviously a dedicated Mum...and Dad. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of gries Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 1:50 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... As I was without my trusty 28mm lens the other day, I used my 18/3.5 instead. The results are better than I expected. The distortion isn't as bad as I would have thought, and the DOF is amazing! Almost all of the shots were wide open! Any and all comments welcome. Bob http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22551 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 22:49:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 22:49:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 14:50:07 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08122 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:49:59 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.97.114]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021219224543.PNER4233.pop016.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:45:43 -0600 Message-ID: <000d01c2a7b0$61eb79e0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <000e01c2a76d$e7d2a210$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: Re: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 17:45:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [141.157.97.114] at Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:45:43 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You are right, they are amazing. I wouldn't have thought an 18 would be good for people shots, but you've proven me wrong! Crisp, clear and sharp through the room. Nice! Was the flash camera or stand mounted? There is only one shot that is portrait oriented, but the flash is still bounced from the ceiling. I guess it could have been cropped. The flash worked really well. You got a nice soft yet adequate bath of light through the room (pun intended). Well done! Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "gries" To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:49 AM Subject: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... > As I was without my trusty 28mm lens the other day, I used my 18/3.5 > instead. The results are better than I expected. The distortion isn't > as bad as I would have thought, and the DOF is amazing! Almost all of > the shots were wide open! > > Any and all comments welcome. > > Bob > http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22837 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 22:52:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 22:52:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 14:52:54 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA08130 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:52:45 -0800 Received: (qmail 3307 invoked by uid 706); 19 Dec 2002 22:51:38 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 22:51:36 -0000 Message-ID: <007a01c2a7b2$05219760$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <00af01c2a791$1a262840$1f00a8c0@mike> Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS Adapters Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:57:33 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have never seen the D60 finder, but I'm using a bright EOS EC (?) focusing screen (not all EOS screen are having the same brightness, this could be the brightest one) on my 4Ti, its brightness is next to the OM 2-series screen. I have tried many focusing screen, haven't seen one that is as bright and fine as the OM. But I found it a little difficult when using short zoom like the 35-70/3.6, focusing is not so easy at the wide end especially at lower light level, for tele it is perfect. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Veglia" > In a message dated 12/18/2002 C.H.Ling writes: > > << If you are not use to ground glass focusing, forget about it, if you > already using a 2-4 on your camera with good success then there will > be no problem on D-60. >> > > Good to know. I have used a 2-4 for a while now in my OM-4t and find the 1 > series screens in my other bodies nearly worthless in comparison now. I > shoot mostly telephoto, but I find the 2-4 seems to work well for me with my > 21/3.5 as well. With the 350/2.8 the difference is night and day. With the > old screen (a 1-13 I think) it was okay, but with the 2-4 cars simply snap > into (and out of) focus as they come into the frame. Makes my job of timing > the shutter release point when something is coming at me at 150mph+ with > next to no DOF much easier. Even moreso with the 1.4XA mounted. > > Is a D-60 viewfinder really that bright? I'll have to check this out... > > Mike Veglia > Motor Sport Visions Photography > http://www.motorsportvisions.com > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23419 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 23:26:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 23:26:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 15:26:54 2002 -0800 Received: from web13704.mail.yahoo.com (web13704.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA08183 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:26:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20021219232633.18363.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.34] by web13704.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:26:33 PST Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:26:33 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] I'm back! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021219152212.10536.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >...here are some shots that I did recently at my parish. >After some convincing from [AG Schnozz], I thought that I >would try some PanF. I am very pleased with the results, and >as always, scans can never do the original prints justice. Nor do the prints compared to the negs. Those particular pictures taken with the Tamron 80-200/2.8 with 140F are among the very sharpest negatives I've ever seen. I'm completely convinced that lens is in the "world-class" category. I believe it "out-sharpened" every other shot on the roll taken with the Zuikos. Heresy? Given that these were on PanF, I wouldn't hesitate to blow them up to 20x30" or greater. The 8x10s look like they were taken by a medium format camera. One could probably survive quite nicely with a Zuiko 35-80/2.8 and the Tamron along with a couple of specialty wide-angles. >I'd also recommend [AG's] services as he takes great care in >achieving the best results. Thanks for the plug. My turn-around time has been a bit long this month due to my day-job and other holiday activities, but the B&W services are available for any others. Rates are comparable to other labs, slightly more in some areas, less in others. But I offer things like push/pull processing at no extra cost. Also, I will only deal with Ilford films and process them only in Ilford DD-X. I print using Ilford Papers and chemistry. (Note a theme here?) Contact me offlist for details, pricing, availablity, film suggestions, etc. If enough consistant business comes in, who knows, this might become a full-time gig. It's getting harder and harder to find a lab that will do B&W anymore, much less correctly and not everybody is able to setup a darkroom. End of commercial message... AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23813 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 23:42:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 23:42:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 15:42:53 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA08197 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:42:44 -0800 Received: (qmail 14070 invoked by uid 706); 19 Dec 2002 23:41:41 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 23:41:41 -0000 Message-ID: <010801c2a7b9$03e93a40$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] [OT]Digital Theater Pix Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:47:37 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That is one good example why you need high ISO DC with fine grain, the E10/20 is very poor in this department. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" > For you theater/stadium shooters this might be of interest. Digital > shot at 1600 ISO. > > >...the Dickens' classic, 'A Christmas > >Carol'. Performed by the East coast tour of the Nebraska Theatre > >Caravan. The photos were all taken with the 1D, manual exposure > >at ISO1600, on the Canon 70-200L IS lens. > > > >Enjoy! > >http://ckuiphoff.com/bardavon/christmas_carol/ > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24130 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2002 23:48:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 19 Dec 2002 23:48:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 15:48:30 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08214 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 15:48:22 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.76]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021219234730.YAYV14019.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:47:30 -0500 Message-ID: <012501c2a7b8$f1b83ec0$4c2a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <3E52F1E4-117E-11D7-BF6D-000393D898F8@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT - Awesome Digital Photography Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:47:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ha! You want to exchange quotes? Take this: Pop Photo Sept 2002, p 88: "Pro photographers will no doubt wonder how the D100 compares to the higher-priced Nikon D1x or D1H. Like both of these cameras, the Nikon D100 is designed from the ground up as a digital SLR and is not based on a modified film camera body." And now for my finishing move: Your post was in html ! Lama From: Winsor Crosby >>>>>> DP Review on the web says: "The D100 has a six megapixel sensor, a body loosely based on the N80 (although Nikon are keen to note that it shares only some of its components with that camera), a Nikon F mount and a set of features which make it an extremely attractive and capable proposition." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26050 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 03:38:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 03:38:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 19:38:41 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d05.mx.aol.com (imo-d05.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08378 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 19:38:33 -0800 From: Crooks420@aol.com Received: from Crooks420@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.105.22a42b43 (3699) for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:34:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <105.22a42b43.2b33e9b1@aol.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:34:09 EST Subject: [OM] T32/F280 battery drain To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_105.22a42b43.2b33e9b1_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_105.22a42b43.2b33e9b1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have a question; has anyone had experience with battery drain on a T32 or an F280? My T32, when "on" during use will drain new batteries after one day. This started happening recently (it also had two recent drops), luckily I am using NIMH batteries. On the same topic, I bought a used F280, and it seems to drain batteries while stored in "off" (one week). to prevent this, I started storing with the battery cover removed, with no problems..... fully charged NIMH batteries will last saeveral weeks (weekend use). Is this normal for the F280?? How easy to fix the T32?? Cost of having it repaired?? on a side topic, I am starting to use fill flash (OM 4t with F280 and T32 &20 with wein photo slaves) at high shutter speeds, like 1/60--1/500. I have been using the OM 4t Auto mode, but would like to use it in Manual mode ( to get more control).... is it still possible to use the F280 in Super FP mode/ high sync sppeds?? I just finally got me a Skonic L-358 flash meter, and would like to better control my lighting ratios. Thanks for the help. Jesse --part1_105.22a42b43.2b33e9b1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have a question; has anyone had experience with battery drain on a T32 or an F280? My T32, when "on" during use will drain new batteries after one day. This started happening recently (it also had two recent drops), luckily I am using NIMH batteries. On the same topic, I bought a used F280, and it seems to drain batteries while stored in "off" (one week). to prevent this, I started storing with the battery cover removed, with no problems..... fully charged NIMH batteries will last saeveral weeks (weekend use). Is this normal for the F280??
How easy to fix the T32?? Cost of having it repaired??

on a side topic, I am starting to use fill flash (OM 4t with F280 and T32 &20 with wein photo slaves) at high shutter speeds, like 1/60--1/500. I have been using the OM 4t Auto mode, but would like to use it in Manual mode ( to get more control).... is it still possible to use the F280 in Super FP mode/ high sync sppeds?? I just finally got me a Skonic L-358 flash meter, and would like to better control my lighting ratios. Thanks for the help.

Jesse --part1_105.22a42b43.2b33e9b1_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26494 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 04:06:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 04:06:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 20:06:44 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08397 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:06:36 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.118.111]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021220040220.QROK4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:02:20 -0600 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:01:51 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <000e01c2a76d$e7d2a210$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Subject: Re: [OM] I'd hate to be on topic with all this digi-talk, but... X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [151.198.118.111] at Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:02:20 -0600 Message-Id: <20021220040220.QROK4606.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <000e01c2a76d$e7d2a210$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com>, on 12/19/02 at 08:49 AM, "gries" said: >http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/18.htm Number 11 is truly a winner...and you're right about the DOF. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26782 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 04:13:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 04:13:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 20:13:22 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08401 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:13:14 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18PEXB-0007XM-00 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:13:13 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: [OM] ES-10 Scanners Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:12:25 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There are several Olympus ES-10 film scanners on EB*Y for $100 BIN. These are not the best scanners but that is a good price for someone that wants to get started with this process. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=706&item=1946269551 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27073 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 04:19:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 04:19:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 20:19:54 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08411 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:19:46 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.118.111]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021220041531.ZFNH4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:15:31 -0600 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:14:57 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <001201c2a776$910971d0$d1ea4a42@davegael> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [151.198.118.111] at Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:15:30 -0600 Message-Id: <20021220041531.ZFNH4645.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <001201c2a776$910971d0$d1ea4a42@davegael>, on 12/19/02 at 07:51 AM, "Dave Dougherty" said: >http://www.pbase.com/davehugh/macro_florals *Most* impressive. Hmmm.... ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27357 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 04:21:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 04:21:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 20:21:23 2002 -0800 Received: from out005.verizon.net (out005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.143]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08417 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:21:15 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.118.111]) by out005.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021220041659.UMCW19422.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:16:59 -0600 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:16:47 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <00e901c2a735$4acdecf0$0100a8c0@parents> Subject: Re: [OM] RE: Visit to Oz (OT) X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out005.verizon.net from [151.198.118.111] at Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:16:59 -0600 Message-Id: <20021220041659.UMCW19422.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <00e901c2a735$4acdecf0$0100a8c0@parents>, on 12/19/02 at 07:04 PM, "Terry and Tracey" said: >A shout is the round of beers. All clear now. Thanks! ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27716 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 04:35:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 04:35:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 20:36:07 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.comcast.net (smtp.comcast.net [24.153.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08425 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:35:58 -0800 Received: from comcast.net (pcp02036052pcs.mnhwkn01.nj.comcast.net [68.83.186.91]) by mtaout01.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.07 (built Nov 25 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7E002ZQHV721@mtaout01.icomcast.net> for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:30:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:30:40 -0500 From: Ed Senior Subject: Re: [OM] ES-10 Scanners To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <3E029CEF.1070404@comcast.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 References: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I remember talking a bit about them when I was asking about a PrimeImage scanner. I would imagine that the Win 98 drivers would still work with ME, but does anyone know for sure? Also, is the ES-10 that much better that I should try it? BTW, my "fall back" position would be to put it on my wife's computer... it's running Win 98SE. Ed Senior James N. McBride wrote: >There are several Olympus ES-10 film scanners on EB*Y for $100 BIN. These >are not the best scanners but that is a good price for someone that wants to >get started with this process. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28274 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 05:17:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 05:17:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 21:17:29 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao04.cox.net (lakemtao04.cox.net [68.1.17.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08473 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:17:21 -0800 Received: from number1 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021220051300.GTWK22825.lakemtao04.cox.net@number1> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:13:00 -0500 Message-ID: <004801c2a7e6$9599da80$0201a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <001f01c2a619$ce429b20$0200a8c0@ctx> <004a01c2a69c$2d84ebb0$efe27ad1@hppav> Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:12:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Use Norton and you problems disappear. Bryan Pilati OM-2n; IS-3 Va-USA Disclaimer: I'm always joking unless I should be serious. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hermanson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT > I used to get 2-3 klez emails a day, don't get any now. > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > please call 1-800-221-3000 > _________________________________ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mickey Trageser" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:15 PM > Subject: [OM] VIRUS ALERT > > > > According to Norton, I have received an email containing the W32.KLEZ.H@MM > > virus. > > The subject is: Sep 12 2002 19. > > The return and from addresses are 'jlind@spitfire.net', but the apparant > > sender is JAQ50@aol.com. > > > > -Mickey > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28765 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 05:50:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 05:50:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 21:50:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08501 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:50:26 -0800 Received: from [206.170.5.134] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7E004QBLH9HA@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:48:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:50:18 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) In-reply-to: <20021219151310.67469.qmail@web13703.mail.yahoo.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/19/02 7:13 AM, AG Schnozz at agschnozz@yahoo.com wrote: > Iowa ain't that cheap. We spend similar amounts on housing and > cars. It's just that both are a whole lot bigger. > > AG I thought that was Texas... or is it -everything's- bigger in TEXAS...? -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29047 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 05:55:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 05:55:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 21:56:12 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08509 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:56:03 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.154] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A15D58EC00EC; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:57:49 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:54:16 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <65B6ZVYBMIIF761VMLZU163LKYW51.3e02b088@desktop> Subject: Re: [OM] Film vs. Digital in terms of $$$ (long) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/19/2002 9:50:18 PM, Jim Brokaw wrote: >on 12/19/02 7:13 AM, AG Schnozz at agschnozz@yahoo.com wrote: > >> Iowa ain't that cheap. We spend similar amounts on housing and >> cars. It's just that both are a whole lot bigger. >> >> AG > >I thought that was Texas... or is it -everything's- bigger in TEXAS...? >-- got that right! Tx is the only place we lived where in various houses i visited, the showerhead was always at mounted higher than in NY and CA. at least in the 2 houses i visit in NY, dozen or so in Ca, and a couple in Tx. i liked having them up high. /S -- "We apologise for the inconvenience." < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29415 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 06:11:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 06:11:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 22:11:59 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08528 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:11:50 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:58:42 +0800 Message-ID: <3E02B410.6080505@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:09:20 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens References: <21240v8m7vv789hr9adclb5t5dpgkh5cjf@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <21240v8m7vv789hr9adclb5t5dpgkh5cjf@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'd get that thing looked at before it's too late. If there's an foreign object in there (and it's sharp) it will ruin your tubes with constant use.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29666 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 06:12:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 06:12:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 22:12:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08532 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:12:14 -0800 Received: from [206.170.5.134] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7E004GHMHLHA@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:10:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:12:05 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens In-reply-to: <02121920595100.00777@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/19/02 11:31 AM, fischerchristian at fischerchristian@free.fr wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I dont post very much. > I am affraid my english may not be correct. > > Has anybody used or made tests of Voigtlander/Cosina 75mm ? > I have the 100/2.8 and 50/3.5, think the 85/2 to close from the 100mm. > I am interested with this 75mm. > An other possibility is to trade the 100 for 85 ;-) > > I own also : OM1N 35/2.8 28/3.5 21/3.5. > The last, the more recent. > Use of WA, first experience, was very impressing for me. > Now I am still to far from the subject but I am learning... > > fischerchristian@free.fr Christian -- Your English is quite OK, much better than my French! By Cosina-Voigtlander 75mm I assume you mean the SLR lens. Cosina-Voigtlander makes a range of lenses for the Leica screw mount cameras (and Leica M with adapter). They also make some of these lenses in mounts for old Nikon rangefinder and Contax rangefinder bodies. These lenses are regarded very well. If the SLR lenses use a similar optical design they should be quite good. I have seen many pictures posted on the internet taken with the rangefinder Cosina-Voigtlander lenses which look very good. Cosina makes SLR cameras which are sold with many different names, possibly some lenses sold as Minolta or Nikon or Canon were actually manufactured by Cosina, probably to a design by the 'named' company. If you like the 75mm focal length, it may be a good choice. I really like the Zuiko 85/2.0, it is compact, easy to focus, and works well indoors without flash. They are popular enough to be rather expensive compared to the 100/2.8 and 75-150/4.0 zoom which are near the same focal length. -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29695 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 06:12:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 06:12:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 22:12:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08536 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:12:17 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBK6B4d53453; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:11:04 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.143] (195-74-115-143.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.143]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBK6Awo53379; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:10:59 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <001401c2a770$6e08c740$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> References: <001401c2a770$6e08c740$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:26:36 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] I'm back! Cc: "gries" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Lovely interior photos Bob! They are almost luminous... I must have a go at church interiors with mono film, but you reckon, do you, that Pan F is the business? I like little Luis as well. The exposure is just right, and the distortion of the ultrawide is kept to a minimum. Cheers Chris At 09:08 -0600 19/12/02, gries wrote: >Also lost to the bounce: > >...here are some shots that I did recently at my parish. After some >convincing from Ken Norton, I thought that I would try some PanF. I am >very pleased with the results, and as always, scans can never do the >original prints justice. > >I'd also recommend Ken's services as he takes great care in achieving >the best results. > >The church is one of two basilicas here in Chicago, although our pastor >says that the other one isn't the *real* basilica. ;) the church was >founded in the late 1800's and I believe the present structure was >completed in 1897. the servites are a small order founded in Florence in >13th century (more info can be found at: http://www.servite.org/ )who >have a special devotion to Mary. The alter featured here is devoted to >the seven founders and is surrounded by frescos describing the church's >status as a basilica. The fresco immediately behind the alter shows the >church during its inauguration by Pope Pius the V (I think). If one >looks closely, many of the city's landmarks of the time, can be seen >depicted as the context of this looming structure - the Chicago board of >trade, Wrigley building, and industrial factories. > >As always, any comments are most welcome. Enjoy! > >http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/OLS.htm > >http://ols-chicago.org/index.htm -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30543 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 07:01:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 07:01:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 23:01:14 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp017.mail.yahoo.com (smtp017.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.114]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA08585 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:01:05 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-26-250.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.26.250 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 07:00:20 -0000 Message-ID: <3E02C001.7090202@sbcglobal.net> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:00:17 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: <001201c2a776$910971d0$d1ea4a42@davegael> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dave Dougherty wrote: >For the most part I have stayed on the sidelines of the discussions of the >pros and cons of Digital vs. Film. > Me too. It seems to me that these discussions are a lot like when 'the guys' get together, possibly with a few beers, and talk about cars, electronics, etc. There is a lot more noise in the air based on speculation, theory and what people have (or think they have) read or heard than on actual experience. It can be a fun exercise, but also quite misleading. >I purchased an Olympus C4040, intending to shoot digital >as a supplement to my film efforts. The immediacy and overall high quality >of the photos made with the C4040 exceeded my expectations. > I bought a Can*n S110 as a size/cost/quality trade-off based on extensive reading research. I did so with some trepidation whether it would be up to making acceptable 4x6 prints, based on all the discussions of how many pixels it would take. Much to my surprise, I discovered that a decent lens and 2.1mp is more than adequate for 8x10 with proper digital printing on a good quality printer. >At 5 MP the E-20 will not produce a photo with the same sharpness as film >when subjected to high magnification or enlargement. But in the "real" >world of photo prints that I feel that I am part of the photos are wonderful >and more than acceptable. > As someone else posted a while ago, there is something about prints from DCs that people really like. Skin, eye sparkles, reflections in and through water are a few areas where I've noticed that they really excell. Of course, my little P&S has a lot of limitations, but in its areas of competence, it's damn good. Of course it's already 'obsolete', in that newer models exceed its specs, but it still does more than what I bought it for and will likely do so for some time, so I don't worry about price/feature issues. If I'd waited for the perfect computer at the best deal, I still wouldn't have one 20+ years later; same thin with DCs. > Rather than argue how many pixels can dance on >the head of a pin, I just decided to go ahead and get involved. The results >speak for themselves and I am better off for having started the journey. > Exactly. It's the results that count, no matter what the tools. And in my opinion, you really can't tell very much about the quality of the results in other forms from web images. I'm really amazed when people comment on the sharpness of lenses and film based on small jpeg images that have been downsampled, sharpened and compressed. Moose < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31098 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 07:41:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 07:41:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 19 23:41:19 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08617 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:41:10 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:28:21 +0800 Message-ID: <3E02C904.2020807@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:38:44 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://www.tawbaware.com/film_digital.htm This guy sums up what I couldn't figure out.. Finally, I can have some peace... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31622 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 08:20:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 08:20:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 00:21:02 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA08658 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:20:52 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:08:07 +0800 Message-ID: <3E02D24B.6050004@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:18:19 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: <001201c2a776$910971d0$d1ea4a42@davegael> <3E02C001.7090202@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <3E02C001.7090202@sbcglobal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Because I currently own nothing that is digital, I feel that I have an advantage.. Because I am starting from a new sheet. But with the introduction of the Kodak 14Mpx SLR, it would seem like you can get what you never thought possible before, Medium format quality in a 35mm SLR. I am still not sure that the lens would resolve that much though in a 35mm lens... Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31942 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 08:33:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 08:33:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 00:34:03 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA08670 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:33:55 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA40429 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:33:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220002900.027b1d08@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 00:34:31 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital In-Reply-To: <3E02D24B.6050004@achtung.com> References: <3E02C001.7090202@sbcglobal.net> <001201c2a776$910971d0$d1ea4a42@davegael> <3E02C001.7090202@sbcglobal.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 04:18 PM 12/20/2002 +0800, Albert wrote: >Because I currently own nothing that is digital, I feel that I have an >advantage.. Because I am starting from a new sheet. > >But with the introduction of the Kodak 14Mpx SLR, it would seem like you >can get what you never thought possible before, Medium format quality in a >35mm SLR. > >I am still not sure that the lens would resolve that much though in a 35mm >lens... >... Well, we should stop soon before other OM listers kick us out for taking over the list into a digital list! But,.... it is clear to me anyway that with the 13-MP/14-MP 1Ds from Cannon and DC-14n from Kodak, the only two major factors preventing mass migration to digitals are 1) High Cost. Kodak's $5000 and Cannon's $9000. These are without lens! and 2) Massive wonderbricks. We are talking about 3 to 4 lbs worth of machinery on your hand. Add a flash and you're talking about 4-5 pounds! Hang THAT on your neck. As for the lens, it can be reformulated if needed be. Also, I thought the bottleneck is the film resolution of the 35mm and not the lens? Then again, I know next to nothing about lens design... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32458 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 09:13:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 09:13:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 01:13:37 2002 -0800 Received: from web14406.mail.yahoo.com (web14406.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.76]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA08693 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 01:13:29 -0800 Message-ID: <20021220091316.76398.qmail@web14406.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [205.188.208.105] by web14406.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 01:13:16 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 01:13:16 -0800 (PST) From: "W. Xato" Subject: Re: [OM] 4x5 Provia cross processed c-41 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021219152212.10536.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Try scanning it into Photoshop or similar, invert it, and then try autolevels. You will probably be surprised at how close it is. Then work on the curves a bit to bring it back to how you want it. Warren on 12/18/02 2:46 PM, M. Lloyd at royer007@yahoo.com wrote: > My question to the list is this; can I rescue these > photos in any way? I'm not so disapponited by the > landscapes they actually look kinda cool but there is > one shot of my family that I would really like to try > and save if I can. Thnaks for your time and reading > through this long winded post. > > Mark Lloyd > ===== Warren Xato For where to go when you know when -PhotoDates-and-Places@yahoogroups.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 329 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 09:29:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 09:29:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 01:29:25 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA08701 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 01:29:15 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:16:50 +0800 Message-ID: <3E02E25E.3000302@achtung.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:26:54 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My friend is about to take a B&W photo class as part of her being an art major... Same thing happened with my ex-gf, the teachers recommend a used Pentax MF as THE camera to have for the class.. As far as "Bang for the buck" I don't see how my Om1n can be beat.. What am I missing here that the photo teachers know or don't know or conspire?? I would think an Om1+50mm/f1.8 is the cats meow.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1215 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 09:55:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 09:55:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 01:55:17 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA08738 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 01:55:08 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBK9lGU04631 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:47:16 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:54:06 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F56B6@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:54:04 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Albert [mailto:olympus@achtung.com] wrote: > My friend is about to take a B&W photo class as part of her > being an art major... Same thing happened with my ex-gf, the > teachers recommend a used Pentax MF as THE camera to have for > the class.. I believe for many years, and from the sounds of it still, the K1000 was *the* student camera of choice. Cheap, manual and everywhere (produced from 1976 to 1997 from memory). Place that next to (at least around this way) the far greater secondhand availability of appropriate fit lenses for the K1000 compared to the Olympus, and it probably explains a lot (student = little money in many circumstances). I think the thinking is that "get them to buy something cheap, readily available, and *manually* simple, and if they decide they like it *then* they can pick their poison from the more expensive ranges and wonderbricks if they so wish". Oddly, in recent times I've seen far more OM1 one bodies than I've seen K1000 bodies (and the K1000's weren't so cheap as suggested for that same reason I guess). Still, from all I read while looking for my "manual camera of choice" that became the OM1, I'd not begrudge having settled on one of the Pentax jobbies (other than or the "Made in Japan", not "Assembled in China", version K1000) with a 50mm/f1.8 attached. 'Course, I could be completely wrong. Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1652 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 10:18:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 10:18:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 02:19:10 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix4-1.free.fr (postfix4-1.free.fr [213.228.0.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA08765 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:19:01 -0800 Received: from min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (strasbourg-2-a7-62-147-14-14.dial.proxad.net [62.147.14.14]) by postfix4-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 20D20D751 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:18:58 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:20:11 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <1530-2200212419205555805@M2W090.mail2web.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122011173100.00859@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for your "encouragements" I will post more=20 and for the list that keep OM alive.=20 I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices.=20 Christian Le jeu, 19 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > Your english is fine, and don't lurk so much. We love to see new voice= s. >=20 > I'd expect the 75/2.5 to be a very good lens, as good or better than th= e > 85/2. It's not readily available here in the US though. It costs $475 > here, if you can find it. You could buy an 85/2 from KEH for $300. >=20 > Personnaly, I'd rather have the 85/2. There isn't very much difference > between the 75mm and 85mm focal lengths. And you get 1/2 stop more lig= ht > with the 85/2. =20 >=20 > If you don't need the reach of the 100, sell it and buy an 85 and a > 135/3.5. That would be $300 for the 85 and $75 for the 135/3.5. You c= ould > sell the 100/2.8 for $125. So the whole change from 100 to 85+135 woul= d > cost ~$250. >=20 > Skip >=20 >=20 >=20 > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: fischerchristian fischerchristian@free.fr > Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:31:08 +0100 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens >=20 >=20 > Hello everybody, >=20 > I dont post very much. > I am affraid my english may not be correct. >=20 > Has anybody used or made tests of Voigtlander/Cosina 75mm ?=20 > I have the 100/2.8 and 50/3.5, think the 85/2 to close from the 100mm.=20 > I am interested with this 75mm.=20 > An other possibility is to trade the 100 for 85 ;-)=20 >=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1961 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 10:25:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 10:25:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 02:25:33 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA08772 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:25:24 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA66884 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:24:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220015319.02468770@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:25:58 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? In-Reply-To: <3E02E25E.3000302@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 05:26 PM 12/20/2002 +0800, Albert wrote: >My friend is about to take a B&W photo class as part of her being an art >major... Same thing happened with my ex-gf, the teachers recommend a used >Pentax MF as THE camera to have for the class.. > >As far as "Bang for the buck" I don't see how my Om1n can be beat.. What >am I missing here that the photo teachers know or don't know or conspire?? > >I would think an Om1+50mm/f1.8 is the cats meow.. >.. The Pentax is as small as the OM. The Pentax K mount is probably the most popular bayonet lensmount out there, at least before Nikon and Cannon completely taking over the photo world. The K1000 was cheap, cheap, and cheap. Remember the OM-1 is supposed for professional who didn't want to lug around a 2 lbs Nikon F (Hmmm... may history repeat itself with the 4/3 system!) whereas the K1000 was designed to be, cheap, for students. Of course there is also a cult of the Takumar lens of old, but I don't know how much that follows to the Pentax SLR line. Many have said that the Takumar are some of the best lens ever made, and that includes the Leica and Zeiss. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2242 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 10:32:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 10:32:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 02:32:15 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA08776 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:32:07 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA68563 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:31:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220023006.027c5e88@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:32:43 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens In-Reply-To: <02122011173100.00859@min.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> References: <1530-2200212419205555805@M2W090.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 10:20 AM 12/20/2002 +0100, fischerchristian wrote: >Thanks for your "encouragements" I will post more >and for the list that keep OM alive. > >I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices. >.. Definitely don't worry your English, your English is not that bad compared to mine, and I have been living here for well over a quarter of a century! The CV lens that I would be interested in is the 40/2. However, it is large, turns the wrong way, and I am getting quite fond of the Zuiko 40/2. I still would like to see a head to head comparison though... // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4440 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 14:37:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 14:37:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 06:38:14 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08990 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:38:05 -0800 Received: from M2W043.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.43]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:37:43 -0500 Message-ID: <2920-2200212520143743451@M2W043.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:37:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2002 14:37:43.0604 (UTC) FILETIME=[5B2A7F40:01C2A835] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca *** No direct OM content *** Further to the bokeh discussion of a couple of weeks ago, y'all might want= to check this page out with some comparisons between two Leica lenses: 90/= 2 Apo-Summicron and 90/2=2E8 Tele-Elmarit=2E I was struck by the bokeh differences between these two lenses, one of 1970's vintage, and the other= the best 90mm lens that Leica has ever built=2E Even at the same aperture= , there are significant differences between the bokeh of the photos=2E I prefer the Apo-Summicron, personnaly=2E The interesting thing is that I had both of these lenses and sold the TE because I didn't like it's images and bokeh, while the Apo-Summicron was too heavy=2E =20 Skip -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4720 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 14:42:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 14:42:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 06:42:59 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08994 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:42:50 -0800 Received: from M2W046.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.46]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:42:29 -0500 Message-ID: <157240-2200212520144229202@M2W046.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:42:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2002 14:42:29.0337 (UTC) FILETIME=[0579E490:01C2A836] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Duhhh! http://www=2Ephotoartworld=2Ecom/lenstest/ Original Message: ----------------- From: om@skipwilliams=2Ecom om@skipwilliams=2Ecom Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:37:43 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons *** No direct OM content *** Further to the bokeh discussion of a couple of weeks ago, y'all might want= to check this page out with some comparisons between two Leica lenses: 90/= 2 Apo-Summicron and 90/2=2E8 Tele-Elmarit=2E I was struck by the bokeh differences between these two lenses, one of 1970's vintage, and the other= the best 90mm lens that Leica has ever built=2E Even at the same aperture= , there are significant differences between the bokeh of the photos=2E I prefer the Apo-Summicron, personnaly=2E The interesting thing is that I had both of these lenses and sold the TE because I didn't like it's images and bokeh, while the Apo-Summicron was too heavy=2E =20 Skip -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5049 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 14:52:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 14:52:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 06:52:55 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA09011 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:52:46 -0800 Received: from M2W092.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.92]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:52:24 -0500 Message-ID: <114780-2200212520145224490@M2W092.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:52:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2002 14:52:24.0659 (UTC) FILETIME=[6850D230:01C2A837] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My $=2E02: I have to disagree on one thing: a Pentax K1000 is NOT as small as an OM=2E= =20 But the LX, ME, MX, etc lines are as small, or even smaller than an OM camera though=2E The M's are not as reliable as the K1000 though=2E The availability of lenses is a major factor, as is the very good reliability-to-price ratio of the K1000=2E The earlier screw-mount MC Taukmars were every bit the equal to Zeiss at the time=2E They are one of= the all-time geat lens buys still out there=2E Get a Spotmatic F and thre= e MC Taukmars, and you'll can out-shoot a modern Nikon AF camera short of an= AFS lens and AF or Motor needs=2E There are plenty of other, non-Pentax options that should be considered from the late 70's, early 80's era: The ones with readily available lense= s include: Nikon FM2, FE2, Canon FTb, AE1, Minolta SRT 101/102, Olympus OM-1, OM2=2E=20 It's just easier for instructors if they specify one camera=2E They know that the K1000's work well=2E The students can share lenses or cameras=2E= The controls are all in the same place=2E The lenses turn the same way=2E So= it's only good practice to have as many people as possible using the same affordable, reliable equipment=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Richard F=2E Man richard@imagecraft=2Ecom Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 02:25:58 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? The Pentax is as small as the OM=2E The Pentax K mount is probably the mos= t=20 popular bayonet lensmount out there, at least before Nikon and Cannon=20 completely taking over the photo world=2E The K1000 was cheap, cheap, and=20= cheap=2E Remember the OM-1 is supposed for professional who didn't want to= =20 lug around a 2 lbs Nikon F (Hmmm=2E=2E=2E may history repeat itself with t= he 4/3=20 system!) whereas the K1000 was designed to be, cheap, for students=2E Of course there is also a cult of the Takumar lens of old, but I don't kno= w=20 how much that follows to the Pentax SLR line=2E Many have said that the=20= Takumar are some of the best lens ever made, and that includes the Leica=20= and Zeiss=2E // richard =20 On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site=2E [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previou= s=20 replies in your msgs=2E ]=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5101 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 14:52:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 14:52:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 06:52:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-a.bcc.ac.uk (mail-a.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA09015 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:52:50 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-a.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:49:02 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBKEmu420536 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:48:56 GMT Message-ID: <3E032DD8.9030002@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:48:56 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a date first and then a place! Otherwise we'll be discussing possibilities until about April. Myself, almost any weekend is good for me in the next couple of months, excepting a couple in February when I'm going abroad. As I generally take far too few photos of London a group meeting would be a great excuse to get some shots of this place. Roger IanG wrote: > It's not going to take too much arranging, just a date and a place to take > some pix... > > is anybody interested in a meet? Central London may not be the best place > but probably beats Watford Gap services... I've been led to believe that the > world stops just past there..... > > Thames Barrier could be good.... Bluewater with partners and freshly > prepared cedit cards? One of the big parks - Woburn maybe (superb pubs and > grub around there).. Longleat? Windsor? - feed the family to the lions. > > Just a thought. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5717 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 15:11:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 15:11:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 07:11:25 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09041 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:11:16 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.ac.342a9780 (4206) for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:09:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:09:14 EST Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_ac.342a9780.2b348c9a_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_ac.342a9780.2b348c9a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: > I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a > date first and then a place! If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my cameras. Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Bill Barber --part1_ac.342a9780.2b348c9a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes:

I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a
date first and then a place!


If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related activities.  If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch.  When I talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods.  I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my cameras.  Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone?  Bill Barber  --part1_ac.342a9780.2b348c9a_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6011 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 15:18:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 15:18:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 07:18:55 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09045 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:18:45 -0800 Received: from modem-1541.alligator.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.6.5] helo=skelly) by cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18POvB-00054F-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:18:42 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:18:46 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C2A83B.17341020" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C2A83B.17341020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Harrods is perfectly safe although dress code is strict and must be adhered to. 30th is fine with me. Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: 20 December 2002 15:09 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a date first and then a place! If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my cameras. Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C2A83B.17341020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Harrods is perfectly safe although dress code is strict and = must be=20 adhered to.
 
30th=20 is fine with me.
 
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: 20 December 2002=20 15:09
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: = [OM] London=20 gathering - was London camera shops

In a=20 message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time,=20 roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes:

I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but = suggest=20 fixing a
date first and then a place!


If you = were to=20 have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the = 30th of=20 August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a = Saturday) and=20 would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related=20 activities.  If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot = finishing=20 up in time to have lunch.  When I talked it over with my bride, = she said=20 it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to = Harrods.  I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as = to=20 arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my = cameras.  Is=20 it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone?  Bill = Barber =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C2A83B.17341020-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6346 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 15:29:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 15:29:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 07:29:59 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09049 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:29:50 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:34:35 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:29:23 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:33:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2002 15:34:35.0140 (UTC) FILETIME=[4C999440:01C2A83D] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think that the possible advantage is relative availability/cost of equipment. Let's face it, Oly stuff isn't exactly bargain basement equipment. -----Original Message----- From: Albert [mailto:olympus@achtung.com] Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 1:27 AM To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? My friend is about to take a B&W photo class as part of her being an art major... Same thing happened with my ex-gf, the teachers recommend a used Pentax MF as THE camera to have for the class.. As far as "Bang for the buck" I don't see how my Om1n can be beat.. What am I missing here that the photo teachers know or don't know or conspire?? I would think an Om1+50mm/f1.8 is the cats meow.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6752 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 15:47:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 15:47:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 07:48:12 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09073 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:48:04 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA46282 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:47:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220074209.027d07b0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:48:40 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? In-Reply-To: <114780-2200212520145224490@M2W092.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:52 AM 12/20/2002 -0500, om@skipwilliams.com wrote: >I have to disagree on one thing: a Pentax K1000 is NOT as small as an OM. >But the LX, ME, MX, etc lines are as small, or even smaller than an OM >camera though. The M's are not as reliable as the K1000 though. >... Ah yes, I haven't seen a K-1000 much :-) My perception of the Pentax being about as small as the OM was in fact because when I bought my first SLR (a FM), one of the classmates had a ME-Super, I believe, and I couldn't believe that it was even smaller than my FM! The ZX-5 that I bought to "replace" the OM-4T, is not a whole lot bigger than the 4-T, even though it is a modern autofocus camera with builtin winder. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7002 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 15:48:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 15:48:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 07:48:28 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (snake.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09078 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:48:17 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18PPNk-0001xO-00 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:48:12 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:47:22 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0054_01C2A804.697E0FC0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0054_01C2A804.697E0FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill, No, it is not safe for your bank account. You could perhaps keep her away from Herrods by convincing her that it is a frequent target of terrorist attacks. Send her to a nice quiet pub. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 8:09 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a date first and then a place! If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my cameras. Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0054_01C2A804.697E0FC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bill,=20
 
No, it=20 is not safe for your bank account. You could perhaps keep her away from = Herrods=20 by convincing her that it is a frequent target of terrorist attacks. = Send her to=20 a nice quiet pub.
 
/jim 
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 = 8:09=20 AM
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: [OM] = London=20 gathering - was London camera shops

In a=20 message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time,=20 roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes:

I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but = suggest=20 fixing a
date first and then a place!


If you = were to=20 have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the = 30th of=20 August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a = Saturday) and=20 would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related=20 activities.  If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot = finishing=20 up in time to have lunch.  When I talked it over with my bride, = she said=20 it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to = Harrods.  I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as = to=20 arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my = cameras.  Is=20 it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone?  Bill = Barber =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0054_01C2A804.697E0FC0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7330 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 15:55:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 15:55:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 07:55:24 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09086 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:55:15 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.193]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021220155059.BGVZ1642.out004.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:50:59 -0600 Message-ID: <001701c2a83f$9d475920$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:51:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0014_01C2A815.B401C670" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [141.157.96.193] at Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:50:59 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C2A815.B401C670 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've been to Harrods once. I'd say it's perfectly safe for your wife. = The safety of your credit cards is significantly imperiled, however.=20 -Mickey ----- Original Message -----=20 From: NSURIT@aol.com=20 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca=20 Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 10:09 AM Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, = roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a = date first and then a place! If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in = London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the = 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some = Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would do a morning = shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I talked it over with my = bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a = cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so = resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play = with my cameras. Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? = Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C2A815.B401C670 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I've been to Harrods once. I'd say it's = perfectly=20 safe for your wife. The safety of your credit cards is significantly = imperiled,=20 however.
-Mickey
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 = 10:09=20 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] London = gathering - was=20 London camera shops

In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central = Standard=20 Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.= uk=20 writes:

I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but = suggest=20 fixing a
date first and then a place!

If you = were to=20 have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the = 30th of=20 August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a = Saturday) and=20 would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related=20 activities.  If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot = finishing=20 up in time to have lunch.  When I talked it over with my bride, = she said=20 it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to = Harrods.  I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as = to=20 arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my = cameras.  Is=20 it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone?  Bill = Barber =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C2A815.B401C670-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7637 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 16:00:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 16:00:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 08:00:59 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f20.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09094 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:00:50 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:59:56 -0800 Received: from 66.154.131.20 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:59:56 GMT X-Originating-IP: [66.154.131.20] From: "james olson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Olympus ES-10 scanner with Windows XP????? Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:59:56 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2002 15:59:56.0966 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7ADCC60:01C2A840] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Does anyone know if the ES-10 will work with windows XP? Please contact me off list. Thanks, James. ********************************************** James Olson 1320 Franklin Ave. Apt. H Astoria, OR. 97103 = _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_smartspamprotection_3mf < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8041 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 16:18:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 16:18:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 08:18:52 2002 -0800 Received: from web13708.mail.yahoo.com (web13708.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA09123 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:18:43 -0800 Message-ID: <20021220161830.93274.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.2] by web13708.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:18:30 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:18:30 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] I'm back! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021220092915.381.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Lovely interior photos Bob! They are almost luminous... I >must have a go at church interiors with mono film, but you >reckon, do you, that Pan F is the business? I'll pipe in here, since Bob hasn't even seen the best of his shots. I screwed up the printing a bit. The PanF, for these church interiors was spot-on. I can see where Delta 100 would have provided a slightly cleaner shadow detail and possibly would have compressed the highlights a little bit more. Bob bracketed the shots and in most cases the over-exposed shot turned out to be the best because of shadow detail. However, in the case of the statues, the over-exposed shot did slightly lose detail in the brightest highlights. The scans don't show the gradients that exist in the highlights. The prints were a grade too hard, possibly two grades too hard for scanning. The cross in the one shot is quite 3-dimensional on the print where it loses that aspect in the digital image. The negative holds such detail that you can make out the texture (marbling) of the stone. At first I thought it was grain. Do I recommend PanF for this type of work? Absolutely! PanF is a beast to print because the grain magnifier is worthless. . Delta 100 would be an excellent choice too as it would not need the over-exposure to gather the shadow detail which would protect the highlights a little more. Yes, these pictures "glow". L**ca ain't the only way to get "glow". AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8415 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 16:30:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 16:30:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 08:30:50 2002 -0800 Received: from web13708.mail.yahoo.com (web13708.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA09139 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:30:41 -0800 Message-ID: <20021220163029.95804.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.2] by web13708.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:30:29 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:30:29 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021220092915.381.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Please excuse the lousy scans and lack of tonal adjustments. I whipped these out (no computer processing) to show somebody this car. All shots were taken with Delta 100, OM-2S, 35/2.8 (silvernosed of course), monopod. Who says wide-angles don't Bokeh? If you've got a slow connection, sorry. But, I kept the JPEG compression to a very minimum. No, that's not film-grain, it's dust on the car. These were scanned at this resolution with sharpening turned on in Vuescan. No resampling was done. Scan was done on a Nikon Coolscan II, single pass. Chemical prints? No comparison. http://www.iowatelecom.net/~image66/ AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8790 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 16:45:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 16:45:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 08:45:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.cruzio.com (root@mail.cruzio.com [63.249.95.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09156 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:45:40 -0800 Received: from andersongeorge (dsl3-63-249-86-145.cruzio.com [63.249.86.145]) by mail.cruzio.com with SMTP id IAA25350 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:45:23 -0800 (PST) From: "George M. Anderson, Photographer" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:45:24 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021220163029.95804.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ken; Quick, put those pix on ebay and you'll get a bundle for that Mercury. George > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of AG Schnozz > Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 8:30 AM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment > > > Please excuse the lousy scans and lack of tonal adjustments. I > whipped these out (no computer processing) to show somebody this > car. > > All shots were taken with Delta 100, OM-2S, 35/2.8 (silvernosed > of course), monopod. Who says wide-angles don't Bokeh? > > If you've got a slow connection, sorry. But, I kept the JPEG > compression to a very minimum. No, that's not film-grain, it's > dust on the car. These were scanned at this resolution with > sharpening turned on in Vuescan. No resampling was done. Scan > was done on a Nikon Coolscan II, single pass. > > Chemical prints? No comparison. > > http://www.iowatelecom.net/~image66/ > > AG-Schnozz > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9041 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 16:45:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 16:45:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 08:46:07 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09159 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:45:58 -0800 Received: from jjohnso4.attbi.com (c-66-56-1-50.atl.client2.attbi.com[66.56.1.50]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021220164445002000ecnae>; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:44:45 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021220113935.00a69100@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: jjohnso4@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:44:05 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Johnny Johnson Subject: Re: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment In-Reply-To: <20021220163029.95804.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021220092915.381.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:30 AM 12/20/02 -0800, AG Schnozz wrote: >But, I kept the JPEG compression to a very minimum. Hi Ken, Where'd those seriously ugly artifacts come from, especially around the window frames on #9? Later, Johnny __________________________ Johnny Johnson Lilburn, GA mailto:jjohnso4@attbi.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9291 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 16:47:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 16:47:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 08:47:20 2002 -0800 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09163 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:47:11 -0800 Received: from pool0112.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.134.112] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PQIM-0007F6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:46:42 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <157240-2200212520144229202@M2W046.mail2web.com> References: <157240-2200212520144229202@M2W046.mail2web.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:46:36 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > http://www.photoartworld.com/lenstest/ It is just too subtle for me, I guess. If anything, on the last pair of images on the page the Tele-Elmarit out of focus trees look like what they are and there is the faintest hint of break up of the out of focus image in the APO Summicron. But I did not have the patience to look at them all. Unless it is really gross as with a mirror tele it seems like the concern with "bokeh" is really overblown as is the obsession with perfection that prompts some Tokyo shoppers to pay $25-30 for a little basket of "perfect" strawberries. But I guess I am a Luddite. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9886 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:16:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:16:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:17:07 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09210 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:16:57 -0800 Received: from [62.64.230.46] (helo=[62.64.230.46]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18PQk0-0009sp-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:15:17 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:16:34 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I should be able to make that one, at least Bill. Harrods might once have been a pretty risky place to let your wife go, alone ... however, I visited the ground floor a few weeks ago and I was struck by how tacky it looks. It even has a department for merchandising Harrods - bags pens etc... Mr Al Fayed has made part of it a shrine to Dodi and Diana (no comment as I might sound insensitive), but the remainder reminds me of a mall, rather than a high-class department shop. But it had been some 20 years since my previous visit so perhaps I am merely out of touch - Bah Humbug ;-) Chris At 10:09 -0500 20/12/02, NSURIT@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, >roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: > >>I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a >>date first and then a place! >> > > >If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in >London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however >the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals >for some Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would >do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I >talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with >her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky >to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight >seeing trips while I go play with my cameras. Is it safe for her to >go to this Harrods place alone? Bill Barber -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10136 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:17:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:17:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:17:30 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09213 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:17:20 -0800 Received: from [62.64.230.46] (helo=[62.64.230.46]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18PQk5-0009sp-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:15:21 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E032DD8.9030002@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> References: <3E032DD8.9030002@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:40:25 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I can probably get a Sunday or Monday off from mid-January (I work Wednesday to Sunday during the Winter, to allow the students from the London Universities to get to us to fly at the weekends). Happy to start mid-morning, break for a lunch (beer & sandwich/wine & salad) and continue strolling for a couple of post-prandial hours... Chris At 14:48 +0000 20/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a >date first and then a place! Otherwise we'll be discussing >possibilities until about April. Myself, almost any weekend is good >for me in the next couple of months, excepting a couple in February >when I'm going abroad. As I generally take far too few photos of >London a group meeting would be a great excuse to get some shots of >this place. > >Roger > >IanG wrote: > >>It's not going to take too much arranging, just a date and a place to take >>some pix... >> >>is anybody interested in a meet? Central London may not be the best place >>but probably beats Watford Gap services... I've been led to believe that t= he >>world stops just past there..... >> >>Thames Barrier could be good.... Bluewater with partners and freshly >>prepared cedit cards? One of the big parks - Woburn maybe (superb pubs and >>grub around there).. Longleat? Windsor? - feed the family to the lions. >> >>Just a thought. > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10500 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:28:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:28:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:28:35 2002 -0800 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09233 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:28:26 -0800 Received: from pool0368.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.211.113] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PQwH-0005RT-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:27:58 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220074209.027d07b0@192.168.100.11> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220074209.027d07b0@192.168.100.11> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:56:52 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Ah yes, I haven't seen a K-1000 much :-) My perception of the >Pentax being about as small as the OM was in fact because when I >bought my first SLR (a FM), one of the classmates had a ME-Super, I >believe, and I couldn't believe that it was even smaller than my FM! >The ZX-5 that I bought to "replace" the OM-4T, is not a whole lot >bigger than the 4-T, even though it is a modern autofocus camera >with builtin winder. > >// richard Good luck with it. I have a friend who bought two and both have been to the Pentax service center. One has been in twice and needs to go again. Mostly intermittent metering problems. It is a beautiful little camera though. I was quite taken with it. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10807 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:31:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:31:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:31:40 2002 -0800 Received: from siaag1ab.compuserve.com (siaag1ab.compuserve.com [149.174.40.4]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09248 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:31:30 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by siaag1ab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.18) id MAA04254 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:27:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:26:39 -0500 From: Walt Wayman Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons To: "INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Message-ID: <200212201227_MC3-1-20C0-6D43@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message text written by INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Unless it is really gross as with a mirror tele = >it seems like the concern with "bokeh" is really overblown as is the = >obsession with perfection that prompts some Tokyo shoppers to pay = >$25-30 for a little basket of "perfect" strawberries. But I guess I = >am a Luddite. >-- = >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California It's nice to see I'm not the only one. Luddites unite! If we want to contemplate something fuzzy, we can just check out the lint in our navels= . = Out-of-focus lint probably has a wonderful bokeh. Maybe next we can take= up toe jam bouquet. A rose by any name, etc. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11112 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:36:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:36:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:36:24 2002 -0800 Received: from web20010.mail.yahoo.com (web20010.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA09252 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:36:15 -0800 Message-ID: <20021220173602.27293.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20010.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:36:02 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:36:02 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212201227_MC3-1-20C0-6D43@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Personally I see a good deal of difference in the Bokeh of the two lenses and like Skip I definitely prefer the APO f2. Mark (guess I'm not a Ludditie) Lloyd --- Walt Wayman wrote: > Message text written by > INTERNET:olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Unless it is really gross as with a mirror tele > >it seems like the concern with "bokeh" is really > overblown as is the > >obsession with perfection that prompts some Tokyo > shoppers to pay > >$25-30 for a little basket of "perfect" > strawberries. But I guess I > >am a Luddite. > >-- > >Winsor Crosby > >Long Beach, California > > It's nice to see I'm not the only one. Luddites > unite! If we want to > contemplate something fuzzy, we can just check out > the lint in our navels. > Out-of-focus lint probably has a wonderful bokeh. > Maybe next we can take > up toe jam bouquet. A rose by any name, etc. > > Walt __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11371 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:37:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:37:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:37:46 2002 -0800 Received: from shockwave.systems.pipex.net (shockwave.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.9]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09263 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:37:36 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by shockwave.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 83EC81600B5CD for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:37:29 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:37:29 -0000 Message-ID: <000d01c2a84e$780e1720$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C2A84E.780E1720" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C2A84E.780E1720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SHHHHH !!! I was contemplating coming along to this London meet, but if my CFO finds out about the H*rr*ds trip for her then I'll have to sell all my OM gear just to pay off the minimum payment on the Credit Card !! No more mention of "that shop" please - she who must be obeyed may be listening !! Jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: 20 December 2002 15:09 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a date first and then a place! If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my cameras. Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C2A84E.780E1720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
SHHHHH=20 !!!
 
I was=20 contemplating coming along to this London meet, but if my CFO finds out = about=20 the H*rr*ds trip for her then I'll have to sell all my OM gear just to = pay off=20 the minimum payment on the Credit Card !!  No more mention of "that = shop"=20 please - she who must be obeyed may be listening !!
 
Jon
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: 20 December 2002=20 15:09
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: = [OM] London=20 gathering - was London camera shops

In a=20 message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time,=20 roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes:

I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but = suggest=20 fixing a
date first and then a place!


If you = were to=20 have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the = 30th of=20 August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a = Saturday) and=20 would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related=20 activities.  If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot = finishing=20 up in time to have lunch.  When I talked it over with my bride, = she said=20 it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to = Harrods.  I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as = to=20 arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my = cameras.  Is=20 it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone?  Bill = Barber =20 ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C2A84E.780E1720-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11726 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:49:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:49:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:49:44 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09268 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:49:35 -0800 Received: from pool0368.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.211.113] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PRGo-0001wK-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:49:11 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021220173602.27293.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20021220173602.27293.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:49:03 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Personally I see a good deal of difference in the >Bokeh of the two lenses and like Skip I definitely >prefer the APO f2. > >Mark (guess I'm not a Ludditie) Lloyd Can you enlighten on the definite difference you see? -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12073 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:58:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:58:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:58:41 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09276 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:58:32 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8433F20 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:59:33 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021220092915.381.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021220092915.381.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:58:14 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Albert > >with the introduction of the Kodak 14Mpx SLR, it would seem like you >can get what you never thought possible before, Medium format quality in >a 35mm SLR. That depends on whose numbers you believe. My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. Medium format may contain 40Mpx. In 1997, I predicted that price/performance parity between digital and 35mm was 8 years off. I stand by that: it's now 3 years off. (That doesn't mean there won't be earlier performance-parity cameras, just that they won't be affordable. The Kodak is what, a $3,000 body?) I think price/performance parity with medium format is still 5 years out, with 4x5, 8 years, and with 8x10, 11 years. Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. According to a recent survey, film sales have already peaked; film is now on the downslope of Geoffrey Moore's technology adoption lifecycle, characterized by what Moore calls "technology laggards." (in "Chrossing the Chasm") This is not mere crystal-ball gazing; it's simple back-of-envelope math based on Moore's Law. (different Moore :-) (Of course, there will always be a niche market for fine art photochemistry, just as some brush-media artists still mix their own egg temupra.) So you "fence sitters" still have about 3 years to grouse and whine, or you can start getting some actual experience on a state-of-the-art-minus-one camera TODAY, then step up to the plate in 3 years. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12323 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 17:59:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 17:59:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 09:59:29 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09280 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:59:20 -0800 Received: from modem-62.crocodile.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.32.62] helo=skelly) by cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18PRQb-0000Wb-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:59:17 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:59:23 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2A851.876EFB50" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <000d01c2a84e$780e1720$0800a8c0@reac.local> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2A851.876EFB50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Guys I was only semi joking about the dress requirements... other than the obligatory purse stuffed with credit cards. A young lady from the USA was recently banned from the place because her attire was considered unacceptable. She'd been spending big time for 3/4 days before the ban however.... no I don't know what she was wearing. I -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Jon Mitchell Sent: 20 December 2002 17:37 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops SHHHHH !!! I was contemplating coming along to this London meet, but if my CFO finds out about the H*rr*ds trip for her then I'll have to sell all my OM gear just to pay off the minimum payment on the Credit Card !! No more mention of "that shop" please - she who must be obeyed may be listening !! Jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: 20 December 2002 15:09 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops In a message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time, roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes: I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but suggest fixing a date first and then a place! If you were to have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the 30th of August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a Saturday) and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related activities. If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot finishing up in time to have lunch. When I talked it over with my bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just catch a cab and go to Harrods. I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play with my cameras. Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Bill Barber ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2A851.876EFB50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Guys I=20 was only semi joking about the dress requirements... other than the = obligatory=20 purse stuffed with credit cards. A young lady from the USA was = recently=20 banned from the place because her attire was considered unacceptable. = She'd been=20 spending big time for 3/4 days before the ban however.... no I don't = know what=20 she was wearing.
 
 
I
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of Jon Mitchell
Sent: 20 December 2002=20 17:37
To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: RE: = [OM] London=20 gathering - was London camera shops

SHHHHH !!!
 
I was=20 contemplating coming along to this London meet, but if my CFO finds = out about=20 the H*rr*ds trip for her then I'll have to sell all my OM gear just to = pay off=20 the minimum payment on the Credit Card !!  No more mention of = "that shop"=20 please - she who must be obeyed may be listening = !!
 
Jon
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: 20 December 2002=20 15:09
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: = [OM]=20 London gathering - was London camera shops

In a=20 message dated 12/20/2002 8:53:47 AM Central Standard Time,=20 roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk writes:

I think a London meeting would be a great idea, but = suggest=20 fixing a
date first and then a place!


If = you were to=20 have a second or third meeting, this Texan will be in London on the = 30th of=20 August (actually the 28th & 29th also, however the 30th is a = Saturday)=20 and would love to hook up with some locals for some Olympus related=20 activities.  If I were designing it I would do a morning shoot=20 finishing up in time to have lunch.  When I talked it over with = my=20 bride, she said it that would be fine with her as she would just = catch a cab=20 and go to Harrods.  I'm so lucky to have a partner who is so=20 resourceful as to arrange her own sight seeing trips while I go play = with my=20 cameras.  Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place = alone? =20 Bill Barber  =
------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2A851.876EFB50-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13025 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:03:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:03:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:04:00 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com (sagan.skybridgegroup.com [194.201.127.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09299 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:03:50 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:02:56 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Thread-Index: AcKoUgWEw4im40eASTS4ABrP/3y7rw== From: "Sam Shiell" To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >>Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Depends on whether or not she has your credit cards...... Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13324 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:06:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:06:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:07:13 2002 -0800 Received: from freud.skybridgegroup.com (sagan.skybridgegroup.com [194.201.127.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09306 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:07:04 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:06:10 -0000 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Thread-Index: AcKoUnleo3JvLvHETpSDhTdGKhOuDQ== From: "Sam Shiell" To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca But seriously folks...... Sunday's are best for me, and (I think) I'm fairly free for the next few = months..... Sam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13671 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:17:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:17:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:17:57 2002 -0800 Received: from mail-d.bcc.ac.uk (mail-d.bcc.ac.uk [144.82.100.24]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09318 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:17:48 -0800 Received: from pop-c.ucl.ac.uk by mail-d.bcc.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:14:00 +0000 Received: from worldtraveller.f9.co.uk (helix.star.ucl.ac.uk [128.40.1.44]) by pop-c.ucl.ac.uk (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBKIDu400615 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:13:56 GMT Message-ID: <3E035DE4.3020909@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:13:56 +0000 From: Roger Wesson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sundays are a good day for photography I reckon. Can I suggest Sunday 19th January as a possible date? The 'morning photography followed by hearty lunch' plan sounds great. Roger Sam Shiell wrote: > But seriously folks...... > > Sunday's are best for me, and (I think) I'm fairly free for the next few months..... > > Sam > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14054 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:25:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:25:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:25:19 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09326 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:25:09 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:24:40 -0500 Message-Id: <200212201324.AA1802371340@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca To me, a genuine old geezer, except as the equivalent of a 4x6 snapshot, it=92s a grand waste of time, this looking at photographs on my little TV -- I mean my computer. I can tell more, even with my unaided, 60-something-year-old eyes, from a 35mm contact sheet than I can from the most super-duper, high-res scan on a computer monitor. I shoot transparencies; I look at them through a high-quality 10X loupe; I project them; I make occasional Cibachrome -- oops, living in the past again -- Ilfochrome prints. I just don=92t think quality can be assessed from anything you can show me on a computer screen. It=92s kinda like looking at the world through the wrong end of a telescope, and not a very good one at that. I could be wrong. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Winsor Crosby Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:49:03 -0800 >>Personally I see a good deal of difference in the >>Bokeh of the two lenses and like Skip I definitely >>prefer the APO f2. >> >>Mark (guess I'm not a Ludditie) Lloyd > >Can you enlighten on the definite difference you see? >-- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14414 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:35:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:35:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:35:29 2002 -0800 Received: from web13704.mail.yahoo.com (web13704.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA09334 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:35:20 -0800 Message-ID: <20021220183507.19712.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.2] by web13704.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:35:07 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:35:07 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: Re: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Where'd those seriously ugly artifacts come from, especially >around the window frames on #9? Viewscan's sharpening algorithm. Normally, I would scan at higher resolutions and resample the images. I know it's ugly--especially on a laptop screen. Turns out, the car might actually belong "in the family". I'm checking to see about availability. It is in amazingly good shape and just sitting in the ditch next to this Iowa backroad. I'm sure I could make it "disappear" without any hassles. Shoot, except for a few spots on the front end, all sheet metal is wrinkle-free. The bumper was damaged when somebody dragged it into the ditch with a tractor. AG __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14672 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:36:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:36:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:36:58 2002 -0800 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09338 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:36:48 -0800 Received: from pool0368.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.211.113] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PS0o-0001Qr-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:36:43 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212201324.AA1802371340@mynra.com> References: <200212201324.AA1802371340@mynra.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:36:39 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] 8-10X Loupe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >I shoot transparencies; I look at them through a high-quality 10X >loupe; I project them; I make occasional Cibachrome -- oops, >living in the past again -- Ilfochrome prints. -snip > >Walt What kind of loupe are you using? I have a very crisp Kenko 4X which I like because it covers the whole frame, does not distort like a wide angle lens and has nice color rendition. I have wished I had something with similar qualities in an 8 or 10X. Can anyone recommend something? -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14926 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:37:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:37:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:38:11 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09347 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:38:02 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-66-84-58.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.66.84.58]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBKIbUMm179590 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:37:30 -0500 Message-ID: <000e01c2a855$04604620$3a544241@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] I know you said you had a new car, but... Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:24:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Please excuse the lousy scans and lack of tonal adjustments. I whipped these out (no computer processing) to show somebody this car." Ken, Nice car, I can see why you're so proud! Bet it gets a bit cold in the winter, though, and all the pollen in the summer... Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15401 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:55:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:55:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:55:56 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts11.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.55]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09380 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:55:46 -0800 Received: from [64.229.244.30] by tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021220185201.GMUR8221.tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.244.30]> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:52:01 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:52:06 -0500 Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Christian - My two cents worth: my 100/2.8 is amazingly sharp, with beautiful contrast and clarity. I haven't tried the 85/2, but it's hard for me to believe it could be better. - The 85/2 has the advantage of 8 blades vs 6 for the 100/2.8, so it will do soft backgrounds better. - The 100/2.8 will have slightly flatter perspective, which is often more flattering (esp. if the subject has a big nose). Regards, Andrew Gullen > Re: [OM] Portrait lens > I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15652 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 18:57:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 18:57:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 10:57:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09384 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:57:07 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:56:43 -0500 Message-Id: <200212201356.AA1666449708@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] 8-10X Loupe X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Winsor, It would probably be a good idea for me to become more familiar with my own equipment. It's not a 10X. It's a Cabin Pro 8X Loupe PL-8. So much for my awareness and/or memory. B&H had a special on these a couple of years ago for, best I recall, $100 per. It covers approximately 75 percent of a 35mm tranny and comes with both an opaque and a translucent bottom, and the eyepiece is threaded so it can be focused. Mamiya distrubtes these, and I am right happy with mine. Also, it's a perfect fit for one of the small Olympus drawstring lens pouches. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Winsor Crosby Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:36:39 -0800 >> >>I shoot transparencies; I look at them through a high-quality 10X >>loupe; I project them; I make occasional Cibachrome -- oops, >>living in the past again -- Ilfochrome prints. > >-snip > >> >>Walt > >What kind of loupe are you using? I have a very crisp Kenko 4X which >I like because it covers the whole frame, does not distort like a >wide angle lens and has nice color rendition. I have wished I had >something with similar qualities in an 8 or 10X. Can anyone >recommend something? >-- >Winsor Crosby >Long Beach, California > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16063 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 19:08:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 19:08:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 11:08:40 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09426 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:08:31 -0800 Received: from host213-122-201-169.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.201.169] helo=carroljulian) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18PSSa-0005IM-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:05:25 +0000 Message-ID: <002a01c2a85a$ae26da20$a9c97ad5@carroljulian> From: "Julian Davies" To: References: <114780-2200212520145224490@M2W092.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:03:24 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Guess it also stops the "mine's better than yours" syndrome. Mind you, the lecturer at Bath University apparently recommends everyone to get an OM1, or at least this was the reason given to me by most of the retailers there as to why they are always short of OM gear around the start of term. Julian Cambs, UK The above statements are inaccurate (at best) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 2:52 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? It's just easier for instructors if they specify one camera. They know that the K1000's work well. The students can share lenses or cameras. The controls are all in the same place. The lenses turn the same way. So it's only good practice to have as many people as possible using the same affordable, reliable equipment. Skip < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16391 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 19:16:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 19:16:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 11:16:27 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09434 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:16:18 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:15:54 -0500 Message-Id: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Or you could get a Tamron 80-200/2.8. It's actually sharper than either the 100/2.8 or the 85/2, and you can zoom it to either focal length, or anywhere in between, or shorter, or longer. Oh, and by the way, it has a nine-blade diaphragm. Must be another bokeh thing. :-) Happy holidays. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Andrew Gullen Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:52:06 -0500 >Christian - > >My two cents worth: my 100/2.8 is amazingly sharp, with beautiful contrast >and clarity. I haven't tried the 85/2, but it's hard for me to believe it >could be better. > - The 85/2 has the advantage of 8 blades vs 6 for the 100/2.8, > so it will do soft backgrounds better. > - The 100/2.8 will have slightly flatter perspective, which is often > more flattering (esp. if the subject has a big nose). > >Regards, >Andrew Gullen > >> Re: [OM] Portrait lens >> I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices. > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16799 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 19:33:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 19:33:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 11:33:58 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts25.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.188]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09454 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:33:49 -0800 Received: from [64.229.244.30] by tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021220193003.HRQE17112.tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.244.30]> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:30:03 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:30:08 -0500 Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3773 From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Winsor and Walt - Look at Photo 2 at f5.6 (second row in the second group on the page). The out-of-focus highlights to the right of the tree in the TE are definitely polygons (hexagons I think), while the APO ones are rounder and thus smoother. Depends on what you want for any given image, though. I've taken a shot with my Zuiko 50/3.5 I didn't like because the little hexagons in the background made it look rough. (Actually I've taken lots I didn't like, but those weren't the lens' fault. I've taken lots I did like. But I digress...) I wanted smooth in this case. Try taking a shot with an XA at about 5.6 with an out-of-focus background. It has a sort-of four-bladed iris; background can be quite rough. Six blades (many Zuikos) is smoother, eight or nine even better. I myself am skeptical of many of these kind of claims (remember monster speaker wire?), but this one I can see. Regards, Andrew > Can you enlighten on the definite difference you see? > - -- > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California > It's nice to see I'm not the only one. Luddites unite! > Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17299 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 20:01:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 20:01:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 12:02:12 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts11.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.55]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09473 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:02:02 -0800 Received: from [64.229.244.30] by tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021220195816.IQUZ8221.tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.244.30]> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:58:16 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:58:21 -0500 Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > From: Jan Steinman > That depends on whose numbers you believe. My research indicates > that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. Medium > format may contain 40Mpx. Actually, a 100 lp/mm 24x36 film image has about 200 pixels/mm or 4800x7200 = 35MP. But that'll probably come too. Formate-doping will raise the ante, though. > In 1997, I predicted ... Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. I approximately agree with all that, except the last. Digital will equal and probably surpass film, but film is just a different medium, harder for some things, different look but more fun (though that's probably because I'm a software developer and spend my entire day with computers). I'll probably end up half-and-half myself. > According to a recent survey, ... "technology laggards." ... > So you "fence sitters" still have about 3 years to grouse and > whine, or you can start getting some actual experience on a > state-of-the-art-minus-one camera TODAY, then step up to the > plate in 3 years. *Cough!* Don't take offense (really, sincerely), but please check the attitude. Unless you make your daily living from photography there's probably no need to rush. Being "left behind" is not an issue otherwise. Mastery of process is important, but less so than mastery of seeing, composition, etc. There's nothing wrong with waiting until digital has the quality and price you want. (Boy, a few years off this list and I'm making up for it the first day back. :-) ) Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17957 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 20:46:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 20:46:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 12:46:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09545 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:46:29 -0800 Received: from 209-122-227-112.s793.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.227.112] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18PU1F-0006dk-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:45:18 -0500 Message-ID: <000201c2a868$b10fc0e0$70e37ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <3E029CEF.1070404@comcast.net> Subject: Re: [OM] ES-10 Scanners Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:31:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's old technology, very slow, old software, why bother, really. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Senior" To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:30 PM Subject: Re: [OM] ES-10 Scanners > I remember talking a bit about them when I was asking about a PrimeImage > scanner. I would imagine that the Win 98 drivers would still work with > ME, but does anyone know for sure? Also, is the ES-10 that much better > that I should try it? BTW, my "fall back" position would be to put it > on my wife's computer... it's running Win 98SE. > > Ed Senior > > James N. McBride wrote: > > >There are several Olympus ES-10 film scanners on EB*Y for $100 BIN. These > >are not the best scanners but that is a good price for someone that wants to > >get started with this process. > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18158 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 20:46:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 20:46:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 12:46:47 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09549 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:46:35 -0800 Received: from 209-122-227-112.s793.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.227.112] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18PU1T-0006dk-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:45:32 -0500 Message-ID: <000301c2a868$b1b1f450$70e37ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <001f01c2a619$ce429b20$0200a8c0@ctx> <004a01c2a69c$2d84ebb0$efe27ad1@hppav> <004801c2a7e6$9599da80$0201a8c0@hr.cox.net> Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:33:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've used Norton for years, you still have to download it for Norton to catch it, though, even if it is an attachment. Now that I'm using Mailwasher (www.mailwasher.net) spam and virus's don't even get THAT far. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Pilati" To: Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 12:12 AM Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT > Use Norton and you problems disappear. > > Bryan Pilati > OM-2n; IS-3 > Va-USA > Disclaimer: I'm always joking > unless I should be serious. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Hermanson" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:48 AM > Subject: Re: [OM] VIRUS ALERT > > > > I used to get 2-3 klez emails a day, don't get any now. > > _________________________________ > > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com > > Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 > > 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 > > 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, > > please call 1-800-221-3000 > > _________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18455 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 20:47:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 20:47:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 12:47:53 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix4-2.free.fr (postfix4-2.free.fr [213.228.0.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09553 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:47:43 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-22-81-56-95-237.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.95.237]) by postfix4-2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 44068C0C9 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:47:41 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:43:30 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122021480401.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id MAA09553 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca How can a zoom lens be sharper than fix focal lens ? Happy Christmas time for all.=20 Christian Le ven, 20 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > Or you could get a Tamron 80-200/2.8. It's actually sharper than=20 > either the 100/2.8 or the 85/2, and you can zoom it to either=20 > focal length, or anywhere in between, or shorter, or longer. >=20 > Oh, and by the way, it has a nine-blade diaphragm. Must be=20 > another bokeh thing. :-) >=20 > Happy holidays. > =20 > Walt > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: Andrew Gullen > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:52:06 -0500 >=20 > >Christian - > > > >My two cents worth: my 100/2.8 is amazingly sharp, with=20 > beautiful contrast > >and clarity. I haven't tried the 85/2, but it's hard for me to=20 > believe it > >could be better. > > - The 85/2 has the advantage of 8 blades vs 6 for the 100/2.8, > > so it will do soft backgrounds better. > > - The 100/2.8 will have slightly flatter perspective, which is=20 > often > > more flattering (esp. if the subject has a big nose). > > > >Regards, > >Andrew Gullen > > > >> Re: [OM] Portrait lens > >> I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices. > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18755 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 20:54:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 20:54:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 12:54:17 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09558 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:54:08 -0800 Received: from 209-122-227-112.s793.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.227.112] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18PU9m-0000Ws-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:54:07 -0500 Message-ID: <004501c2a869$f157f0e0$70e37ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus ES-10 scanner with Windows XP????? Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:54:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I doubt it will work. Olympus said point blank they would not be upgrading the drivers beyond W98 (I think). I'm surprised the ES-10 is still listed in their price list. Only the parallel version is available and that is slow as s*@t. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "james olson" To: Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: [OM] Olympus ES-10 scanner with Windows XP????? > Does anyone know if the ES-10 will work with windows XP? Please contact me > off list. > > Thanks, James. > > ********************************************** > James Olson > 1320 Franklin Ave. Apt. H > Astoria, OR. 97103 > = > > > _________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19144 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:08:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:08:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:09:12 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09582 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:09:02 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.158]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021220210446.NPZS21770.out003.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:04:46 -0600 Message-ID: <002301c2a86b$73619fe0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <20021220163029.95804.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:04:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [141.157.94.158] at Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:04:46 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A high school chum had a Comet like that one in white. Best features under the hood? Bermuda bell and Aaoooogah horn. I really like the results from the 35/2.8. It's very versatile. Also think some online shopping for Ilford films is in order.... Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "AG Schnozz" To: Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 11:30 AM Subject: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment > Please excuse the lousy scans and lack of tonal adjustments. I > whipped these out (no computer processing) to show somebody this > car. > > All shots were taken with Delta 100, OM-2S, 35/2.8 (silvernosed > of course), monopod. Who says wide-angles don't Bokeh? > > If you've got a slow connection, sorry. But, I kept the JPEG > compression to a very minimum. No, that's not film-grain, it's > dust on the car. These were scanned at this resolution with > sharpening turned on in Vuescan. No resampling was done. Scan > was done on a Nikon Coolscan II, single pass. > > Chemical prints? No comparison. > > http://www.iowatelecom.net/~image66/ > > AG-Schnozz > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19403 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:10:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:10:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:10:20 2002 -0800 Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09586 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:10:11 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021220205723.PRBY513731.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:57:23 -0500 Message-ID: <015701c2a85b$49bcde80$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> <02122021480401.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:09:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:57:22 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA09586 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "fischerchristian" To: Sent: Friday, 20 December, 2002 04:43 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens How can a zoom lens be sharper than fix focal lens ? Happy Christmas time for all. Christian Le ven, 20 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > Or you could get a Tamron 80-200/2.8. It's actually sharper than > either the 100/2.8 or the 85/2, and you can zoom it to either > focal length, or anywhere in between, or shorter, or longer. Would anyone be prepared to put up their two bits and show conclusively t= hat the Tamron zoom is sharper than an 85/2 and under what conditions? My MC 85/2 is a stunning performer but to have an off brand zoom outperfom it would be a real eye opener. jh > > Oh, and by the way, it has a nine-blade diaphragm. Must be > another bokeh thing. :-) > > Happy holidays. > > Walt > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: Andrew Gullen > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:52:06 -0500 > > >Christian - > > > >My two cents worth: my 100/2.8 is amazingly sharp, with > beautiful contrast > >and clarity. I haven't tried the 85/2, but it's hard for me to > believe it > >could be better. > > - The 85/2 has the advantage of 8 blades vs 6 for the 100/2.8, > > so it will do soft backgrounds better. > > - The 100/2.8 will have slightly flatter perspective, which is > often > > more flattering (esp. if the subject has a big nose). > > > >Regards, > >Andrew Gullen > > > >> Re: [OM] Portrait lens > >> I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices. > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19848 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:29:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:29:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:29:45 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09627 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:29:36 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PUhj-0004cL-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:29:12 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:29:08 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3773 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >I myself am skeptical of many of these kind of claims (remember monster >speaker wire?), but this one I can see. > >Regards, >Andrew > That's Monster CABLE, not skinny old wire. (Grunting animal noises) :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20137 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:31:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:31:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:31:59 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09635 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:31:50 -0800 From: GPaul64@aol.com Received: from GPaul64@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.132.183fe6fe (4362) for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:29:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7@aol.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:29:59 EST Subject: Re: [OM] 8-10X Loupe To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10621 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2002 2:37:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, wincros@earthlink.net writes: > What kind of loupe are you using? I have a very crisp Kenko 4X which > I like because it covers the whole frame, does not distort like a > wide angle lens and has nice color rendition. I have wished I had > something with similar qualities in an 8 or 10X. Can anyone > recommend something? > -- > Winsor Crosby > Hi Winsor, I use a Peak 7x Anastigmat. It's just off the lower end of your magnification scale, but it is sharp from corner to corner, has no distortion I can see, and has good color rendition. Regards, Greg Logiodice --part1_132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2002 2:37:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, wincros@earthlink.net writes:


What kind of loupe are you using?  I have a very crisp Kenko 4X which
I like because it covers the whole frame, does not distort like a
wide angle lens and has nice color rendition.  I have wished I had
something with similar qualities in an 8 or 10X.  Can anyone
recommend something?
--
Winsor Crosby


Hi Winsor,

I use a Peak 7x Anastigmat.  It's just off the lower end of your magnification scale, but it is sharp from corner to corner, has no distortion I can see, and has good color rendition.

Regards,

Greg Logiodice --part1_132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20399 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:34:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:34:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:35:13 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09647 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:35:03 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA84187 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:34:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220133131.027f8b48@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:35:34 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220074209.027d07b0@192.168.100.11> <5.2.0.9.0.20021220074209.027d07b0@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 08:56 AM 12/20/2002 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote: >>Ah yes, I haven't seen a K-1000 much :-) My perception of the Pentax >>being about as small as the OM was in fact because when I bought my first >>SLR (a FM), one of the classmates had a ME-Super, I believe, and I >>couldn't believe that it was even smaller than my FM! The ZX-5 that I >>bought to "replace" the OM-4T, is not a whole lot bigger than the 4-T, >>even though it is a modern autofocus camera with builtin winder. >> >>// richard > >Good luck with it. I have a friend who bought two and both have been to >the Pentax service center. One has been in twice and needs to go >again. Mostly intermittent metering problems. It is a beautiful little >camera though. I was quite taken with it. >... Just to make it clear, I bought the ZX-5 "replacement" when the camera came out, so may be about 6, 7 years ago? About a year and half ago, the ZX-5 has been replaced by the one that it replaced, i.e. I got bit by Zuikoholicism big time. So now the ZX-5 sits on the shelf, and the OMs and the Zuikos get a lot of workout. I have to say, I don't miss the autofocus a bit, even though that was one of the main reasons why I bought the ZX-5 in the first place. I love the fast wide Zuiko primes. Sometimes I miss the zoom flexibility, or the fill flash, but overall, I am happier w/ the OM setup by far. // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20797 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:46:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:46:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:46:42 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09659 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:46:32 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with ESMTP id <20021220214524051006k7p1e>; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:45:24 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:45:16 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. At 5:59 PM +0000 12/20/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:58:14 -0800 >From: Jan Steinman >Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital > > >From: Albert > > > >with the introduction of the Kodak 14Mpx SLR, it would seem like you > >can get what you never thought possible before, Medium format quality in > >a 35mm SLR. > >That depends on whose numbers you believe. My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. Medium format may contain 40Mpx. Reasonable 25mm film cameras resolve something like 50 line pairs per millimeter; sometimes better in the center, sometimes less at the edges. At two pixels per line pair, that's 100 pixels per millimeter. A 35mm frame is 24 by 36 mm, so we have (24*100)(36*100)= 8.64 million pixels (each having all three colors), or (8.64)(3)= 25.92= 26 million pixels (as usually quoted for digital cameras). So, 18 Mpix is a bit low to be "optimal", but it isn't that far off: 26/18= 1.44 to 1. Hmm. I see. The 18 Mpix appears to assume the typical compromise red-green-green-blue pattern, where the R:G:B ratio is 1:2:1, so the effective multiplier from film pixels (which are tri-color) to CCD pixels is two, not the three one uses for 1:1:1 ratio sensors: 8.64*2= 17.28 million pixels, close enough. As for medium format, a 6x7 image has 3*(60*100)^2= 108 million pixels (as camera pixel counts are usually quoted) for 1:1:1, and 72 million pixels for 1:2:1 ratio. The Foveon sensor is 1:1:1, while the usual prosumer CCD cameras are 1:2:1. The $10K pro studio cameras are mostly 1:1:1, and may have three CCD chips in them, just like studio TV cameras. >In 1997, I predicted that price/performance parity between digital and 35mm was 8 years off. I stand by that: it's now 3 years off. I assume that you used Moore's Law, that holds that semiconductor technology doubles in performance (halves in cost for the same performance) every 18 months. Confirmed below. >(That doesn't mean there won't be earlier performance-parity cameras, just that they won't be affordable. The Kodak is what, a $3,000 body?) When I bought my first OM-1n body and 50mm f/1.4 lens, it was $300 in 1975, which would be $1100 today. Let's assume that the Kodak body requires a $300 lens, for a total of $3300. At the Moore's Law rate, 3.3:1 will take 31 months, call it 3 years, so your estimate isn't that bad. >I think price/performance parity with medium format is still 5 years out, with 4x5, 8 years, and with 8x10, 11 years. Yes. The ratio of film areas is 60^2/(24*36)= 4.167. It will take 18*log2(4.167)= 37 months, call it three years more to achieve parity. The total is 31+37= 68 months, or 5.7 years. Large-format: 4X5 has an image of 3.75 by 4.75 inches, or (3.75*25.4)(4.75*25.4)/(24*36)= 13.3 times larger than 35mm, which will take 67 months, a total of 31+67= 98 months, or 8.2 years. What will take the longest is movies. The The Two Towers, the latest Lord of the Rings film: three hours of 35mm film. Movie frames are half-frame size (like a Pen) and you get 24 frames per second. Let's assume each frame is 24x18, uses 24-bit color, and so contains (24*100)(18*100)(3*1)/(1024^2)= 12.36 Mbytes. Three hours at 24 frames a second is (3*60*60)(24)= 259,200 frames, and 3,128 Gbytes, or 3 Terabytes. The proposed new blu-ray DVD disks can store something like 30 GB per disk, so it would take more than 100 such disks per movie. Nothing else currently available beats the storage capacity of film, and certainly not at the price of film. >Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. No; nothing is ever that clean. There will be a very gradual transition, because people will wait for their current equipment to wear out. And the movie industry will still need vast quantities of film. One print of The Two Towers is (259,200 frames)(18mm)= 4.7 Km long, and there are thousands of prints in circulation, so all those theaters can show the film at the same time. A 36-exposure 35mm film is about 2 meters long, so one such movie print is equivalent to 2,333 rolls of 36-exposure 35mm film. >According to a recent survey, film sales have already peaked; film is now on the downslope of Geoffrey Moore's technology adoption lifecycle, characterized by what Moore calls "technology laggards." (in "Chrossing the Chasm") It may be that film has peaked or will soon peak, but it's still orders of magnitude larger than digital. I recall someone posted the actual numbers on the reflector a while ago. If I recall, the data came from Kodak's Annual Report. Look at us -- we happily use mechanical cameras from thirty years ago, and debate when the right time to go digital might be. Technology laggards indeed. And proud of it. For unintentional humour, it's hard to beat the management books published ten years before the present -- we believed back then, but in the fullness of time all the silly assumptions have been laid bare. >This is not mere crystal-ball gazing; it's simple back-of-envelope math based on Moore's Law. (different Moore :-) The killer is that the electronics are only a part of the total cost of a camera, and the optical and mechanical components do not follow Moore's Law, except that much of the mechanical complexity of cameras has been eliminated: a camera today has simple mechanicals controlled by a little computer chip. >(Of course, there will always be a niche market for fine art photochemistry, just as some brush-media artists still mix their own egg temupra.) Or develop their own photos? >So you "fence sitters" still have about 3 years to grouse and whine, or you can start getting some actual experience on a state-of-the-art-minus-one camera TODAY, then step up to the plate in 3 years. Nah. It's never too late. And digital will get better and better, and simpler to use as well. With film, the technology and ergonmetrics are pretty well figured out, while we are still figuring out what a digital camera ought to be and do. Present-day cameras (digital and film wunderbricks) are far too complex, being encrusted with so many features that nobody can remember how to take a picture, and burdened with misfeatures like agonizing shutter lag and slow picture storage time andinadequate capacity. Not to mention battery problems. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21056 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:48:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:48:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:48:46 2002 -0800 Received: from web20001.mail.yahoo.com (web20001.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA09668 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:48:36 -0800 Message-ID: <20021220214821.9462.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20001.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:48:21 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:48:21 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you look at the 600 dpi I agree there is not much difference but the 1200 dpi if you look at the first and second photo as f5.6 for example the grass and the ligth reflecting off the grass is much more... defined I guess you could say with the APO whereas the f2.8 has a much muddier and less defined background. Just my observation. Mark Lloyd --- Winsor Crosby wrote: > >Personally I see a good deal of difference in the > >Bokeh of the two lenses and like Skip I definitely > >prefer the APO f2. > > > >Mark (guess I'm not a Ludditie) Lloyd > > Can you enlighten on the definite difference you > see? > -- > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing > List > > < For questions, > mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: > http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21337 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 21:50:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 21:50:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 13:51:00 2002 -0800 Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09672 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:50:51 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PV2I-00061S-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:50:27 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:50:25 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3773 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Winsor and Walt - > >Look at Photo 2 at f5.6 (second row in the second group on the page). The >out-of-focus highlights to the right of the tree in the TE are definitely >polygons (hexagons I think), while the APO ones are rounder and thus >smoother. Depends on what you want for any given image, though. > >I've taken a shot with my Zuiko 50/3.5 I didn't like because the little >hexagons in the background made it look rough. (Actually I've taken lots I >didn't like, but those weren't the lens' fault. I've taken lots I did like. >But I digress...) I wanted smooth in this case. > >Try taking a shot with an XA at about 5.6 with an out-of-focus background. >It has a sort-of four-bladed iris; background can be quite rough. Six blades >(many Zuikos) is smoother, eight or nine even better. > >I myself am skeptical of many of these kind of claims (remember monster >speaker wire?), but this one I can see. > >Regards, >Andrew I looked, but could detect little difference with the smaller images you refer to. With the larger versions I could see a difference. I could detect no polygons, but the little out of focus circles were bigger and more hard edged with the Tele-Elmarit. As Walt remarked, it may make a more pronounced difference with a large print or projection. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21727 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:00:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:00:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:01:15 2002 -0800 Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09708 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:01:06 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PVCb-00054k-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:01:05 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:01:01 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Christian - > >My two cents worth: my 100/2.8 is amazingly sharp, with beautiful contrast >and clarity. I haven't tried the 85/2, but it's hard for me to believe it >could be better. > - The 85/2 has the advantage of 8 blades vs 6 for the 100/2.8, > so it will do soft backgrounds better. > - The 100/2.8 will have slightly flatter perspective, which is often > more flattering (esp. if the subject has a big nose). > >Regards, >Andrew Gullen I kind of agree even though I have the 85/2. Take a look at the portrait in the Bokeh event of the OM gallery done by James Kiker with the 100/2.8 shot wide open. You could not ask for more and the 100/2.8 is much cheaper than the 85/2. http://www.millennics.com/olympus/tope/gallery.html -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22020 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:06:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:06:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:06:25 2002 -0800 Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09712 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:06:15 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PVHa-0004NZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:06:14 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <02122021480401.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> References: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> <02122021480401.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:06:13 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >How can a zoom lens be sharper than fix focal lens ? >Happy Christmas time for all. >Christian Zoom or fixed focal length are just categories of lenses. There are good and bad examples of each. A good zoom can out perform a bad fixed focal length. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22342 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:11:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:11:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:12:07 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09728 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:11:57 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PVMe-00027t-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:11:28 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:11:27 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Fwd: Re: [OM] Why do photo teachers recommend Pentax? : Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >As an instructor in a college commercial photography program and in >kids photography >programs, and a used equipment reseller, these are the reasons I >observe (in order of >importance): > >1. due to instructors lack of knowledge of other suitable cameras! >2. because other instructors who have mentored them recommended the >K1000 and Canon AE-1 >3. short attention span of students and/or lack of interest by >instructor for this subject >in the first weeks into a course >4. reluctance to mention any less common models (beside the K1000 >and AE-1) which a student >might have to hunt around for >5. unsupported perception of reliability of the K1000 and AE-1* >6. nagging notion that some camera models have battery availability >problems, so they take >the keep it simple approach (and limit their recommendations) or >just pass the student onto >to some resident "expert" >7. availability of used lenses. > >* I see lots of used K1000 bodies. My two biggest observed problems >are significant, >non-linear exposure meter errors from its very primitive CdS >photocell and shutter curtain >speed errors, esp. those leading to tapering (caping) where one side >of the frame ends up >darker than the rest of the picture. Then there is the AE-1 (and >all A series bodies) in >which about 500f all bodies need relubrication of the mirror >gearing to eliminate "squeek" >and slowly raising mirrors. > >The most ironic thing about the AE-1 is that it isn't even a true >manual exposure camera. > >Better choices here would be a Canon AT-1 (true manual) and an >earlier Pentax KX or KM, >which incorporates a self timer and often has a better, older SMC >Pentax lens (the only line >with a f/1.8), versus a smaller SMC Pentax-M or SMC Pentax-A series one. > >My favorite cameras to sell are the: >Olympus OM-2000 with a 50mm f/1.8 >Nikon FM-10 with a 50mm f/1.8 Series E >both of which require me to sell off the cheap zoom they are most >often obtained with. How >odd that Japanese manufacturers failed to supply these with 50mm lenses! > >Other great choices are: >Minolta X-570 (the only true manual camera in the X series) >Pentax MX >Nikon FM and FM2/FM2n >Olympus OM-1n with battery conversion >among MANY others out there. > >The fact is that many new photography students go out and buy a low >end autofocus SLR, like >a Canon Rebel 2000 with 28-80mm (probably Rebel Ti next semester) or >the Nikon N55 and N65 >with zoom, or a Maxxum 5 with zoom. They are pretty quick to buy a >used AF 50mm once they >get going on assignments, because the students with 50's start >skunking them in available >light assignments. > >I'll be doing a school Photography Club clinic this next semester on >buying a suitable >student camera. It really saddens me to see the junk they buy and >bring to their early >classes only to discover they have been ripped off. > >Gary Reese -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22685 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:20:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:20:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:21:10 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09732 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:21:00 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PVVq-0006cF-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:20:59 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7@aol.com> References: <132.183fe6fe.2b34e5d7@aol.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:20:58 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] 8-10X Loupe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >> > > >Hi Winsor, > >I use a Peak 7x Anastigmat. It's just off the lower end of your >magnification scale, but it is sharp from corner to corner, has no >distortion I can see, and has good color rendition. > >Regards, > >Greg Logiodice Thanks for the tip. I have a couple of very cheap Peak 10X loupes and tended to brand everything with the Peak name as cheap and not very good. I will take a look. Nice to see you on the list. Long time. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22947 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:25:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:25:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:25:18 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09740 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:25:08 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.42.239]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021220222416.HKFR14019.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:24:16 -0500 Message-ID: <001d01c2a876$757c8fa0$ef2a44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> <02122021480401.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> <015701c2a85b$49bcde80$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:23:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The Tamron may be an independent manufacturer but calling it an "off-brand" is a stretch. Gary Reese's lens test show the Tamron 80-200 f2.8 to be a very sharp lens. On the other hand, back in the 70s, I bought a Tamron 80-210 f4.5 that was a dog. My experience with Zuikos is similar. The 'slower', more affordable lenses often aren't nearly as sharp as the primo lenses. (An exception would be the 50 f1.8 labeled "Made in Japan".) Super-telephotos in particular. On the other hand, I have a very very sharp Sigma 24mm f2.8 that I found on ebay for $30. Similarly, I got a very very sharp Tamron 28mm f2.8 with owner's manual, original hard case and original shade on ebay for $30. If you like sharp pictures, Gary's site can show you that the most expensive lenses are not always the best performers nor the best values. My two cents. By the way, some have repeated the mantra that wide angles are hard to focus. I don't think so. I've had 3 other 28mm lenses on various OM bodies and they all looked unsharp until I found the Tamron. I contend that if it's hard to focus, it may just be an unsharp lens. Similarly, the 24mm is crystalline sharp on the 2-13 screen. Don't settle. Lama "Some get the gravy. Some get the gristle. Some get nothing though there's plenty to spare." Joni Mitchell Lama From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> How can a zoom lens be sharper than fix focal lens ? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23213 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:25:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:25:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:25:49 2002 -0800 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09744 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:25:39 -0800 Received: from pool0715.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.136.205] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PVaM-0004m1-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:25:39 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212201356.AA1666449708@mynra.com> References: <200212201356.AA1666449708@mynra.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:25:37 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] 8-10X Loupe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Winsor, > >It would probably be a good idea for me to become more familiar >with my own equipment. It's not a 10X. It's a Cabin Pro 8X >Loupe PL-8. So much for my awareness and/or memory. > >B&H had a special on these a couple of years ago for, best I >recall, $100 per. It covers approximately 75 percent of a 35mm >tranny and comes with both an opaque and a translucent bottom, >and the eyepiece is threaded so it can be focused. Mamiya >distrubtes these, and I am right happy with mine. Also, it's a >perfect fit for one of the small Olympus drawstring lens pouches. > >Walt Thanks for the tip, Walt. There is a camera shop listed as a Mamiya Cabin next to my nearest REI. I will drop in and take a look. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23634 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 22:42:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 22:42:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 14:43:01 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts1.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09768 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:42:52 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.253.65]) by simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021220223834.HOZM2033.simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:38:34 -0500 Message-ID: <001501c2a878$a6c586a0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:39:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Nah. It's never too late. And digital will get better and better, and simpler to use as well. With film, the technology and ergonmetrics are pretty well figured out, while we are still figuring out what a digital camera ought to be and do. Present-day cameras (digital and film wunderbricks) are far too complex, being encrusted with so many features that nobody can remember how to take a picture, and burdened with misfeatures like agonizing shutter lag and slow picture storage time andinadequate capacity. Not to mention battery problems. > > Joe Gwinn > Thanks Joe, I needed that. This is the most sensible statement on the argument I've read for awhile. It is exactly why I haven't switched to AF film wunderbricks. I've spent a good part of today trying to get a used HP film scanner working, and have finally come to the conclusion it has to go back to the seller. (will work fine in slide and negative mode, but not print mode, diagnosed as lid sensor switch mal-functioning). As some of you know, I've been seriously considering the Olympus C-5050, but after this afternoons digital frustrations, am not so sure. I know the two aren't directly connected, but somehow I've just been reminded that maybe there is enough frustration in owning a computer, without an expensive short-lived digital camera too, at least for a while yet. I think tomorrow I'll load up an OM1n and 35RC with slide film, and go have some fun. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24163 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 23:10:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 23:10:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 15:10:40 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp017.mail.yahoo.com (smtp017.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.114]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA09802 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:10:30 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-27-176.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.27.176 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 23:09:44 -0000 Message-ID: <3E03A334.20608@sbcglobal.net> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:09:40 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens References: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> <02122021480401.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> <015701c2a85b$49bcde80$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's already been done. Check out Gary's lens tests for the 2 lenses . Gary is careful to point out that only whole grade differences are valid in comparing 2 lenses (except in a few paired tests). Applying that rule, one can clearly conclude that the Tamron at 80mm is at least as good a performer in both sharpness and contrast at every overlapping f-stop as either of the 2 MC samples of the 85/2 that he tested. Based on the consistency with which it outscores the 85/2, I suspect the Tamron is slightly the better lens overall with the particular samples involved and under the specific test conditions. Walt started all this by suggesting the Tamron as an all-round solution to the 85/2 vs. 100/2.8 (and to stir up a little action- satisfied Walt?). The Tamron is certainly a great lens, but I would never think of it for portrait work except in a fixed setup with a tripod. It's big and heavy and has a completely different feel than either of those small, light Zuikos, like carrying around a couple of extra bricks. (Yes, Mike V., you CAN hand hold it. I guess I could, but I use a monopod.). Wandering around pointing that thing at people in a casual portrait situation would probably send some running in fright! They are both great lenses, capable of exceptional image-making, but quite different beasts. Why does one have to be best? How could one even know? How about about tests at 1:10, 1:15,,,,1:100...infinity, all duplicated for flare vs. non-flare light, low vs. high contrast subject, hand held vs.sturdy support (particularly appropriate here), wth and without teleconverters, extension tubes, etc., etc..................... What a colossal waste of time!!!!!!! Moose stepping down from soapbox John Hudson wrote: >would anyone be prepared to put up their two bits and show conclusively that >the Tamron zoom is sharper than an 85/2 and under what conditions? My MC >85/2 is a stunning performer but to have an off brand zoom outperfom it >would be a real eye opener. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24676 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2002 23:42:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 20 Dec 2002 23:42:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 15:42:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA09834 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:42:16 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:41:52 -0500 Message-Id: <200212201841.AA540279108@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Moose Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:09:40 -0800 >Walt started all this by suggesting the Tamron as an all-round >solution to the 85/2 vs. 100/2.8 (and to stir up a little action- >satisfied Walt?). Yep. Just like when I was a kid, I still like to start something, then stand back and watch the fur fly. :-) >The Tamron is certainly a great lens, but I would never think >of it for portrait work except in a fixed setup with a tripod. I agree. It can be hand-held. I do it occasionally, but I don't think anybody would want to for long. It really needs a monopod, at least. And as far as sharp and contrasty, who wants that in a portrait lens anyway? My choice for portraits, especially of members of the tender gender, is the 100/2 Zuiko, but with a Tiffen Soft Net filter. They'll like the results, and then they'll like you. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25176 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 00:10:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 00:10:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 16:10:44 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA09868 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:10:33 -0800 Received: (qmail 29242 invoked by uid 104); 21 Dec 2002 00:09:07 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 00:09:06 -0000 Message-ID: <00b801c2a886$138718a0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <200212201415.AA1576665264@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:15:28 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca For the bokeh, I'm sure other lens design factors is same or even more important than number of aperture blade, look at the Zuiko 50/1.2 you will know. Bokeh of long lens usually is good as the out focus area is usually too soft to identify. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" > Or you could get a Tamron 80-200/2.8. It's actually sharper than > either the 100/2.8 or the 85/2, and you can zoom it to either > focal length, or anywhere in between, or shorter, or longer. > > Oh, and by the way, it has a nine-blade diaphragm. Must be > another bokeh thing. :-) > > Happy holidays. > > Walt > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25683 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 00:42:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 00:42:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 16:42:36 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA09904 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:42:25 -0800 Received: (qmail 5500 invoked by uid 104); 21 Dec 2002 00:40:57 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 00:40:56 -0000 Message-ID: <016501c2a88a$851cb700$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3773 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:47:18 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A circle or polygon (or something non circle like the triangle three blade Rollie 85/1.4) highlight is not critical for me. I just don't like the astigmatical look (double lines) out focus background. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Gullen" > Winsor and Walt - > > Look at Photo 2 at f5.6 (second row in the second group on the page). The > out-of-focus highlights to the right of the tree in the TE are definitely > polygons (hexagons I think), while the APO ones are rounder and thus > smoother. Depends on what you want for any given image, though. > > I've taken a shot with my Zuiko 50/3.5 I didn't like because the little > hexagons in the background made it look rough. (Actually I've taken lots I > didn't like, but those weren't the lens' fault. I've taken lots I did like. > But I digress...) I wanted smooth in this case. > > Try taking a shot with an XA at about 5.6 with an out-of-focus background. > It has a sort-of four-bladed iris; background can be quite rough. Six blades > (many Zuikos) is smoother, eight or nine even better. > > I myself am skeptical of many of these kind of claims (remember monster > speaker wire?), but this one I can see. > > Regards, > Andrew > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26177 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 01:16:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 01:16:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 17:16:25 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp04.iprimus.com.au (smtp04.iprimus.com.au [210.50.76.52]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA09927 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:16:15 -0800 Received: from smtp01.iprimus.net.au (210.50.30.70) by smtp04.iprimus.com.au (6.7.010) id 3DF583C30016A98F for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:15:44 +1100 Received: from default ([211.26.72.8]) by smtp01.iprimus.net.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:15:43 +1100 Message-ID: <00b301c2a88e$42fa0860$08481ad3@default> From: "Bolty" To: References: <20021220163029.95804.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:14:06 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2002 01:15:44.0152 (UTC) FILETIME=[7C269180:01C2A88E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hmmm... TOPE shots I presume??? I love the first image. Cheers Adam < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26923 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 02:25:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 02:25:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 18:26:11 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09979 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:26:00 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.121.132]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021221022145.MKCE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:21:45 -0600 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:21:19 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.121.132] at Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:21:45 -0600 Message-Id: <20021221022145.MKCE4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In , on 12/20/02 at 10:09 AM, NSURIT@aol.com said: > Is it safe for her to go to this Harrods place alone? Not if you have deep pockets or an understanding banker. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27457 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:04:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:04:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:05:07 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10006 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:04:56 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <20021221030349051006j4ule>; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 03:03:49 +0000 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:01:26 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] in case you want that junker of a 35-80... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219113417.0266f598@192.168.100.11> Message-Id: <7E7E8A02-1490-11D7-92F5-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for the heads-up. I kept watching the page until one of them sold and then I couldn't stop myself, so I bought the other. I know, I know...it's a shame to see a hack end up with one of them, but it seems like a really nice general-purpose lens. I tend to imagine I'll end up using it most of the time. -Rob On Thursday, December 19, 2002, at 11:35 AM, Richard F. Man wrote: > The description says "new" and the seller seems to be a store in > Brooklyn? (hope it's not one of those evil ones). Anyway, no > connection, etc. ~$1100 seems to be a very good price is it is truly > new, isn't it? > > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1946630022 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27777 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:14:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:14:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:14:44 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10010 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:14:34 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA18486 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:13:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220191331.027f8828@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:15:11 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] in case you want that junker of a 35-80... In-Reply-To: <7E7E8A02-1490-11D7-92F5-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219113417.0266f598@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 07:01 PM 12/20/2002 -0800, Rob wrote: >Thanks for the heads-up. I kept watching the page until one of them sold >and then I couldn't stop myself, so I bought the other. I know, I >know...it's a shame to see a hack end up with one of them, but it seems >like a really nice general-purpose lens. I tend to imagine I'll end up >using it most of the time. >... Congratulation. When I saw one went, I was VERY tempt to buy the remaining one, but decided not to. Immense self control here! I'm sure you will enjoy it very much, despite what that heretic Walt says :-) // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28504 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:21:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:21:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:21:46 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10039 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:21:37 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002122103202905200fgtqfe>; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 03:20:29 +0000 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:18:06 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] in case you want that junker of a 35-80... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220191331.027f8828@192.168.100.11> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I hardly slept last night. I kept coming in here and refreshing the auction page to see if the remaining one was gone and I finally couldn't stop myself. I kept telling April I really didn't need it and it wasn't the time of year to buy it and that I was just curious as to how long they'd last and finally she said, "Buy it. You have photography classes in your schedule, so tell yourself it was an educational expense, click the button and come to bed or I'm going to give you a Xanax." That was all the prompting I needed. Heretics aside. ;-) -Rob On Friday, December 20, 2002, at 07:15 PM, Richard F. Man wrote: > Congratulation. When I saw one went, I was VERY tempt to buy the > remaining one, but decided not to. Immense self control here! I'm sure > you will enjoy it very much, despite what that heretic Walt says :-) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28821 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:32:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:32:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:33:02 2002 -0800 Received: from web20009.mail.yahoo.com (web20009.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA10051 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:32:53 -0800 Message-ID: <20021221033240.50081.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20009.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:32:40 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:32:40 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: [OM] What's the place you can get the cheap SR-44's again? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <016501c2a88a$851cb700$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca All out of SR-44's and I want to get some more could someone direct me to tplace that has them for like 50 cents. Thnaks. Mark Lloyd __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29215 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:47:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:47:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:48:07 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10081 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:47:57 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA31006; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:47:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220194459.07f968c0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:48:33 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] in case you want that junker of a 35-80... In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220191331.027f8828@192.168.100.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 07:18 PM 12/20/2002 -0800, R. Jackson wrote: >I hardly slept last night. I kept coming in here and refreshing the >auction page to see if the remaining one was gone and I finally couldn't >stop myself. I kept telling April I really didn't need it and it wasn't >the time of year to buy it and that I was just curious as to how long >they'd last and finally she said, "Buy it. You have photography classes in >your schedule, so tell yourself it was an educational expense, click the >button and come to bed or I'm going to give you a Xanax." That was all the >prompting I needed. Heretics aside. ;-) >... Heh, I see you have the same kind of wife I do! You know, normally, a spouse supposes to say things like, "dear, the roof is leaking and our kids have no shoes, so I don't think it is wise to spend $5000 on a Nikon lens hood." But no, instead my wife says, "Go ahead and buy that lens. Sure, it's the fifth lens you bought this year but you know you want it." I guess this is what happened when you are married for 20 years :-)! Doubly Congratulation! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29579 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:56:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:56:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:56:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10086 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:56:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:55:50 -0500 Message-Id: <200212202255.AA449380666@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] What's the place you can get the cheap SR-44's again? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://store.watchsupply.com Silver 357s for just a bit more than a pittance. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "M. Lloyd" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:32:40 -0800 (PST) >All out of SR-44's and I want to get some more could >someone direct me to tplace that has them for like 50 >cents. Thnaks. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29830 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 03:57:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 03:57:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 19:58:11 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10094 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:58:00 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-26.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.26]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBL3qKM00822; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:52:20 +1300 Message-Id: <200212210352.gBL3qKM00822@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: fischerchristian@free.fr, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:57:37 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Christian Fischer wrote > > How can a zoom lens be sharper than a fix(ed) focal (length) lens ? > Happy Christmas time for all. > Christian Easy (to describe, not to do). There has been continuous improvement in lens design (use of computers, different thinkers working on the problems, different combinations of different lens elements), aspherical surfaces, better and different glass, better lens coatings, improved quality of manufacture for the same price or lower, greater precision in all important things. During the last 20 years at least. This shows in the published lens tests. But obviously not for ALL lenses; just some. The trick is, to find out WHICH. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30125 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 04:04:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 04:04:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 20:04:25 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10100 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:04:16 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002122104030805200fhgede>; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 04:03:08 +0000 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:00:45 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] in case you want that junker of a 35-80... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021220194459.07f968c0@192.168.100.11> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Heh...17 years on December 5th. It's a good thing I ended up with someone who can take my obsessive impulses in stride. Most women would have called their lawyer shortly after the 4 a.m. "The Zuiko zoom hasn't sold yet." update. ;-) -Rob On Friday, December 20, 2002, at 07:48 PM, Richard F. Man wrote: > Heh, I see you have the same kind of wife I do! You know, normally, a > spouse supposes to say things like, "dear, the roof is leaking and our > kids have no shoes, so I don't think it is wise to spend $5000 on a > Nikon lens hood." But no, instead my wife says, "Go ahead and buy that > lens. Sure, it's the fifth lens you bought this year but you know you > want it." I guess this is what happened when you are married for 20 > years :-)! > > Doubly Congratulation! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30376 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 04:04:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 04:04:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 20:05:11 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts23.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.185]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10104 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:05:01 -0800 Received: from [64.229.244.193] by tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021221040105.TBWL15164.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.244.193]> for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:01:05 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:01:10 -0500 Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >> How can a zoom lens be sharper than fix focal lens ? >> Happy Christmas time for all. >> Christian There may also be sample variation. Or different variants of lenses as the design evolves. Someone on eBay just claimed he had to try something like 6 or 8 100/2.8's to get one that *really* sang (grain of salt here - this is the lens he was selling :-) ). I tried out the Tamron, compared it with the parallel Zuiko shots and passed. Maybe I should have tried another. Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30855 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 04:33:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 04:33:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 20:33:28 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10148 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:33:17 -0800 Received: from interisland.net ([12.17.134.163]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBL4Tas05724 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:29:36 -0800 Message-ID: <3E03EF1F.BB625B78@interisland.net> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:33:35 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] Sample shots for your entertainment Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id UAA10148 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Around here we call this "Montana mini storage" mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31132 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 04:38:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 04:38:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 20:38:30 2002 -0800 Received: from web20006.mail.yahoo.com (web20006.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.69]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA10152 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:38:20 -0800 Message-ID: <20021221043807.36816.qmail@web20006.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20006.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:38:07 PST Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:38:07 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] What's the place you can get the cheap SR-44's again? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212202255.AA449380666@mynra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thnaks. Just ordered 24 for 16 bucks. They cost 2-3 bucks at radio shack and elsewhere. Mark Lloyd --- Walt Wayman wrote: > http://store.watchsupply.com > > Silver 357s for just a bit more than a pittance. > > Walt > > > ---------- Original Message > ---------------------------------- > From: "M. Lloyd" > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:32:40 -0800 (PST) > > >All out of SR-44's and I want to get some more > could > >someone direct me to tplace that has them for like > 50 > >cents. Thnaks. > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing > List > > < For questions, > mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: > http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31414 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 04:43:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 04:43:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 20:44:14 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10161 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:44:05 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.7c.330909c5 (25508) for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:42:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <7c.330909c5.2b354b23@aol.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:42:11 EST Subject: Re: [OM] What's the place you can get the cheap SR-44's again? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7c.330909c5.2b354b23_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_7c.330909c5.2b354b23_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2002 9:33:03 PM Central Standard Time, royer007@yahoo.com writes: > All out of SR-44's Don't recall specifically if they had SR-44's, however I just put an order together on the list for some Eveready 357 silver oxide. After postage to me and back out to the list members, they ended up costing 75 cents a piece. Got them from cheapbatteries.com, you may want to check them out. Bill Barber --part1_7c.330909c5.2b354b23_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2002 9:33:03 PM Central Standard Time, royer007@yahoo.com writes:

All out of SR-44's


Don't recall specifically if they had SR-44's, however I just put an order together on the list for some Eveready 357 silver oxide. After postage to me and back out to the list members, they ended up costing 75 cents a piece. Got them from cheapbatteries.com, you may want to check them out.  Bill Barber --part1_7c.330909c5.2b354b23_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 590 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 07:37:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 07:37:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 20 23:37:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10298 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:37:34 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBL7aL327567 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:36:21 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.106.172] (195-74-106-172.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.106.172]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBL7aHo27515 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:36:20 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 06:46:56 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] A couple of pix Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nice shots there Ian. I am envious of your closeup flower shots as the lighting seems so interesting. Am I right in thinking that you used a single camera flash with a reflector? Chris At 23:11 +0000 16/12/02, IanG wrote: >Thought I should load a couple of pix up to a site I can use. With one >exception all taken with an OM4 + a zuiko, the exception being a Tamron. > >The site is run by the RPS Digit group. > > >http://www.digit.org.uk/images/thumbs.asp?user_id=3D60089&personal=3D1 > >Ian -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1379 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 08:32:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 08:32:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 00:32:53 2002 -0800 Received: from prospera.dns20.com (prospera.dns20.com [216.71.32.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10321 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 00:32:42 -0800 Received: from hades ([81.212.42.154]) by prospera.dns20.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBL8WAK16834 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 02:32:10 -0600 Message-ID: <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> From: "Volkan Olgun" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Paris Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:31:54 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-9" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear All, I will be in Paris on January. Does any1 knows any place in Paris where I can probably find second hand cameras and lenses, especially OM series cameras and Zuiko lenses. All kind of Paris info with this respect will be wellcomed. Best regards, Volkan Olgun < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1832 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 08:58:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 08:58:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 00:58:26 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10342 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 00:58:12 -0800 Received: from modem-503.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.49.247] helo=skelly) by cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18PfSP-0006GP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:58:06 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] A couple of pix Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:58:12 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id AAA10342 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks Chris, I'm putting these up for a basic Royal Photographic Society distinction (LRPS) and all advice, comments, guidance is most appreciated. With the exception of the dog shot all the pix are natural light. We get very strong direction sunlight through our main bedroom window for a coup= le of hours in the morning and I use that. Tends to be a scrabble across the floor and bed chasing light and shadow, sheets being used as both backdro= p and reflector. The closeups were mostly taken with either a 35-70 3.5-4.5, or a 50 1.8 w= ith a vivitar 7 element 2x macro. Scanning neg gives me huge files so I can c= rop and enlarge quite drastically especially for digital display. Regards Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: 21 December 2002 06:47 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] A couple of pix Nice shots there Ian. I am envious of your closeup flower shots as the lighting seems so interesting. Am I right in thinking that you used a single camera flash with a reflector? Chris At 23:11 +0000 16/12/02, IanG wrote: >Thought I should load a couple of pix up to a site I can use. With one >exception all taken with an OM4 + a zuiko, the exception being a Tamron. > >The site is run by the RPS Digit group. > > >http://www.digit.org.uk/images/thumbs.asp?user_id=3D60089&personal=3D1 > >Ian -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2080 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 08:58:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 08:58:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 00:58:54 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr (postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10346 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 00:58:43 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-17-81-56-71-113.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.71.113]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 414B2C138 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:58:41 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Paris Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:47:38 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122109590403.00749@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id AAA10346 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Here are few addresses without connection. JM Photo 78 rue d'avron 75020 shop photo nikon 191 rue de courcelles 75017 Around place de la Bastille / boulevard Beaumarchais Have a good time in Paris. Christian Le sam, 21 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > Dear All, >=20 > I will be in Paris on January. Does any1 knows any place in Paris where= I > can probably find second hand cameras and lenses, especially OM series > cameras and Zuiko lenses. >=20 > All kind of Paris info with this respect will be wellcomed. >=20 > Best regards, >=20 > Volkan Olgun >=20 >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2400 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 09:06:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 09:06:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 01:07:12 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10352 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:07:01 -0800 Received: from modem-503.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.49.247] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Pfb0-0002VZ-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:06:59 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:07:09 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20021221043807.36816.qmail@web20006.mail.yahoo.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OM content.... I use one :-) Last night I started reading a magazine to discover that I don't know how to use curves and unsharp properly. I've discovered how to set black and white points with curves and the difference to a few of my pix is startling. Now I strongly suspect I've been using unsharp mask badly, which could go a long way to explain lots of 'grain' in my prints. Does anybody have a simple approach / guide to using unsharp? I have a horrid susption that I'm going to need to rescan and correct a lot of negs now :-( thanks Ian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2810 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 09:31:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 09:31:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 01:31:38 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp017.mail.yahoo.com (smtp017.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.114]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA10370 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:31:27 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-24-160.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.24.160 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 09:30:41 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0434BF.3080906@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:30:39 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Whoa! Check your assumptions. The Mpix numbers advertised for DCs are approximately the number of 3 color pixels delivered in the output (after all that complicated stuff you did). My 2.1 Mp camera produces 1600x1200 pixel images with 19,200,000 individual 3 channel pixels, so it's really a 1.92Mp camera. I think most of them quote the raw specs of the sensor, rather than the output of the actual camera design. It's sort of like the way disk drive manufacturers advertise capacities in decimal so that a 60mb drive is 60/1.024 or 58.59 mb to a digital system. In both cases, the biggest number that is even sort of defensible is used for promotion. So, using your approach, but adjusted for the way Megapixels are quoted for DCs and adjusting for promotional inflation, you need about 9 Mp to equal 35mm film (even less for 25mm film!) I'm not necessarily agreeing with the 9 MP number here, just disagreeing with your assumptions and 26 Mp conclusion. Where it comes to where the rubber meets the road for me, all these calculations don't mean much, it's the images and how people react/interact, "see" them. It's clear to me that digital camera output has certain qualities that differ subjectively from film and scanned film. In the particular case of my eyes and those of friends and family, DC prints are superior to 2720 dpi scanned 35mm prints for certain common subjects at 8x10 and smaller. Assuming that's about the limit for 1.9 Mp, one would need about an advertised 8.4 Mp for 16x20, which is about the limit for sharp 35mm prints using lenses of the quality you assume and reasonable technique. So your marhematical and my subjective approach end up pretty close. On the other hand, C.H.'s examples make it empicically clear that 4000 dpi (157dpmm) scans reveal more detail from at least fine grain film than 2700 dpi (107dpmm), so your 100 pixel calculated value may be suspect? It leads one to suspect that something closer to the 18 Mp otheres have come up with may be required to reach the resolution of fine grained 35mm film. Moose So here's another question. A significant number of this group view the vast majority of their images as 4x6 automated prints. Why would they need anything more than a couple of Mps, 0.5 for the 4x6s and the rest for the occasional 8x10 with a little cropping? Of course, I except John L., AG, you slide buffs and big print makers. Remember what Mike V., who makes prints to sell said about 4 Mp: "Largest I have gone so far from an E-10 file was 11x14. Print quality was on par with an 11x14 custom enlargement from Provia F 100 film. In fact, I picked up both from the lab at the same time and both the lab's store manager and lab's owner were stunned by the results and we all agreed they were quite comparable." Moose wearing a Walt mask Joe Gwinn wrote: >Comments interspersed below. > >>>From: Albert >>> >>>with the introduction of the Kodak 14Mpx SLR, it would seem like you >>>can get what you never thought possible before, Medium format quality in >>>a 35mm SLR. >>> >>> >>That depends on whose numbers you believe. My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. Medium format may contain 40Mpx. >> >> > >Reasonable 25mm film cameras resolve something like 50 line pairs per millimeter; sometimes better in the center, sometimes less at the edges. At two pixels per line pair, that's 100 pixels per millimeter. A 35mm frame is 24 by 36 mm, so we have (24*100)(36*100)= 8.64 million pixels (each having all three colors), or (8.64)(3)= 25.92= 26 million pixels (as usually quoted for digital cameras). > >So, 18 Mpix is a bit low to be "optimal", but it isn't that far off: 26/18= 1.44 to 1. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3197 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 09:51:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 09:51:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 01:51:29 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA10383 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:51:19 -0800 Received: from adsl-209-76-222-68.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@209.76.222.68 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 09:50:33 -0000 Message-ID: <3E043968.7030102@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:50:32 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Some good on-line resources are Computer-Darkroom a few scanning tips Making fine prints in your digital darkroom Mastering Downsampling This site is great for explaining what you are doing and why you are doing it, not only for downsampling, but for unsharp mask. I found the very detailed procedures are not optimal for all kinds of images. Try them as a tutorial, experiment, and discover what's best for you. In Photoshop 6 or 7, with that lovely, one click, multi-level undo/redo, it's easy to compare before and after of one or several steps adjustment steps. I always scan for and save the best straight scan I can. Later, I make adjustments to curves, balance, sharpening, etc. in photoshop and also save the final print and/or web versions. Moose IanG wrote: >OM content.... I use one :-) > >Last night I started reading a magazine to discover that I don't know how to >use curves and unsharp properly. I've discovered how to set black and white >points with curves and the difference to a few of my pix is startling. > >Now I strongly suspect I've been using unsharp mask badly, which could go a >long way to explain lots of 'grain' in my prints. Does anybody have a simple >approach / guide to using unsharp? > >I have a horrid susption that I'm going to need to rescan and correct a lot >of negs now :-( > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3854 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 10:52:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 10:52:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 02:52:47 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA10398 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 02:52:35 -0800 Received: (qmail 8344 invoked by uid 706); 21 Dec 2002 10:51:33 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 10:51:31 -0000 Message-ID: <017f01c2a8df$c47d13e0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <200212210352.gBL3qKM00822@central.caverock.net.nz> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 18:57:31 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In spite of the improve in technology of newer lens but many of them only work for a good specification that will let them "tested" good in sharpness. Some of them may not have other desired lens characteristic improved, such as bokeh, color and tone rendering. My friend who is a N*k*n fan, he said his 300/4 AF and 70-180 AF macro were not very good in color/tone rendering. Another example was an older story, there is a common consent here (from people uses different gears) that the Pe*t*x SMC has the poorest color accuracy, on the other hand it was the best performer in flare resistance (the SMC was famous for that in the 70's), everyone blame it was due to the use of too many coating. Actually, OM is not famous for high contrast and sharpness (the resolution isn't bad for most lenses though) it is the beautiful color and natural beautiful contrast that inspire me. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Swale" > Easy (to describe, not to do). There has been continuous improvement in > lens design (use of computers, different thinkers working on the problems, > different combinations of different lens elements), aspherical surfaces, better > and different glass, better lens coatings, improved quality of manufacture for > the same price or lower, greater precision in all important things. > > During the last 20 years at least. This shows in the published lens tests. > > But obviously not for ALL lenses; just some. The trick is, to find out WHICH. > > Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4199 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 11:07:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 11:07:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 03:08:16 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10408 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 03:08:05 -0800 Received: from [195.202.40.227] (mueasc-wan227.citykom.de [195.202.40.227]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA05283 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:07:16 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasc-wan227.citykom.de [195.202.40.227] claimed to be [195.202.40.227] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:07:12 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Am 17.12.2002 22:55 Uhr schrieb "Sean Davis" unter : > I guess i'm wondering about people's experiences with these lenses, > keeping in mind that i'm wanting one mostly for portraiture purposes. > Any thoughts would be appreciated. My opinion. to get an undistortion perspektive for a portrait, you might choose a distance of about ca 2 meters (6.6 foot) - so, if you wanna get a close portrait of the head you may take a 135mm, for a head/shoulder-Portrait 85/100mm, for the whole man/woman 50mm - with regards, Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4486 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 11:12:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 11:12:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 03:13:07 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10419 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 03:12:56 -0800 Received: from modem-2670.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.58.110] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18PhYs-0005gE-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:12:54 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:13:04 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <3E043968.7030102@sbcglobal.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks, I'll check them out. In theory I keep the original scan file and probably have them on disk or CD. However this year has been a long learning experience and I've found that I can now get better scans so I'll go back to the original negs and start again for a few pix. Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Moose Sent: 21 December 2002 09:51 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp Some good on-line resources are Computer-Darkroom a few scanning tips Making fine prints in your digital darkroom Mastering Downsampling This site is great for explaining what you are doing and why you are doing it, not only for downsampling, but for unsharp mask. I found the very detailed procedures are not optimal for all kinds of images. Try them as a tutorial, experiment, and discover what's best for you. In Photoshop 6 or 7, with that lovely, one click, multi-level undo/redo, it's easy to compare before and after of one or several steps adjustment steps. I always scan for and save the best straight scan I can. Later, I make adjustments to curves, balance, sharpening, etc. in photoshop and also save the final print and/or web versions. Moose IanG wrote: >OM content.... I use one :-) > >Last night I started reading a magazine to discover that I don't know how to >use curves and unsharp properly. I've discovered how to set black and white >points with curves and the difference to a few of my pix is startling. > >Now I strongly suspect I've been using unsharp mask badly, which could go a >long way to explain lots of 'grain' in my prints. Does anybody have a simple >approach / guide to using unsharp? > >I have a horrid susption that I'm going to need to rescan and correct a lot >of negs now :-( > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5029 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 11:58:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 11:58:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 03:58:39 2002 -0800 Received: from carbon.btinternet.com (carbon.btinternet.com [194.73.73.92]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10451 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 03:58:28 -0800 Received: from host62-7-81-82.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.7.81.82] helo=Inwin) by carbon.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18PiDw-0006M2-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:55:20 +0000 Message-ID: <004201c2a8e8$12e8f050$4547073e@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] OM3 Spotted in UK Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:49:49 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was in Link Cameras in Eastleigh yesterday and noticed that they still have a pre-loved OM3 body for sale. I had a "full frontal" view of it in the cabinet, and it seemed to be in good condition -- it had the usual two areas of brassing where the strap fixings rub the body, but apart from those there seemed to be no other marks. However, I could not see the back or underside of the camera (the film memo holder on the back of OM's often loses paint). They also had some Zuikos, but nothing exotic: 24mm f2.8, 35mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8, 135mm f3.5. The 100mm was obviously well-used, but the other three lenses seemed only lightly used. Link Cameras got this OM3 about 4-5 months ago, and as they have not sold it yet, they might be open to an offer if you are interested. They want 350 UK pounds for the OM3 (body only -- no lens). I have just had a flip though a November issue of the UK weekly magazine "Amateur Photographer"; Ffordes have an OM3 in excellent plus condition for 500 UK pounds, and Nicholas have various OM3's ranging from 425 to 600 UK pounds, with one in "superlative" condition at 800 UK pounds. As far as I can tell, these are all OM3's, not OM3Ti's. If you are interested, give Link Cameras a ring and ask them to describe the OM3 to you in detail (don't rely on my description!); their number is: +44 (0) 23 8065 2076 For those of you in the UK, Eastleigh (or "beastly Eastleigh" as it is humorously known to its inhabitants) is located on the M3 motorway midway between Southampton and Winchester. It is also one of the stops on the fast trains from London Waterloo to Southampton. -- from Cy in the UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6613 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 14:54:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 14:54:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 06:54:34 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10567 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 06:54:24 -0800 Received: from hppav (adsl-64-217-216-137.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net [64.217.216.137]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA10818 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:54:23 -0600 Message-ID: <004d01c2a910$b12a3760$5ac0fea9@hppav> From: "gries" To: References: <20021220092915.381.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] bounce flash Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:47:42 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mickey: most of th shots are camera mounted, and i just shyed away from using portrait format, but on the ones that i knew i wanted it, i mounted the T32 to the BG. a bit cumbersome, but it worked well for a couple shots. Thanks for all the compliments! hopefully more soon! Bob You are right, they are amazing. I wouldn't have thought an 18 would be good for people shots, but you've proven me wrong! Crisp, clear and sharp through the room. Nice! Was the flash camera or stand mounted? There is only one shot that is portrait oriented, but the flash is still bounced from the ceiling. I guess it could have been cropped. The flash worked really well. You got a nice soft yet adequate bath of light through the room (pun intended). Well done! Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6996 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 15:12:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 15:12:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 07:12:51 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10589 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:12:41 -0800 Received: from hppav (adsl-64-217-216-137.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net [64.217.216.137]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA12850 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:12:40 -0600 Message-ID: <005d01c2a913$3f3e1060$5ac0fea9@hppav> From: "gries" To: References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] WE-02 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:06:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca for those of you who DON'T have my page set as your home page, the WE02 link can be found here: http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/ have a great holiday! ;) Bob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8385 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 18:04:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 18:04:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 10:04:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10714 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:04:24 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB8E3F20 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:05:24 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:04:02 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Joe Gwinn > > >From: Jan Steinman > > > >My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. > >Hmm. I see. The 18 Mpix appears to assume the typical compromise red-green-green-blue pattern... It was from actual measurements, primarily RN Clark's and Norman Koren's. Most folks who are serious about this point out that there is no simple equation -- film has one equivalence if you measure one way, or a different one if you measure some other way. > >In 1997, I predicted that price/performance parity between digital and 35mm was 8 years off. I stand by that: it's now 3 years off. > >I assume that you used Moore's Law, that holds that semiconductor technology doubles in performance (halves in cost for the same performance) every 18 months. Confirmed below. Thanks for demo'ing the math I was too lazy to type in! As I mentioned, I first went through this exercise five years ago, and it looks like it's holding true. >What will take the longest is movies... Perhaps not... Movies don't require the maximum amount of information that the format can supply, and movie films are accordingly NOT even close to Velvia, in terms of resolution. (Don't believe me, shoot some of that crap that Seattle Filmworks -- or whatever they're called since the re-org -- or Dale Labs, or any of those movie film repacking houses sells.) It may be true that if you were using each frame to its utmost, but the human eye cannot discern all that detail at 24 frames per second. It would appear that MPEG formats do a pretty darn good job of containing as much "useful" information as is needed. > >Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. > >No; nothing is ever that clean. There will be a very gradual transition, because people will wait for their current equipment to wear out. I'd be more inclined to accept this if digitals didn't offer typical typical consumers so much more. Digital cameras are supposed to be "the" gift this Christmas. These will be "sold forward," to people who already have computers and printers. The infrastructure for digital is in place. The "gradual transition" has been going on since 1984, when the first graphics-based computer (Apple Macintosh) was mass-produced. >And the movie industry will still need vast quantities of film. Again, I dissent. Figure the angular area of a movie screen for the average viewer. (Not the front row seats that are always empty!) It isn't much different from viewing an 8x10 at 12". The movie business is capital intensive and very price conscious. Given that the 8x10 print is most people's idea of "a nice picture," I see the movie industry's movement into digital as an indication that the format has achieved price-performance parity for the masses, and I think it will happen in three years. The larger problem is theaters. They have considerable investment film, and don't turn over investments as fast as movie production companies do. But I expect the large chains, which are more capital intensive, will switch to digital in three years. >Look at us -- we happily use mechanical cameras from thirty years ago... Then there's the Society for Creative Anachronism, who joust and traipse around in three-hundred-year-old designer clothes... there's always room for outliers! >electronics are only a part of the total cost of a camera, and the optical and mechanical components do not follow Moore's Law, except that much of the mechanical complexity of cameras has been eliminated: a camera today has simple mechanicals controlled by a little computer chip. There you go! And they're injection molded of plastic, rather than milled from metal. And the lenses are computer-generated, rather than designed with a slide-rule. And the lenses in the eventual price-parity product will be much smaller. I agree that mechanics and optics don't follow the identical 18 month curve that electronics do, but they do have a curve of their own. And to the extent that many parts of digital and film cameras are identical in function, that forms the basis for a price-parity point. When the sensor costs the same as the various motors, soleniods, and mechanical parts that are unique to film cameras, price-parity will be achieved. > >(Of course, there will always be a niche market for fine art photochemistry, just as some brush-media artists still mix their own egg temupra.) > >Or develop their own photos? Please don't take what I write about marketplace and technology trends involving hundreds of millions of people as a personal affront. There will always be an artistic niche for film, just as one can still buy a horse-drawn carriage and buggy whip today. Simply by preferring Olympus gear, this group can be defined as an outlier in the larger scheme of things. However, I expect a gradual return to sheet film. It will require far less infrastructure to produce than sprocket-punched roll film. Roll film is a convenience, and convenenience is digital's middle name! The fanatics will be willing to take the time to mess with sheet film. There may even be a niche market for sprocket hole punches, for those of us who want to keep or OM's alive long after 35mm roll film is no longer commercially available. (Requisite on-topic content. :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9232 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 19:29:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 19:29:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 11:30:06 2002 -0800 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk (pfepa.post.tele.dk [193.162.153.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10768 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:29:54 -0800 Received: from get2net.dk (0x503ea020.boanxx10.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.160.32]) by pfepa.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 372C94804E5 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:29:33 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3E04C348.864C279F@get2net.dk> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:38:48 +0100 From: Klaus Elmquist Nielsen X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-3 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS: New OM-4Ti Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, Quite a while back I orderen a new OM-4Ti from a shop here in Copenhagen. It has now arrived. However, I am not completely sure that I want the OM-4Ti, partly for financial reasons and partly because I already have another OM Ti body. The price is around 15.000 danish kroner which is about 2022 euro or 2079 US$. If any of you are interested in buying this OM-4Ti then please contact me. I will not be involved in the actual purchase other than pointing the lucky person to the shop and tell the shop that this person will buy the OM-4Ti instead of me. For people outside the EU it should be noted that 25% VAT is included in the price and that this will (?) be subtracted from the price. Oh, and this is my first post to the olympus list. Kind apologies for offering stuff for sale so early. :-) Cheers and thanks in advance, Klaus < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9630 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 19:49:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 19:49:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 11:49:30 2002 -0800 Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10793 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:49:19 -0800 Received: from pool0303.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.135.48] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PpcF-0006BV-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:48:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E0434BF.3080906@sbcglobal.net> References: <3E0434BF.3080906@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:08:01 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And another side: When you carry a film camera which is inexpensive by today's rising digital standard, you have the potential when faced with a stunning subject and great care in taking the picture of creating that once in a lifetime shot that ends up on the wall in a giant sized enlargement. If you opt for an affordable digital in the 2 or 3 megapixel range which makes fine 4 X 6 prints you cut off that creative option. If you opt to get a second mortgage on the house, lose your spouse, and buy an 11-14 megapixel wonder with the same capability as your $10 roll of film you may not find that wonderful photo it is capable of before it is so outmoded in 3 or 4 years as to be embarrassing to be seen with. :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9937 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 19:55:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 19:55:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 11:55:56 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10801 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:55:44 -0800 Received: from modem-4084.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.63.244] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Ppio-0001Io-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 19:55:42 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 19:55:49 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Also, when faced by marauding muggers, with an OM you have two financially viable options... give them the camera or slug them with it. What are you going to do with your megabuck wunderbrick? You can't run 'cos it weighs too much. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Winsor Crosby Sent: 21 December 2002 17:08 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital And another side: When you carry a film camera which is inexpensive by today's rising digital standard, you have the potential when faced with a stunning subject and great care in taking the picture of creating that once in a lifetime shot that ends up on the wall in a giant sized enlargement. If you opt for an affordable digital in the 2 or 3 megapixel range which makes fine 4 X 6 prints you cut off that creative option. If you opt to get a second mortgage on the house, lose your spouse, and buy an 11-14 megapixel wonder with the same capability as your $10 roll of film you may not find that wonderful photo it is capable of before it is so outmoded in 3 or 4 years as to be embarrassing to be seen with. :-) -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10203 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 20:00:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 20:00:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 12:00:25 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts20.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10805 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:00:14 -0800 Received: from [65.92.127.92] by tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021221195628.SJFE16986.tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net@[65.92.127.92]> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:56:28 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:56:33 -0500 Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons, and portraits From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I looked, but could detect little difference with the smaller images > you refer to. With the larger versions I could see a difference. I > could detect no polygons, but the little out of focus circles were > bigger and more hard edged with the Tele-Elmarit. As Walt remarked, > it may make a more pronounced difference with a large print or > projection. Sorry, I wasn't being very careful with what I wrote. What I see in some cases are um, "inflated" hexagons, or circles with six little points on them. But the exact details don't matter here, what matters is whether one likes the look produced by any given lens. As an aside, what's being compared here are two top-notch lenses, which may not differ as much a more uneven comparison would. I think Clement is also correct: there are undoubtedly other factors. I just don't know enough about them to say anything. I'd guess that where the diaphragm is in the light path affects it as well. It's worth noting that shooting wide open if possible will obviously eliminate any diaphragm effects. Keeping highlights out of the background also obviously helps. And since this is sort of related... > And as far as sharp and contrasty, who wants that in a portrait > lens anyway? My choice for portraits, especially of members of > the tender gender, is the 100/2 Zuiko, but with a Tiffen Soft Net > filter. They'll like the results, and then they'll like you. You're absolutely right of course. I've been taking portraits of my 5-year old daughter, and the 100/2.8 gives an almost heightened realism and immediacy; the projected image seems even sharper than what I see with my own eyes. For a someone my own age I should consider a diffuser or soft-focus or such. I take it you recommend the Tiffen? Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10601 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 20:21:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 20:21:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 12:21:25 2002 -0800 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10823 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:21:14 -0800 Received: from pool0325.cvx29-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.135.70] helo=[10.0.1.2]) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Pq74-0001FP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:20:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wincros@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:19:52 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Winsor Crosby Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >>What will take the longest is movies... > >Perhaps not... Movies don't require the maximum amount of >information that the format can supply, and movie films are >accordingly NOT even close to Velvia, in terms of resolution. (Don't >believe me, shoot some of that crap that Seattle Filmworks -- or >whatever they're called since the re-org -- or Dale Labs, or any of >those movie film repacking houses sells.) > >It may be true that if you were using each frame to its utmost, but >the human eye cannot discern all that detail at 24 frames per >second. It would appear that MPEG formats do a pretty darn good job >of containing as much "useful" information as is needed. There are some small digital movie houses in Los Angeles all ready. I am impressed with the digital projections of astronomical photos in the lecture hall where my astronomy club meets. They look better than slide projections that precede them. Of couse the Epson digital projector is the size of the trunk of a Hyundai and must have cost the university many thousands. > > >Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. I think film will be viable until disposable cameras are converted to digital and every film processor has a digital printing system that will take anyone's memory card. The economy of scale for film will then be lost and it will become a very expensive boutique product. > > >And to the extent that many parts of digital and film cameras are >identical in function, that forms the basis for a price-parity >point. When the sensor costs the same as the various motors, >soleniods, and mechanical parts that are unique to film cameras, >price-parity will be achieved. I think the part omitted in the mix is the custom computer chip designed by or for the camera manufacturer which runs everything and probably costs a small fortune. I could see in the future that some chip manufacturer might end up producing chips that all manufacturers might use in order to get the cost down. Intel inside? > -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11260 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 21:23:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 21:23:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 13:23:38 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts1.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10851 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 13:23:26 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.253.82]) by simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021221211909.BJSB2033.simmts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:19:09 -0500 Message-ID: <000a01c2a936$b993e240$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:19:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I think film will be viable until disposable cameras are converted to > digital and every film processor has a digital printing system that > will take anyone's memory card. The economy of scale for film will > then be lost and it will become a very expensive boutique product. > Winsor Crosby > Long Beach, California We had some relatives stay with us overnight, on their way to Grandma's house for the holidays. They were using two cameras for their trip, both Kodak disposables complete with T Max and flash, and were quite happy. I questioned them a little, and they seem quite satisfied with past results, and have no intention of switching to digital :-) I think we may forget how many like them there are out there. The problem is however, do millions of disposable film cameras do anything to keep slide film alive? Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11747 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 21:59:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 21:59:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 13:59:57 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix4-1.free.fr (postfix4-1.free.fr [213.228.0.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10872 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 13:59:45 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-18-81-56-76-126.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.76.126]) by postfix4-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id BA425D3F0 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:59:43 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] FS XA in France Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:40:45 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122123000601.00771@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am surprising to post again ;-) Talking with a photo reseller he has showed me an Olympus XA in good conditions (used by himself). I dont know even the specifiactions of this Olympus camera. He asks 100 Euros (~100$) in the box with flash. I am not sure I would like this amount for a compact. Well, I am very despite with such small camera. I own a Minox EL (the first model) with a problem. It now cannot track a film longer than 24 exposures. But a very good lens. 800 Fuji Superia, hyperfocale distance and a T32 head up with a home made reflector to soften the light, it makes very good snap shoots without shades or red eyes. So is it 100$ worth ? I have read XA vs Rollei 35 opinions on this list months ago. But not remember the main. What is your opinion ? Christian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12323 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 22:48:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 22:48:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 14:48:45 2002 -0800 Received: from vs.bgnett.no (vs.bgnett.no [194.54.96.159]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10901 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:48:31 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3) id gBLMev926931 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:40:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) Received: from svein (lppp214.bgnett.no [194.54.100.214]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3av) with SMTP id gBLMet926924 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:40:55 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from svein@bgnett.no) From: =?windows-1252?Q?Svein=20Skj=F8tskift?= To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:48:01 +0100 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Organization: ess In-Reply-To: <02122123000601.00771@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] FS XA in France MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 X-Virus-Scanned: by vs.bgnett.no Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Christian, For an enthusiast site, try http://www.diaxa.com/xa/xastart.htm where you also can find some spesifications. I have owned and used XA for some time, as has my son (8) - who is not very careful. I have also, many years ago, owned a Minox. So, my personal conclusion is that XA is simple to use, takes very good pictures (allthough not as good as minox, - some vignetting on wide aperture), is very robust, lovely to handle. A good one in box with flash for 100 euro is a very good price for a lovely camera. Bear in mind that you can by the new Olympus mju II (stylus) for a low price now, down to 110 euro, at least here in Norway. I would say, buy the XA, for the style alone. For collectors, I have never seen the box, is it rare? Svein 1.12.2002 22:40:45, skreiv fischerchristian : >I am surprising to post again ;-) > >Talking with a photo reseller he has showed me >an Olympus XA in good conditions (used by himself). > >I dont know even the specifiactions of this Olympus >camera. > >He asks 100 Euros (~100$) in the box with flash. > >I am not sure I would like this amount for a compact. > >Well, I am very despite with such small camera. >I own a Minox EL (the first model) with a problem. >It now cannot track a film longer than 24 exposures. >But a very good lens. >800 Fuji Superia, hyperfocale distance >and a T32 head up with a home made reflector to >soften the light, it makes very good snap shoots >without shades or red eyes. > >So is it 100$ worth ? > >I have read XA vs Rollei 35 opinions on this list months >ago. But not remember the main. >What is your opinion ? > >Christian > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12858 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2002 23:33:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 21 Dec 2002 23:33:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 15:34:00 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10927 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 15:33:48 -0800 Received: from default ([213.120.42.240]) by care4free.net ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:29:18 -0000 Message-ID: <000b01c2a948$f50b67a0$f02a78d5@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: [OM] (OT) Netscape 7 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:30:25 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Anybody out there using Netscape 7? Anybody doing so managed to get their ALT text to show up on mouseover? Works with all my other versions, and with all versions of IE, but I have been all through my options everywhere and still can't get the blasted things to work. Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 25-11-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13698 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 01:09:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 01:09:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 17:09:44 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA10962 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:09:32 -0800 Received: (qmail 3308 invoked by uid 706); 22 Dec 2002 01:08:25 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 01:08:24 -0000 Message-ID: <00c701c2a957$7a46bba0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:14:28 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Winsor Crosby" > > I think the part omitted in the mix is the custom computer chip > designed by or for the camera manufacturer which runs everything and > probably costs a small fortune. I could see in the future that some > chip manufacturer might end up producing chips that all manufacturers > might use in order to get the cost down. Intel inside? > Intel may be fine, but no wintel, I don't want my DC hang unexpectedly :-) C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14180 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 01:41:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 01:41:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 17:41:43 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10994 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:41:31 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.126] by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7H0031ZZ72E8@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:37:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:39:25 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] FS XA in France In-reply-to: <02122123000601.00771@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/21/02 1:40 PM, fischerchristian at fischerchristian@free.fr wrote: > I am surprising to post again ;-) > > Talking with a photo reseller he has showed me > an Olympus XA in good conditions (used by himself). > > I dont know even the specifiactions of this Olympus > camera. > > He asks 100 Euros (~100$) in the box with flash. > > I am not sure I would like this amount for a compact. > > Well, I am very despite with such small camera. > I own a Minox EL (the first model) with a problem. > It now cannot track a film longer than 24 exposures. > But a very good lens. > 800 Fuji Superia, hyperfocale distance > and a T32 head up with a home made reflector to > soften the light, it makes very good snap shoots > without shades or red eyes. > > So is it 100$ worth ? > > I have read XA vs Rollei 35 opinions on this list months > ago. But not remember the main. > What is your opinion ? > > Christian Christian -- The Olympus XA is a very nice camera for snapshots with a bit more control over focus and aperture. The flash must be a matching Olympus flash, there are about four models (A-9, A-11, A-1A, A-16) of flash. The lens does not fold up like the Minox, so the camera is a bit larger, but it has a nice shape. A nice XA with an A-11 flash can often be found on eBay for less than US$100, although I don't know if you would end up paying near that with shipping and VAT to France. So maybe $100 is an OK price for one in your hands after all, but if you are patient you can find them in auctions for $60 or a bit more... -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14435 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 01:43:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 01:43:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 17:43:57 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11005 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:43:46 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021222013051.XKBA214174.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:30:51 -0500 Message-ID: <00da01c2a959$f984ab00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Subject: [OM] who is JAQ50@aol.com Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:32:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:30:51 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Does anyone on this list have this email address? JAQ50@aol.com I have received more than one message from more than one list member where the "X-Apparently-From" sender is JAQ50. The messages have been blank but have included attached files. If JAQ50 is a list member please contact me off list. Thanks John Hudson < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15376 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 03:25:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 03:25:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 19:26:09 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11083 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 19:25:57 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.34]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021222032142.RBEH4558.pop018.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:21:42 -0600 Message-ID: <001701c2a969$3fe70480$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <00c701c2a957$7a46bba0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:21:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [141.157.99.34] at Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:21:41 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The DC already comes equipped with the screen that wintel can turn into the BSOD. Gee, imagine it to the tune of 9 megapixels! And won't it be fine whey your DC get's Klez and starts sending screwy pictures to all your email friends! -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" > > Intel may be fine, but no wintel, I don't want my DC hang unexpectedly :-) > > C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16026 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 03:29:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 03:29:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 19:30:14 2002 -0800 Received: from out002.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11104 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 19:30:02 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.34]) by out002.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021222032547.IVTZ1873.out002.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:25:47 -0600 Message-ID: <001f01c2a969$d1dd0ba0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <00da01c2a959$f984ab00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] who is JAQ50@aol.com Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:25:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out002.verizon.net from [141.157.99.34] at Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:25:46 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I didn't find that address on the subscription lists for the list or digest. I checked when I was getting emails from that address that were carrying the Klez virus and had list members falsely referenced as the 'from' and 'return to' addresses. Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: "LIST - Olympus" Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 8:32 PM Subject: [OM] who is JAQ50@aol.com > Does anyone on this list have this email address? > > JAQ50@aol.com > > I have received more than one message from more than one list member where > the "X-Apparently-From" sender is JAQ50. The messages have been blank but > have included attached files. > > If JAQ50 is a list member please contact me off list. > > Thanks > > John Hudson > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16856 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 04:49:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 04:49:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 20:49:42 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts23.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.185]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA11166 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:49:31 -0800 Received: from [65.92.124.101] by tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021222044545.VQOP15164.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@[65.92.124.101]> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:45:45 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:45:51 -0500 Subject: Re: [OM] FS XA in France From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Talking with a photo reseller he has showed me > an Olympus XA in good conditions (used by himself). >... > What is your opinion ? I tried a couple, as I'm looking for a pocket manual camera. Nice camera, nice pictures, except: - hair trigger shutter on the ones I tried; you have to be a bit careful - out of focus background somewhat harsh at intermediate apertures; not a serious complaint but you'd have to be careful with background - quite noticeable vignetting with even-colored things like blue sky. This last point is why I haven't bought one (yet). See also Gary Reese's lens tests at http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default.htm (the XA is second item under "Point and Shoot"). The vignetting might not be as much of a problem for people shots, street scenes, etc., but I thought it might be depressing to always keep the sky out of my photographs (:-) > I have read XA vs Rollei 35 opinions on this list months ago. Great! Can anyone give me an approximate pointer into the archives, by issue# or date? Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17347 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 05:24:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 05:24:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 21:24:31 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11180 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:24:20 -0800 Received: from homebody.telusplanet.net ([142.59.163.196]) by priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021222052034.SXCS21412.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@homebody.telusplanet.net> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:20:34 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021221221931.00b91510@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:20:34 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] who is JAQ50@aol.com In-Reply-To: <00da01c2a959$f984ab00$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:32 PM 12/21/2002 -0400, John Hudson wrote: >Does anyone on this list have this email address? > >JAQ50@aol.com > >I have received more than one message from more than one list member where >the "X-Apparently-From" sender is JAQ50. The messages have been blank but >have included attached files. John: Delete the files, they're most likely virus-containing. The e-mail sender is at best a third party who may be in the address list of someone on the List. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17657 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 05:32:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 05:32:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 21:32:58 2002 -0800 Received: from txsmtp02.texas.rr.com (smtp2.texas.rr.com [24.93.36.230]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11184 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:32:46 -0800 Received: from mike (cs170100-71.sport.rr.com [24.170.100.71]) by txsmtp02.texas.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with SMTP id gBM5UfSr024303 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:30:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <01c901c2a97b$c0bbcd40$0400a8c0@sport.rr.com> From: "Michael S. Williamson" To: References: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:34:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >> How can a zoom lens be sharper than fix focal lens ? > >> Happy Christmas time for all. > >> Christian > > There may also be sample variation. Or different variants of lenses as the > design evolves. Someone on eBay just claimed he had to try something like 6 > or 8 100/2.8's to get one that *really* sang (grain of salt here - this is > the lens he was selling :-) ). I tried out the Tamron, compared it with the > parallel Zuiko shots and passed. Maybe I should have tried another. > > Regards, > Andrew Andrew, I bought the aforementioned 100 f2.8. Having purchased a new 85 f2 earlier this year and a used 90mm f2.5 (49mm) Tamron in 2001, it seemed time for another roughly equivalent focal length (although I guess I should have waited until 2003). This is what the seller of the 100mm had to say about the lens (after I purchased it): Just to tell you some about this lens. I have been a professional newspaper, magazine and commercial photographer for over 30 years and had just about retired when I got a chance to do some 16 X 20 and 20 X 24 posters. Knowing the great demand this would put upon a lens, I bought a Tamron 90mm, a Vivitar 105 macro and three 100mm Olympus lenses. This one was best of all. It compared to the 105 Nikon and the 100 F3.5 Zeiss for Contax I had used before. I believe it will please you in every way. This is a little different from what he said in his eBay ad, but it makes for a good story anyway. I hope to take a few shots with it over the holidays. I doubt if I'll keep both it and the 85mm, but perhaps I will. The 100mm was no Fang, but $121.80 USD for a relatively new model was pretty good (especially since I see E. Zuiko models going for more quite often). Mike < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17951 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 05:40:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 05:40:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 21:40:23 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11198 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:40:11 -0800 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:39:47 -0500 Message-Id: <200212220039.AA1164967976@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons, and portraits X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I use the Tiffen because that's what I've got. There are probably other filters that work as well or better. I've had good results from shooting through an old UV filter with a light coating of Vaseline smeared on it. This sometimes does really nice things to highlights. Screen wire, panty hose, an old onion sack -- these are some of the many things that have been used to soften up images. And the panty hose, depending on the tint, can provide the same effect as a warming filter, then can be used as a mask while holding up the local liquor store to get money to buy more OM gear. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Andrew Gullen Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:56:33 -0500 >And since this is sort of related... > >> And as far as sharp and contrasty, who wants that in a portrait >> lens anyway? My choice for portraits, especially of members of >> the tender gender, is the 100/2 Zuiko, but with a Tiffen Soft >> Net filter. They'll like the results, and then they'll like >>you. > >You're absolutely right of course. I've been taking portraits of >my 5-year old daughter, and the 100/2.8 gives an almost >heightened realism and immediacy; the projected image seems even >sharper than what I see with my own eyes. For a someone my own >age I should consider a diffuser or soft-focus or such. I take >it you recommend the Tiffen? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18331 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 05:56:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 05:56:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 21:56:57 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11207 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:56:45 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Pz6S-0001Jf-00 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:56:45 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons, and portraits Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:55:55 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200212220039.AA1164967976@mynra.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Shooting through panty hose can be especially rewarding if there is a female person on the other side of them. But, alas, not always. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Walt Wayman Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 10:40 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Lens bokeh comparisons, and portraits I use the Tiffen because that's what I've got. There are probably other filters that work as well or better. I've had good results from shooting through an old UV filter with a light coating of Vaseline smeared on it. This sometimes does really nice things to highlights. Screen wire, panty hose, an old onion sack -- these are some of the many things that have been used to soften up images. And the panty hose, depending on the tint, can provide the same effect as a warming filter, then can be used as a mask while holding up the local liquor store to get money to buy more OM gear. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Andrew Gullen Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:56:33 -0500 >And since this is sort of related... > >> And as far as sharp and contrasty, who wants that in a portrait >> lens anyway? My choice for portraits, especially of members of >> the tender gender, is the 100/2 Zuiko, but with a Tiffen Soft >> Net filter. They'll like the results, and then they'll like >>you. > >You're absolutely right of course. I've been taking portraits of >my 5-year old daughter, and the 100/2.8 gives an almost >heightened realism and immediacy; the projected image seems even >sharper than what I see with my own eyes. For a someone my own >age I should consider a diffuser or soft-focus or such. I take >it you recommend the Tiffen? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18785 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 06:29:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 06:29:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 22:29:23 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11218 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:29:11 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-24.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.24]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBM6NQM05132; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 19:23:27 +1300 Message-Id: <200212220623.gBM6NQM05132@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: I@nskelly.com, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 19:28:50 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Ian, may also be of use to you. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19032 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 06:29:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 06:29:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 22:29:36 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11222 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:29:23 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-24.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.24]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBM6NSM05136; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 19:23:30 +1300 Message-Id: <200212220623.gBM6NSM05136@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: "C.H.Ling" , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 19:28:55 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, C. H. Ling wrote > Actually, OM is not famous for high contrast and sharpness (the resolution > isn't bad for most lenses though) it is the beautiful color and natural > beautiful contrast that inspire me. > > C.H.Ling CH has a point here. I've been using Zuikos for so long and have little extensive & recent experience of many other brands (one hears of Kiron being "cold" in colour rendition), that I had overlooked the colour aspect of their performance. Also, with regard to the 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko, as far as I know it is the first (and last) of the last Zuiko series of design that used special glass to get very accurate colour. So, regardless of its resolution, the colour delivery should be spot on. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19528 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 07:02:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 07:02:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 21 23:02:24 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11251 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:02:12 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002122207005900300lohr1e>; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 07:01:00 +0000 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:58:39 -0800 Subject: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <200212220623.gBM6NSM05136@central.caverock.net.nz> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thank you for making the $1075 I just spent seem like a better and better allocation of funds. ;-) Any more information on this "special glass" they used or is it a secret like the sauce McDonalds puts on Big Macs? -Rob (practically camping on my doorstep waiting for this lens to arrive) On Saturday, December 21, 2002, at 10:28 PM, Brian Swale wrote: > Also, with regard to the 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko, as far as I know it is > the first > (and last) of the last Zuiko series of design that used special glass > to get > very accurate colour. So, regardless of its resolution, the colour > delivery > should be spot on. > > Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20436 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 08:38:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 08:38:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 00:38:42 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA11283 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:38:30 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-26-164.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.26.164 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 08:37:44 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0579D3.7010108@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:37:39 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: <3E0434BF.3080906@sbcglobal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I quite agree. I thought someone would bring that up. Of course, all too often my "once in a lifetime shots" turns out not to be up to great enlargement. I'm not scrupulous with technique all the time and enlargement over 8x10 exposes the flaws of imperfect handholding, imprecise focusing, inadequate DOF, etc. Often a potentially great images end up pushing the boundaries of aperture and speed. And of course I don't have a tripod or the light is changing too fast to set it up, and so on. But not always, so I'm still using film for all but casual snapshots. The other factor for me is photographic flexibility. The one-piece cameras have their place, but just can't do things SLR systems can. The digital SLR has come nowhere near reaching its potential. I can't believe that the long term future of the DC SLR is a gigantic monster using unnecsssarily large sensor sizes that are disproportionately expensive because of the physics/economics of chip production. Whether it's the Olydak or some other source, someone is going to produce a 15-20 Mp sensor of modest size with low noise, higher ISO, etc. and build a smaller, lighter body and lens line around it. It may take a few years, but I can wait. I don't really believe those pros are carrying around those massive DCs because they like the workout. Moose Winsor Crosby wrote: > And another side: When you carry a film camera which is inexpensive > by today's rising digital standard, you have the potential when faced > with a stunning subject and great care in taking the picture of > creating that once in a lifetime shot that ends up on the wall in a > giant sized enlargement. If you opt for an affordable digital in the 2 > or 3 megapixel range which makes fine 4 X 6 prints you cut off that > creative option. If you opt to get a second mortgage on the house, > lose your spouse, and buy an 11-14 megapixel wonder with the same > capability as your $10 roll of film you may not find that wonderful > photo it is capable of before it is so outmoded in 3 or 4 years as to > be embarrassing to be seen with. :-) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20746 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 08:47:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 08:47:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 00:47:34 2002 -0800 Received: from maynard.mail.mindspring.net (maynard.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.243]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA11287 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:47:22 -0800 Received: from user-38ldvth.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.255.177]) by maynard.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Q1l1-0000PU-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 03:46:48 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:46:31 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] The mexapixel vs. image quality discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:07:09 -0000 >From: "IanG" >Subject: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp > >OM content.... I use one :-) > >Last night I started reading a magazine to discover that I don't know how to >use curves and unsharp properly. I've discovered how to set black and white >points with curves and the difference to a few of my pix is startling. > >Now I strongly suspect I've been using unsharp mask badly, which could go a >long way to explain lots of 'grain' in my prints. Does anybody have a simple >approach / guide to using unsharp? Ian, I like Fred Miranda's FMIntellisharpen Pro...about 12 bucks from www.fredmiranda.com -Stephen >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:30:39 -0800 >From: Moose >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital > > > >Where it comes to where the rubber meets the road for me, all these >calculations don't mean much, it's the images and how people >react/interact, "see" them. It's clear to me that digital camera output >has certain qualities that differ subjectively from film and scanned >film. In the particular case of my eyes and those of friends and family, >DC prints are superior to 2720 dpi scanned 35mm prints for certain >common subjects at 8x10 and smaller. Assuming that's about the limit for >1.9 Mp, one would need about an advertised 8.4 Mp for 16x20, which is >about the limit for sharp 35mm prints using lenses of the quality you >assume and reasonable technique. All this math is well and good, but one should not forget what a Sr. VP at Oympus says: a lot more goes into image production on a DC than the no. of megapixels of the camera. The Imaging engine (firmware and algorithms) are a very large part of it. He says that a C4040Z can make prints as large as 20X24". I've personally seen photos from an E10 that are even larger that that with incredible sharpness and resolution. The guys I have been shooting with routinely make 30" X 40" prints from a Canon D30 using proprietary interpolation software at Pictopia in Emerville, CA. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21137 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 09:09:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 09:09:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 01:09:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA11302 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 01:09:27 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FEF73E6E for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 01:09:07 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 19:57:50 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Mickey Trageser" > >won't it be fine whey your >DC get's Klez and starts sending screwy pictures to all your email friends! I'll be looking for a minority player. I haven't had a Macintosh virus since 1995! :-) But then I guess I'll end up RECEIVING all those screwy virus pictures, just like I have to go delete all the email virii that Windows users send me every day, even though I can't catch them. :-( -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28281 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 13:12:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 13:12:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 05:12:46 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11584 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 05:12:34 -0800 Received: from modem-2852.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.27.36] helo=skelly) by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Q5u8-00075M-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:12:30 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:12:18 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200212220623.gBM6NQM05132@central.caverock.net.nz> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for the advice guys, I think I've sussed it out..... basically I'm stupid :-( I normally only produce for monitor display and I've been sharpening my original file for that.... net result one very oversharpened file for A4 printing. So.... I'm now rescanning and sending out an unsharpened file for printing (the labs recommendation, they will sharpen) and producing smaller files for display.. Well, I'm hoping that's it. Links supplied by people have been very interesting and helpfull, thanks. Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Brian Swale Sent: 22 December 2002 06:29 To: I@nskelly.com; olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp Hi Ian, may also be of use to you. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30087 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 17:13:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 17:13:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 09:13:31 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.cruzio.com (root@mail.cruzio.com [63.249.95.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11702 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:13:18 -0800 Received: from andersongeorge (dsl3-63-249-86-145.cruzio.com [63.249.86.145]) by mail.cruzio.com with SMTP id JAA27615 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:13:01 -0800 (PST) From: "George M. Anderson, Photographer" To: Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:12:46 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi. Been lurking for a short time. Am a returning member to the Oly list. 2 things real quick: Congradulations on your purchase of a Zuiko 35-80/2.8 I've had mine for several years now and it's become a real workhorse and favorite. In fact, IIRC, that's my lens on Gary Reese's test page. Some of my impressions, good and one bad (nothing's perfect!): Don't ever be afraid to use this lens wide open. It is sharp and beautiful all the way thru the apertures. And all the way to the edges. I like to take star photos - both star trails and tracked constellation shots. This lens is now my favorite (short focal length) for this work. Not only because it can zoom to compose and it is very sharp wide open but because it has virtually *no* coma distortion, which can cause stars towards the edge of the field to be distorted into comet-like shapes. Coma is very common and hard to eliminate especially at wide-open apertures which is where a lens will be set for star photos usually. I sold my 35/2 and 85/2 because of this lens. This zoom is sharper and less coma-prone than either. The only thing I want to warn you about is that towards the 35 end of the zoom it has, as you'll see on Gary's test and I can vouch for in real life, pronounced barrel distortion. So be careful with horizon lines and such. I have an otherwise beautiful slide of a beach scene in Hawaii that is compromised by a curved ocean horizon. One of these days, I'll use photoshop to straighten it out. 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera equipment'. She is the master. George > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of R. Jackson > Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 10:59 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko > > > Thank you for making the $1075 I just spent seem like a better and > better allocation of funds. ;-) > > Any more information on this "special glass" they used or is it a > secret like the sauce McDonalds puts on Big Macs? > > -Rob (practically camping on my doorstep waiting for this lens to > arrive) > > On Saturday, December 21, 2002, at 10:28 PM, Brian Swale wrote: > > > Also, with regard to the 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko, as far as I know it is > > the first > > (and last) of the last Zuiko series of design that used special glass > > to get > > very accurate colour. So, regardless of its resolution, the colour > > delivery > > should be spot on. > > > > Brian > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30533 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 17:45:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 17:45:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 09:45:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11715 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:45:22 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.97]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H7J8QN02.E35 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 02:01:35 +0800 Message-ID: <000701c2a9e1$5f4b47a0$615b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: "OlympusWebring" Subject: [OM] Emmanuelle Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:41:30 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Emmanuel has a new seller name : camera$(127) Beware. As we all know, some people on the list have not been happy in dealings with this seller. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30919 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 18:05:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 18:05:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 10:06:21 2002 -0800 Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.226]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11728 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:06:09 -0800 Received: from user-v8ldv6q.dsl.mindspring.com ([209.86.252.218]) by blount.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18QATo-0008OD-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:05:37 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:05:52 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3775 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:08:01 -0800 >From: Winsor Crosby >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital > >And another side: When you carry a film camera which is inexpensive >by today's rising digital standard, you have the potential when faced >with a stunning subject and great care in taking the picture of >creating that once in a lifetime shot that ends up on the wall in a >giant sized enlargement. If you opt for an affordable digital in the >2 or 3 megapixel range which makes fine 4 X 6 prints you cut off that >creative option. If you opt to get a second mortgage on the house, >lose your spouse, and buy an 11-14 megapixel wonder with the same >capability as your $10 roll of film you may not find that wonderful >photo it is capable of before it is so outmoded in 3 or 4 years as to >be embarrassing to be seen with. :-) If a photographer shares your concerns that they will miss the once in a lifetime shot that they can't blow up to wall size, then carry a film camera. Its no big deal. One could get the impression reading this list for the first time that the pro-digital folks are "digital or nothing", and the film folks are "film or nothing". I carry both. My Contax T3 (the camera you and I both own and love, Winsor) goes with me everywhere -it is always loaded with slide film. But I am starting to take the D60 with me everywhere, too (the only digital I have right now, but I *will* have another, likely a C-50Z or the new Contax TVS digital); to have the added versatility of digital. As I have said before, and likely will say again, it's a wonderful extension to the set of tools we know and love (our OM gear), not a replacement (at least for me). Winsor's point is a good one but can be just as well applied to a digital camera, too....to be able to review, experiment, and reshoot a shot with the immediate feedback you get from digital: Last night I stopped back in Danville, CA for some dinner after coming back from San Jose. The town was decked out in Christmas lights...I took out the D60 and shot some storefronts/windows with the D60. One of them was a storefront with a white door. The standard white balance setting was all wrong (too yellow), so I made a custom white balance from the door, and reshot...perfect white balance. I also shot a nice window front for a cigar store that was all decorated....I shot a number of frames, with different exposure compensations and white balances. Took the camera into the pub down the street, had a Boddington's, and reviewed my photos on the Powerbook in PS7. Decided that I liked a particular setting, but wanted to frame the shot a little differently. After my beer and light meal, I went back, set up the tripod and got the photo I wanted. Like to see you do that with film. -Stephen Scharf -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31303 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 18:26:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 18:26:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 10:27:14 2002 -0800 Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11736 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:27:02 -0800 Received: from user-v8ldv6q.dsl.mindspring.com ([209.86.252.218]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18QAo2-0005PS-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:26:30 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021221031432.27828.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:26:45 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] The Wonderbrick Hype Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Nah. It's never too late. And digital will get better and better, >and simpler to use as well. With film, the technology and >ergonmetrics are pretty well figured out, while we are still >figuring out what a digital camera ought to be and do. Yes, don't you see? That's the *fun* part....(must be the scientist in me). > Present-day cameras (digital and film wunderbricks) are far too >complex, being encrusted with so many features that nobody can >remember how to take a picture, and burdened with misfeatures like >agonizing shutter lag and slow picture storage time andinadequate >capacity. Not to mention battery problems. You know, this is just not true. When I first joined this list, having only shot Oly equipment for the last 22 years, I believed everyone's comments about wonderbricks. In retrospect, I see that I fell for a bunch of hype. Yes, my OM-1 is well made, simple, elegant...beautiful to hold and to use. But it has its limitations, too, things like shutter speed and aperture flexibility, flash sync, and the simple metering. I was very pleasantly surprised to see how well Canon designed and implemented this camera. It has cool design touches *everywhere*. Having used my D30 or D60 "wonderbrick" for the last month, I find it to be extremely well-made, well thought-out and well-executed, and very user-friendly, too. It just WORKS. It delivers the goods. Yep, it's heavy....but like a Zuiko 350/2.8, it's benefits "outweigh" its disadvantage of it's portliness. 'Nuff said.... -Stephen Scharf -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31602 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 18:34:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 18:34:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 10:35:11 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11760 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:34:59 -0800 Received: from M2W045.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.45]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:34:31 -0500 Message-ID: <114780-2200212022183431625@M2W045.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:34:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2002 18:34:31.0661 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4A771D0:01C2A9E8] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Rob, It's a great lens, and the photos you get from it will be fabulous (assuming you're a good photographer :-))=2E It only falls down if you HA= VE to have more zoom range than it offers=2E Otherwise, it's at the top of t= he heap for early-mid 1990's technology=2E There's very little raw details about the lens that I've ever seen=2E=20 Perhaps Gary Reese or John Hermanson has something, as they seeem to have been pretty tuned in to Olympus Japan=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: KEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJ Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:58:39 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2=2E8 Zuiko Thank you for making the $1075 I just spent seem like a better and=20 better allocation of funds=2E ;-) Any more information on this "special glass" they used or is it a=20 secret like the sauce McDonalds puts on Big Macs? -Rob (practically camping on my doorstep waiting for this lens to=20 arrive) On Saturday, December 21, 2002, at 10:28 PM, Brian Swale wrote: > Also, with regard to the 35 ~ 80 f/2=2E8 Zuiko, as far as I know it is=20= > the first > (and last) of the last Zuiko series of design that used special glass=20= > to get > very accurate colour=2E So, regardless of its resolution, the colour=20 > delivery > should be spot on=2E > > Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31887 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 18:38:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 18:38:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 10:39:08 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11768 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:38:56 -0800 Received: from M2W063.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.63]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:38:34 -0500 Message-ID: <39020-2200212022183834478@M2W063.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] FS: New OM-4Ti Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:38:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2002 18:38:34.0562 (UTC) FILETIME=[556F3220:01C2A9E9] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Let's see=2E=2E=2E=2EHmmmm=2E=2E=2E=2E$2079/$1560 (U=2ES=2E) for a new bod= y that was probably made 5-7 years ago=2E=2E=2E=2E=2Eor $5-600 for an almost-new or Ex+ body o= ff the 'bay=2E =20 It doesn't seem like much of a choice to me if you want to use the camera=2E= =20 but if you're a collector who thinks that the price of a NIB OM4ti will rise over the next few years, it may be a prudent purchase=2E Skip =20 Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: XISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEMSFDULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLE Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:38:48 +0100 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] FS: New OM-4Ti Hi all, Quite a while back I orderen a new OM-4Ti from a shop here in Copenhagen=2E= It has now arrived=2E However, I am not completely sure that I want the OM-4Ti, partly for financial reasons and partly because I already have another OM Ti body=2E The price is around 15=2E000 danish kroner which is about 2022 euro or 207= 9 US$=2E If any of you are interested in buying this OM-4Ti then please contact me=2E= I will not be involved in the actual purchase other than pointing the lucky person to the shop and tell the shop that this person will buy the OM-4Ti instead of me=2E For people outside the EU it should be noted that 25% VAT is included in the price and that this will (?) be subtracted from the price=2E Oh, and this is my first post to the olympus list=2E Kind apologies for offering stuff for sale so early=2E :-) Cheers and thanks in advance, Klaus < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32168 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 18:40:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 18:40:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 10:41:13 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11772 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:41:01 -0800 Received: from M2W079.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.79]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:40:39 -0500 Message-ID: <303330-2200212022184039562@M2W079.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Welcome back George (35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko) Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:40:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2002 18:40:39.0527 (UTC) FILETIME=[9FEB5770:01C2A9E9] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca George, It's good to see you back on the list after a hiatus=2E I hope you've had= a good vacation=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: WCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFS Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:12:46 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2=2E8 Zuiko Hi=2E Been lurking for a short time=2E Am a returning member to the Oly li= st=2E 2 things real quick: Congradulations on your purchase of a Zuiko 35-80/2=2E8 I've had mine for= several years now and it's become a real workhorse and favorite=2E In fact= , IIRC, that's my lens on Gary Reese's test page=2E Some of my impressions, = good and one bad (nothing's perfect!): Don't ever be afraid to use this lens wide open=2E It is sharp and beauti= ful all the way thru the apertures=2E And all the way to the edges=2E I like to take star photos - both star trails and tracked constellation shots=2E This lens is now my favorite (short focal length) for this work=2E= Not only because it can zoom to compose and it is very sharp wide open but because it has virtually *no* coma distortion, which can cause stars towar= ds the edge of the field to be distorted into comet-like shapes=2E Coma is ve= ry common and hard to eliminate especially at wide-open apertures which is where a lens will be set for star photos usually=2E I sold my 35/2 and 85/2 because of this lens=2E This zoom is sharper and = less coma-prone than either=2E The only thing I want to warn you about is that towards the 35 end of the zoom it has, as you'll see on Gary's test and I can vouch for in real life= , pronounced barrel distortion=2E So be careful with horizon lines and such= =2E I have an otherwise beautiful slide of a beach scene in Hawaii that is compromised by a curved ocean horizon=2E One of these days, I'll use photoshop to straighten it out=2E 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name= as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera equipment'=2E She is the master=2E George -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32476 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 18:47:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 18:47:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 10:48:18 2002 -0800 Received: from suite224.net (cambot.suite224.net [209.176.64.2]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11790 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:48:05 -0800 Received: from [65.197.9.162] (account ) by suite224.net (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 3.5.9) with HTTP id 1078367 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:47:16 -0500 From: "John Ockman" Subject: Re: [OM] Emmanuelle To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.3.5.9 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:47:16 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000701c2a9e1$5f4b47a0$615b68cb@titoy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oh, he has a lot more than just that new one. I count a least 4, and maybe more accounts that he has. John n Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:41:30 +0800 "Clemente Colayco" wrote: >Emmanuel has a new seller name : camera$(127) >Beware. As we all know, some people on the list have not >been happy in >dealings with this seller. > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >> >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: >http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 494 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 19:15:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 19:15:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 11:16:17 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11809 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 11:16:04 -0800 Received: from [207.214.213.103] by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7J0086ZC0NQX@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 11:12:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 11:13:59 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: [OM] Fang report In-reply-to: To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/22/02 9:12 AM, George M. Anderson, Photographer at george@whitneygallery.com wrote: > 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name > as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera > equipment'. She is the master. > > George When I joined this list the verb-form of 'Fang' was well-established... in the interest of continuing the tradition of 'Fang-reports' --I was out doing the thrift-shop prowl yesterday and came upon a very clean Olympus 35-SP in full working condition for $14.99... Some have speculated that the 40/2.0 OM lens is based on the 42/1.7 on this camera . -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 788 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 19:21:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 19:21:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 11:21:28 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao05.cox.net (lakemtao05.cox.net [68.1.17.116]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11815 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 11:21:16 -0800 Received: from dhurley ([68.102.135.227]) by lakemtao05.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021222191658.VUCZ2213.lakemtao05.cox.net@dhurley> for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 14:16:58 -0500 Message-ID: <003101c2a9ee$9acbe700$8119fea9@dhurley> From: "Daryl Hurley" To: References: <303330-2200212022184039562@M2W079.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Welcome back George (35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko) Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:16:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, welcome back George! Daryl Hurley Topeka, KS ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 12:40 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Welcome back George (35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko) George, It's good to see you back on the list after a hiatus. I hope you've had a good vacation. Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: WCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFS Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:12:46 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Hi. Been lurking for a short time. Am a returning member to the Oly list. 2 things real quick: Congradulations on your purchase of a Zuiko 35-80/2.8 I've had mine for several years now and it's become a real workhorse and favorite. In fact, IIRC, that's my lens on Gary Reese's test page. Some of my impressions, good and one bad (nothing's perfect!): Don't ever be afraid to use this lens wide open. It is sharp and beautiful all the way thru the apertures. And all the way to the edges. I like to take star photos - both star trails and tracked constellation shots. This lens is now my favorite (short focal length) for this work. Not only because it can zoom to compose and it is very sharp wide open but because it has virtually *no* coma distortion, which can cause stars towards the edge of the field to be distorted into comet-like shapes. Coma is very common and hard to eliminate especially at wide-open apertures which is where a lens will be set for star photos usually. I sold my 35/2 and 85/2 because of this lens. This zoom is sharper and less coma-prone than either. The only thing I want to warn you about is that towards the 35 end of the zoom it has, as you'll see on Gary's test and I can vouch for in real life, pronounced barrel distortion. So be careful with horizon lines and such. I have an otherwise beautiful slide of a beach scene in Hawaii that is compromised by a curved ocean horizon. One of these days, I'll use photoshop to straighten it out. 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera equipment'. She is the master. George -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1475 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 20:19:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 20:19:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 12:20:03 2002 -0800 Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11844 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 12:19:50 -0800 Received: from user-v7kak8o.dialup.mindspring.com ([207.69.81.24] helo=red) by hall.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18QCZh-0003j1-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 15:19:49 -0500 Message-ID: <001901c2aa10$f6d75120$7451fea9@red> From: "Scott & Barbara" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 15:22:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From one lurker to another welcome back. Anyone who does not recall George Anderson should check out the link below. I have never forgotten this one! http://www.whitneygallery.com/html/coyote.html Cheers Scott Stone Mountain GA ----- Original Message ----- From: George M. Anderson, Photographer To: Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:12 AM Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko > Hi. Been lurking for a short time. Am a returning member to the Oly list. <> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1883 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 20:38:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 20:38:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 12:39:17 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11863 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 12:39:04 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh95.interisland.net [12.17.134.95]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBMKZHs21364 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 12:35:17 -0800 Message-ID: <3E0622FE.32199619@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 12:39:27 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] circ. polarizer question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id MAA11863 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Help. I dropped my 72mm circular polarizer and the lens and retaining ring popped out. No damage was done to the glass but I wonder, Is there a front and back? If so How do I tell? Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2427 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 21:21:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 21:21:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 13:21:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mx3.melange.net ([212.59.199.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11887 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:21:36 -0800 Received: from smta03.arrakis.isp ([192.168.197.85]) by mx3.melange.net (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBMLNEv02136 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:23:14 +0100 Received: from hola ([195.5.78.138]) by smta03.arrakis.isp (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 ssmtp05 Jun 21 2001 23:53:48) with SMTP id H7JI2O02.F00 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:23:12 +0100 Message-ID: <001901c2aa00$345801e0$8a4e05c3@arrakis.es> From: "Angel Lobo" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> Subject: RE: [OM] Paris Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:22:15 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-9" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA11887 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You can try NATION PHOTO 241 Bd. Voltaire 75011 PARIS or MAC MAHON PHOTO 31 Av. Mac Mahon 75017 PARIS =C1ngel Lobo Cuenca ( Spain ). ----- Original Message ----- From: Volkan Olgun To: Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 9:31 AM Subject: [OM] Paris > Dear All, > > I will be in Paris on January. Does any1 knows any place in Paris where= I > can probably find second hand cameras and lenses, especially OM series > cameras and Zuiko lenses. > > All kind of Paris info with this respect will be wellcomed. > > Best regards, > > Volkan Olgun > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3058 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 22:08:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 22:08:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 14:08:25 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11945 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 14:08:13 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with ESMTP id <2002122222070500300lp9gne>; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:07:05 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 17:07:04 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. At 3:25 AM +0000 12/22/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:30:39 -0800 >From: Moose >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital > >Whoa! Check your assumptions. The Mpix numbers advertised for DCs are >approximately the number of 3 color pixels delivered in the output >(after all that complicated stuff you did). My 2.1 Mp camera produces >1600x1200 pixel images with 19,200,000 individual 3 channel pixels, so >it's really a 1.92Mp camera. Huh? Check decimal point. Ah: 1600x1200= 1,920,000 pixels, but each pixel is of just one color, red, green, or blue, so we don't have the equal of a camera with 1.93 million tri-color pixels. The ratio of colors is 1:2:1 for R:G:B, so there are 1.92/2= 960000 green pixels, 1.92/4= 480000 blue pixels, and 480000 red pixels. The resolution is set by the green pixels; the other colors are interpolated to fill in the missing values. So, a 2.1 Mpix camera actually has 0.96 Mpix of true tri-color resolution. Actually, one needs always to look for the "optical resolution", as the 1600x1200 may have been interpolated from a lesser number of actual CCD pixels (of any color). The true resolution cannot exceed the optical resolution, regardless of the nominal resolution of the format. Interpolation cannot supply the missing picture detail. Scanners also suffer from this same marketing malaise. When comparing various cameras and scanners, we probably should always ascertain the optical resolution of the green channel alone, and use that as our comparison. These numbers will be directly comparable to the resolutions of black&white film and cameras. >I think most of them quote the raw specs of >the sensor, rather than the output of the actual camera design. It's >sort of like the way disk drive manufacturers advertise capacities in >decimal so that a 60mb drive is 60/1.024 or 58.59 mb to a digital >system. In both cases, the biggest number that is even sort of >defensible is used for promotion. Exactly. In sum: Your mileage may vary. >So, using your approach, but adjusted for the way Megapixels are quoted >for DCs and adjusting for promotional inflation, you need about 9 Mp to >equal 35mm film (even less for 25mm film!) I'm not necessarily agreeing >with the 9 MP number here, just disagreeing with your assumptions and 26 >Mp conclusion. Not so. My claim is that one needs more like 25 Mpix (sum of red, green, and blue pixels in 1:1:1 ratio), which is the equivalent of 8.64, call it 9 million tri-color pixels. >Where it comes to where the rubber meets the road for me, all these >calculations don't mean much, it's the images and how people >react/interact, "see" them. It's clear to me that digital camera output >has certain qualities that differ subjectively from film and scanned >film. In the particular case of my eyes and those of friends and family, >DC prints are superior to 2720 dpi scanned 35mm prints for certain >common subjects at 8x10 and smaller. Assuming that's about the limit for >1.9 Mp, one would need about an advertised 8.4 Mp for 16x20, which is >about the limit for sharp 35mm prints using lenses of the quality you >assume and reasonable technique. While beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I would comment that there is a lot of equipment in the chain from scene to photograph in each case, and if any element in the chain isn't up to standard, the photos won't be good. So, I would be cautious about making sweeping generalizations from two photos or two specific sets of equipment. >So your marhematical and my subjective approach end up pretty close. On >the other hand, C.H.'s examples make it empicically clear that 4000 dpi >(157dpmm) scans reveal more detail from at least fine grain film than >2700 dpi (107dpmm), so your 100 pixel calculated value may be suspect? >It leads one to suspect that something closer to the 18 Mp otheres have >come up with may be required to reach the resolution of fine grained >35mm film. I used the 100 pixels per millimeter as a nice round number representative of films and cameras in wide use, because the question was ultimately about the behaviour of a mass market. I would bet that anybody on this list can beat that value if they try. That said, it may simply be that the 4000 dpi system has better optics and focus control than the 2700 dpi system, not that either claimed resolution is at the limits of film resolution. Actually, this leads to a good question for CH: Has he or can he measure the resolution of his scanners? If one can find a suitable resolution chart and scan it, it ought to be easy. The scanner maker probably also knows, but may not be willing to publish the modulation transfer function. Joe Gwinn >Moose wearing a Walt mask > >Joe Gwinn wrote: > > >Comments interspersed below. > > > >>>From: Albert > >>> > >>>with the introduction of the Kodak 14Mpx SLR, it would seem like you > >>>can get what you never thought possible before, Medium format quality in > >>>a 35mm SLR. > >>> > >>> > >>That depends on whose numbers you believe. My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. Medium format may contain 40Mpx. > >> > >> > > > >Reasonable 25mm film cameras resolve something like 50 line pairs per millimeter; sometimes better in the center, sometimes less at the edges. At two pixels per line pair, that's 100 pixels per millimeter. A 35mm frame is 24 by 36 mm, so we have (24*100)(36*100)= 8.64 million pixels (each having all three colors), or (8.64)(3)= 25.92= 26 million pixels (as usually quoted for digital cameras). > > > >So, 18 Mpix is a bit low to be "optimal", but it isn't that far off: 26/18= 1.44 to 1. > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4062 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 23:43:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 23:43:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 15:44:13 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12012 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 15:44:00 -0800 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:43:36 -0500 Message-Id: <200212221843.AA1545469992@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] circ. polarizer question X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Circular polarizers only work in one direction. Looking through it at a shiny surface should give you the answer. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Mike Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 12:39:27 -0800 >Help. I dropped my 72mm circular polarizer and the lens and >retaining ring popped out. No damage was done to the glass but I >wonder, Is there a front and back? If so How do I tell? > >Mike > >-- >Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4374 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 23:54:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 23:54:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 15:54:27 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12021 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 15:54:14 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with ESMTP id <2002122223530600300lqusle>; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:53:06 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:53:04 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. At 3:25 AM +0000 12/22/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:04:02 -0800 >From: Jan Steinman >Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > >From: Joe Gwinn > > > > >From: Jan Steinman > > > > > >My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. > > > >Hmm. I see. The 18 Mpix appears to assume the typical compromise red-green-green-blue pattern... > >It was from actual measurements, primarily RN Clark's and Norman Koren's. Most folks who are serious about this point out that there is no simple equation -- film has one equivalence if you measure one way, or a different one if you measure some other way. The compromise is the camera makers', in that they don't provide full-color (tricolor) pixels. > > >In 1997, I predicted that price/performance parity between digital and 35mm was 8 years off. I stand by that: it's now 3 years off. > > > >I assume that you used Moore's Law, that holds that semiconductor technology doubles in performance (halves in cost for the same performance) every 18 months. Confirmed below. > >Thanks for demo'ing the math I was too lazy to type in! As I mentioned, I first went through this exercise five years ago, and it looks like it's holding true. Yes. Despite the non-electronic parts, discussed below. > >What will take the longest is movies... > >Perhaps not... Movies don't require the maximum amount of information that the format can supply, and movie films are accordingly NOT even close to Velvia, in terms of resolution. (Don't believe me, shoot some of that crap that Seattle Filmworks -- or whatever they're called since the re-org -- or Dale Labs, or any of those movie film repacking houses sells.) > >It may be true that if you were using each frame to its utmost, but the human eye cannot discern all that detail at 24 frames per second. It would appear that MPEG formats do a pretty darn good job of containing as much "useful" information as is needed. I've seen computations from the film industry for when they would go to digital, and they too get terabytes if one wants to have full traditional quality. If one will settle for less quality than the traditional methods have delivered for decades, then of course the crossover day comes nearer. But it isn't clear that the movie industry will do any such thing, or else the standard movie film size would be 16mm, not 35mm (used for typical stuff) and even 70mm (used for very high quality). But, 16mm was used only for educational films and the like, where price and convenience were more important than quality. Does anybody remember 8mm home movies, and Super8 format (because 8mm picture quality was just too poor)? Not that Super8 was that great. Videocams pretty much killed all that off. > > >Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. > > > >No; nothing is ever that clean. There will be a very gradual transition, because people will wait for their current equipment to wear out. > >I'd be more inclined to accept this if digitals didn't offer typical typical consumers so much more. Digital cameras are supposed to be "the" gift this Christmas. These will be "sold forward", to people who already have computers and printers. The infrastructure for digital is in place. The "gradual transition" has been going on since 1984, when the first graphics-based computer (Apple Macintosh) was mass-produced. The question was when film would die, not low-end consumer film cameras. That's why talk of the movie industry was relevant. And those disposable cameras show no sign of dying. Only about 250f homes in the US contains any kind of computer, PC or Mac, while something like 950f homes have at least one camera. So, the infrastructure for digital is *not* in place for 750f the population. For them, film cameras are by far the better choice, as they don't need to buy or deal with a computer. Dealing with a computer is a very big issue for many people. While my wife could afford a computer, she would never have bought one without someone to be the home IT department because she could never get a computer to work without IT support. Not even the iMac she loves. She's the Art Department, not Engineering. > >And the movie industry will still need vast quantities of film. > >Again, I dissent. Figure the angular area of a movie screen for the average viewer. (Not the front row seats that are always empty!) It isn't much different from viewing an 8x10 at 12". I don't think that the movie industry would have standardized on 35mm film if a smaller width would have sufficed. There would have been so much money to be saved if they could have used 16mm instead that the transition would have happened decades before TV cameras became practical, and Leicas would be 16mm, not 35mm. >The movie business is capital intensive and very price conscious. Given that the 8x10 print is most people's idea of "a nice picture," I see the movie industry's movement into digital as an indication that the format has achieved price-performance parity for the masses, and I think it will happen in three years. > >The larger problem is theaters. They have considerable investment film, and don't turn over investments as fast as movie production companies do. But I expect the large chains, which are more capital intensive, will switch to digital in three years. This is exactly backwards. The more capital intensive the industry, the *slower* to switch to a new method: they have to wait until the old equipment has paid for itself and worn out before they can afford to go out and buy new stuff. The classical exception has been where the new technology was literally ten times better than what it replaced, such that the new stuff could be purchased for a few years of the maintenance budget of the old. It is *very* rare that a new technology is this much better, and digital photography does not qualify. > >Look at us -- we happily use mechanical cameras from thirty years ago... > >Then there's the Society for Creative Anachronism, who joust and traipse around in three-hundred-year-old designer clothes... there's always room for outliers! We should wear bell-bottom pants while using our OM-1s? > >electronics are only a part of the total cost of a camera, and the optical and mechanical components do not follow Moore's Law, except that much of the mechanical complexity of cameras has been eliminated: a camera today has simple mechanicals controlled by a little computer chip. > >There you go! And they're injection molded of plastic, rather than milled from metal. And the lenses are computer-generated, rather than designed with a slide-rule. And the lenses in the eventual price-parity product will be much smaller. To have an apples-to-apples comparison, one must compare cameras of equivalent build quality and ruggedness. And some are injection-molded from metal. Lenses will be no cheaper, because optics is a very mature industry, and the mecanics to hold and move the elements is already pretty well optimised. Computer design of lenses does speed the design process, but has no effect on the labor to actually make the lenses. Current digital cameras get away with low-grade and thus cheap lenses, but as the CCD reaches 35mm camera resolution and coverage, the lenses will need to improve to match. Camera body cases and their finger-operated controls won't be cheaper, because they need to be dust-tight enough and robust enough to live in the real world, and the size and dexterity of the human hand is not changing. Viewfinder optics will also remain about the same, as the human eye isn't getting any better. In fact, it declines with age. What's left are the camera body innards, where various mechanical things are being simplified or eliminated, with the complexity being moved into the digital electronics. This (plus the CCD chip) is where Moore's Law applies. >I agree that mechanics and optics don't follow the identical 18 month curve that electronics do, but they do have a curve of their own. Compared to Moore's Law, mechanics and optics do not improve at all. These are very mature technologies. A skilled 16th century instrument maker could duplicate a Leica III (except the lightmeter) albeit at great expense, as it would all be done by hand, right down to the making of various optical glasses from sand. >And to the extent that many parts of digital and film cameras are identical in function, that forms the basis for a price-parity point. When the sensor costs the same as the various motors, soleniods, and mechanical parts that are unique to film cameras, price-parity will be achieved. Not so fast. People buy into systems to make photos. The price of the CCD is only a part of the equation. Don't forget the entire infrastructure needed to make cameras of either kind practical for the masses. Right now, actually making a digital photo print is far too complex and expensive for most folk. In time, five or ten years, this will be solved. In the meantime, buying a disposable camera, taking the pictures, sending the whole thing off to be processed, and getting the prints back is by far the cheapest and simpleset way to get photos that usually much exceed the quality of point&shoot digital cameras, all for far less trouble and money than anything digital. > > >(Of course, there will always be a niche market for fine art photochemistry, just as some brush-media artists still mix their own egg temupra.) > > > >Or develop their own photos? > >Please don't take what I write about marketplace and technology trends involving hundreds of millions of people as a personal affront. Huh? Just drew the obvious parallel. And pointed out that the parallel is off by a century or so. Actually, the 40,000-year-old cave paintings in Spain were done with a form of egg tempura, so if anything the egg tempura market has been growing ever since. >There will always be an artistic niche for film, just as one can still buy a horse-drawn carriage and buggy whip today. My point is simply that by then I will be dead, buried, and forgotten. Transitions between major technologies happen very very slowly, taking decades. How long did it take for electronic flash units to replace flashbulbs? That's the fastest transition in photography I can recall. One way to tell is to count by sales volume when various cameras dropped their FP sync option. >Simply by preferring Olympus gear, this group can be defined as an outlier in the larger scheme of things. Thirty year old *mechanical* cameras! Cibachrome! Black and white! >However, I expect a gradual return to sheet film. It will require far less infrastructure to produce than sprocket-punched roll film. Roll film is a convenience, and convenenience is digital's middle name! The fanatics will be willing to take the time to mess with sheet film. It will be a while before digital systems (camera, photo printers, etc) will equal the quality of large format at any price. An 8x10 image contains (7.75*25.4*100)(9.75*25.4*100)= 487,499,025 tricolor pixels, or 975 Mpixels (as digital cameras are usually advertised). By Moore's Law, this will take 18*log2(975/4)= 142.7 months, or 12 years to come down to the price of 4 Mpix camera. This would likely be the minimum delay, as the market for large format is far smaller than for 35mm, so far less money will be invested in pusing into the large format market. Also, the quality requirements and expectations of the 8x10 crowd far exceed that of the 35mm crowd, even the pros. >There may even be a niche market for sprocket hole punches, for those of us who want to keep or OM's alive long after 35mm roll film is no longer commercially available. (Requisite on-topic content. :-) The movie film market will ensure that the sprocket-hole punching machines will be around long enough that none of us will ever need to worry. Not to mention all those disposable cameras. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5060 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 23:57:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 23:57:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 15:57:43 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12037 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 15:57:30 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.e.2a4e303f (4196); Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:55:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:55:37 EST Subject: Re: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca CC: george@whitneygallery.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_e.2a4e303f.2b37aaf9_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_e.2a4e303f.2b37aaf9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2002 2:47:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, george@whitneygallery.com writes: Welcome back George! > 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name > as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera > equipment'. She is the master Boy, it hads been a long time for you, hasn't it? Regards, Paul Schings --part1_e.2a4e303f.2b37aaf9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2002 2:47:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, george@whitneygallery.com writes:

Welcome back George!

> 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name
> as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera
> equipment'. She is the master

Boy, it hads been a long time for you, hasn't it?

Regards,

Paul Schings

 --part1_e.2a4e303f.2b37aaf9_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5309 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 23:58:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 23:58:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 15:58:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12041 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 15:58:22 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.92]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H7JQ6E03.V25 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:18:14 +0800 Message-ID: <002901c2aa15$fc0f6e20$5c5b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Fang report Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:58:10 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll double your money anytime and take that 35 SP off your hands for $ 30.00......not a bad return given the stock market this days. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Brokaw" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 3:13 AM Subject: [OM] Fang report > on 12/22/02 9:12 AM, George M. Anderson, Photographer at > george@whitneygallery.com wrote: > > > 2) I was nearly LOL the other day when someone used Doris Fang's last name > > as a verb meaning, I inferred, 'to get a great deal on used camera > > equipment'. She is the master. > > > > George > > When I joined this list the verb-form of 'Fang' was well-established... in > the interest of continuing the tradition of 'Fang-reports' --I was out doing > the thrift-shop prowl yesterday and came upon a very clean Olympus 35-SP in > full working condition for $14.99... Some have speculated that the 40/2.0 OM > lens is based on the 42/1.7 on this camera . > -- > > Jim Brokaw > OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6656 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 01:58:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 01:58:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 17:58:56 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA12150 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 17:58:43 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-7.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040608650!122 Received: (qmail 28364 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 01:57:31 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-7.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 01:57:31 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBN1U8u29497 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:30:09 +0800 Message-ID: <3E066D9F.92366011@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:57:51 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Joe Gwinn wrote: > Not so fast. People buy into systems to make photos. The price of the CCD is only a part of the equation. Don't forget the entire infrastructure needed to make cameras of either kind practical for the masses. Right now, actually making a digital photo print is far too complex and expensive for most folk. In time, five or ten years, this will be solved. > May be US is a bit slow, here in Hong Kong you can process digital print anywhere in almost the same price as film print. Ten years? it is a joke! BTW, a good quality 2MP DC is now in the $200-250 range, normal consumer will not see the different in 4x6 print. They may not need a computer too, the lab can burn their file into a CD for storage and their memory card are free to use again. I think it is dirty cheap as the lab are charging less than $1.5 for scanning and making CD when you send your film in for D&P. > It will be a while before digital systems (camera, photo printers, etc) will equal the quality of large format at any price. An 8x10 image contains (7.75*25.4*100)(9.75*25.4*100)= 487,499,025 tricolor pixels, or 975 Mpixels (as digital cameras are usually advertised). By Moore's Law, this will take 18*log2(975/4)= 142.7 months, or 12 years to come down to the price of 4 Mpix camera. This would likely be the minimum delay, as the market for large format is far smaller than for 35mm, so far less money will be invested in pusing into the large format market. Also, the quality requirements and expectations of the 8x10 crowd far exceed that of the 35mm crowd, even the pros. > To my understanding, large format lenses has much lower resolution, I don't think they can close to 50lm/pp. For DC vs 35mm, I always think a 16MP (single layer CCD) DC will outperform 35mm film system in all aspect including resolution. The time for an affordable 16MP SLR DC system is coming soon, I expected it will be less than 3 years. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7380 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 02:49:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 02:49:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 18:50:08 2002 -0800 Received: from out005.verizon.net (out005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.143]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12229 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:49:55 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.34]) by out005.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021223024540.IFHS19422.out005.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:45:40 -0600 Message-ID: <003801c2aa2d$63b5e330$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <20021222032552.15422.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] Zuiko lens info? Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:45:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out005.verizon.net from [141.157.99.34] at Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:45:40 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Anyone know what a 35 F2.8 (49) WITH AM-M1 MOUNT, FOCUS SCREEN, FILTER is? It's at KEH, but I have no clue what it is. Here's the link: -Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7677 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 02:55:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 02:55:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 18:55:32 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12238 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:55:19 -0800 Received: from M2W073.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.73]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:54:58 -0500 Message-ID: <174210-22002121232545827@M2W073.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Zuiko lens info? Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:54:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 02:54:58.0015 (UTC) FILETIME=[ADC176F0:01C2AA2E] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It looks like a garden-variety 35/2=2E8 screwed into some sort of microsco= pe adapter=2E If so, it's not worth anywhere near $254 in my book=2E The description says that it comes with focusing screen and filter=2E Wha= t screen? What filter? Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: DULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBX Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:45:42 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Zuiko lens info? Anyone know what a 35 F2=2E8 (49) WITH AM-M1 MOUNT, FOCUS SCREEN, FILTER i= s? It's at KEH, but I have no clue what it is=2E Here's the link: -Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8388 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:03:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:03:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:04:07 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12308 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:03:54 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.34]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021223035938.NBHL1642.out004.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:59:38 -0600 Message-ID: <004201c2aa37$b9207330$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <174210-22002121232545827@M2W073.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko lens info? Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:59:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [141.157.99.34] at Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:59:38 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A view from the other side might have helped, but KEH didn't do much to market it to the person who would need it and think it's worth that price. For you and me, it's nothing special. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:54 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Zuiko lens info? It looks like a garden-variety 35/2.8 screwed into some sort of microscope adapter. If so, it's not worth anywhere near $254 in my book. The description says that it comes with focusing screen and filter. What screen? What filter? Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: DULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBX Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:45:42 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Zuiko lens info? Anyone know what a 35 F2.8 (49) WITH AM-M1 MOUNT, FOCUS SCREEN, FILTER is? It's at KEH, but I have no clue what it is. Here's the link: -Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8663 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:06:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:06:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:07:13 2002 -0800 Received: from mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu (mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu [160.94.23.45]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12316 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:07:00 -0800 Received: from tc.umn.edu (x128-101-252-130.dialup.umn.edu [128.101.252.130]) by mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu with ESMTP for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:03:12 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3E068BE9.CF01DC73@tc.umn.edu> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:07:09 -0600 From: "Dean C. Hansen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] x128-101-252-130.dialup.umn.edu #+LO+TR Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello OM-types, The "Dipping our Toe into Digital" thread has been interesting. I'd like to comment on one point in Joe Gwinn's recent post. Joe wrote: "Does anybody remember 8mm home movies, and Super 8 format (because 8mm picture quality was just too poor)? Not that Super 8 was that great. Videocams pretty much killed all that off." Not completely. I have put together a 45 minute Super 8 movie on butterflies using a Canon 1014XL-S that I show occasionally to garden clubs, nature groups, etc. Particularly with macro shots of butterflies, Super 8 is really pretty good. I can project this on a screen 12' or more wide, and I have heard gasps of astonishment from viewers in the audience when they see a butterfly's tongue going into a flower to sip nectar. Kodachrome film in a good Super 8 camera can do a very credible job of capturing both detail and colors. I once followed a person at a native plant society meeting who showed a projected video of spring wildflowers. Sorry, Joe, but my 30-year-old Super 8 technology blow this guy's spankin' new video away. The edges of the clouds in the sky in his video were jagged, and the colors of the pasque flowers were barely recognizable. His presentation, technically, wasn't even in the same league with the Super 8. With Kodachrome, blues are blue, reds are red (and don't bleed), and greens are green. People routinely ask me after a showing, "Gee, you mean you can still get film for that old camera?" Yes, you can, and the results are pretty darn nice. What killed Super 8 are cost and, more importantly, the editing that is needed to put something together. Cutting, splicing, and working at a hand cranked editor with a 4" screen is a thankless task. However, I am very thankful that I shot movies of my kids, starting 32 years ago, on Super 8 Kodachrome--they still look like they were shot yesterday. Let me know if anyone can say the same about their videos. One final note: I recently had a 5 x 7 print made from a Kodachrome slide taken at my 6th birthday party in 1948. Fifty four years ago, and the print looks like it was shot yesterday. Kodachrome is pretty amazing stuff! Best wishes for the holidays, guys, Dean < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8912 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:09:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:09:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:09:40 2002 -0800 Received: from mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu (mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu [160.94.23.45]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12324 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:09:26 -0800 Received: from tc.umn.edu (x128-101-252-130.dialup.umn.edu [128.101.252.130]) by mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu with ESMTP for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:09:25 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3E068D8A.BAB3342D@tc.umn.edu> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:14:07 -0600 From: "Dean C. Hansen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Sorry! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] x128-101-252-130.dialup.umn.edu #+LO+TR Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry, guys, I hit "send" instead of "save" with Joe Gwinn's thoughts of going digital. Don't mean to clutter up the list. Dean < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9160 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:09:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:09:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:10:00 2002 -0800 Received: from web20010.mail.yahoo.com (web20010.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA12328 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:09:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20021223040933.24364.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20010.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:09:33 PST Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:09:33 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <3E066D9F.92366011@accura.com.hk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Most current LF lenses are about 80-100 lpm under lab conditions. look at these pictures in this discussion forum... http://www.f32.net/discus/messages/6/232.html?1019726552 Taken with a lens at least 40 years old or more. I've only just gotten into LF photography and I'm getting results for landscapes and portraits that are quite simply amazing. Also I've learned resolution can be discounted quite a bit for LF that cannot be the same for 35mm and DC. I look at pictures taken 100 or more years ago at the George Eastman House (if anyone of you can visit it it is the Mecca of photography) and though one can see obvious distortion effects or cannot see every grain of sand those pictures have a mystical quality to them that truth be told I've never seen from a digicam or any photoshop tool and these pictures speak to me in a way digital does not. This is all just IMHO of course everyone sees things in different ways. Digital just hasn't yet inspired me to take pictures like my OM's and my LF equipment has. Mark Lloyd --- "C.H.Ling" wrote: > To my understanding, large format lenses has much > lower resolution, I > don't think they can close to 50lm/pp. For DC vs > 35mm, I always think > a 16MP (single layer CCD) DC will outperform 35mm > film system in all > aspect including resolution. The time for an > affordable 16MP SLR DC > system is coming soon, I expected it will be less > than 3 years. > > C.H.Ling > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9425 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:10:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:10:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:10:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu (mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu [160.94.23.45]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12332 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:10:20 -0800 Received: from tc.umn.edu (x128-101-252-130.dialup.umn.edu [128.101.252.130]) by mhub-m2.tc.umn.edu with ESMTP for olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:06:30 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3E068CDD.DCF759A5@tc.umn.edu> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:11:13 -0600 From: "Dean C. Hansen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] olympus-digest V2 #3776 going digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] x128-101-252-130.dialup.umn.edu #+LO+TR Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca olympus-digest Sunday, December 22 2002 Volume 02 : Number 3776 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:53:04 -0500 From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Comments interspersed below. At 3:25 AM +0000 12/22/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:04:02 -0800 >From: Jan Steinman >Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > >From: Joe Gwinn > > > > >From: Jan Steinman > > > > > >My research indicates that an optimal 35mm frame may contain as much as 18Mpx. > > > >Hmm. I see. The 18 Mpix appears to assume the typical compromise red-green-green-blue pattern... > >It was from actual measurements, primarily RN Clark's and Norman Koren's. Most folks who are serious about this point out that there is no simple equation -- film has one equivalence if you measure one way, or a different one if you measure some other way. The compromise is the camera makers', in that they don't provide full-color (tricolor) pixels. > > >In 1997, I predicted that price/performance parity between digital and 35mm was 8 years off. I stand by that: it's now 3 years off. > > > >I assume that you used Moore's Law, that holds that semiconductor technology doubles in performance (halves in cost for the same performance) every 18 months. Confirmed below. > >Thanks for demo'ing the math I was too lazy to type in! As I mentioned, I first went through this exercise five years ago, and it looks like it's holding true. Yes. Despite the non-electronic parts, discussed below. > >What will take the longest is movies... > >Perhaps not... Movies don't require the maximum amount of information that the format can supply, and movie films are accordingly NOT even close to Velvia, in terms of resolution. (Don't believe me, shoot some of that crap that Seattle Filmworks -- or whatever they're called since the re-org -- or Dale Labs, or any of those movie film repacking houses sells.) > >It may be true that if you were using each frame to its utmost, but the human eye cannot discern all that detail at 24 frames per second. It would appear that MPEG formats do a pretty darn good job of containing as much "useful" information as is needed. I've seen computations from the film industry for when they would go to digital, and they too get terabytes if one wants to have full traditional quality. If one will settle for less quality than the traditional methods have delivered for decades, then of course the crossover day comes nearer. But it isn't clear that the movie industry will do any such thing, or else the standard movie film size would be 16mm, not 35mm (used for typical stuff) and even 70mm (used for very high quality). But, 16mm was used only for educational films and the like, where price and convenience were more important than quality. Does anybody remember 8mm home movies, and Super8 format (because 8mm picture quality was just too poor)? Not that Super8 was that great. Videocams pretty much killed all that off. > > >Then kiss film goodbye in ~2013. > > > >No; nothing is ever that clean. There will be a very gradual transition, because people will wait for their current equipment to wear out. > >I'd be more inclined to accept this if digitals didn't offer typical typical consumers so much more. Digital cameras are supposed to be "the" gift this Christmas. These will be "sold forward", to people who already have computers and printers. The infrastructure for digital is in place. The "gradual transition" has been going on since 1984, when the first graphics-based computer (Apple Macintosh) was mass-produced. The question was when film would die, not low-end consumer film cameras. That's why talk of the movie industry was relevant. And those disposable cameras show no sign of dying. Only about 250f homes in the US contains any kind of computer, PC or Mac, while something like 950f homes have at least one camera. So, the infrastructure for digital is *not* in place for 750f the population. For them, film cameras are by far the better choice, as they don't need to buy or deal with a computer. Dealing with a computer is a very big issue for many people. While my wife could afford a computer, she would never have bought one without someone to be the home IT department because she could never get a computer to work without IT support. Not even the iMac she loves. She's the Art Department, not Engineering. > >And the movie industry will still need vast quantities of film. > >Again, I dissent. Figure the angular area of a movie screen for the average viewer. (Not the front row seats that are always empty!) It isn't much different from viewing an 8x10 at 12". I don't think that the movie industry would have standardized on 35mm film if a smaller width would have sufficed. There would have been so much money to be saved if they could have used 16mm instead that the transition would have happened decades before TV cameras became practical, and Leicas would be 16mm, not 35mm. >The movie business is capital intensive and very price conscious. Given that the 8x10 print is most people's idea of "a nice picture," I see the movie industry's movement into digital as an indication that the format has achieved price-performance parity for the masses, and I think it will happen in three years. > >The larger problem is theaters. They have considerable investment film, and don't turn over investments as fast as movie production companies do. But I expect the large chains, which are more capital intensive, will switch to digital in three years. This is exactly backwards. The more capital intensive the industry, the *slower* to switch to a new method: they have to wait until the old equipment has paid for itself and worn out before they can afford to go out and buy new stuff. The classical exception has been where the new technology was literally ten times better than what it replaced, such that the new stuff could be purchased for a few years of the maintenance budget of the old. It is *very* rare that a new technology is this much better, and digital photography does not qualify. > >Look at us -- we happily use mechanical cameras from thirty years ago... > >Then there's the Society for Creative Anachronism, who joust and traipse around in three-hundred-year-old designer clothes... there's always room for outliers! We should wear bell-bottom pants while using our OM-1s? > >electronics are only a part of the total cost of a camera, and the optical and mechanical components do not follow Moore's Law, except that much of the mechanical complexity of cameras has been eliminated: a camera today has simple mechanicals controlled by a little computer chip. > >There you go! And they're injection molded of plastic, rather than milled from metal. And the lenses are computer-generated, rather than designed with a slide-rule. And the lenses in the eventual price-parity product will be much smaller. To have an apples-to-apples comparison, one must compare cameras of equivalent build quality and ruggedness. And some are injection-molded from metal. Lenses will be no cheaper, because optics is a very mature industry, and the mecanics to hold and move the elements is already pretty well optimised. Computer design of lenses does speed the design process, but has no effect on the labor to actually make the lenses. Current digital cameras get away with low-grade and thus cheap lenses, but as the CCD reaches 35mm camera resolution and coverage, the lenses will need to improve to match. Camera body cases and their finger-operated controls won't be cheaper, because they need to be dust-tight enough and robust enough to live in the real world, and the size and dexterity of the human hand is not changing. Viewfinder optics will also remain about the same, as the human eye isn't getting any better. In fact, it declines with age. What's left are the camera body innards, where various mechanical things are being simplified or eliminated, with the complexity being moved into the digital electronics. This (plus the CCD chip) is where Moore's Law applies. >I agree that mechanics and optics don't follow the identical 18 month curve that electronics do, but they do have a curve of their own. Compared to Moore's Law, mechanics and optics do not improve at all. These are very mature technologies. A skilled 16th century instrument maker could duplicate a Leica III (except the lightmeter) albeit at great expense, as it would all be done by hand, right down to the making of various optical glasses from sand. >And to the extent that many parts of digital and film cameras are identical in function, that forms the basis for a price-parity point. When the sensor costs the same as the various motors, soleniods, and mechanical parts that are unique to film cameras, price-parity will be achieved. Not so fast. People buy into systems to make photos. The price of the CCD is only a part of the equation. Don't forget the entire infrastructure needed to make cameras of either kind practical for the masses. Right now, actually making a digital photo print is far too complex and expensive for most folk. In time, five or ten years, this will be solved. In the meantime, buying a disposable camera, taking the pictures, sending the whole thing off to be processed, and getting the prints back is by far the cheapest and simpleset way to get photos that usually much exceed the quality of point&shoot digital cameras, all for far less trouble and money than anything digital. > > >(Of course, there will always be a niche market for fine art photochemistry, just as some brush-media artists still mix their own egg temupra.) > > > >Or develop their own photos? > >Please don't take what I write about marketplace and technology trends involving hundreds of millions of people as a personal affront. Huh? Just drew the obvious parallel. And pointed out that the parallel is off by a century or so. Actually, the 40,000-year-old cave paintings in Spain were done with a form of egg tempura, so if anything the egg tempura market has been growing ever since. >There will always be an artistic niche for film, just as one can still buy a horse-drawn carriage and buggy whip today. My point is simply that by then I will be dead, buried, and forgotten. Transitions between major technologies happen very very slowly, taking decades. How long did it take for electronic flash units to replace flashbulbs? That's the fastest transition in photography I can recall. One way to tell is to count by sales volume when various cameras dropped their FP sync option. >Simply by preferring Olympus gear, this group can be defined as an outlier in the larger scheme of things. Thirty year old *mechanical* cameras! Cibachrome! Black and white! >However, I expect a gradual return to sheet film. It will require far less infrastructure to produce than sprocket-punched roll film. Roll film is a convenience, and convenenience is digital's middle name! The fanatics will be willing to take the time to mess with sheet film. It will be a while before digital systems (camera, photo printers, etc) will equal the quality of large format at any price. An 8x10 image contains (7.75*25.4*100)(9.75*25.4*100)= 487,499,025 tricolor pixels, or 975 Mpixels (as digital cameras are usually advertised). By Moore's Law, this will take 18*log2(975/4)= 142.7 months, or 12 years to come down to the price of 4 Mpix camera. This would likely be the minimum delay, as the market for large format is far smaller than for 35mm, so far less money will be invested in pusing into the large format market. Also, the quality requirements and expectations of the 8x10 crowd far exceed that of the 35mm crowd, even the pros. >There may even be a niche market for sprocket hole punches, for those of us who want to keep or OM's alive long after 35mm roll film is no longer commercially available. (Requisite on-topic content. :-) The movie film market will ensure that the sprocket-hole punching machines will be around long enough that none of us will ever need to worry. Not to mention all those disposable cameras. Joe Gwinn ------------------------------ End of olympus-digest V2 #3776 ****************************** < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9690 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:14:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:14:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:14:47 2002 -0800 Received: from tiger.cybersurf.com (tiger.cybersurf.com [209.197.145.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12336 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:14:34 -0800 Received: from localhost (cal-uas-7-209197184151.3web.net [209.197.184.151]) by tiger.cybersurf.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBN4CfS9001328 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:13:01 -0700 From: Sean Davis To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Olympus D380 digital Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:12:22 -0700 Message-ID: <9p2d0v4fdskcqm4u5ndrsftkbiq1kog7bl@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello all, my wife and I are considering buying an entry level digital to replace the traditional point-n-shoot for every day type snapshots - does anyone have any experience with this camera? from it's specs it seems to have a decent amount of features for a low-price camera... 2 megapixels from my understanding should be good to about 5x7 enlargments. we have a pretty tight budget (under ~$200 USD) and i'd like to get the most bang for my bucks, and, of course, stay with Olympus :) and Merry Christmas! Sean D. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9971 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:16:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:16:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:17:03 2002 -0800 Received: from web20004.mail.yahoo.com (web20004.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.49]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA12340 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:16:50 -0800 Message-ID: <20021223041637.71934.qmail@web20004.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20004.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:16:37 PST Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:16:37 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] Emmanuelle To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This guy sells all kinds of photographic equipment and most of it is overpriced and overrated. Luckily he always uses that ugly as hell yellow background that gives him away every single time. Never bought from him and never will. Mark Lloyd --- John Ockman wrote: > Oh, he has a lot more than just that new one. I > count a > least 4, and maybe more accounts that he has. > John > n Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:41:30 +0800 __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10268 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:24:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:24:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:25:02 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12352 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:24:49 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.114.1c82f829 (3932) for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:22:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <114.1c82f829.2b37e9a2@aol.com> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:22:58 EST Subject: [OM] WTB: Pentax Spotmeter V To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_114.1c82f829.2b37e9a2_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_114.1c82f829.2b37e9a2_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm interested in buying or trading for a Pentax Spotmeter V. Would like LN,Mint or new mint and will pay good old folding green stuff or possibly trade for OM equipment. The answer to the unasked question is, "I have a Mamiya Universal and I'm not getting out of using the Olympus OM." Please reply off list. Bill Barber --part1_114.1c82f829.2b37e9a2_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm interested in buying or trading for a Pentax Spotmeter V.  Would like LN,Mint or new mint and will pay good old folding green stuff or possibly trade for OM equipment.  The answer to the unasked question is, "I have a Mamiya Universal and I'm not getting out of using the Olympus OM."  Please reply off list.  Bill Barber --part1_114.1c82f829.2b37e9a2_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10582 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:32:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:32:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:32:43 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA12356 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:32:29 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040617806!793 Received: (qmail 5744 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:30:07 -0000 Received: from softdnserror (HELO timpani.hk.dyxnet.com) (202.134.64.241) by server-2.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:30:07 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBN42du00318 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:02:40 +0800 Message-ID: <3E069155.8168E651@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:30:13 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Emmanuelle References: <20021223041637.71934.qmail@web20004.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oh! Don't let him/them know the trick about yellow background otherwise he will change it! I have a friend bought a 24/2 from him at very high price ($400?) and found some problem need return, he also overcharged him a lot on the shipping cost. C.H.Ling "M. Lloyd" wrote: > > This guy sells all kinds of photographic equipment and > most of it is overpriced and overrated. Luckily he > always uses that ugly as hell yellow background that > gives him away every single time. Never bought from > him and never will. > > Mark Lloyd > > --- John Ockman wrote: > > Oh, he has a lot more than just that new one. I > > count a > > least 4, and maybe more accounts that he has. > > John > > n Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:41:30 +0800 > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10874 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:39:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:39:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:40:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA12364 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:40:01 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040617986!805 Received: (qmail 15806 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:33:07 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:33:07 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBN4BTu00448 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:11:29 +0800 Message-ID: <3E069368.86DD7DDF@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: <20021223040933.24364.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center resolution of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have seen from pop photo test. The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking about aerial resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film resolution, I really doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF resolution, they are not much better than 35mm. C.H.Ling "M. Lloyd" wrote: > > Most current LF lenses are about 80-100 lpm under lab > conditions. look at these pictures in this discussion > forum... > > http://www.f32.net/discus/messages/6/232.html?1019726552 > > Taken with a lens at least 40 years old or more. I've > only just gotten into LF photography and I'm getting > results for landscapes and portraits that are quite > simply amazing. Also I've learned resolution can be > discounted quite a bit for LF that cannot be the same > for 35mm and DC. > > I look at pictures taken 100 or more years ago at the > George Eastman House (if anyone of you can visit it it > is the Mecca of photography) and though one can see > obvious distortion effects or cannot see every grain > of sand those pictures have a mystical quality to them > that truth be told I've never seen from a digicam or > any photoshop tool and these pictures speak to me in a > way digital does not. > > This is all just IMHO of course everyone sees things > in different ways. Digital just hasn't yet inspired me > to take pictures like my OM's and my LF equipment has. > > Mark Lloyd > > --- "C.H.Ling" wrote: > > To my understanding, large format lenses has much > > lower resolution, I > > don't think they can close to 50lm/pp. For DC vs > > 35mm, I always think > > a 16MP (single layer CCD) DC will outperform 35mm > > film system in all > > aspect including resolution. The time for an > > affordable 16MP SLR DC > > system is coming soon, I expected it will be less > > than 3 years. > > > > C.H.Ling > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11232 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 04:53:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 04:53:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 20:53:43 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12382 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:53:30 -0800 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:53:06 -0500 Message-Id: <200212222353.AA494534834@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A look here might prove informative. http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "C.H.Ling" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 >80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center resolution >of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have seen from pop >photo test. >The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking about aerial >resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film resolution, I really >doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF resolution, they are >not much better than 35mm. > >C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11682 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 05:15:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 05:15:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 21:16:07 2002 -0800 Received: from web20001.mail.yahoo.com (web20001.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.46]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA12408 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:15:54 -0800 Message-ID: <20021223051541.36252.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [128.151.129.75] by web20001.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:15:41 PST Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:15:41 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212222353.AA494534834@mynra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was looking at Schniediers white paper stuff on their current lenses which can be found at www.schneideroptics.com . Maybe I misread. And I did say under lab conditions. I'm under no illusions that I can get anywhere near that but then again I'm pretty sure I can't get near 80-100 lpm with my OM or indeed if someone gave me that ultra zeiss lens that is reputed to have like 500 lpm (250/8?) either even with a tripod. Frankly, it kinda scares me when you look at all the stuff the image has to go through before it can be displayed that we get any image at all. Imagine you have a lens like the Zeiss capable of 500 lpm. 500 immeditly goes down to 100 or less if you decide to use color film or 150 if you use TMAX. If you handhold the camera there goes another 50 lpm. If the subject is moving there goes some more. Then you send the film to be processed and then printed (lose another 10 lpm to the enlarger, lose some more to the laser printer or whatever it is that is used. So eventually you have a 4x6 that has probably 10-20 or less lpm no matter what you do. Mark Lloyd --- Walt Wayman wrote: > A look here might prove informative. > > http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html > > Walt > > ---------- Original Message > ---------------------------------- > From: "C.H.Ling" > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 > > >80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center > resolution > >of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have > seen from pop > >photo test. > >The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking > about aerial > >resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film > resolution, I really > >doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF > resolution, they are > >not much better than 35mm. > > > >C.H.Ling __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12048 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 05:31:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 05:31:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 21:31:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA12417 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:31:24 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040621342!984 Received: (qmail 11603 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 05:29:03 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-2.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 05:29:03 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBN52qu00889 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:02:52 +0800 Message-ID: <3E069F72.719709FC@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:30:26 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: <200212222353.AA494534834@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks for the data, it looks much better than I though. Below is what photodo say, although I'm not totally agree with it. I believe MF and large format are much better than 35mm but not to the extend of... what 8x10 equal to 900MP of valuable data. I have never use LF, but it is hard to imagine. http://www.photodo.com/nav/artindex.html Check on the "35 mm, medium format, or large format?" C.H.Ling Walt Wayman wrote: > > A look here might prove informative. > > http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html > > Walt > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "C.H.Ling" > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 > > >80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center resolution > >of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have seen from pop > >photo test. > >The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking about aerial > >resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film resolution, I really > >doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF resolution, they are > >not much better than 35mm. > > > >C.H.Ling > > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12300 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 05:32:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 05:32:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 21:32:42 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12421 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:32:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:32:05 -0500 Message-Id: <200212230032.AA1821704460@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm on your side, Mark. I shoot big stuff too. I actually thought some of the numbers were quite impressive, especially considering that an 8x10 print from a 4x5 negative is only a 2X enlargement, not 6X like 35mm. That means a 35mm lens would have to resolve 200 lpm to equal a large format lens at 50 lpm. I haven't seen any of those. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "M. Lloyd" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:15:41 -0800 (PST) >I was looking at Schniediers white paper stuff on >their current lenses which can be found at >www.schneideroptics.com . Maybe I misread. And I did >say under lab conditions. I'm under no illusions that >I can get anywhere near that but then again I'm pretty >sure I can't get near 80-100 lpm with my OM or indeed >if someone gave me that ultra zeiss lens that is >reputed to have like 500 lpm (250/8?) either even with >a tripod. > >Frankly, it kinda scares me when you look at all the >stuff the image has to go through before it can be >displayed that we get any image at all. Imagine you >have a lens like the Zeiss capable of 500 lpm. > >500 immeditly goes down to 100 or less if you decide >to use color film or 150 if you use TMAX. If you >handhold the camera there goes another 50 lpm. If the >subject is moving there goes some more. Then you send >the film to be processed and then printed (lose >another 10 lpm to the enlarger, lose some more to the >laser printer or whatever it is that is used. So >eventually you have a 4x6 that has probably 10-20 or >less lpm no matter what you do. > >Mark Lloyd > >--- Walt Wayman wrote: >> A look here might prove informative. >> >> http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html >> >> Walt >> >> ---------- Original Message >> ---------------------------------- >> From: "C.H.Ling" >> Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 >> >> >80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center >> resolution >> >of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have >> seen from pop >> >photo test. >> >The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking >> about aerial >> >resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film >> resolution, I really >> >doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF >> resolution, they are >> >not much better than 35mm. >> > >> >C.H.Ling > > >__________________________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. >http://mailplus.yahoo.com > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13028 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 06:53:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 06:53:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 22:53:52 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12468 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:53:33 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:53:53 +0800 Message-ID: <3E06B249.7000900@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:50:49 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Sharp Portrait lens problems Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I had spent the better of 4 hours cleaning up "zits" on portraits I had taken.. It seems that would not have been a problem with a softer lens. I had used my Tokina 90mmf2.5 for most of the work. The details I get with that lens is simply amazing. I can see the pores and count the zits... to which most of my female subjects have just objected.. But in the end, I'm in the camp that says I can always "post process" make a picture softer, but I can't make it sharper. I cannot sharpen what was not recorded. So I guess I'll just suck it up, and live with a sharp portrait lens. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13661 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 07:54:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 07:54:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 22 23:55:20 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12500 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:55:07 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-21.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.21]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBN7nGU11732 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:49:16 +1300 Message-Id: <200212230749.gBN7nGU11732@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:55:01 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Two web-pages to note - maybe X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, I see there are several recent new-comers to the list (including members from 'way back who have re-joined). So I mention that I maintain two public web-pages for the benefit of members of this group. 1). a list of members photographic web-pages, at http://homepages.caverock.net.nz/~bj/photography/zuikoholics/members.htm 2) a list of good photo-processors and OM repairers around the world. This started at the time that airport X-rays were beginning to be made much more powerful and people were looking for means to get their film developed before it got Zapped. http://homepages.caverock.net.nz/~bj/photography/zuikoholics/processors.htm Please draw to my attention any omissions to these pages, so that I can rectify the matter. I also have a page of lens tests for those who are interested and haven't bookmarked it. Since it contains material that is still paper-published, the URL is not publicised. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14060 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 08:16:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 08:16:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 00:17:01 2002 -0800 Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA12510 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:16:48 -0800 Received: from user-38ldteq.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.245.218]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18QNl2-0003WL-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 03:16:16 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:16:32 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3776 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >It will be a while before digital systems (camera, photo printers, >etc) will equal the quality of large format at any price. An 8x10 >image contains (7.75*25.4*100)(9.75*25.4*100)= 487,499,025 tricolor >pixels, or 975 Mpixels (as digital cameras are usually advertised). >By Moore's Law, this will take 18*log2(975/4)= 142.7 months, or 12 >years to come down to the price of 4 Mpix camera. This would likely >be the minimum delay, as the market for large format is far smaller >than for 35mm, so far less money will be invested in pusing into the >large format market. Also, the quality requirements and >expectations of the 8x10 crowd far exceed that of the 35mm crowd, >even the pros. > How many photographers shoot with 8X10 view cameras anymore? Not many, I'd expect. My guess is that they are a minor, minor fraction of the no. of photographers out there, and even a small fraction of working pros. A lot of pros do shoot view cameras with Phase One or LEAF digital backs, though. You're also making an assumption that Moore's law is dictating the pace of digital back/camera development. From what Iwould guess, just anecdotally, is that it is even faster than that. For example, in the eighteen mos. or so since Canon's first DSLR became available (beginning of 2001) we have seen the resolution go from 3 megapixels to 11. From what I can see, it's like motorcycle tire development, they just keep getting batter and better! I would expect that we will see the advent of a 6-8 megapixel digital SLR that is the equivalent to an EOS 3 that will sell for $1000 in two years at the very outside, and quite possibly within a year.... Stephen Scharf -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14367 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 08:29:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 08:29:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 00:30:10 2002 -0800 Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk (pfepb.post.tele.dk [193.162.153.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA12515 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:29:56 -0800 Received: from get2net.dk (0x503ea020.boanxx10.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.160.32]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0651F5EE3C2 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:29:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3E06CB9C.6F41D275@get2net.dk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:38:52 +0100 From: Klaus Elmquist Nielsen X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-3 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] FS: New OM-4Ti References: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Skip, As far as I am informed it is a new body that has been produced this autum. In any case, why should I have been waiting for it so long? It has been imported from a dealer in Japan and comes with the Olympus worldwide warranty (as did the lens I ordered :-). Yes, it is expensive. But it is the danish list price. That is personally ok for me, but I have changed priorities and (more importantly) financial situation. Hence the FS posting. Cheers, Klaus Skip wrote: > Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:38:34 -0500 > From: "om@skipwilliams.com" > Subject: RE: [OM] FS: New OM-4Ti > > Let's see....Hmmmm....$2079/$1560 (U.S.) for a new body that was probably > made 5-7 years ago.....or $5-600 for an almost-new or Ex+ body off the > 'bay. > > It doesn't seem like much of a choice to me if you want to use the camera. > but if you're a collector who thinks that the price of a NIB OM4ti will > rise over the next few years, it may be a prudent purchase. > > Skip I wrote: > Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:38:48 +0100 > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] FS: New OM-4Ti > > Hi all, > > Quite a while back I orderen a new OM-4Ti from a shop here in Copenhagen. > It has now arrived. > > However, I am not completely sure that I want the OM-4Ti, partly for > financial reasons and partly because I already have another OM Ti body. > > The price is around 15.000 danish kroner which is about 2022 euro or 2079 > US$. > [...] > For people outside the EU it should be noted that 25% VAT is included in > the price and that this will (?) be subtracted from the price. > [...] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14824 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:04:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:04:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:05:02 2002 -0800 Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk (pfepb.post.tele.dk [193.162.153.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12553 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:04:48 -0800 Received: from get2net.dk (0x503ea020.boanxx10.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.160.32]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id D33625EE8EE for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:04:28 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3E06D3C6.741DC7CF@get2net.dk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:13:42 +0100 From: Klaus Elmquist Nielsen X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-3 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, At Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:53:04 -0500 Jan Steinman wrote: >It may be true that if you were using each frame to its utmost, but the human eye cannot discern all > that detail at 24 frames per second. It would appear that MPEG formats do a pretty darn good job of > containing as much "useful" information as is needed. A while back I was watching TV with my ex girlfriend. She has been working for years with drum scanners and has a very good eye for images. She pointed out that in some scenes when the camera was moving there are some noise appearing. Much like small "dancing" squares (kind apologies for my english here). It takes a little to notice it. But it is there. So in fact, while MPEG is quite good, it it shows its limitations to the trained eye. Cheers, Klaus < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15188 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:21:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:21:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:21:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA12560 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:21:20 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-21.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040635205!1893 Received: (qmail 2345 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:20:06 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-21.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:20:06 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBN8qiu05538 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:52:45 +0800 Message-ID: <3E06D54B.F613C905@accura.com.hk> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:20:11 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <3E06D3C6.741DC7CF@get2net.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think this is called block noise, more obvious in MPEG-1, in MPEG-2 it has been greatly reduced. It is also related to the encoding/decoding software/hardware, most Hollywood VCD (MPEG-1) encoded very well, they look quite acceptable. C.H.Ling Klaus Elmquist Nielsen wrote: > > Hi all, > > A while back I was watching TV with my ex girlfriend. She has been working for years with > drum scanners and has a very good eye for images. She pointed out that in some scenes > when the camera was moving there are some noise appearing. Much like small "dancing" > squares (kind apologies for my english here). It takes a little to notice it. But it > is there. So in fact, while MPEG is quite good, it it shows its limitations to the > trained eye. > > Cheers, > Klaus > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15436 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:24:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:24:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:25:04 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix4-2.free.fr (postfix4-2.free.fr [213.228.0.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12564 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:24:51 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-16-81-56-190-108.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.190.108]) by postfix4-2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 61C9DC0CD for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:24:49 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT field-of-view calculator Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:17:12 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122310251100.00747@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello, just a link to a field-of-view calculator for classic format sizes and free size (useful for Digital non standard format chip...) http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/angles.html that I think well designed. Christian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15819 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:39:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:39:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:39:36 2002 -0800 Received: from smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net (smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net [212.135.6.14]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12584 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:39:22 -0800 Received: from mail.context.co.uk ([195.40.43.131] helo=exchange.context.co.uk) by smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18QP3E-000EjT-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:39:08 +0000 Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:40:31 -0000 Message-ID: <11A8F53414D6D211820B0000E8E43068AFD702@EXCHANGE> From: Alan Wood To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Netscape 7 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:40:30 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Donald MacDonald wrote: > Anybody out there using Netscape 7? Anybody doing so managed to get their > ALT text to show up on mouseover? Works with all my other versions, and > with > all versions of IE, but I have been all through my options everywhere and > still can't get the blasted things to work. > ALT text is not supposed to show up on mouseover, although some browsers do/did this. It is intended to be displayed when the image is not displayed, e.g. a text browser, or a normal browser with images turned off. TITLE text is supposed to show up on mouseover. Alan Wood http://ww.alanwood.net (Unicode, special characters, pesticide names) http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/ (macro, under construction) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16096 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:44:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:44:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:45:05 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12588 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:44:52 -0800 Received: from host62-7-4-94.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.7.4.94] helo=Inwin) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18QP5m-0001fa-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:41:47 +0000 Message-ID: <003d01c2aa67$c16e4d20$5e04073e@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Re: FS XA in France Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:31:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ------Original message------ >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:45:51 -0500 >From: Andrew Gullen >Subject: Re: [OM] FS XA in France >but I thought it might >be depressing to always keep the sky out of my photographs (:-) Not in the UK! -- from Cy in the UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16101 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:44:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:44:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:45:07 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12592 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:44:53 -0800 Received: from host62-7-4-94.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.7.4.94] helo=Inwin) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18QP5o-0001fa-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:41:48 +0000 Message-ID: <003e01c2aa67$c27b2940$5e04073e@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:34:14 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ------Original message------ >Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:43:36 -0500 >From: "Walt Wayman" >Subject: Re: [OM] circ. polarizer question >Circular polarizers only work in one direction. That is true; but they polarise in both directions. >Looking through it at a shiny surface should give you the answer. No, it won't. A circular polariser consists of two "glass" elements. The first element (the one nearest the subject) is the polarising element. Light from the subject strikes the polarising element and emerges polarised. The polarised light then strikes the second element, which is a randomiser -- it takes the polarised light and randomises the polarisation, so that the light emerging from the second element is unpolarised This is necessary to prevent autofocus sensors and spot meters giving incorrect readings. So: Polariser fitted correctly: Unpolarised light from subject strikes first element, emerges polarised, strikes second element, emerges unpolarised, then strikes front element of camera lens. This gives correct spot readings. Polariser fitted reversed: Unpolarised light from subject strikes second element, emerges unpolarised, strikes first element, emerges polarised, then strikes front element of camera lens. This gives incorrect spot readings. Now, the whole point of using a polariser is selectively to reduce the amount of light in certain parts of the picture (e.g. the sky) by eliminating polarised light originating from that part of the picture. So of course you have polarised light striking the first element of the polariser. But light with the incorrect polarisation is eliminated by the first element, so that the light striking the second element is still polarised, but there is less of it (e.g. the sky is darker than it otherwise would be). The way to determine which way round a loose polariser should be fitted is to use a second circular polariser. Fit them together and then rotate one with respect to the other whilst looking through them (you don't need to look at polarised light). If there is no (or little) darkening as one polariser is rotated with respect to the other, they are fitted correctly. If the image darkens to complete blackness, one polariser is fitted the wrong way round relative to the other. Although a circular polariser consists of two elements, they may be cemented together, so that you actually have only one piece of "glass". -- from Cy in the UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16622 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 09:47:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 09:47:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 01:47:25 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12596 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:47:12 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.8d.21925ab2 (4206) for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 04:42:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <8d.21925ab2.2b38349f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 04:42:55 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Sharp Portrait lens problems To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_8d.21925ab2.2b38349f_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_8d.21925ab2.2b38349f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/23/2002 12:53:57 AM Central Standard Time, olympus@achtung.com writes: > So I guess I'll just suck it up, and live with a > sharp portrait lens. > Well, I like your choice of lenses with the Tamron 90 f2.5, however I can offer you a little advice it you don't mind taking it from one of the list members who has seen a few more New Years parties than you. For about 400f the cost of your lens, you go out and get yourself a nice Zeiss Softar 1 or 2 which will soften things up a bit and the girl friends may like the results better. A piece of pantyhose stretched over the front of your lens will produce a similar result, as long as, it is a piece of their panty hose. Have known a few who would stretch the panty hose over the lens and then use a cigarette to burn a hole in the middle so just the outside was in soft focus. An alternative to this method would just be to wait. With time their complexions will clear up, your eyes will start to fail and if they have been with that long, they will love the results just because you still want to take pictures of them after all these years. Bill Barber --part1_8d.21925ab2.2b38349f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/23/2002 12:53:57 AM Central Standard Time, olympus@achtung.com writes:

So I guess I'll just suck it up, and live with a
sharp portrait lens.


Well, I like your choice of lenses with the Tamron 90 f2.5, however I can offer you a little advice it you don't mind taking it from one of the list members who has seen a few more New Years parties than you.  For about 400f the cost of your lens, you go out and get yourself a nice Zeiss Softar 1 or 2 which will soften things up a bit and the girl friends may like the results better.  A piece of pantyhose stretched over the front of your lens will produce a similar result, as long as, it is a piece of their panty hose.  Have known a few who would stretch the panty hose over the lens and then use a cigarette to burn a hole in the middle so just the outside was in soft focus.  An alternative to this method would just be to wait.  With time their complexions will clear up, your eyes will start to fail and if they have been with that long, they will love the results just because you still want to take pictures of them after all these years.  Bill Ba! rber --part1_8d.21925ab2.2b38349f_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17536 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 10:24:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 10:24:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 02:24:47 2002 -0800 Received: from nemesis.systems.pipex.net (nemesis.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA12635 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 02:24:34 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by nemesis.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 63A33160074B3 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:24:23 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:24:25 -0000 Message-ID: <000601c2aa6d$7805d300$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry, Joe, but my 30-year-old Super 8 technology blow this guy's spankin' new video away. The edges of the clouds in the sky in his video were jagged, and the colors of the pasque flowers were barely recognizable. His presentation, technically, wasn't even in the same league with the Super 8. With Kodachrome, blues are blue, reds are red (and don't bleed), and greens are green. <\snip> Dean, At the risk of starting a big US / UK debate here (we don't need any more flame wars here !) I have one word for you - "NTSC" !!! I know there are pro's and con's of both NTSC and PAL, but what you describe above is particularly noticeable with NTSC and less so (tho still there) with PAL. We don't refer to NTSC as "Never Twice the Same Colour" for nothing !!! Jon (ducking for cover !) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18178 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 11:29:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 11:29:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 03:30:18 2002 -0800 Received: from actinium.btinternet.com (actinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.66]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA12674 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 03:30:04 -0800 From: julian_davies@btinternet.com Received: from hafnium ([194.75.226.99]) by actinium.btinternet.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id 18QQjb-0004hn-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:26:59 +0000 Received: from 194.200.72.1 by hafnium ([194.75.226.99]); Mon, 23 Dec 02 11:26:59 GMT Message-ID: <8283706.1040642819881.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:26:59 +0000 (GMT) To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MAILER: talk21.com WAS v2 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mo(o)re comments interspersed below > from: Joe Gwinn > date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:53:04 > to: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > Comments interspersed below. > This is exactly backwards. The more capital intensive the industry, the *slower* to switch to a new method: they have to wait until the old equipment has paid for itself and worn out before they can afford to go out and buy new stuff. The classical exception has been where the new technology was literally ten times better than what it replaced, such that the new stuff could be purchased for a few years of the maintenance budget of the old. It is *very* rare that a new technology is this much better, and digital photography does not qualify. One of the largest post - production costs in movies is printing and transporting the many prints required. This currently limits the number produced and leads to the first - run, second - run etc. and country - by country release. The state of prints received in a second - tier country is on average diabolical, and is a limitation to income. Theatres will invest in digital technology if they can recover the costs through increased revenue because of a step - change in the distribution system, and a reduction in cost of transportation. The quality of the projected image is very, very secondary, provided it is clean. > Lenses will be no cheaper, because optics is a very mature industry, and the mecanics to hold and move the elements is already pretty well optimised. Computer design of lenses does speed the design process, but has no effect on the labor to actually make the lenses. Current digital cameras get away with low-grade and thus cheap lenses, but as the CCD reaches 35mm camera resolution and coverage, the lenses will need to improve to match. I think lens technology is going into a new phase of development, now that the computer power exists to design such things as the diffractor lens that C*N*N now have. This will not generate savings in the Moore's law league, however. > Camera body cases and their finger-operated controls won't be cheaper, because they need to be dust-tight enough and robust enough to live in the real world, and the size and dexterity of the human hand is not changing. Viewfinder optics will also remain about the same, as the human eye isn't getting any better. In fact, it declines with age. Actually, it has been noted that people of the younger generation in the UK are developing increased dexterity of thumb, due to all the text - messaging they do on their phones. > Compared to Moore's Law, mechanics and optics do not improve at all. These are very mature technologies. A skilled 16th century instrument maker could duplicate a Leica III (except the lightmeter) albeit at great expense, as it would all be done by hand, right down to the making of various optical glasses from sand. He may have a problem getting the glass good enough, and tools which are hard enough to opeate at the reduced scale would be a problem also, but the skills are broadly similar. I also expect to use my OM system for a very, very long time. The parts I expect to fail are all "new technology", so I may be down to the OM1 by the time film ceases to become GENERALLY available, and that will probably see me out using film from the minority supliers. Julian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19296 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 13:02:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 13:02:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 05:03:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA12791 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 05:02:48 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:02:23 -0500 Message-Id: <200212230802.AA653721914@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is all very interesting, but it=92s kind of like asking someone what time it is and being given instructions for building a clock. The question was which way round to put the glass back in the ring, and my answer was the essence of simplicity AND was correct: Just look through the damn thing! I have now, this morning, after only a half cup of coffee, verified my hypothesis by making like Popeye and squinting through each of my circular polarizers, three B+W=92s, one Tiffen and one Hoya. Looking from the back, or camera, side of the filter and rotating it while looking at reflections on a plastic slide storage sheet, the polarizing effect was obvious -- the reflections went away! Turning the filter around and repeating the exercise from the front, or subject, side produced an equally obvious and opposite result. Simple minds seek simple solutions. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "CyberSimian" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:34:14 -0000 >------Original message------ >>Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:43:36 -0500 >>From: "Walt Wayman" >>Subject: Re: [OM] circ. polarizer question > >>Circular polarizers only work in one direction. > >That is true; but they polarise in both directions. > >>Looking through it at a shiny surface should give you the >>answer. > >No, it won't. A circular polariser consists of two "glass" >elements. The first element (the one nearest the subject) is >the polarising element. >Light from the subject strikes the polarising element and >emerges polarised. >The polarised light then strikes the second element, which is a >randomiser -- it takes the polarised light and randomises the >polarisation, >so that the light emerging from the second element is >unpolarised This is necessary to prevent autofocus sensors and spot meters giving incorrect readings. So: > >Polariser fitted correctly: > Unpolarised light from subject strikes first element, emerges >polarised, strikes second element, emerges unpolarised, then >strikes front element of camera lens. This gives correct spot >readings. > >Polariser fitted reversed: > Unpolarised light from subject strikes second element, emerges >unpolarised, strikes first element, emerges polarised, then >strikes front element of camera lens. This gives incorrect spot >readings. > >Now, the whole point of using a polariser is selectively to >reduce the amount of light in certain parts of the picture (e.g. >the sky) by eliminating polarised light originating from that >part of the picture. So of course you have polarised light >striking the first element of the polariser. >But light with the incorrect polarisation is eliminated by the >first element, so that the light striking the second element is >still polarised, but there is less of it (e.g. the sky is darker >than it otherwise would be). > >The way to determine which way round a loose polariser should be >fitted is to use a second circular polariser. Fit them together >and then rotate one with respect to the other whilst looking >through them (you don't need to look at polarised light). If >there is no (or little) darkening as one polariser is rotated >with respect to the other, they are fitted correctly. >If the image darkens to complete blackness, one polariser is >fitted the wrong way round relative to the other. > >Although a circular polariser consists of two elements, they may >be cemented together, so that you actually have only one piece >of "glass". > >-- from Cy in the UK > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19604 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 13:11:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 13:11:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 05:12:04 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA12796 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 05:11:50 -0800 Received: (qmail 16187 invoked by uid 706); 23 Dec 2002 13:10:48 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 13:10:47 -0000 Message-ID: <002901c2aa85$916ff100$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM]: Dipping our Toe Into Digital, 16MP DC vs film again Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:16:54 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Gwinn" > When comparing various cameras and scanners, we probably should always ascertain the optical resolution of the green channel alone, and use that as our comparison. These numbers will be directly comparable to the resolutions of black&white film and cameras. > Well, thanks for the details analysis. I think it is not so proper to count just the green channel, assume you use the CCD for B/W photo, every pixel will be used for resolution information. For color it will also be close, but some details' color could be wrong, making a not so "clean" picture but the "resolution" should be there. It is very difficult to make a "true" resolution assessment here. Just like the resolution of film camera system, as I mentioned before, a CCD pixel will contain 256 different levels (assume 8 bits) but the film color (information) is composed by grain, a few dots may be good enough to compose a line to represent resolution data but this few dots will not be as informative as a CCD pixel. This favor to film, in resolution test film will be the winner. Since each CCD pixel is so informative and clean (compared to the dot grain of film), that is why in many case a 4-6MP DC showing picture quality better than film. Ok, the details may not be as good as film but overall it look better. > > Actually, this leads to a good question for CH: Has he or can he measure the resolution of his scanners? If one can find a suitable resolution chart and scan it, it ought to be easy. The scanner maker probably also knows, but may not be willing to publish the modulation transfer function. > I don't have a professional slide for scanner test, but I do have a lens test slide, below is a crop of Zuiko 50/3.5 at F5.6 shot, exposed with flash so vibration should be minimized. The size is 5.2mm x 2.1mm, download it in PhotoShop to check the resolution, to me it looks over 75lp/mm. http://www.accura.com.hk/50-02.jpg (200K) Below is a message I posted before to compare a simulated 16MP DC and 35mm film system, enjoy! ============== May be we start another interesting topic about how many pixel a DC can be comparable to a common film we are using. I just perform a test with E-10, shooting at 140mm (35mm equ.) and Fuji Provia F shooting with 35-105 at 70mm. E-10 is a 4MP DC, I try to simulate a 16MP DC by setting it to 140mm and compare it to a shot taking at 70mm. The file is a bit large (around 1.1MB and 1.7MB each). But it is interesting to have a look. The 70mm shot taking with Zuiko 35-105mm (early version) at 70mm F8, tripod and shutter speed was 1/250. Scanned at 4000dpi and cropped the center 179.mmx13.4mm. I have made three shoots, two with 35-70/3.6 and one with 35-105, they all have similar resolution but the 35-105 has slight higher contrast. http://www.accura.com.hk/70mm.jpg This is a E-10 shot at 140mm, ISO80, F4.8, 1/640s, sharpness setting: low (F4 is the best aperture of E10) http://www.accura.com.hk/E10-140mm.jpg I don't make any comment, download them and check it out yourself by making side to side comparison, you may need to see the different in 200% view. C.H.Ling ========================= < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20176 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 14:05:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 14:05:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 06:05:51 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12831 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:05:37 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:05:14 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:05:14 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] What's the place you can get the cheap SR-44's again? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:09:07 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 14:05:14.0499 (UTC) FILETIME=[50A5ED30:01C2AA8C] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Or, http://store.watchsupply.com/ -----Original Message----- From: NSURIT@aol.com [mailto:NSURIT@aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 8:42 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] What's the place you can get the cheap SR-44's again? In a message dated 12/20/2002 9:33:03 PM Central Standard Time, royer007@yahoo.com writes: All out of SR-44's Don't recall specifically if they had SR-44's, however I just put an order together on the list for some Eveready 357 silver oxide. After postage to me and back out to the list members, they ended up costing 75 cents a piece. Got them from cheapbatteries.com, you may want to check them out. Bill Barber < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20468 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 14:11:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 14:11:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 06:11:43 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.52]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12845 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:11:29 -0800 Received: from [64.229.246.204] by tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021223140749.GDMZ23339.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.246.204]> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:07:49 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:07:55 -0500 Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I bought the aforementioned 100 f2.8. > ... > The 100mm was no Fang... Thanks. It's always interesting to get behind the advertising. :-) BTW, I found mine performs best wide open or nearly so. At f8 and up I was still happy but there was no wow; that occurred at f4 and 2.8. Walt's idea worked great - now I can afford to try the 100/2. :-) Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20979 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 14:53:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 14:53:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 06:54:12 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12870 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:53:58 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:56:04 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0722F8.9030005@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:51:36 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Portrait lens References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca One of the great things about portraits is that, even if the lens is not very sharp wide open, you won't notice and the subjects won't mind. Wide open (and especially at f2!) you'll get a good background blur, great bokeh. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21047 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 14:53:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 14:53:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 06:54:17 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12873 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:54:02 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:57:40 +0800 Message-ID: <3E072355.7010407@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:53:09 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Sharp Portrait lens problems References: <8d.21925ab2.2b38349f@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8d.21925ab2.2b38349f@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, it's a Tokina 90mmf2.5 not a Tamron. I don't know if I'm all that big on softners, as I can always do that post production.. But I might buy one if it's not too expensive. Albert > > > Well, I like your choice of lenses with the Tamron 90 f2.5, however I > can offer you a little advice it you don't mind taking it from one of > the list members who has seen a few more New Years parties than you. > For about 400f the cost of your lens, you go out and get yourself a > nice Zeiss Softar 1 or 2 which will soften things up a bit and the > girl friends may like the results better. A piece of pantyhose > stretched over the front of your lens will produce a similar result, > as long as, it is a piece of their panty hose. Have known a few who > would stretch the panty hose over the lens and then use a cigarette to > burn a hole in the middle so just the outside was in soft focus. An > alternative to this method would just be to wait. With time their > complexions will clear up, your eyes will start to fail and if they > have been with that long, they will love the results just because you > still want to take pictures of them after all these years. Bill Ba! rber < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21511 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 14:59:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 14:59:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 06:59:58 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12893 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 06:59:45 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.97.180]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021223145529.NFZZ20431.pop016.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:55:29 -0600 Message-ID: <001b01c2aa93$57f6c620$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212230032.AA1821704460@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:55:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [141.157.97.180] at Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:55:29 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca But it's worse, Walt. The magnification for 8x10 from 35mm is nearly 8.5x.... -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:32 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > I'm on your side, Mark. I shoot big stuff too. I actually > thought some of the numbers were quite impressive, especially > considering that an 8x10 print from a 4x5 negative is only a 2X > enlargement, not 6X like 35mm. That means a 35mm lens would have > to resolve 200 lpm to equal a large format lens at 50 lpm. I > haven't seen any of those. > > Walt > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "M. Lloyd" > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:15:41 -0800 (PST) > > >I was looking at Schniediers white paper stuff on > >their current lenses which can be found at > >www.schneideroptics.com . Maybe I misread. And I did > >say under lab conditions. I'm under no illusions that > >I can get anywhere near that but then again I'm pretty > >sure I can't get near 80-100 lpm with my OM or indeed > >if someone gave me that ultra zeiss lens that is > >reputed to have like 500 lpm (250/8?) either even with > >a tripod. > > > >Frankly, it kinda scares me when you look at all the > >stuff the image has to go through before it can be > >displayed that we get any image at all. Imagine you > >have a lens like the Zeiss capable of 500 lpm. > > > >500 immeditly goes down to 100 or less if you decide > >to use color film or 150 if you use TMAX. If you > >handhold the camera there goes another 50 lpm. If the > >subject is moving there goes some more. Then you send > >the film to be processed and then printed (lose > >another 10 lpm to the enlarger, lose some more to the > >laser printer or whatever it is that is used. So > >eventually you have a 4x6 that has probably 10-20 or > >less lpm no matter what you do. > > > >Mark Lloyd > > > >--- Walt Wayman wrote: > >> A look here might prove informative. > >> > >> http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html > >> > >> Walt > >> > >> ---------- Original Message > >> ---------------------------------- > >> From: "C.H.Ling" > >> Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 > >> > >> >80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center > >> resolution > >> >of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have > >> seen from pop > >> >photo test. > >> >The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking > >> about aerial > >> >resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film > >> resolution, I really > >> >doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF > >> resolution, they are > >> >not much better than 35mm. > >> > > >> >C.H.Ling > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > >Do you Yahoo!? > >Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > >http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22036 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 15:33:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 15:33:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 07:33:32 2002 -0800 Received: from libra.i-cable.com (libra.i-cable.com [203.83.111.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA12949 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:33:18 -0800 Received: (qmail 15561 invoked by uid 706); 23 Dec 2002 15:29:48 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 15:29:15 -0000 Message-ID: <02ab01c2aa98$e9705800$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <200212230032.AA1821704460@mynra.com> <001b01c2aa93$57f6c620$0200a8c0@ctx> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:35:20 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wow! to avoid digital catching us we should go for 8x10, it will take a long time before there is any digital can match. This is the only hope of our film users so that we can stand proud before the DC users. But I worry if I have that money for a 8x10 system and the film & processing :-( C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mickey Trageser" > But it's worse, Walt. The magnification for 8x10 from 35mm is nearly > 8.5x.... > -Mickey > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Walt Wayman" > > > > I'm on your side, Mark. I shoot big stuff too. I actually > > thought some of the numbers were quite impressive, especially > > considering that an 8x10 print from a 4x5 negative is only a 2X > > enlargement, not 6X like 35mm. That means a 35mm lens would have > > to resolve 200 lpm to equal a large format lens at 50 lpm. I > > haven't seen any of those. > > > > Walt > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22322 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 15:39:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 15:39:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 07:40:23 2002 -0800 Received: from web13708.mail.yahoo.com (web13708.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.141]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA12958 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:40:10 -0800 Message-ID: <20021223153956.31055.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.200] by web13708.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:39:56 PST Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:39:56 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] Res wars continue To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021223094704.16669.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OK, I've got to pipe in here again. I'm tickled by those who claim that a 14 megapixel digital file is equivelent, or greater than 35mm film, or that a 35mm camera produces sharper images than a 4x5 view camera. Both claims fly in the face of physics. Laws of nature cannot be overturned by desire to justify our overspending on our own selected equipment. Digital imaging presents many advantages over film for most applications. No question there. However, it must be understood that digital capture presents a finite product--one of which is limited by the technology used to capture it. With film, I can always rescan it with newer, better technology. Does my 2700 DPI scanner come close to capturing "most" of the data on my slides or negatives? Get real! Everybody compares their digital cameras to ProviaF scanned at 4000 DPI and says "hey look at all that nasty grain" and look how much sharper the digital shot is. Ok, fine. But remember that ProviaF is just one of a hundred different types of film available on the market today. ProviaF has extremly fine grain, but has a nasty film base. Same with Velvia, but the grain pattern in Velvia is more pleasing to me. Is it possible that ProviaF just doesn't scan as well as we'd like? I've never seen a scan yet (even a high-res drum scan) that captured everything I could see with a loupe or an enlargment in my darkroom. In the darkroom, there is no substitute for film size. Compare a 35mm negative blown up to 11x14 to a 4x5 negative blown up to 11x14. Granted the 4x5's lens might not resolve as good as our lovely Zuikos, but the difference in the two shots will be night and day. Anybody who says differently is dreaming and not looking at it objectively. AG __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22671 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 15:50:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 15:50:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 07:50:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12975 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:50:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:50:07 -0500 Message-Id: <200212231050.AA250741048@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's what happens when the simple-minded, especially those who suffer from inumeracy, try to do math in their heads after midnight. It may also help to explain why my wife won't let me carry the checkbook. :-) ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Mickey Trageser" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:55:32 -0500 >But it's worse, Walt. The magnification for 8x10 from 35mm is >nearly 8.5x.... >-Mickey >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Walt Wayman" >To: >Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:32 AM >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > >>I'm on your side, Mark. I shoot big stuff too. I actually >>thought some of the numbers were quite impressive, especially >>considering that an 8x10 print from a 4x5 negative is only a 2X >>enlargement, not 6X like 35mm. That means a 35mm lens would have >>to resolve 200 lpm to equal a large format lens at 50 lpm. I >>haven't seen any of those. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22953 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 15:55:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 15:55:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 07:55:49 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12984 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 07:55:34 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:57:52 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07316A.7040804@achtung.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:53:14 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: <20021223153956.31055.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20021223153956.31055.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have to say, that what I can see under a microscope on fuji velvia, is amazing.. I was able to read a car license plate from a picture, and the license plate must have been no bigger then a dot. So as far a resolution, I'm not sure I buy into it. BUT, I have to admit, what makes the digital images look so good, is lack of grain. But the resolving power is not there...yet.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23300 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:07:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:07:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:08:12 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13022 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:07:58 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:07:34 -0500 Message-Id: <200212231107.AA336592928@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Could it be that a preference for film and is just ingrained in some of us? Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Albert Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:53:14 +0800 >I have to say, that what I can see under a microscope on fuji >velvia, is amazing.. I was able to read a car license plate >from a picture, and the license plate must have been no bigger >then a dot. So as far a resolution, I'm not sure I buy into it. > >BUT, I have to admit, what makes the digital images look so >good, is lack of grain. > >But the resolving power is not there...yet.. > >Albert > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23577 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:11:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:11:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:11:56 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13025 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:11:41 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:15:34 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07358C.7020601@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:10:52 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: <200212231107.AA336592928@mynra.com> In-Reply-To: <200212231107.AA336592928@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually walt, no, it has nothing to do with film being ingrained in us. When you look at the resolution tests in comparison, film is sharper (good film is sharper). But, what gives the appearance of sharpness in digital is the lack of grain.. Albert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23858 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:16:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:16:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:16:31 2002 -0800 Received: from out006.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13033 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:16:18 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.92]) by out006.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021223161202.BIC19982.out006.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:12:02 -0600 Message-ID: <001301c2aa9e$09ce1290$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212230032.AA1821704460@mynra.com> <001b01c2aa93$57f6c620$0200a8c0@ctx> <02ab01c2aa98$e9705800$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:12:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out006.verizon.net from [141.157.94.92] at Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:12:02 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Frankly, I'm not worried about it at all. I'm using my Oly stuff and enjoying it. If I need different tools, I'll work on getting them. I think I have plenty of time before I *must* change. Besides, I am pleased with my Oly gear and still lust for some other components [anyone got a real cheap shift? :-)]. There are certainly advantages to digital, but as yet there is nothing that makes me want to abandon my OM system. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 10:35 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > Wow! to avoid digital catching us we should go for 8x10, it will take a long > time before there is any digital can match. This is the only hope of our > film users so that we can stand proud before the DC users. But I worry if > I have that money for a 8x10 system and the film & processing :-( > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mickey Trageser" > > > But it's worse, Walt. The magnification for 8x10 from 35mm is nearly > > 8.5x.... > > -Mickey > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Walt Wayman" < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24116 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:19:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:19:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:19:52 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13037 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:19:38 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.92]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021223161523.PAWF1439.out001.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:15:23 -0600 Message-ID: <001901c2aa9e$81543790$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212231050.AA250741048@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:15:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [141.157.94.92] at Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:15:22 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Walt, If your wife is like mine, you don't handle the checkbook because there are still Zuikos to be had.... ;-) -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > That's what happens when the simple-minded, especially those who > suffer from inumeracy, try to do math in their heads after > midnight. It may also help to explain why my wife won't let me > carry the checkbook. :-) > > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "Mickey Trageser" > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:55:32 -0500 > > >But it's worse, Walt. The magnification for 8x10 from 35mm is > >nearly 8.5x.... > >-Mickey > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Walt Wayman" > >To: > >Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:32 AM > >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > > > > >>I'm on your side, Mark. I shoot big stuff too. I actually > >>thought some of the numbers were quite impressive, especially > >>considering that an 8x10 print from a 4x5 negative is only a 2X > >>enlargement, not 6X like 35mm. That means a 35mm lens would have > >>to resolve 200 lpm to equal a large format lens at 50 lpm. I > >>haven't seen any of those. > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24396 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:21:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:21:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:22:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13051 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:21:47 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:21:23 -0500 Message-Id: <200212231121.AA256966968@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry. I was attempting a feeble funny and couldn't even type a coherent sentence. It was a pun: "grain" as in film and "ingrained" as in this is us. I'll go now, since I obviously have too much time on my hands. Anyway, I need to go set my Santa Claus trap. This year I intend to finally catch the old bugger. I'm getting really tired of those reindeer crapping on the roof. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Albert Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:10:52 +0800 >Actually walt, no, it has nothing to do with film being ingrained in us. > When you look at the resolution tests in comparison, film is sharper >(good film is sharper). But, what gives the appearance of sharpness in >digital is the lack of grain.. > >Albert. > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24827 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:45:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:45:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:46:12 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13077 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:45:59 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP id <20021223164450002000fqb8e>; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:44:50 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:44:45 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LF lenses) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We are somewhat going in circles here. The reason that all photgraphic lenses seem to have resolution within a factor of two of 50 line pairs per millimeter (100 pixels per millimeter) is that this is more or less the resolution of film of reasonable sensitivity (ASA 100 or greater), so the lenses are designed to that resolution. Whatever the size of the film, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5, 8x10, the film resolution is the same, so all lenses will have more or less the same on-film resolution, with the more expensive lenses being better, and the less expensive lenses being worse. The limits, from the websites mentioned below, seem to range from 100 line pairs to 25 line pairs per millimeter. Lenses can be designed to have far higher resolution, as evidenced by the lenses used to project mask patterns onto silicon wafers during the manufacture of integrated circuits. Basically, these lenses are diffraction-limited, with focal spots being of order one wavelength in diameter. In the near ultraviolet, this is about 350 nanometers, which corresponds to 2860 pixels per millimeter. One can buy film with such resolution, but consider yourself fortunate if the film speed exceeds ASA 1.00. While photographic lenses are never diffraction limited at max settings, astronomical telescopes are almost often designed to be diffraction-limited, forming perfect airy-disk images of stars. In this, it's the main aperture that's the limit, and on-film resolution is a lesser problem. So, the resolution of a lens is an engineering design goal resulting from contemplation of the target market and use, and is not a property of the universe (except when up against the diffraction limit). And those old, grainless photos from 100 years ago used large plates of very low photographic sensitivity. Joe Gwinn At 9:47 AM +0000 12/23/02, olympus-digest wrote: > >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:30:26 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > >Thanks for the data, it looks much better than I though. Below is what >photodo say, although I'm not totally agree with it. I believe MF and >large format are much better than 35mm but not to the extend of... >what 8x10 equal to 900MP of valuable data. I have never use LF, but it >is hard to imagine. > >http://www.photodo.com/nav/artindex.html > >Check on the "35 mm, medium format, or large format?" > >C.H.Ling > >Walt Wayman wrote: > > > > A look here might prove informative. > > > > http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html > > > > Walt > > > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > > From: "C.H.Ling" > > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:39:04 +0800 > > > > >80-100lpmm! seems that it is better than the center resolution > > >of all lenses from Contax AF 645 MF camera I have seen from pop > > >photo test. > > >The LF lenses must be a magic! If you are talking about aerial > > >resolution, may be, I'm not sure. If on film resolution, I really > > >doubt. Check what photodo said about MF/LF resolution, they are > > >not much better than 35mm. > > > > > >C.H.Ling > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25080 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 16:48:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 16:48:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 08:49:17 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13082 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:49:02 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:51:29 +0800 Message-ID: <3E073DEE.7040504@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:46:38 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: <200212231121.AA256966968@mynra.com> In-Reply-To: <200212231121.AA256966968@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, I caught the "ingrained" joke aftewards.. It's 1am where I am, so the reflexes are a bit slow as is the grammer and spelling.. Also, film vs. digital; I'm reading on my gun forums about yet another 9mm vs. .45 or 1911's vs. Glocks.. This just seems like the same discussion as well. Apples and Oranges.. Albert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25441 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:00:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:00:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:00:46 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13106 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:00:32 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.41]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021223165617.PJQE1439.out001.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:56:17 -0600 Message-ID: <000f01c2aaa4$384cf040$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212231107.AA336592928@mynra.com> <3E07358C.7020601@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:56:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [141.157.94.41] at Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:56:17 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have no technical data to support the following, however.... My sense is that the digital looks sharper because there is sharpening done on the image in the camera. Close looks at many digital images that were not processed outside of the camera show artificial high contrast at hard boundaries. But when looking for details in the image, they don't seem as striking as these sharpened boundaries. The appearance of the image is eye catching and great for snapshots, but in the end, it's eye candy to make a medium that does not contain all the information look better. Digital looks cleaner without the grain, but again, processing can render broad areas of gently changing hues into bands of rough changing colors. More resolution and less compression make for better renditions and pleasing images. For point and shooters, it probably doesn't matter. They see sharp, contrasty images with vivid, if overdone saturation. I think it's quite subjective. I don't think the digital cameras are marketed to film lovers anyway. They are high tech toys sold to people who want either instant gratification and fast turnaround, or MP bragging rights. They can be serious tools, even at the middle level, but marketing for that interest is left for the high end gear. It all comes down to what an individual demands from the product. Millions of totally crappy portable CD players have been sold. I expect that same trend to repeat in the DC arena. As a group, we are more like audiophiles. We appreciate a level of detail lost on the masses. When we decide to own a DC, we will select a model based on different criteria than the masses. Even different than one another. Well, I don't know if any of this made any sense, but I've got to run off for last minute shopping. 'bout time I started, eh? Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue > Actually walt, no, it has nothing to do with film being ingrained in us. > When you look at the resolution tests in comparison, film is sharper > (good film is sharper). But, what gives the appearance of sharpness in > digital is the lack of grain.. > > Albert. > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25691 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:01:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:01:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:01:55 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13112 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:01:41 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.41]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021223165726.XEWJ4558.pop018.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:57:26 -0600 Message-ID: <001701c2aaa4$616bfa20$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212231121.AA256966968@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:57:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [141.157.94.41] at Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:57:26 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca AAHHHHHH! ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue > I'll go now, since I obviously have too much time on my hands. > Anyway, I need to go set my Santa Claus trap. This year I intend > to finally catch the old bugger. I'm getting really tired of > those reindeer crapping on the roof. > > Walt > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25939 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:02:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:02:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:02:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13116 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:02:33 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:02:09 -0500 Message-Id: <200212231202.AA1945829644@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't have to worry about that one. I've got both a .45 1911 Colt and two -- yes, two -- 9mm Glocks. But we better not go there. And I won't say anything about keeping a Glock in one SUV and a Beretta in the other. We don't want to start a pre-Xmas flame fest. :-) I live in the South, have all my life (so far), and like being at least a part-time redneck. And for those who aren't familiar with some of our unique Southern Christmas traditions, this might prove informative. http://www.toonedin.com/movies/WhiteTrashXmas.html If you don't have a fast connection, it'll take a few minutes, but you may find it worth the wait. Ho, ho, ho! Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Albert Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:46:38 +0800 ---SNIP--- >Also, film vs. digital; I'm reading on my gun forums about yet >another 9mm vs. .45 or 1911's vs. Glocks.. This just seems like >the same discussion as well. Apples and Oranges.. > >Albert. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26187 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:03:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:03:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:03:54 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13120 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:03:41 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:08:31 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:03:17 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:07:08 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 17:08:31.0875 (UTC) FILETIME=[EB985530:01C2AAA5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That I can tolerate... it's the cookie crumbs that Santa leaves all over the place that annoys me.... -----Original Message----- From: Mickey Trageser > I'll go now, since I obviously have too much time on my hands. > Anyway, I need to go set my Santa Claus trap. This year I intend > to finally catch the old bugger. I'm getting really tired of > those reindeer crapping on the roof. > > Walt > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26452 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:05:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:05:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:05:34 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13124 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:05:20 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh62.interisland.net [12.17.134.62]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBNH1bs26485 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:01:37 -0800 Message-ID: <3E074270.4D456778@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:05:52 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Netscape 7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id JAA13124 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Anybody out there using Netscape 7? Anybody doing so managed to get the= ir > > ALT text to show up on mouseover?..... > Ask this question on the Netscape newsgroup. Windows link below. By the way version 7.01 is just released. snews://secnews.netscape.com/netscape.netscape7.windows Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26759 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:11:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:11:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:11:27 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13132 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:11:14 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh62.interisland.net [12.17.134.62]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBNH7Us26847 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:07:31 -0800 Message-ID: <3E0743D2.B8E8927D@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:11:46 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id JAA13132 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > The way to determine which way round a loose polariser should be fitted= is > to use a second circular polariser. ..... > Thanks for the explanation Cy. Unfortunately, 72 pols being as spendy as they are, I only have one. But I'll try your method handholding a 55mm. Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27107 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:20:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:20:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:20:36 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13155 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:20:22 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:22:56 +0800 Message-ID: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:18:01 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only thing I can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or a camera.. I'd love to hear the theories though.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27385 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:24:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:24:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:24:45 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13178 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:24:31 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:29:22 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:23:02 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:28:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 17:29:22.0515 (UTC) FILETIME=[D508DA30:01C2AAA8] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca yes, but are they also SUV pilots?? hate to admit this, but my wife has me looking at SUVs, as her little toy car (Miata) is a little apprehensive to drive in the winter time -----Original Message----- From: Albert [mailto:olympus@achtung.com] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 9:18 AM To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] Guns and Cameras? 1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only thing I can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or a camera.. I'd love to hear the theories though.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27787 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:41:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:41:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:42:12 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13207 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:41:59 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021223174051002000fegoe>; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:40:51 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:38:23 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> Message-Id: <55C403CA-169D-11D7-9014-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I always thought it was because both photographic lenses and gun barrels are phallic symbols and both groups are desperately trying to overcome feelings of sexual inadequacy, but every time I say that someone takes a photo of me being shot at. -Rob On Monday, December 23, 2002, at 09:18 AM, Albert wrote: > 1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also > photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only thing > I can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or a camera.. > > I'd love to hear the theories though.. > > Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28174 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 17:56:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 17:56:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 09:57:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13241 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:56:47 -0800 Received: from [62.64.225.190] (helo=[62.64.225.190]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18QWkT-000EF3-00; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:52:17 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <8d.21925ab2.2b38349f@aol.com> References: <8d.21925ab2.2b38349f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:04:48 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Sharp Portrait lens problems Cc: NSURIT@aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That made me smile Bill, your last sentence :>). Chris At 04:42 -0500 23/12/02, NSURIT@aol.com wrote: > >Well, I like your choice of lenses with the Tamron 90 f2.5, however >I can offer you a little advice it you don't mind taking it from one >of the list members who has seen a few more New Years parties than >you. For about 400f the cost of your lens, you go out and get >yourself a nice Zeiss Softar 1 or 2 which will soften things up a >bit and the girl friends may like the results better. A piece of >pantyhose stretched over the front of your lens will produce a >similar result, as long as, it is a piece of their panty hose. Have >known a few who would stretch the panty hose over the lens and then >use a cigarette to burn a hole in the middle so just the outside was >in soft focus. An alternative to this method would just be to wait. >With time their complexions will clear up, your eyes will start to >fail and if they have been with that long, they will love the >results just because you still want to take pictures of them after >all these years. Bill Ba! rber -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28619 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 18:23:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:23:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 10:23:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13269 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:23:46 -0800 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:23:22 -0500 Message-Id: <200212231323.AA2004615300@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Speaking only for myself, I figured out a long time ago that a big part of the attraction for me was the love of gadgets, of well-made stuff. Although I grew up with guns, was taught to shoot at age five by my grandfather and was, so to speak, to the manner born, I think I would have found them anyway, just as I did cameras and other wonderful things later on. For me, it=92s not just guns and cameras, but there=92s also the love of tools, sports cars, stereo gear, and old clocks and watches. I can=92t explain it. I=92ve always been an =93eyes and legs=94 man with the ladies. I can=92t explain that either; it=92s just what gets my attention, just like the Olys and Glocks and Z-cars and Snap-Ons and Vandersteens and Seth Thomases and Hamiltons and... Call it a sickness, if you choose, but I don=92t have any interest in being cured, thank you. I just need a lot more money. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Albert Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:18:01 +0800 >1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also >photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only >thing I can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun >or a camera.. > >I'd love to hear the theories though.. > >Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28892 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 18:25:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:25:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 10:25:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mail05.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail05.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.21]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA13273 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:25:24 -0800 Received: (qmail 61347 messnum 267489 invoked from network[159.134.66.31/p66-31.as1.ddk.dundalk.eircom.net]); 23 Dec 2002 18:24:42 -0000 Received: from p66-31.as1.ddk.dundalk.eircom.net (HELO eircom.net) (159.134.66.31) by mail05.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 61347) with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:24:42 -0000 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:25:03 +0000 Subject: [OM] WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: Tom Murphy To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <003801c2aa2d$63b5e330$0200a8c0@ctx> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, I was taking some photos of my daughters Christmas concert and when I got home I discovered that I had lost the calculator panel from my T32 flash. Is there anyone who has a spare calculator panel for sale? Thanks in anticipation, Tom Murphy, Ireland. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29147 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 18:26:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:26:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 10:27:23 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13277 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:27:10 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18QXID-0002An-00 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:27:09 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:26:20 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <3E073DEE.7040504@achtung.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Try the Glock in 40 S$W loaded with Glazer Blues. Any hit in the chest area will most likely be a kill. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Albert Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 9:47 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Actually, I caught the "ingrained" joke aftewards.. It's 1am where I am, so the reflexes are a bit slow as is the grammer and spelling.. Also, film vs. digital; I'm reading on my gun forums about yet another 9mm vs. .45 or 1911's vs. Glocks.. This just seems like the same discussion as well. Apples and Oranges.. Albert. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29568 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 18:50:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:50:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 10:50:42 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13295 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:50:28 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with ESMTP id <20021223184919051006i46ue>; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:49:20 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:49:15 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (in the movies) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As for the debate on when the motion picture industry will go digital, a relevant one-page article appeared on page 95 of the 21 December 2002 issue of The Economist: "Face value -- A movie-making Luddite". Basically, Steven Spielberg (director of ET, Jaws, Saving Private Ryan, etc) says that digital is not "just aroud the corner", while George Lucas (Star Wars, etc) argues the contrary. The economic case is that while in the long run, digital will save money, the changeover will take more money than is available right now. An added point is that digital is far too easy to pirate, compared to film. There is far more in the article than my short summary above. Anyway, one can conclude that if two big-name directors are debating the issue, the issue is far from settled. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29856 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 18:56:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:56:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 10:57:00 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13299 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:56:46 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:59:38 +0800 Message-ID: <3E075BE1.1040108@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:54:25 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? References: <200212231323.AA2004615300@mynra.com> In-Reply-To: <200212231323.AA2004615300@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You know what disgusts me Walt? I WANT a pair of Vandersteens.. (Speakers made by former engineers turned truck driver turned speaker designer has GOT to be good right??) The fact that I know what Vandersteens are, makes me poor.... I don't remember how, (it's too long ago) but when I was making my camera choices, the OM system got me excited.. It was old, and not a wonderbrick, but it had an attractiveness, probably because I read the philosophy if the design of the camera, and agreed with it. Maybe I just want to own the finer things in life.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30117 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 18:58:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 18:58:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 10:59:18 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13306 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:59:03 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 04:03:27 +0800 Message-ID: <3E075CC6.2080309@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:58:14 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I own a Steyr M40 in a .40S&W, not a Glock, but thanks for the load recommendation ;-) BTW, gun and "weapons" photography is a pretty big part of most of my friend's photos... http://www.olegvolk.net/ <-- a good friend, great photographer, currently is a photography teacher in the greater Nashville area. I love his portrait work; and he has taught me quite a bit as far as how to shoot (both a gun and a camera). Albert James N. McBride wrote: >Try the Glock in 40 S$W loaded with Glazer Blues. Any hit in the chest area >will most likely be a kill. /jim > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30487 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 19:13:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 19:13:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 11:14:10 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13337 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:13:55 -0800 Received: from M2W026.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.26]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:13:32 -0500 Message-ID: <114780-2200212123191332827@M2W026.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:13:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 19:13:32.0829 (UTC) FILETIME=[628314D0:01C2AAB7] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Soap box out=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2ERead only if you don't mind an opinion=2E=2E= =2E=2E=2E=2E Too many people worry about resolving power, contrast lines per mm, Modular-Transfer-Function graphs, grain size, SQF evaluations, RF vs=2E SL= R, Leica vs=2E Zeiss, Zuiko vs=2E Nikkor, 4x5 vs 35mm, 6x6 vs=2E 35mm=2E blah= , blah, blah=2E=2E Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, or capturing the "decisive moment"=2E Look at most of the pictures that g= o onto the internet or through one-hour labs and you'll see a lot of crap that was taken by GREAT equipment=2E=20 If more people took more time to actually think about the image made by th= e equipment that they have, and live with it's limitations or advantages, they'd produce much better photos=2E I'm constantly surprised at the numb= er of people who actually worry about these impersonal measurements as a way to disguise their lack of time to concentrate on the photos=2E=2E=2E=2E(Me= included at times)=2E=2E=2E=2EPerhaps they really don't want to make better picture= s? I belong to a group of photographers that meet every month to comment and discuss each others' work=2E About 8-12 people bring 4-6 prints for the group (which usually numbers 25-40) to critique and comment on=2E There i= s very little discussion of equipment or lens or format=2E It's all about t= he photos and VERY refreshing=2E Sometimes I long to discuss the gear, but there are many other forums for that=2E The sad thing is that I've been going for 18 months, and I've never taken the time to bring prints, becaus= e I'm "too busy"=2E=2E=2E=2EGo figure! 4x5 vs 35mm: If anyone wants to print a 30x40 or other similarly large photo, you really have to move up to MF or 4x5 to get really good quality=2E= =20 And BTW, it's very easy to see the differences on-print between 4x5 and 35mm at/above 11x14=2E The differences are more subtle between 4x5/MF or MF/35mm=2E Much there depends on the technique=2E But remember, 990f 3= 5mm photos are taken hand-held, and 990f 4x5 photos are taken on a rock-soli= d tripod=2E Right there, the LF has the edge=2E If you want to show off a= n image taken by 35mm, it's best done < 16x20, IMO=2E =20 =2E=2E=2E=2E=2EPush soap box back under desk=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Albert olympus@achtung=2Ecom Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:53:14 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue I have to say, that what I can see under a microscope on fuji velvia, is=20= amazing=2E=2E I was able to read a car license plate from a picture, and=20= the license plate must have been no bigger then a dot=2E So as far a=20 resolution, I'm not sure I buy into it=2E BUT, I have to admit, what makes the digital images look so good, is=20 lack of grain=2E But the resolving power is not there=2E=2E=2Eyet=2E=2E Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30770 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 19:15:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 19:15:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 11:16:15 2002 -0800 Received: from relay3.softcomca.com (relay3.softcomca.com [168.144.1.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13341 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:16:01 -0800 Received: from M2W095.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.95]) by relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:15:40 -0500 Message-ID: <281450-2200212123191539757@M2W095.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 198.245.191.72 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:15:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 19:15:40.0033 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE54DF10:01C2AAB7] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Do you use the T-32 with a TTL-OTF camera that controls the flash? If so,= you really don't need the panel=2E All it does is set the camera to full manual by pushing the switch all the way to the left=2E (=2E=2E=2E=2Emy m= emory is right, yes=2E=2E=2E=2E=2Eleft=2E=2E=2Eor right=2E=2E=2E=2Eright?) It's too close to Christmas to think=2E=2E=2E=2E Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Tom Murphy murphytj@eircom=2Enet Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:25:03 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash Hi all, I was taking some photos of my daughters Christmas concert and when I=20 got home I discovered that I had lost the calculator panel from my T32=20 flash=2E Is there anyone who has a spare calculator panel for sale? Thanks in anticipation, Tom Murphy, Ireland=2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31372 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 20:00:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 20:00:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 12:00:42 2002 -0800 Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13388 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:00:28 -0800 Received: from mike ([67.114.19.90]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with SMTP id <0H7L003KI8QKLY@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:56:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:59:33 -0800 From: Mike Veglia Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: <01a101c2aabd$d024aac0$1f00a8c0@mike> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/22/2002 Stephen Scharf writes: << The guys I have been shooting with routinely make 30" X 40" prints from a Canon D30 using proprietary interpolation software at Pictopia in Emerville, CA. >> That would Pictopia's own interpolation software they use on their digital printing machines wouldn't it? On the topic of interpolation, I have always heard it best to leave the "upsampling" to the lab for this very reason--they have proprietary software from the manufacturers of the printing equipment that is optimal for that printer. I believe Pictopia uses Lightjet, do they not? I have not yet tried them, but am told they are a very good lab. Mike Veglia Motor Sport Visions Photography http://www.motorsportvisions.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32223 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 20:22:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 20:22:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 12:22:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13454 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:22:30 -0800 From: bsandyman@att.net Received: from mtiwebc08 ([204.127.135.29]) by mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021223202122.FLPW9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc08>; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:21:22 +0000 Received: from [199.181.237.2] by mtiwebc08; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:21:22 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:21:22 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 25 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: YnNhbmR5bWFuQGF0dC5uZXQ= Message-Id: <20021223202122.FLPW9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc08> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think the reason most people do not discuss these other problems while talking about Digital Vs. Film is that they are not issues peculiar to the way the different technologies work Bad lighting will give you a bad pic regardless of your medium. I can see making a case for camera shake, because digital doesn't have film transport, but this only applies to motorized film rigs. So, while what you say is true, it doesn't get to the heart of the discussion. What are the diffences between film and digital, where is the line, how far can you push what, and so on... P.s. There is a forest, right behind this tree, I know it! ;-) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:13:32 -0500 From: "om@skipwilliams.com" Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Soap box out=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2ERead only if you don't mind an opinion=2E=2E= =2E=2E=2E=2E Too many people worry about resolving power, contrast lines per mm, Modular-Transfer-Function graphs, grain size, SQF evaluations, RF vs=2E SL= R, Snip.... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 332 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:13:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:13:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:13:51 2002 -0800 Received: from tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13490 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:13:36 -0800 Received: from modem-17.iodine.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.44.17] helo=pbncomputer) by tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18QZtC-00072C-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:13:32 +0000 Message-ID: <005c01c2aac9$51b41520$112c883e@pbncomputer> From: "Roger Wesson" To: References: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:21:39 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Don't know what proportion of your gun/camera-toting friends are American, but might I hazard a guess that it's of the order of 100%? Guns and cameras are very much not linked here in the UK! Apologies to gun evangelists, but I definitely prefer living in a country where very few people own guns, and the police still quaintly carry truncheons instead of pistols. I love photography but I've got no desire to handle lethal weapons. Roger ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert" To: "Olympus List" Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 5:18 PM Subject: [OM] Guns and Cameras? > 1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also > photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only thing I > can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or a camera.. > > I'd love to hear the theories though.. > > Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 642 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:16:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:16:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:16:57 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13499 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:16:43 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:16:20 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:15:14 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:20:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 21:16:20.0343 (UTC) FILETIME=[89E48070:01C2AAC8] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't own or carry any firearms, but firmly believe our society was a much more civilized, congenial one back in the days when virtually everyone had a six-shooter on their hip. For some reason it's a little more difficult to be discourteous to someone when you know they're packing heat...... -----Original Message----- From: Roger Wesson Don't know what proportion of your gun/camera-toting friends are American, but might I hazard a guess that it's of the order of 100%? Guns and cameras are very much not linked here in the UK! Apologies to gun evangelists, but I definitely prefer living in a country where very few people own guns, and the police still quaintly carry truncheons instead of pistols. I love photography but I've got no desire to handle lethal weapons. Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 975 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:25:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:25:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:25:57 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13512 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:25:43 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh76.interisland.net [12.17.134.76]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBNLLTs07526 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:21:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3E077F56.601F1B5C@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:25:42 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA13512 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Simple minds seek simple solutions..... > Exactly. Thanks(?) Walt. I tried your method today since there is enough light to actually have some reflections. However this cheapo piece 'o crap plastic retaining ring isn't holding the glass very securely and I'm afraid the lens will come loose again next time it gets bumped. mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1290 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:35:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:35:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:36:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.cs.auc.dk (root@mailhost.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13540 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:35:54 -0800 Received: from armada (voop@pico.cs.auc.dk [130.225.194.80]) by mailhost.cs.auc.dk (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBNLSKjh016503 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:28:21 +0100 (MET) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:28:18 +0100 From: Thomas Heide Clausen To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: No more guns, please....Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Message-Id: <20021223222818.292c2c3c.T.Clausen@computer.org> In-Reply-To: <005c01c2aac9$51b41520$112c883e@pbncomputer> References: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> <005c01c2aac9$51b41520$112c883e@pbncomputer> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA13540 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Guys, Could we please leave the "gun-chatter" off the list? We know, from experience, that this is a touchy subject where many feel strongly towards one side or the other. We also know, again from experience, that too much gun-chatter tend to drive people off the list. We do not want that to happen... Thanks, guys. --thomas On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:21:39 -0000 "Roger Wesson" wrote: > Don't know what proportion of your gun/camera-toting friends are > American, but might I hazard a guess that it's of the order of > 100%? Guns and cameras are very much not linked here in the UK!=20 > Apologies to gun evangelists, but I definitely prefer living in a > country where very few people own guns, and the police still > quaintly carry truncheons instead of pistols. I love photography > but I've got no desire to handle lethal weapons. >=20 > Roger >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Albert" > To: "Olympus List" > Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 5:18 PM > Subject: [OM] Guns and Cameras? >=20 >=20 > > 1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also > > photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only > > thing I can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or > > a camera.. > > > > I'd love to hear the theories though.. > > > > Albert >=20 >=20 > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: T.Clausen@computer.org WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1538 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:37:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:37:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:37:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13544 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:37:20 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBNLa5C24768 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:36:05 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [62.64.225.190] (195-74-115-49.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.49]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBNLa1o24717 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:36:02 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <005c01c2aac9$51b41520$112c883e@pbncomputer> References: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> <005c01c2aac9$51b41520$112c883e@pbncomputer> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:36:36 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, I feel safer that way too Roger. I handle a gun because of my profession, but I feel no need to have it to hand in my house. the annual 25 yard range does me fine. Chris At 21:21 +0000 23/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Don't know what proportion of your gun/camera-toting friends are American, >but might I hazard a guess that it's of the order of 100%? Guns and camera= s >are very much not linked here in the UK! Apologies to gun evangelists, but >I definitely prefer living in a country where very few people own guns, and >the police still quaintly carry truncheons instead of pistols. I love >photography but I've got no desire to handle lethal weapons. > >Roger -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1820 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:41:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:41:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:41:44 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13553 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:41:30 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh76.interisland.net [12.17.134.76]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBNLbks08293 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:37:46 -0800 Message-ID: <3E078329.D52089D1@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:42:01 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id NAA13553 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I always thought it was because both photographic lenses and gun > barrels are phallic symbols... > At the risk of being shot, run over and then photographed I'll add to that phallic analogy the front end of a lot of those SUV's and pickups. Check out the Dodge pickup for example. A lot of women I know think that guys who drive a rig like that are trying to make up for inadequacies in other areas. Mike (ducking) -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1836 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:41:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:41:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:41:47 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13556 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:41:32 -0800 Received: from default ([62.7.155.37]) by care4free.net ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:36:57 -0000 Message-ID: <001801c2aacb$99d8cb00$259b073e@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: RE: [OM] (OT) Netscape 7 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:36:39 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Alan Wood wrote: Bummer! This means I've got to go insert a lot of TITLE code into my web pages...! Thanks, Alan. I should really read the specs of this HTML stuff. All the browsers I've used since I started doing this stuff six or seven years ago have treated ALT text by showing it on mouseover. Never bothered to check whether it was supposed to. Thanks also to Mike. Not often I post an OT query, but I knew I'd get some response here that I could understand...! And the code is used with photos taken with my Zuikos. ;-) Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 25-11-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2355 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 21:47:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 21:47:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 13:47:27 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13560 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:47:14 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:46:51 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:45:44 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:50:50 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 21:46:51.0031 (UTC) FILETIME=[CD115270:01C2AACC] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'll buy your analogy if you're saying they're attractive men trying to make up for it by driving BUTT UGLY trucks..... Jim... ducking right behind Mike. -----Original Message----- From: Mike At the risk of being shot, run over and then photographed I'll add to that phallic analogy the front end of a lot of those SUV's and pickups. Check out the Dodge pickup for example. A lot of women I know think that guys who drive a rig like that are trying to make up for inadequacies in other areas. Mike (ducking) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2739 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 22:07:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 22:07:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 14:07:31 2002 -0800 Received: from tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13575 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:07:16 -0800 Received: from modem-17.iodine.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.44.17] helo=pbncomputer) by tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Qaj8-0004qN-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:07:13 +0000 Message-ID: <010001c2aad0$d0c84320$112c883e@pbncomputer> From: "Roger Wesson" To: References: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com><005c01c2aac9$51b41520$112c883e@pbncomputer> <20021223222818.292c2c3c.T.Clausen@computer.org> Subject: Re: No more guns, please....Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:15:21 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry - didn't mean to kick off a gun argument, just wanted to make the point that American photographers are far more likely to also be gun-owners than UK or European photographers, and if lots of American photographers own guns it doesn't imply any connection at all between desire to photograph and desire to shoot. Please take this as an entirely neutral statement intended only to point out an invalid syllogism, and my apologies for wording it a little too provocatively in my previous e-mail. Roger ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Heide Clausen" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 9:28 PM Subject: No more guns, please....Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Guys, Could we please leave the "gun-chatter" off the list? We know, from experience, that this is a touchy subject where many feel strongly towards one side or the other. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2991 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 22:09:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 22:09:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 14:10:19 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13579 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:10:05 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:14:56 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:08:35 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: No more guns, please....Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:13:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 22:14:56.0296 (UTC) FILETIME=[B9905A80:01C2AAD0] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca where's my gun......... -----Original Message----- From: Roger Wesson [mailto:roger@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 2:15 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: No more guns, please....Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Sorry - didn't mean to kick off a gun argument, just wanted to make the point that American photographers are far more likely to also be gun-owners than UK or European photographers, and if lots of American photographers own guns it doesn't imply any connection at all between desire to photograph and desire to shoot. Please take this as an entirely neutral statement intended only to point out an invalid syllogism, and my apologies for wording it a little too provocatively in my previous e-mail. Roger ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Heide Clausen" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 9:28 PM Subject: No more guns, please....Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Guys, Could we please leave the "gun-chatter" off the list? We know, from experience, that this is a touchy subject where many feel strongly towards one side or the other. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3342 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 22:22:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 22:22:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 14:23:12 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13587 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:22:57 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-05.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.5]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBNMGtU05289; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:16:55 +1300 Message-Id: <200212232216.gBNMGtU05289@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: Joe Gwinn , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:22:45 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] Film and lens resolution (was Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LF lenses)) X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, Joe Gwinn wrote > We are somewhat going in circles here. The reason that all photgraphic lenses > seem to have resolution within a factor of two of 50 line pairs per millimeter > (100 pixels per millimeter) is that this is more or less the resolution of film > of reasonable sensitivity (ASA 100 or greater), so the lenses are designed to > that resolution. > > Whatever the size of the film, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5, 8x10, the film resolution is the > same, so all lenses will have more or less the same on-film resolution, with the > more expensive lenses being better, and the less expensive lenses being worse. > The limits, from the websites mentioned below, seem to range from 100 line pairs > to 25 line pairs per millimeter. In my opinion, it's not reasonable to generalise so much. With lenses there are very measurable and significant differences. For film, there are also significant differences between emulsions. Go to http://www.google.com and do a search for " film resolution limits " without the quotes. Near the top of the search you will find a couple of Robert Monaghan's pages. You will need to download the cached versions as the original sites have exceeded their paid-up download limits and have all access denied except for the author. The file names are "lenslpm.html" and "limits.html" They are very instructive as to what film, lenses and systems can deliver. If anyone can't get these files give me a call and I can e-mail copies. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3694 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 22:37:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 22:37:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 14:38:24 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13595 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:38:10 -0800 Received: from 209-122-217-138.s138.tnt1.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.217.138] helo=xps) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18QbC8-0003Ip-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:37:09 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20021223173305.00aa4160@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:33:05 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Dead Pen FT available In-Reply-To: <20021223200021.31423.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have a really dead Pen FT (#351xxx) that I really don't need. The top and bottom plates and back door are in good shape (no brassing) but everything else is a total writeoff. No rewind knob, shutter curtains really messed up, etc. If anyone could use this, pelase contact me off-list with what you think it's worth - which is probably next to nothing. I'd really like to trade it for any dead Zuiko that has three slotted screws on the lens mount (which will allow me to fix up two other old Zuikos). I can send a digital photo upon request. Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3942 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 22:39:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 22:39:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 14:40:13 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13599 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:39:59 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18QbEs-0008Gp-00 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:39:58 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:39:08 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <114780-2200212123191332827@M2W026.mail2web.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well Skip....You were on a soap box but a damn good one. Too many of us are equipment freaks and sometimes forget about what's really important. My favorite photographic subject is wildlife and that is very frustrating because I don't have the time to stay in the field for days at a time to get the perfect (sharp) shot. I have to grab what I can when the opportunity presents itself and, consequently, my images are usually not as sharp as I would like them to be. I can still enjoy them because I remember the moment but the pictures are not marketable nor will they win any contests. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of om@skipwilliams.com Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:14 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Soap box out......Read only if you don't mind an opinion...... Too many people worry about resolving power, contrast lines per mm, Modular-Transfer-Function graphs, grain size, SQF evaluations, RF vs. SLR, Leica vs. Zeiss, Zuiko vs. Nikkor, 4x5 vs 35mm, 6x6 vs. 35mm. blah, blah, blah.. Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, or capturing the "decisive moment". Look at most of the pictures that go onto the internet or through one-hour labs and you'll see a lot of crap that was taken by GREAT equipment. If more people took more time to actually think about the image made by the equipment that they have, and live with it's limitations or advantages, they'd produce much better photos. I'm constantly surprised at the number of people who actually worry about these impersonal measurements as a way to disguise their lack of time to concentrate on the photos....(Me included at times)....Perhaps they really don't want to make better pictures? I belong to a group of photographers that meet every month to comment and discuss each others' work. About 8-12 people bring 4-6 prints for the group (which usually numbers 25-40) to critique and comment on. There is very little discussion of equipment or lens or format. It's all about the photos and VERY refreshing. Sometimes I long to discuss the gear, but there are many other forums for that. The sad thing is that I've been going for 18 months, and I've never taken the time to bring prints, because I'm "too busy"....Go figure! 4x5 vs 35mm: If anyone wants to print a 30x40 or other similarly large photo, you really have to move up to MF or 4x5 to get really good quality. And BTW, it's very easy to see the differences on-print between 4x5 and 35mm at/above 11x14. The differences are more subtle between 4x5/MF or MF/35mm. Much there depends on the technique. But remember, 990f 35mm photos are taken hand-held, and 990f 4x5 photos are taken on a rock-solid tripod. Right there, the LF has the edge. If you want to show off an image taken by 35mm, it's best done < 16x20, IMO. .....Push soap box back under desk........ Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Albert olympus@achtung.com Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:53:14 +0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue I have to say, that what I can see under a microscope on fuji velvia, is amazing.. I was able to read a car license plate from a picture, and the license plate must have been no bigger then a dot. So as far a resolution, I'm not sure I buy into it. BUT, I have to admit, what makes the digital images look so good, is lack of grain. But the resolving power is not there...yet.. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4494 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 23:17:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 23:17:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 15:17:45 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc05.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13648 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:17:31 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18QbpC-0000gq-00 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:17:30 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:16:40 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <3E078329.D52089D1@interisland.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA13648 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Where I live those big rigs are being driven because they are much better= at plowing through the mud and snow than little low-slung cars. The penis-extension theory would, at least, be a secondary effect. That may n= ot be true in the cities where these vehicles are being driven for reasons t= hat probably have little to do with need. Firearms are carried here because t= he nearest law enforcement personnel may be a long ways from where you are. = The only protection I have is that which I can provide all by my little self. The police do detective work after the fact and there is little protectio= n in that. We have had some interesting discussions on this list about pickpockets operating in some parts of the world. It seems to me that the authorities do very little to take the thieves off the streets but perhap= s that is a misconception on my part. Life could be very hazardous for a pickpocket here because, if caught, the police would probably receive his much modified body. We live in very diverse societies and cultures where = the needs are completely different. Projecting our personal values on others seldom works and those debates on this list never solve the issues. It do= es present on opportunity to insult one another. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 2:42 PM To: olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? > I always thought it was because both photographic lenses and gun > barrels are phallic symbols... > At the risk of being shot, run over and then photographed I'll add to that phallic analogy the front end of a lot of those SUV's and pickups. Check out the Dodge pickup for example. A lot of women I know think that guys who drive a rig like that are trying to make up for inadequacies in other areas. Mike (ducking) -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4773 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 23:22:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 23:22:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 15:22:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13652 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:22:44 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax83-b112.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.23.112]) by mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBNNMft13981 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:22:42 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: "The Zuikoholics" Subject: [OM] Santa's Coming! Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:21:15 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca G'day Zuiks, To all the OM'ers out there in this poor battered world may I wish you the compliments of the season and a happy, safe, and healthy New Year. May all your Zuiko glass be crystal clear and fungus free. Happy Christmas from the Wide Brown Land, John. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5131 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 23:37:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 23:37:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 15:38:05 2002 -0800 Received: from relay2.softcomca.com (relay2.softcomca.com [168.144.1.68]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13667 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:37:50 -0800 Received: from M2W062.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.62]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:37:29 -0500 Message-ID: <184670-2200212123233729314@M2W062.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:37:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 23:37:29.0364 (UTC) FILETIME=[41D28D40:01C2AADC] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My rant might not "get to the heart of the discussion", but IMO, it's stil= l valid=2E Rather than arguing whether the Contax Zeiss or Nikon Nikkor opt= ics are the best, now the gearheads are arguing whether 11MgPx is enough=2E O= r whether the latest whizbang digital camera feature produces the best color= , or, or=2E=2E=2E=2E I've seen few web galleries from new digital shooters that I've been impressed with=2E They should take a beginning photo course first and lea= rn HOW=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E Where is the line between film and digital? Blurry, that's where=2E =20 Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: ULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCG Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:21:22 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Res wars continue I think the reason most people do not discuss these other problems while talking about Digital Vs=2E Film is that they are not issues peculiar to the way t= he different technologies work Bad lighting will give you a bad pic regardless of your medium=2E I can see making a case for camera shake, because digital doesn't have fil= m transport, but this only applies to motorized film rigs=2E So, while what you say is true, it doesn't get to the heart of the discussion=2E What are the diffences between film and digital, where is the line, how fa= r can you push what, and so on=2E=2E=2E P=2Es=2E There is a forest, right behind this tree, I know it! ;-) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:13:32 -0500 Wrom: PKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBXFGGMEPYOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLS Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Soap box out=3D2E=3D2E=3D2E=3D2E=3D2E=3D2ERead only if you don't mind an o= pinion=3D2E=3D2E=3D =3D2E=3D2E=3D2E=3D2E Too many people worry about resolving power, contrast lines per mm, Modular-Transfer-Function graphs, grain size, SQF evaluations, RF vs=3D2E = SL=3D R, Snip=2E=2E=2E=2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5447 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 23:46:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 23:46:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 15:46:27 2002 -0800 Received: from relay1.softcomca.com (relay1.softcomca.com [168.144.1.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13679 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:46:12 -0800 Received: from M2W032.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.32]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:45:51 -0500 Message-ID: <293580-2200212123234551354@M2W032.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 68.39.236.157 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "om@skipwilliams.com" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Film and lens resolution (was Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LF lenses)) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:45:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2002 23:45:51.0417 (UTC) FILETIME=[6D11C290:01C2AADD] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The pages are there, but the URL has changed to: http://medfmt=2E8k=2Ecom/mf/lenslpm=2Ehtml http://medfmt=2E8k=2Ecom/mf/limits=2Ehtml Skip Original Message: ----------------- From: Brian Swale bj@caverock=2Enet=2Enz Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:22:45 +1300 To: joegwinn@attbi=2Ecom, olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca Subject: [OM] Film and lens resolution (was Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LF lenses)) Hi folks, Joe Gwinn wrote =20 > We are somewhat going in circles here=2E The reason that all photgraphi= c lenses > seem to have resolution within a factor of two of 50 line pairs per millimeter > (100 pixels per millimeter) is that this is more or less the resolution of film > of reasonable sensitivity (ASA 100 or greater), so the lenses are designed to > that resolution=2E =20 >=20 > Whatever the size of the film, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5, 8x10, the film resolution= is the > same, so all lenses will have more or less the same on-film resolution, with the > more expensive lenses being better, and the less expensive lenses being worse=2E > The limits, from the websites mentioned below, seem to range from 100 line pairs > to 25 line pairs per millimeter=2E In my opinion, it's not reasonable to generalise so much=2E With lenses there are very measurable and significant differences=2E For film, there are also significant differences between emulsions=2E Go t= o=20 http://www=2Egoogle=2Ecom and do a search for " film resolution limits "= without=20 the quotes=2E Near the top of the search you will find a couple of Robert Monaghan's pages=2E You will need to download the cached versions as the original sites have=20= exceeded their paid-up download limits and have all access denied except=20= for the author=2E The file names are "lenslpm=2Ehtml" and "limits=2Ehtml" They are very instructive as to what film, lenses and systems can deliver=2E= If anyone can't get these files give me a call and I can e-mail copies=2E Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko=2Esls=2Ebc=2Eca/swright/olympuslist=2Ehtml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web=2Ecom/ =2E < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5859 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:09:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:09:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:09:34 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13706 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:09:19 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.162] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A6265F100AC; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:11:18 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:07:45 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <200212231323.AA2004615300@mynra.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/23/2002 10:23:22 AM, "Walt Wayman" wrote: > >Speaking only for myself, I figured out a long time ago that a >big part of the attraction for me was the love of gadgets, of >well-made stuff. Although I grew up with guns, was taught to >shoot at age five by my grandfather and was, so to speak, to the >manner born, I think I would have found them anyway, just as I >did cameras and other wonderful things later on. > >For me, it?s not just guns and cameras, but there?s also the love >of tools, sports cars, stereo gear, and old clocks and watches. >I can?t explain it. I?ve always been an ?eyes and legs? man with >the ladies. I can?t explain that either; it?s just what gets my >attention, just like the Olys and Glocks and Z-cars and Snap-Ons >and Vandersteens and Seth Thomases and Hamiltons and... > >Call it a sickness, if you choose, but I don?t have any interest >in being cured, thank you. I just need a lot more money. > >Walt so i'm not the only thing who thinks 15k for a Lange isn't redikkulus ;) welcome to the club! yes, i admit a fascination for well crafted items, be they knives or watches or whatnot; i might not afford them at the moment, but i don't think they are crazy to make 150$ dollar flashlights either ;) /S -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6250 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:21:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:21:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:21:50 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13718 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:21:35 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with ESMTP id <2002122400202205200fgcise>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:20:22 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:20:20 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM]: Dipping our Toe Into Digital, 16MP DC vs film again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. At 8:00 PM +0000 12/23/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:16:54 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM]: Dipping our Toe Into Digital, 16MP DC vs film again > >- ----- Original Message ----- >From: "Joe Gwinn" > > > When comparing various cameras and scanners, we probably should always >ascertain the optical resolution of the green channel alone, and use that as >our comparison. These numbers will be directly comparable to the >resolutions of black&white film and cameras. > > > >Well, thanks for the detailed analysis. I think it is not so proper to count >just the green channel, assume you use the CCD for B/W photo, every pixel >will be used for resolution information. For color it will also be close, >but some details' color could be wrong, making a not so "clean" picture but >the "resolution" should be there. I don't think I explained my point well enough, probably because I tried to use too few words. Here are more better words. In a digital camera with tricolor pixels, the spatial resolution is set by the color with the most pixels, and the other colors do not increase the spatial resolution, only the color resolution. So, to estimate the true spatial resolution of a camera with a RGB ratio of 1:2:1, one uses the green pixels alone. The other two colors, red and blue, will have half the resolution of green. A black&white only digital camera has unfiltered pixels, so all pixels contribute to spatial resolution. A color camera being used to produce black&white pictures cannot have better resolution than the color with the greatest resolution, typically green. Because digital cameras are either 1:1:1 or 1:2:1, green is always a good choice for determining spatial resolution. So, I use the green channel, and also compare it directly with B&W only pictures as well. >It is very difficult to make a "true" resolution assessment here. Just like >the resolution of film camera system, as I mentioned before, a CCD pixel >will contain 256 different levels (assume 8 bits) but the film color >(information) is composed by grain, a few dots may be good enough to compose >a line to represent resolution data but this few dots will not be as >informative as a CCD pixel. This favor to film, in resolution test film will >be the winner. > >Since each CCD pixel is so informative and clean (compared to the dot grain >of film), that is why in many case a 4-6MP DC showing picture quality better >than film. Ok, the details may not be as good as film but overall it look >better. Yes, it will be some time before digital can beat film in resolution. Where digital already exceeds film is reportedly in dynamic range, linearity, and noise, at least in the expensive cameras. Not that 8 bits is enough, though. The top grade scanners use 12 bits or more per color, and the astronomers use 16 bits per color. The linearity is probably why good digital cameras are reported to handle skin, sparkles, eyelights, et al, so well. > > > > Actually, this leads to a good question for CH: Has he or can he measure >the resolution of his scanners? If one can find a suitable resolution chart >and scan it, it ought to be easy. The scanner maker probably also knows, >but may not be willing to publish the modulation transfer function. > > > >I don't have a professional slide for scanner test, but I do have a lens >test slide, below is a crop of Zuiko 50/3.5 at F5.6 shot, exposed with flash >so vibration should be minimized. The size is 5.2mm x 2.1mm, download it in >PhotoShop to check the resolution, to me it looks over 75lp/mm. > >http://www.accura.com.hk/50-02.jpg (200K) I looked at the picture, but I don't know how to interpret it. What is the purpose of a lens test slide? To test slide duplicators? >Below is a message I posted before to compare a simulated 16MP DC and 35mm >film system, enjoy! > >============== >May be we start another interesting topic about how many pixel a DC can be >comparable to a common film we are using. > >I just perform a test with E-10, shooting at 140mm (35mm equ.) and Fuji >Provia F shooting with 35-105 at 70mm. > >E-10 is a 4MP DC. I try to simulate a 16MP DC by setting it to 140mm and >compare it to a shot taking at 70mm. The file is a bit large (around 1.1MB >and 1.7MB each). But it is interesting to have a look. This ought to be reasonably valid, if the optics in the E-10 are about the same quality as the 35-105 lens. >The 70mm shot taking with Zuiko 35-105mm (early version) at 70mm F8, tripod >and shutter speed was 1/250. Scanned at 4000dpi and cropped the center >17.9mmx13.4mm. The scanner is operating at a claimed 4000/25.4= 157.48 pixels per millimeter, so the kept part of the scan will be (17.9)(157.48)=2818.89 by (13.4)(157.48)= 2110.24, call it 2829x2110. >I have made three shoots, two with 35-70/3.6 and one with >35-105, they all have similar resolution but the 35-105 has slightly higher >contrast. > >http://www.accura.com.hk/70mm.jpg > >This is a E-10 shot at 140mm, ISO80, F4.8, 1/640s, sharpness setting: low >(F4 is the best aperture of E10) > >http://www.accura.com.hk/E10-140mm.jpg > >I don't make any comment, download them and check it out yourself by making >side to side comparison, you may need to see the different in 200% view. To my eye, the E-10 shot is nicer-looking, but the scanned film has higher resolution. Sort of as expected. So, there you have it. If you have the energy, could you make test shots like these, only with wider dynamic range, and including some specular highlights? Thanks. The claim is that digital does better than film in such situations. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6500 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:22:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:22:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:22:50 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13724 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:22:36 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.162] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A941D45100E4; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:24:33 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:10:52 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <114780-2200212123191332827@M2W026.mail2web.com> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/23/2002 11:13:32 AM, "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > >Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration >reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, >or capturing the "decisive moment". Look at most of the pictures that go >onto the internet or through one-hour labs and you'll see a lot of crap >that was taken by GREAT equipment. AMEN! It's not the gear, it's how you use it. Sure, good gear helps, but it all boils down to how one uses it. 'nuff said. /S -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6523 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:22:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:22:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:22:53 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13727 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:22:39 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.162] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A9429D5100CA; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:24:34 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:13:25 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <001801c2aacb$99d8cb00$259b073e@default> Message-Id: Subject: Re: RE: tags, was [OM] (OT) Netscape 7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Alan Wood wrote: > >do/did this. It is intended to be displayed when the image is not >displayed, e.g. a text browser, or a normal browser with images turned off. > >TITLE text is supposed to show up on mouseover.> hmm, another item learned from the list. thanks! /S -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6996 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:22:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:22:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:23:15 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13730 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:23:01 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.112.1c52afd2 (4214) for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:21:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <112.1c52afd2.2b390274@aol.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:21:08 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_112.1c52afd2.2b390274_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_112.1c52afd2.2b390274_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/23/2002 11:20:35 AM Central Standard Time, olympus@achtung.com writes: > 1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters Albert, you need some new friends! Sounds like a possible New Years resolution in the making. I do love my cameras and I just wrapped up a deal today on a new SUV to replace the one I've worn out over the past 7 years. Need a new one or fairly new one for the Olympus Texas Tour we are doing in 2004 and will pick it up Thursday or Friday. Don't want to hear anything from you guys about that 400mm f4 Tamron sitting in my gear closet. I'm very secure. I really am. Really! I grew up with guns and hunting and have fond memories of both from spending time with my father and friends in the wilderness doing guy things. Although I still own guns, a year in the Republic of Viet Nam ended my fascination with them as I'm sure it did for others. I am not antigun as I tend to side with those who consider it part of our "birth right," however my understanding of the mechanics of war leaves me with no fascination with its tools. Please use my response to this thread as an opportunity to join me and others around the world, in a manner which honors your beliefs, during this period of celebration as we pray for peace amongst all people, as we celebrate life and as we rejoice in the abundance we all share. Bill Barber --part1_112.1c52afd2.2b390274_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/23/2002 11:20:35 AM Central Standard Time, olympus@achtung.com writes:

1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters


Albert, you need some new friends!  Sounds like a possible New Years resolution in the making.  I do love my cameras and I just wrapped up a deal today on a new SUV to replace the one I've worn out over the past 7 years.  Need a new one or fairly new one for the Olympus Texas Tour we are doing in 2004 and will pick it up Thursday or Friday.  Don't want to hear anything from you guys about that 400mm f4 Tamron sitting in my gear closet. I'm very secure. I really am. Really! 

I grew up with guns and hunting and have fond memories of both from spending time with my father and friends in the wilderness doing guy things.  Although I still own guns, a year in the Republic of Viet Nam ended my fascination with them as I'm sure it did for others.  I am not antigun as I tend to side with those who consider it part of our "birth right," however my understanding of the mechanics of war leaves me with no fascination with its tools.

Please use my response to this thread as an opportunity to join me and others around the world, in a manner which honors your beliefs, during this period of celebration as we pray for peace amongst all people, as we celebrate life and as we rejoice in the abundance we all share.

Bill Barber --part1_112.1c52afd2.2b390274_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7286 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:28:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:28:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:29:02 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13734 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:28:47 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83FA5B298 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:28:12 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] (OT) Netscape 7 In-Reply-To: Message from "Donald MacDonald" of "Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:30:25 -0000." <000b01c2a948$f50b67a0$f02a78d5@default> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:28:12 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021224002812.B83FA5B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <000b01c2a948$f50b67a0$f02a78d5@default>, "Donald MacDonald" writes: >Anybody out there using Netscape 7? Anybody doing so managed to get their >ALT text to show up on mouseover? Works with all my other versions, and with >all versions of IE, but I have been all through my options everywhere and >still can't get the blasted things to work. Hmmm, that'd be because ALT isn't meant for onMouseOver actions. :-) Alt is for those of us that still use text-only web browsers, to provide an alternative to what the image represents. :-) It's good to see Mozilla group is adhering to standards again. Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7587 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:35:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:35:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:35:31 2002 -0800 Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13742 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:35:16 -0800 Received: from user-2ivfnhe.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.222.46]) by barry.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18Qd1w-0000Me-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:34:45 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: scharfsj@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021223200021.31423.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021223200021.31423.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:35:02 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Scharf Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3778 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:59:33 -0800 >From: Mike Veglia >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital > >In a message dated 12/22/2002 Stephen Scharf writes: > ><< The guys I have been shooting with routinely make 30" X 40" prints from a >Canon D30 using proprietary interpolation software at Pictopia in Emerville, >CA. >> > >That would Pictopia's own interpolation software they use on their digital >printing machines wouldn't it? On the topic of interpolation, I have always >heard it best to leave the "upsampling" to the lab for this very >reason--they have proprietary software from the manufacturers of the >printing equipment that is optimal for that printer. I believe Pictopia uses >Lightjet, do they not? > >I have not yet tried them, but am told they are a very good lab. Mike, you're exactly right. They use their own propeitary interpolation software for enlargments; and yes, I think it is best to leave upsampling to these guys. I am pretty sure they do their printing on a LightJet. I am going to have them do a big print for me from the D60, just to see what it is capable of. Mike Doran thinks very highly of them. I think you could have made a that print from your E10 larger than 11X14 quite easily. You should see the large print I've seen from Reed's in Walnut Creek that was from an E10. The resolution and sharpness were just incredible. Looking forward to seeing you in about a month! Merry Christmas! -Stephen. -- 2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7898 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:44:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:44:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:45:05 2002 -0800 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA13754 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:44:51 -0800 Received: (qmail 2440 invoked by uid 417); 24 Dec 2002 00:44:45 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:44:45 -0000 Received: from enterprise.SoftHome.net ([204.39.225.116]) (AUTH: LOGIN csdunek@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:44:44 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021223124102.00a20b70@pop.softhome.net> X-Sender: csdunek@pop.softhome.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:42:35 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Charles Sdunek Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? In-Reply-To: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My theory is that gun shooters are just well rounded wonderful people. Well rounded wonderful people are also photographers. The top percentage of wonderful shooters/photographers use Olympus cameras. Charles At 12:18 PM 12/23/02, you wrote: >1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also >photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only thing I >can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or a camera.. > >I'd love to hear the theories though.. > >Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8208 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 00:54:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 00:54:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 16:54:32 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13759 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:54:18 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <2002122400530905300k5q7ge>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:53:09 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:53:06 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. At 8:00 PM +0000 12/23/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:26:59 +0000 (GMT) >From: julian_davies@btinternet.com >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > >Mo(o)re comments interspersed below > > > from: Joe Gwinn > > date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 23:53:04 > > to: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > > > Comments interspersed below. > > This is exactly backwards. The more capital intensive the industry, the *slower* to switch to a new method: they have to wait until the old equipment has paid for itself and worn out before they can afford to go out and buy new stuff. The classical exception has been where the new technology was literally ten times better than what it replaced, such that the new stuff could be purchased for a few years of the maintenance budget of the old. It is *very* rare that a new technology is this much better, and digital photography does not qualify. > >One of the largest post - production costs in movies is printing and transporting the many prints required. This currently limits the number produced and leads to the first - run, second - run etc. and country - by country release. The state of prints received in a second - tier country is on average diabolical, and is a limitation to income. Theatres will invest in digital technology if they can recover the costs through increased revenue because of a step - change in the distribution system, and a reduction in cost of transportation. The quality of the projected image is very, very secondary, provided it is clean. I guess you are saying that in second-tier markets the film prints are so awful that even bad digital would be an improvement. Living in major US cities, I haven't experienced bad prints very often. The one time it did happen, the entire theater full of people demaneded their money back, and got it. > > Lenses will be no cheaper, because optics is a very mature industry, and the mechanics to hold and move the elements is already pretty well optimised. Computer design of lenses does speed the design process, but has no effect on the labor to actually make the lenses. Current digital cameras get away with low-grade and thus cheap lenses, but as the CCD reaches 35mm camera resolution and coverage, the lenses will need to improve to match. > >I think lens technology is going into a new phase of development, now that the computer power exists to design such things as the diffractor lens that C*N*N now have. This will not generate savings in the Moore's law league, however. Diffraction lenses have their problems. For one, they are very wavelength-dependent, a property that is sometimes used to counteract the wavelength dependence of the refractive index of the lens. For another, they are temperature-dependent. For a third, they suffer from low transmittance for white light. I would guess that the diffraction lens is used only in the lightmeter path. Anyway, diffraction lenses are not cheap to make, if accuracy and temperature independence are needed. In cheap systems, they can be pressed out of plastic, just like CD-ROMs. In expensive systems they are made by careful etching of glass to controlled depths (phase-only lens). In intermediat cost lenses, they leave resist layers of varying thickness on the glass; the resist is the phase element. A more likely development would be a cheap way to mass-produce glass aspheric lenses with precise surfaces. This would significantly reduce the number of lens elements needed to make a lens of a given performance. A lot of people have tried over the years, but nobody has succeeded yet. The parallel situation is consumer astronomical telescopes, where the Schmidt Cassegranian system is more or less standard. The key development, upon which Celestron was founded, was a cheap way to make to Schmidt corrector plate, which has a cubic curve. If one can make the corrector plate, the main mirror can be spherical (easy to make) not parabolic (takes much hand fiddling, so expensive), and one gets a very wide angle of fully-corrected view. If you can make that damn corrector plate. Anyway, the trick was that if one put a sheet of flat parallel glass in a fixture and stressed the glass sheet so it bent just so, and then ground one face flat (easily done), when the stress was released, the plate would spring back into the correct shape, flat on one face, cubic on the other. The cubic face is the one that had been ground flat while the sheet was under stress. The entire consumer Schmidt Cassegranian telescope industry is based on this trick. Unfortunately, it's hard to bend a thick lens enough for this trick to work. > > Camera body cases and their finger-operated controls won't be cheaper, because they need to be dust-tight enough and robust enough to live in the real world, and the size and dexterity of the human hand is not changing. Viewfinder optics will also remain about the same, as the human eye isn't getting any better. In fact, it declines with age. > >Actually, it has been noted that people of the younger generation in the UK are developing increased dexterity of thumb, due to all the text - messaging they do on their phones. So, they will soon be all thumbs? > > Compared to Moore's Law, mechanics and optics do not improve at all. These are very mature technologies. A skilled 16th century instrument maker could duplicate a Leica III (except the lightmeter) albeit at great expense, as it would all be done by hand, right down to the making of various optical glasses from sand. > >He may have a problem getting the glass good enough, and tools which are hard enough to operate at the reduced scale would be a problem also, but the skills are broadly similar. The trick is to melt the glass ingredients in a platinium crucible, heated by gas. Solid fuels are too dirty. One can use producer gas generated from coal. How to do all this would have to be in the instructions. Don't underestimate what a skilled metalworker can do with a jewler's saw and files, some drills, a clockmakers' lathe, and the like. They made the most amazing clockwork in the 17th century, all by hand, of brass and steel. (Aluminium was unknown then.) The naval chronometer was developed back then, as were very many clocks and watches. A Leica III would be easier, as far less precision is needed than for a chronometer, and the parts are larger than for a watch. >I also expect to use my OM system for a very, very long time. The parts I expect to fail are all "new technology", so I may be down to the OM1 by the time film ceases to become GENERALLY available, and that will probably see me out using film from the minority supliers. Ditto. Not that I won't someday also get a digital camera. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8840 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 01:53:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 01:53:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 17:54:08 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA13785 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:53:54 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.133] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AEA8ABD900C0; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:55:52 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:52:13 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021223124102.00a20b70@pop.softhome.net> Message-Id: <86BXSTPE1UNIHD83YWUC942EDEBTN.3e07bdcd@desktop> Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/23/2002 9:42:35 AM, Charles Sdunek wrote: > >My theory is that gun shooters are just well rounded wonderful >people. Well rounded wonderful people are also photographers. The top >percentage of wonderful shooters/photographers use Olympus cameras. > >Charles which begs the question, what do the top GUN shooters use? (grins, ducks, & runs for cover) /S "humour me i'm being funny again" -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9364 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 02:34:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 02:34:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 18:34:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA13814 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:34:40 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-30.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040696853!406 Received: (qmail 24247 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 02:27:34 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-30.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 02:27:34 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBO25ju11804 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:05:56 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07C75E.3EBBECF7@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:33:02 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM]: Dipping our Toe Into Digital, 16MP DC vs film again References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Joe Gwinn wrote: > > > A color camera being used to produce black&white pictures cannot have better resolution than the color with the greatest resolution, typically green. > > Because digital cameras are either 1:1:1 or 1:2:1, green is always a good choice for determining spatial resolution. So, I use the green channel, and also compare it directly with B&W only pictures as well. > Yes, I know about the 1:2:1 color filter distribution, but the resolution seem not much affected by this, I suspected it will only affect the color accuracy (wrong interpretation of color on fine details) but every pixel will contribute to the scene details. > Yes, it will be some time before digital can beat film in resolution. Where digital already exceeds film is reportedly in dynamic range, linearity, and noise, at least in the expensive cameras. Not that 8 bits is enough, though. The top grade scanners use 12 bits or more per color, and the astronomers use 16 bits per color. > Ok, I know it is not 8 bit but just an example, my E-10 is 10 bit and my first Nikon LS-10 in 93 is 8 bit, second Nikon LS2000 in 98 is 12 bit and now the LS4000 is 14 bit... > The linearity is probably why good digital cameras are reported to handle skin, sparkles, eyelights, et al, so well. > That is the point and I heard long ago in DC news group that some professional photography (at least they said they live on this) think their "new" Nikon 990 is better than their Hass for studio portrait on output quality. > > > >http://www.accura.com.hk/50-02.jpg (200K) > > I looked at the picture, but I don't know how to interpret it. What is the purpose of a lens test slide? To test slide duplicators? > The test was performed in around 1990 to test the performance of my Zuikos, all shots were taken at around 1:50 or something similar. To interpret it is easy, you should download it in photo editing software, there should be dimension information on your software. Check which point you think you can still identify the lines. I would say at least the "200" position. Measure the width of this group of lines, there is total 15lp and at the point "200" the width is 0.2mm, so 5*15=75lp/mm. > > To my eye, the E-10 shot is nicer-looking, but the scanned film has higher resolution. Sort of as expected. So, there you have it. > You really see the scanned film has higher resolution? Yes, it may look to have more details but to me they are just film grain :-) > If you have the energy, could you make test shots like these, only with wider dynamic range, and including some specular highlights? Thanks. The claim is that digital does better than film in such situations. Ok, I will try it out later but to my experience the E-10 has very good shadow details (although a bit noise), but for very bright spots most DC are much poorer than film, it blow out and enlarged the spots. C.H.Ling > > Joe Gwinn > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9774 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 02:52:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 02:52:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 18:52:30 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA13827 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 18:52:16 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040697918!455 Received: (qmail 18578 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 02:45:19 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-32.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 02:45:19 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBO2NXu12275 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:23:33 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07CB89.5AAAD59F@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:50:49 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: <20021223202122.FLPW9286.mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net@mtiwebc08> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, you are right, when the topic is digital vs film we should stick on it, otherwise it will be the war of the DC on your hand is better than the Zuikos on my hand, your Zuiko's pictures is better than my Zuikos pictures... etc. The combinations are too complicated to discuss here :-) C.H.Ling bsandyman@att.net wrote: > > I think the reason most people do not discuss these other problems while talking > about Digital Vs. Film is that they are not issues peculiar to the way the > different technologies work > > Bad lighting will give you a bad pic regardless of your medium. > > I can see making a case for camera shake, because digital doesn't have film > transport, but this only applies to motorized film rigs. > > So, while what you say is true, it doesn't get to the heart of the discussion. > What are the diffences between film and digital, where is the line, how far can > you push what, and so on... > > P.s. There is a forest, right behind this tree, I know it! ;-) > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10090 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 03:02:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 03:02:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 19:02:31 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA13841 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:02:16 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-28.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040698671!305 Received: (qmail 27148 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 02:57:52 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-28.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 02:57:52 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBO2XYu12508 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:33:34 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07CDE2.8E7B4684@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:00:50 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: <01a101c2aabd$d024aac0$1f00a8c0@mike> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mike, you are right, no matter what machine (if they are professional enough) you should leave the interpolation job to it. The professional RIP software is better than most consumer one. I can output 1600x1200 file to slide and project to 60" screen with great result on my film printer. C.H.Ling Mike Veglia wrote: > > In a message dated 12/22/2002 Stephen Scharf writes: > > << The guys I have been shooting with routinely make 30" X 40" prints from a > Canon D30 using proprietary interpolation software at Pictopia in Emerville, > CA. >> > > That would Pictopia's own interpolation software they use on their digital > printing machines wouldn't it? On the topic of interpolation, I have always > heard it best to leave the "upsampling" to the lab for this very > reason--they have proprietary software from the manufacturers of the > printing equipment that is optimal for that printer. I believe Pictopia uses > Lightjet, do they not? > > I have not yet tried them, but am told they are a very good lab. ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10938 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 03:23:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 03:23:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 19:23:53 2002 -0800 Received: from protactinium.btinternet.com (protactinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13901 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:23:38 -0800 Received: from host213-122-38-77.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.38.77] helo=carroljulian) by protactinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18QfcN-0006vO-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:20:32 +0000 Message-ID: <000a01c2aafb$5952b160$4d267ad5@carroljulian> From: "Julian Davies" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:19:06 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed among snips below > I guess you are saying that in second-tier markets the film prints are so awful that even bad digital would be an improvement. Living in major US cities, I haven't experienced bad prints very often. The one time it did happen, the entire theater full of people demaneded their money back, and got it. > Good to know! UK consumers are hardened to spotty prints, it seems. We get them when they've been round the U.S. a few times. It may be better now - it was so bad that I gave up going to the cinema regularly about ten years ago. Another factor in the non - U.S. market is the eventual multiple inventory of subtitled and dubbed. Digital distribution would eliminate this if it incorporated DVD - like options. I realise that there are many factors leading to delay in the introduction of this, but it seems that quality is no longer one of them, so I guess the industry in general thinks the threshold has been reached. Hopefully the dissenters are sufficiently powerful to force a holding out for a system which is beyond quality expectations rather than just up to them, or we'll end up with another CD like debate. > Diffraction lenses have their problems. For one, they are very wavelength-dependent, a property that is sometimes used to counteract the wavelength dependence of the refractive index of the lens. For another, they are temperature-dependent. For a third, they suffer from low transmittance for white light. I would guess that the diffraction lens is used only in the lightmeter path. > > Anyway, diffraction lenses are not cheap to make, if accuracy and temperature independence are needed. In cheap systems, they can be pressed out of plastic, just like CD-ROMs. In expensive systems they are made by careful etching of glass to controlled depths (phase-only lens). In intermediat cost lenses, they leave resist layers of varying thickness on the glass; the resist is the phase element. > > A more likely development would be a cheap way to mass-produce glass aspheric lenses with precise surfaces. This would significantly reduce the number of lens elements needed to make a lens of a given performance. A lot of people have tried over the years, but nobody has succeeded yet. > I was thinking of the new(ish) C*N*N where they have used two diffraction elements in a group to colour correct a *VERY* telephoto lens. The high cost of the diffraction group (moulded if memory serves) is partially (for now) offset by removing several groups of colour correcting glass. I don't know the economics in detail, and C are touting the size benefits and charging a premium at present, but taking lens elements out is a major benefit both from prime cost and construction / set up. I must admit to not having seen the lens in question, much less tried it, so I can't comment on how successful the design is. You're probably right to say that economical aspheric elements present a shorter path to cost reduction, however. The benefits are just waiting for a genius production engineer. > > > Compared to Moore's Law, mechanics and optics do not improve at all. These are very mature technologies. A skilled 16th century instrument maker could duplicate a Leica III (except the lightmeter) albeit at great expense, as it would all be done by hand, right down to the making of various optical glasses from sand. > > > >He may have a problem getting the glass good enough, and tools which are hard enough to operate at the reduced scale would be a problem also, but the skills are broadly similar. > > The trick is to melt the glass ingredients in a platinium crucible, heated by gas. Solid fuels are too dirty. One can use producer gas generated from coal. How to do all this would have to be in the instructions. > > Don't underestimate what a skilled metalworker can do with a jewler's saw and files, some drills, a clockmakers' lathe, and the like. They made the most amazing clockwork in the 17th century, all by hand, of brass and steel. (Aluminium was unknown then.) The naval chronometer was developed back then, as were very many clocks and watches. A Leica III would be easier, as far less precision is needed than for a chronometer, and the parts are larger than for a watch. > For the glass I was thinking of bubble removal as an issue. I've never made glass, so I don't know how difficult this is, but Hoya make a big deal of it in some of their literature. With respect to the craftsmen, absolutely agree. The problem I was thinking of was if they were using period tools also, were hardening techniques well enough advanced to produce viable needle files for steel parts? The loads in the shutter mechanism are quite unlike anything in clocks, so I imgine there is a fair amount of hardened steel to be accurately shaped. That aside, these guys would definitely be up to the job. Give them modern tools and they'd walk it. Julian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11214 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 03:29:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 03:29:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 19:30:12 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13905 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:29:57 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <2002122403284905300k63m9e>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:28:50 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:28:47 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 8:00 PM +0000 12/23/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:24:25 -0000 >From: "Jon Mitchell" >Subject: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > >At 9:47 AM +0000 12/23/02, olympus-digest wrote: >>Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 22:07:09 -0600 >>From: "Dean C. Hansen" >>Subject: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > > >Sorry, Joe, but my 30-year-old Super 8 technology blow this guy's spankin' >new video away. The edges of the clouds in the sky in his video were >jagged, and the colors of the pasque flowers were barely recognizable. His >presentation, technically, wasn't even in the same league with the Super 8. >With Kodachrome, blues are blue, reds are red (and don't bleed), and greens >are green. ><\snip> > >Dean, > >At the risk of starting a big US / UK debate here (we don't need any more >flame wars here !) I have one word for you - "NTSC" !!! I know there are >pro's and con's of both NTSC and PAL, but what you describe above is >particularly noticeable with NTSC and less so (tho still there) with PAL. >We don't refer to NTSC as "Never Twice the Same Colour" for nothing !!! > >Jon (ducking for cover !) It's true. PAL has 625 lines of resolution, compared to 525 for NTSC, so the resolution is better. Not that either ever really achieved their full theoretical resolution. Especially on 1/2-inch consumer-level VHS videotape. Many US TV sets had more like 250 lines (pixels). The big difference is that NTSC codes color as the absolute phase of the color subcarrier, while PAL uses the frame-to-frame difference, so PAL color is far more robust. The Europeans, being the followers in color TV, had the opportunity to improve upon NTSC. I don't know the image size of Super8, but if it scales from 35mm movie film, at 24x18, then the image size will be something like 1/4-size, or 6mm by 4.5mm, which is the rough equivalent of (6*100)(4.5*100)= 270,000 tricolor pixels per frame, or 0.54 Mpix, as digital cameras are rated. In terms of lines, this is equivalent to 520 by 520, far more than VHS ever could do. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11647 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 03:54:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 03:54:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 19:54:28 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13926 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:54:13 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with ESMTP id <2002122403530500300lq86ee>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:53:05 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 22:53:03 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] Film and lens resolution (was Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LF lenses)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 3:02 AM +0000 12/24/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:22:45 +1300 >From: "Brian Swale" >Subject: [OM] Film and lens resolution (was Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LF lenses)) > >Hi folks, > >Joe Gwinn wrote > > > We are somewhat going in circles here. The reason that all photgraphic lenses > > seem to have resolution within a factor of two of 50 line pairs per millimeter > > (100 pixels per millimeter) is that this is more or less the resolution of film > > of reasonable sensitivity (ASA 100 or greater), so the lenses are designed to > > that resolution. > > > > Whatever the size of the film, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5, 8x10, the film resolution is the > > same, so all lenses will have more or less the same on-film resolution, with the > > more expensive lenses being better, and the less expensive lenses being worse. > > The limits, from the websites mentioned below, seem to range from 100 line pairs > > to 25 line pairs per millimeter. > >In my opinion, it's not reasonable to generalise so much. Why not? I'm talking about the typical camera user, the one who still consumes a few billion frames a year taking lousy snapshots of friends and family. They use ASA 200 and 400, mostly. >With lenses there are very measurable and significant differences. Sure. Nobody said that there wasn't. The point is that the ratio of best to worst (excluding the hopeless dogs) is about four to one, and that this is no accident. >For film, there are also significant differences between emulsions. Go to >http://www.google.com and do a search for " film resolution limits " without >the quotes. Also true, and there are spectrographic films that can do thousands of lines per millimeter. But the typical ASA 200 to 400 color negative film is nowhere that good. >Near the top of the search you will find a couple of Robert Monaghan's pages. > >You will need to download the cached versions as the original sites have >exceeded their paid-up download limits and have all access denied except >for the author. > >The file names are "lenslpm.html" and "limits.html" > >They are very instructive as to what film, lenses and systems can deliver. > >If anyone can't get these files give me a call and I can e-mail copies. I guess I can wait until the website becomes available again. It would be interesting, but I assume it's large. The bottom line is that lenses and film have coevolved. Most people take their shots handheld, at something like 1/60-second, so motion blur will limit the achievable resolution. Given this resolution, the film needs to be only a bit better, and the rest of the film's tradeoff space can be spent on making the sensitivity to light good. Given the resolution of typical film and the fact the camera in mostly handheld, the necessary lens resolution is determined, and the rest of the lens trade space can be spent on color correction, big apertures, etc. Each camers manufacturer sells into a market that determines how much the camera system can cost. The higher price points allow a better camera to be produced within those constraints. I recall a story from a photo mag about the genesis of the original XA camera, designed by Maitani (sp?) as a young man. The crux of the story was that Maitani dropped some typical feature and was able to buy a very good multielement glass lens for the savings, thus preserving the intended price point. It turned out to be a good tradeoff, as the XA line sold like hotcakes. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:16 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11955 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:04:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:04:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:05:11 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13932 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:04:57 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021224040349001003m2qle>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 04:03:49 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:01:18 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3E068BE9.CF01DC73@tc.umn.edu> Message-Id: <5AF6340A-16F4-11D7-8FC1-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I really have to second this. I've been using a Beaulieu 7008 Super-8 rig instead of Mini-DV in my production classes and there's just no comparison. Someone pointed out that NTSC isn't as impressive as PAL and that's a good point, but there are students using PAL C*non XL-1S rigs because of the added resolution and because in "Frame Movie Mode" (sort of a half-baked progressive scan mode) they're essentially shooting in 25P, so it makes film transfer easier and the framerate looks more like film. Even with the extra 100 lines and 25P, I'll take my Kodachrome Super-8 footage over their Mini-DV any day of the week. Now, I can't project for my presentations, so it all has to end up telecined to Mini-DV at the end of the day, but my film still looks better than their camcorder footage. The colors are much more vibrant and the latitude I have when I shoot negative film is just amazing. Shooting Kodak 200T or one of the Pro-8mm stocks gives me about six or seven stops of usable latitude. I overexpose by about a stop because telecine on underexposed film gets all digital-artifact-y, but I've accidentally shot four or five stops overexposed and in telecine color corrected and matched it to shots that were shot properly with no real noticable difference in the end result. This is one of those areas where film and digital compliment each other, I think. Editing Super-8 used to be painful. A friend of mine and I used to make Super-8 space operas with models and railroad tracks and black thread back in the 70's and it was nightmarish. The stock is so small and there are no reference numbers on the film to edit by and if you were shooting sound back then you had to always work around the synch offset. Now I can shoot Super-8, telecine to video, edit in Final Cut Pro or Premiere, do post with After Effects including blue screen stuff and digital compositing, burn the whole thing to DVD and show it to anyone with a DVD player. I really feel like the two worlds compliment each other. Same with 35mm, really. I bring home my goofy snaps on PhotoCD, touch them up in Photoshop and print them on an inkjet. At 8x10 I'm usually perfectly happy with the results unless the scans were terrible (which seems to be the case at most local photo shops that scan and make CDs). -Rob On Sunday, December 22, 2002, at 08:07 PM, Dean C. Hansen wrote: > > I have put together a 45 minute Super 8 movie on butterflies using > a > Canon 1014XL-S that I show occasionally to garden clubs, nature groups, > etc. Particularly with macro shots of butterflies, Super 8 is really > pretty good. I can project this on a screen 12' or more wide, and I > have heard gasps of astonishment from viewers in the audience when they > see a butterfly's tongue going into a flower to sip nectar. Kodachrome > film in a good Super 8 camera can do a very credible job of capturing > both detail and colors. I once followed a person at a native plant > society meeting who showed a projected video of spring wildflowers. > Sorry, Joe, but my 30-year-old Super 8 technology blow this guy's > spankin' new video away. The edges of the clouds in the sky in his > video were jagged, and the colors of the pasque flowers were barely > recognizable. His presentation, technically, wasn't even in the same > league with the Super 8. With Kodachrome, blues are blue, reds are red > (and don't bleed), and greens are green. People routinely ask me after > a showing, "Gee, you mean you can still get film for that old camera?" > Yes, you can, and the results are pretty darn nice. > What killed Super 8 are cost and, more importantly, the editing > that > is needed to put something together. Cutting, splicing, and working at > a hand cranked editor with a 4" screen is a thankless task. However, I > am very thankful that I shot movies of my kids, starting 32 years ago, > on Super 8 Kodachrome--they still look like they were shot yesterday. > Let me know if anyone can say the same about their videos. > One final note: I recently had a 5 x 7 print made from a > Kodachrome > slide taken at my 6th birthday party in 1948. Fifty four years ago, > and > the print looks like it was shot yesterday. Kodachrome is pretty > amazing stuff! > Best wishes for the holidays, guys, > Dean < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12230 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:08:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:08:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:08:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13936 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:08:19 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.251] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7L00BHAVF2Z6@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:06:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:08:17 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? In-reply-to: To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/23/02 1:50 PM, Timpe, Jim at Jim.Timpe@Fluke.com wrote: > > I'll buy your analogy if you're saying they're attractive men trying to make > up for it by driving BUTT UGLY trucks..... > > Jim... ducking right behind Mike. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike > At the risk of being shot, run over and then photographed I'll add to > that phallic analogy the front end of a lot of those SUV's and pickups. > Check out the Dodge pickup for example. A lot of women I know think that > guys who drive a rig like that are trying to make up for inadequacies in > other areas. > > Mike (ducking) OK YOU GUYS!!! Cut it out! I just fell out of my chair... laughing! I suppose since I drive a 16-year old Honda Accord I'm not making up for anything, right...? Right...?! -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... new .sig coming... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12581 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:23:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:23:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:23:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13948 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:23:20 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.251] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7L00BHZW2OZA@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:20:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:22:27 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) In-reply-to: <8283706.1040642819881.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/23/02 3:26 AM, julian_davies@btinternet.com at julian_davies@btinternet.com wrote: > One of the largest post - production costs in movies is printing and > transporting the many prints required. This currently limits the number > produced and leads to the first - run, second - run etc. and country - by > country release. The state of prints received in a second - tier country is on > average diabolical, and is a limitation to income. Theatres will invest in > digital technology if they can recover the costs through increased revenue > because of a step - change in the distribution system, and a reduction in cost > of transportation. The quality of the projected image is very, very secondary, > provided it is clean. Plunging further off-topic, I advise anyone who gets a chance to view a 'digitally-projected' film to do so. This process eventually will displace film projection for movies, mostly for the reasons mentioned above of the cost and trouble of distributing the hundreds or thousands of prints to theaters. However, I went to a local film house that was one of a handful around the US showing the "Star Wars Episode II" film in full digital projection. The pictures was very good, sharp, 'solid', well colored and with good contrast, and very easy to watch. Without a side-by-side comparison with a film projection I can't say which is 'better' but in this case I think there was little difference. EVen the best projection can't save a plodding story, of course... The big difference from a business perspective is that the two hours of projection by film is several large, heavy, costly, and wear-prone reels of celluloid, while the digital projection can be transported on a small stack of DVD-like disks or a few hard drives... and the digital images will never wear out even if projected hundreds or thousands of time. Every projection will look exactly like the first... even if no one could stand to sit through the movie that many times. -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12856 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:26:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:26:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:27:27 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA13952 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:27:12 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-25.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1040703709!722 Received: (qmail 25466 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:21:50 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-25.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:21:50 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBO3wRu14646 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:58:27 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07E1C5.5D4F0BBA@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:25:41 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: <200212230032.AA1821704460@mynra.com> <001b01c2aa93$57f6c620$0200a8c0@ctx> <02ab01c2aa98$e9705800$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <001301c2aa9e$09ce1290$0200a8c0@ctx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I just make a joke, I still have lots of Olympus gears (over 25 different Zuikos) on hand and I'm very happy with them. I just upgrade my Olympus AF system with a 24/2.8, 50/2.8 and a OM-101 too, if you want something sharp both will sure satisfy your need. Film camera has much more fun than digital, if you go fully digital you can only say my camera body is with better CCD, lower noise circuitry and better software than yours. Lens is no longer an important parameter as long as the resolution is good. Color/contrast and tone reproduction is all within the camera, if not, PhotoShop can help. Shift? one can easily made with distortion tool in PhotoShop, no challenging at all. I have never think of completely go digital or changing format, 35mm fit my needs very well. But I will follow the digital track, there is something you cannot do with digital and it has its own fun. C.H.Ling Mickey Trageser wrote: > > Frankly, I'm not worried about it at all. I'm using my Oly stuff and > enjoying it. If I need different tools, I'll work on getting them. I think I > have plenty of time before I *must* change. Besides, I am pleased with my > Oly gear and still lust for some other components [anyone got a real cheap > shift? :-)]. There are certainly advantages to digital, but as yet there > is nothing that makes me want to abandon my OM system. > > -Mickey ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13104 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:29:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:29:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:30:16 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13956 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:30:02 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.251] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7L00BISWF9ZE@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:28:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:30:00 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue In-reply-to: <3E073DEE.7040504@achtung.com> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/23/02 8:46 AM, Albert at olympus@achtung.com wrote: > Actually, I caught the "ingrained" joke aftewards.. It's 1am where I > am, so the reflexes are a bit slow as is the grammer and spelling.. > > Also, film vs. digital; I'm reading on my gun forums about yet another > 9mm vs. .45 or 1911's vs. Glocks.. This just seems like the same > discussion as well. Apples and Oranges.. > > Albert. Yes, but are you using a Mac or a PC? And is your SUV a Chevy, Ford, or Dodge? And is that film Fuji or Kodak? Am I evil or what? -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13385 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:33:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:33:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:34:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13960 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:33:45 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.251] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7L00B8VWLGZF@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:32:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:33:43 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: [OM] Christmas message (was Res wars continue) In-reply-to: <000f01c2aaa4$384cf040$0200a8c0@ctx> To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/23/02 8:56 AM, Mickey Trageser at vze3m2s8@verizon.net wrote: > Well, I don't know if any of this made any sense, but I've got to run off > for last minute shopping. 'bout time I started, eh? > > Mickey Still got a day and more where I live... start too early and you miss all the bargains. Actually, got all my Christmas shopping done already... I'm off tomorrow for a week visit with my folks. I'll probably unsub so I don't have 2000+ emails waiting for me when I get back. So everyone have a great Christmas and New Years! Hope you all find OM-3Ti's under -your- tree, too! -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13665 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 04:37:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 04:37:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 20:37:59 2002 -0800 Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13964 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:37:45 -0800 Received: from [207.214.211.251] by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.6 (built Oct 18 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H7L00BWMWS4ZD@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:36:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:37:43 -0800 From: Jim Brokaw Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue In-reply-to: To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca on 12/23/02 4:10 PM, siddiq at iddibhai@ev1.net wrote: > 12/23/2002 11:13:32 AM, "om@skipwilliams.com" wrote: > > >> >> Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration >> reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, >> or capturing the "decisive moment". Look at most of the pictures that go >> onto the internet or through one-hour labs and you'll see a lot of crap >> that was taken by GREAT equipment. > > > AMEN! It's not the gear, it's how you use it. Sure, good gear helps, but it > all boils down to how one uses it. 'nuff said. > > /S > -- > .sig Now just fold this back around to the 'guns and cameras compensating for shortcomings in other areas' thread and we've come full circle. Its -all- about how you use what you've got! -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14162 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 05:15:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 05:15:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 21:15:41 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13995 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:15:25 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:20:13 +0800 Message-ID: <3E07ECE0.4090207@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:13:04 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Unix OpenBSD on an x86 architecture; AMD 1.6G. That's because Macs are way to proprietary and Bill Gates is evil incarnate. I don't own a car, I'm currently in Taiwan where owning a car would be stupidity. But when I did, I owned an Audi A4 1.8TQ. Film? Fuji Reala for my 100ISO speed. Fuji Superia 400 for my indoor stuff. I prefer Fuji Acros 100 but since I can't find it here, I shoot Ilford for all my B&W, Ilford HP5 400 for my indoor stuff, and Ilford Delta 100 for my outdoor stuff... I will probably be doing some outdoor portraits this weekend at a local garden. I still have to call the model and arrange the time, but should be good. BTW, I LOVE my OM, and I like traditional stuff, as they have been time tested. So I own an M1A National Match in .308Win as my rifle. I find that it's hard to replace a good piece of great equipment in your hands.. Albert >Yes, but are you using a Mac or a PC? And is your SUV a Chevy, Ford, or >Dodge? And is that film Fuji or Kodak? > >Am I evil or what? > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14605 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 05:45:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 05:45:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 21:45:38 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA14007 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:45:24 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.95.4]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021224054103.TDKT1439.out001.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:41:03 -0600 Message-ID: <001c01c2ab0f$0c866a70$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <5AF6340A-16F4-11D7-8FC1-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:41:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [141.157.95.4] at Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:41:03 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Clearly, Super8 has a much greater capability than the consumer grade cameras used in its heyday. I have films that look just horrible. Others are ok, but none are better than VHS camcorders I have used, let alone close to my low end mini-dv. Just my personal observation... Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. Jackson" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 11:01 PM Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14927 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 05:56:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 05:56:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 21:56:37 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA14012 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:56:22 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021224055514002000fsp7e>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 05:55:14 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:52:44 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <001c01c2ab0f$0c866a70$0200a8c0@ctx> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I dunno. I have old R8 Kodachrome shot on family vacations in the late 50's and early 60's that looks a lot better than anything I've seen out of Mini-DV. I'm not saying I'm against DV, either. I used Mini-DV for my fall project this year just because I had to get a Mini-DV project done to be able to take some of the other program classes I want to take. It was great to be able to see what we'd shot immediately, but it was SO easy to overexpose or underexpose it and those LCD viewfinders are useless. We used a C*non GL-1 and I set it to zebra stripe after the first shoot went unpredictably. It was just as unpredictable on zebra stripe. We ended up having to lug a CRT out to monitor exposure. If you want to see me overacting, I've got a low-res Quicktime version of it up here: http://www.conventicle.com/final_project.mov -Rob ("The Father") On Monday, December 23, 2002, at 09:41 PM, Mickey Trageser wrote: > Clearly, Super8 has a much greater capability than the consumer grade > cameras used in its heyday. I have films that look just horrible. > Others are > ok, but none are better than VHS camcorders I have used, let alone > close to > my low end mini-dv. Just my personal observation... > Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15618 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 07:03:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 07:03:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 23:03:29 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14062 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:03:15 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Qj5u-0003ci-00 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:03:14 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:02:25 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hell, I think he made it all the way around to the penis extension part of the thread with that last line. Hope you all have a good holiday and use what you've got to the best of your ability. /jim <<< snip Now just fold this back around to the 'guns and cameras compensating for shortcomings in other areas' thread and we've come full circle. Its -all- about how you use what you've got! -- Jim Brokaw OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15891 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 07:09:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 07:09:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 23:09:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14066 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:09:22 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBO785q56109 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:08:05 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.115.67] (195-74-115-67.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.115.67]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBO784o56059 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:08:04 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212231202.AA1945829644@mynra.com> References: <200212231202.AA1945829644@mynra.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:42:54 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ho, ho, ho, indeed Walt! :>) Chris At 12:02 -0500 23/12/02, Walt Wayman wrote: >I >I live in the South, have all my life (so far), and like being at >least a part-time redneck. And for those who aren't familiar >with some of our unique Southern Christmas traditions, this might >prove informative. > >http://www.toonedin.com/movies/WhiteTrashXmas.html > >If you don't have a fast connection, it'll take a few minutes, >but you may find it worth the wait. > >Ho, ho, ho! > >Walt -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16206 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 07:18:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 07:18:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 23:18:48 2002 -0800 Received: from blotto.achtung.com (61-219-255-82.HINET-IP.hinet.net [61.219.255.82]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14074 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:18:32 -0800 Received: from achtung.com ([10.1.1.2]) (AUTH: PLAIN olympus) by blotto.achtung.com with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:23:41 +0800 Message-ID: <3E0809B8.4040507@achtung.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:16:08 +0800 From: Albert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olympus List Subject: [OM] "Action" and pose question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I will probably start taking a martial arts soon (gonna try to lose the holiday gut before it starts to give Homer Simpson a run for his money) being 26, I can get back into shape rather quickly (thank God!). I will be taking San Da, a chinese form of basically Muay Thai kickboxing with throws. I'm thinking about taking pictures of some of the moves, anybody got suggestions on taking a two person "simulated freeze frame" sequence?? I have no clue where to begin.. Thanks. And happy holidays everybody. Albert < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16656 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 07:47:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 07:47:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 23 23:47:57 2002 -0800 Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.139]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14084 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:47:42 -0800 Received: from skopar (ocmax15-156.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.237.156]) by mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBO7lcN07778 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:47:38 +1100 From: "Wayne Harridge" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:47:29 +1100 Message-ID: <002901c2ab20$b91f3ad0$49e09910@meo.dec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > The big difference from a business perspective is that the > two hours of projection by film is several large, heavy, > costly, and wear-prone reels of celluloid, while the digital > projection can be transported on a small stack of DVD-like > disks or a few hard drives... and the digital images will > never wear out even if projected hundreds or thousands of > time. Every projection will look exactly like the first... > even if no one could stand to sit through the movie that many > times. The failure mode for digital media is usually catastrophic failure, rather than analogue gradual degradation. ...Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17192 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:26:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:26:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:27:14 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA14111 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:26:59 -0800 Received: (qmail 24845 invoked by uid 706); 24 Dec 2002 08:25:52 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:25:50 -0000 Message-ID: <01db01c2ab26$ef379760$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <184670-2200212123233729314@M2W062.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:32:00 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Skip, You are a bit unlucky (or lucky if you have not spend a buck on DC), I bought my E-10 two years ago because I have seen so many good digital photos, this were linked by the contributors of rec.photo.digital, I was spending extensive time here in arguing digital is not as good as film. But on the other hand, the quality of pictures really inspire me. Below is just a few examples, I'm so regret I haven't bookmark all the beautiful DC sites, I have seen some studio works that were just impressive! http://photography-on-the.net/gallery/list.php?exhibition=2 http://www.belgiumdigital.com/ http://www.animalu.com/pics/photos.htm Below is link I think most of you know, it may only contain test photo so don't complain, but it shows many test photos of DC so that you see how a DC perform. http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/ Are they really bad? Of course if you insist on showing bad sample site there must be many, not only DC but film users too. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: > My rant might not "get to the heart of the discussion", but IMO, it's still > valid. Rather than arguing whether the Contax Zeiss or Nikon Nikkor optics > are the best, now the gearheads are arguing whether 11MgPx is enough. Or > whether the latest whizbang digital camera feature produces the best color, > or, or.... > > I've seen few web galleries from new digital shooters that I've been > impressed with. They should take a beginning photo course first and learn > HOW..... > > Where is the line between film and digital? Blurry, that's where. > > > Skip > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17440 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:27:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:27:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:28:13 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14115 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:27:57 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.103] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AB119F2500C8; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:30:09 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:26:17 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Subject: [OM] [ot] happy holiday MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca here's wishing a safe & joyous holiday to one & all :) regards /Siddiq -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17717 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:32:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:32:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:33:25 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14121 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:33:10 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA59289 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:32:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021224003113.027f99c0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:33:43 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] "Action" and pose question In-Reply-To: <3E0809B8.4040507@achtung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:16 PM 12/24/2002 +0800, Albert wrote: >I will probably start taking a martial arts soon (gonna try to lose the >holiday gut before it starts to give Homer Simpson a run for his money) >being 26, I can get back into shape rather quickly (thank God!). I will >be taking San Da, a chinese form of basically Muay Thai kickboxing with throws. > >I'm thinking about taking pictures of some of the moves, anybody got >suggestions on taking a two person "simulated freeze frame" sequence?? I >have no clue where to begin.. >... Albert, the best thing to do is for the photographer to know more or less how the action will play out, and prefocus and anticipate. Here's a shot I took 9 months or so ago in a Karate competition: // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18064 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:46:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:46:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:47:18 2002 -0800 Received: from einsteinium.btinternet.com (einsteinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14125 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:47:03 -0800 Received: from host213-122-4-95.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.4.95] helo=carroljulian) by einsteinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18QkfO-0001bO-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:43:59 +0000 Message-ID: <000601c2ab28$883c7420$5f047ad5@carroljulian> From: "Julian Davies" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:43:08 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Trying to distance this from the Logie Baird debate.... My understanding is that the NTSC was a branch of the NPL at Teddington. The UK rejected the results of their deliberations as inadequate, and quietly abandoned the whole idea until the Germans (primarily) came up with PAL.Meanwhile RCA took on the NTSC system, and implemented it as the only available system, despite the same concerns over quality. Julian Cambs, UK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Gwinn" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 3:28 AM Subject: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Snip > It's true. PAL has 625 lines of resolution, compared to 525 for NTSC, so the resolution is better. Not that either ever really achieved their full theoretical resolution. Especially on 1/2-inch consumer-level VHS videotape. Many US TV sets had more like 250 lines (pixels). The big difference is that NTSC codes color as the absolute phase of the color subcarrier, while PAL uses the frame-to-frame difference, so PAL color is far more robust. The Europeans, being the followers in color TV, had the opportunity to improve upon NTSC. > > > Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18312 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:48:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:48:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:48:57 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp017.mail.yahoo.com (smtp017.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.114]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA14130 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:48:43 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-26-95.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.26.95 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:47:56 -0000 Message-ID: <3E081F39.5060508@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:47:53 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Joe Gwinn wrote: >Comments interspersed below. > Likewise >>Whoa! Check your assumptions. The Mpix numbers advertised for DCs are approximately the number of 3 color pixels delivered in the output >>(after all that complicated stuff you did). My 2.1 Mp camera produces 1600x1200 pixel images with 19,200,000 individual 3 channel pixels, so >>it's really a 1.92Mp camera. >> >> > >Huh? Check decimal point. Ah: 1600x1200= 1,920,000 pixels, but each pixel is of just one color, red, green, or blue, so we don't have the equal of a camera with 1.93 million tri-color pixels. The ratio of colors is 1:2:1 for R:G:B, so there are 1.92/2= 960000 green pixels, 1.92/4= 480000 blue pixels, and 480000 red pixels. The resolution is set by the green pixels; the other colors are interpolated to fill in the missing values. So, a 2.1 Mpix camera actually has 0.96 Mpix of true tri-color resolution. > OK, so fool that I am, I assume when people argue/discuss the number of Megapixels needed to match 35mm information content that they are talking about the 3 color pixels in the output produced from processing the raw signal from the imaging device, not the number of individual, filtered, image sensing points on the CCD/CMOS/?? sensing device. When I see camera specs, the number of 3 color output pixels is roughly equal to the advertised Mp of the device. So you are talking about sensor design detail and I'm talking about device output, however produced by interpolation, mixing, mashing or mulching, no? I don't particularly care about what's underneath, as I'm empirically estimating the number of advertising spec. Mps needed to produce what I consider a great print of a large size from the number needed for a smaller print. I realize what's underneath counts, but I read the reviews and will only consider a camera with good review results. Interestingly, the same simplistic area math says a 3.7Mp output for 11x14 is equivalent to 1.9 Mp for 8x10 and that's the size Mike M. says gives such good results from the 3.7 Mp (effective) E-10. Steven S. touts even larger excellent results, but with the aid of special upscaling software. So which number are the folks who come up with the 18Mp as the point where digital may match 35mm using? >Actually, one needs always to look for the "optical resolution", as the 1600x1200 may have been interpolated from a lesser number of actual CCD pixels (of any color). The true resolution cannot exceed the optical resolution, regardless of the nominal resolution of the format. Interpolation cannot supply the missing picture detail. > > >>So, using your approach, but adjusted for the way Megapixels are quoted >>for DCs and adjusting for promotional inflation, you need about 9 Mp to >>equal 35mm film (even less for 25mm film!) I'm not necessarily agreeing >>with the 9 MP number here, just disagreeing with your assumptions and 26 >>Mp conclusion. >> >> > >Not so. My claim is that one needs more like 25 Mpix (sum of red, green, and blue pixels in 1:1:1 ratio), which is the equivalent of 8.64, call it 9 million tri-color pixels. > I thought that's what I said too, it's just that we're talking different ways about the numbers. So what is the 14Mp Kodak? I'm guessing that by your calculations, and assuming 1:1:1 sensor design, that you would call it a 42Mp sensor? >>Where it comes to where the rubber meets the road for me, all these calculations don't mean much, it's the images and how people >>react/interact, "see" them. It's clear to me that digital camera output has certain qualities that differ subjectively from film and scanned >>film. In the particular case of my eyes and those of friends and family, DC prints are superior to 2720 dpi scanned 35mm prints for certain >>common subjects at 8x10 and smaller. Assuming that's about the limit for 1.9 Mp, one would need about an advertised 8.4 Mp for 16x20, which is >>about the limit for sharp 35mm prints using lenses of the quality you assume and reasonable technique. >> >> > >While beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I would comment that there is a lot of equipment in the chain from scene to photograph in each case, and if any element in the chain isn't up to standard, the photos won't be good. So, I would be cautious about making sweeping generalizations from two photos or two specific sets of equipment. > I generally agree, although less for the DC than for the Olys. Most of the S110 images are ready for printing, except sometimes for cropping, right out of the camera. Reviews showed that the diminutive S110 had some compromises in performance compared to it's physically larger siblings, so I don't think I am using some unusually great 2 Mp DC. Moose < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18591 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:54:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:54:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:55:03 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA14134 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:54:48 -0800 Received: (qmail 8667 invoked by uid 706); 24 Dec 2002 08:53:46 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:53:45 -0000 Message-ID: <026c01c2ab2a$d545e920$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <200212231107.AA336592928@mynra.com> <3E07358C.7020601@achtung.com> <000f01c2aaa4$384cf040$0200a8c0@ctx> Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:59:55 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mickey Trageser" > I have no technical data to support the following, however.... My sense is > that the digital looks sharper because there is sharpening done on the image > in the camera. Close looks at many digital images ...... Without really using a good quality DC you will never know how it compare to film, see how the E-10 and E20 owner say you will know, you can also check the site I just posted, there are lots of original size file to download. http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/ > > Digital looks cleaner without the grain, but again, processing can render > broad areas of gently changing hues into bands of rough changing colors. > More resolution and less compression make for better renditions and pleasing > images. For point and shooters, it probably doesn't matter. They see sharp, > contrasty images with vivid, if overdone saturation. I think it's quite > subjective. I don't think the digital cameras are marketed to film lovers > anyway. This is an interesting statement, of course DC is not for diehard film lovers. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18866 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 08:56:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:56:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 00:56:38 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA14138 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:56:24 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-26-95.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.26.95 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 08:55:38 -0000 Message-ID: <3E082109.1080100@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:55:37 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Sharp Portrait lens problems References: <3E06B249.7000900@achtung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You might want to take a look at Fred Miranda's Soft Focus Action for Photoshop . His sharpening plug-in looks great (thanks Steven S.), but I thought the softening examples he showed looked overdone even on the weaker setting. They sure do look like a lot of glamour photography, though. Would certainly save you a lot of time for only $8.50 if it gives an effect your subjects like. Moose Albert wrote: > I had spent the better of 4 hours cleaning up "zits" on portraits I > had taken.. It seems that would not have been a problem with a softer > lens. I had used my Tokina 90mmf2.5 for most of the work. > > The details I get with that lens is simply amazing. I can see the > pores and count the zits... to which most of my female subjects have > just objected.. > > But in the end, I'm in the camp that says I can always "post process" > make a picture softer, but I can't make it sharper. I cannot sharpen > what was not recorded. So I guess I'll just suck it up, and live with > a sharp portrait lens. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19258 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 09:21:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:21:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 01:21:51 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp015.mail.yahoo.com (smtp015.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.59]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA14144 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:21:37 -0800 Received: from adsl-209-76-222-63.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@209.76.222.63 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:20:51 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0826EF.5020601@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:20:47 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (in the movies) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Remember, you are dealing with 2 very different personalities here. Lucas has a very aggressive vision of the technology needed to create the effect he wants in the theater. He almost single-handedly forced a major improvenment in the delivered quality of surround sound. I pick that example rather than all the ways he has moved special effects forward because it's an example where he directly affected the equipment in thearters (and homes). Spielberg tends to create his vision with whatever technology is already available, without pushing the envelope of the possible. Moose Joe Gwinn wrote: >As for the debate on when the motion picture industry will go digital, a relevant one-page article appeared on page 95 of the 21 December 2002 issue of The Economist: "Face value -- A movie-making Luddite". Basically, Steven Spielberg (director of ET, Jaws, Saving Private Ryan, etc) says that digital is not "just aroud the corner", while George Lucas (Star Wars, etc) argues the contrary. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19533 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 09:25:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:25:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 01:25:56 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp015.mail.yahoo.com (smtp015.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.59]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA14152 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:25:42 -0800 Received: from adsl-209-76-222-63.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@209.76.222.63 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:24:56 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0827E7.8010106@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:24:55 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue References: <114780-2200212123191332827@M2W026.mail2web.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Amen brother! I'll take some of that soap :-) Moose om@skipwilliams.com wrote: >Soap box out......Read only if you don't mind an opinion...... > >Too many people worry about resolving power, contrast lines per mm, >Modular-Transfer-Function graphs, grain size, SQF evaluations, RF vs. SLR, >Leica vs. Zeiss, Zuiko vs. Nikkor, 4x5 vs 35mm, 6x6 vs. 35mm. blah, blah, >blah.. > >Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration >reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, >or capturing the "decisive moment". Look at most of the pictures that go >onto the internet or through one-hour labs and you'll see a lot of crap >that was taken by GREAT equipment. > >If more people took more time to actually think about the image made by the >equipment that they have, and live with it's limitations or advantages, >they'd produce much better photos. I'm constantly surprised at the number >of people who actually worry about these impersonal measurements as a way >to disguise their lack of time to concentrate on the photos....(Me included >at times)....Perhaps they really don't want to make better pictures? > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19824 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 09:33:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:33:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 01:33:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA14164 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:33:24 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-26-24.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.26.24 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:32:38 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0829B5.3060806@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:32:37 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital References: <01a101c2aabd$d024aac0$1f00a8c0@mike> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is also what our 'home' printer drivers do. When I print a 1600 pixel wide image 10 inches wide on my 1440 ppi printer, the printer driver upsamples the image by a factor of nine. The results clearly indicate that this is an 'intelligent' process, rather than just making bigger clumps of the same color for each pixel. Moose Mike Veglia wrote: ><>On the topic of interpolation, I have always >heard it best to leave the "upsampling" to the lab for this very >reason--they have proprietary software from the manufacturers of the >printing equipment that is optimal for that printer. > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20102 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 09:39:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 09:39:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 01:39:32 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14172 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:39:17 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA74045 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:38:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021224013522.080415f8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:39:51 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue In-Reply-To: <114780-2200212123191332827@M2W026.mail2web.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 02:13 PM 12/23/2002 -0500, om@skipwilliams.com wrote: >Too many people worry about resolving power, contrast lines per mm, >Modular-Transfer-Function graphs, grain size, SQF evaluations, RF vs. SLR, >Leica vs. Zeiss, Zuiko vs. Nikkor, 4x5 vs 35mm, 6x6 vs. 35mm. blah, blah, >blah.. > >Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration >reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, >or capturing the "decisive moment". Look at most of the pictures that go >onto the internet or through one-hour labs and you'll see a lot of crap >that was taken by GREAT equipment. >... You're right. I am going to buy a Leica M7 because it will lessen camera shakes and no vibration, and the rangefinder will give me perfect focus and catch the decisive moment with no shutter lag. Oh yes, and the Summicron and Noctilux will no doubt give me that glow. Yup, no doubt about it. Just better equipments, and I will be a better snap-shooter. // richard "missing the point" man < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20613 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 10:15:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 10:15:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 02:16:05 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.hccnet.nl (smtp.hccnet.nl [62.251.0.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14193 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:15:50 -0800 Received: from fsc.ujwf24.nl by smtp.hccnet.nl via fia50-1.dsl.hccnet.nl [62.251.1.50] with SMTP for id LAA09681 (8.8.8/1.13); Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:11:58 +0100 (MET) From: Frank van Lindert To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OT: Happy holiday to all of you Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:11:58 +0100 Message-ID: <8icg0vgjtfg7p01776dgm320md24aiab5m@4ax.com> References: <3E06B249.7000900@achtung.com> <3E082109.1080100@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <3E082109.1080100@sbcglobal.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Seven years of reading this Olympus mailing list (and occasional posting to it) did not make it less attractive to me than in the early days.=20 Many of the 'original' members have disappeared, but some are still present, either actively participating or lurking in silence - maybe 'retired' is a better word for it, because it is those people who originally started this thing and got it going! I wish every member of the list, fresh or senior, a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. =46rank van Lindert Utrecht Netherlands. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20975 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 10:31:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 10:31:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 02:32:13 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14205 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:31:58 -0800 Received: from [62.64.217.187] (helo=[62.64.217.187]) by mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18QmKo-000HBd-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:30:50 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <112.1c52afd2.2b390274@aol.com> References: <112.1c52afd2.2b390274@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:29:55 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 19:21 -0500 23/12/02, NSURIT@aol.com wrote: > >Albert, you need some new friends! Sounds like a possible New Years >resolution in the making. I do love my cameras and I just wrapped >up a deal today on a new SUV to replace the one I've worn out over >the past 7 years. Need a new one or fairly new one for the Olympus >Texas Tour we are doing in 2004 and will pick it up Thursday or >Friday. Don't want to hear anything from you guys about that 400mm >f4 Tamron sitting in my gear closet. I'm very secure. I really am. >Really! I don't suppose it's a Mercedes M-Class is it Bill? I really like mine, even if it the facia does creak a bit ;-) =2E.. > >Please use my response to this thread as an opportunity to join me >and others around the world, in a manner which honors your beliefs, >during this period of celebration as we pray for peace amongst all >people, as we celebrate life and as we rejoice in the abundance we >all share. > >Bill Barber Amen Chris -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21457 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 11:05:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 11:05:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 03:06:09 2002 -0800 Received: from web13609.mail.yahoo.com (web13609.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.9]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id DAA14234 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:05:54 -0800 Message-ID: <20021224110541.40186.qmail@web13609.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [194.65.100.8] by web13609.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:05:41 GMT Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:05:41 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Jose=20Afonso?= Subject: Re: [OM] [ot] happy holiday To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Zuiks, Merry Christmas to all of you. In case you don't find many OM gear under your christmas tree you know the reason: Santa is a zuikoholic as well ;) Jose --- siddiq wrote: > here's wishing a safe & joyous holiday to one & all > :) > > regards > > /Siddiq __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21974 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 11:50:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 11:50:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 03:51:22 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr (postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14256 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 03:51:07 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-16-81-56-202-72.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.202.72]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 547F5C0E3 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:51:05 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] [ot] happy holiday Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:43:41 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <20021224110541.40186.qmail@web13609.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122412512601.00854@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id DAA14256 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So he's also ;-)=20 Merry Christmas. Christian Le mar, 24 d=E9c 2002, vous avez =E9crit : > Hello Zuiks, >=20 > Merry Christmas to all of you.=20 > In case you don't find many OM gear under your > christmas tree you know the reason: Santa is a > zuikoholic as well > ;) >=20 > Jose >=20 > --- siddiq wrote:=20 > > here's wishing a safe & joyous holiday to one & all > > :) > >=20 > > regards > >=20 > > /Siddiq >=20 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22400 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 12:04:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 12:04:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 04:04:28 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA14334 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 04:04:13 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.139.18e28a96 (4560) for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:59:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <139.18e28a96.2b39a63a@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:59:54 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_139.18e28a96.2b39a63a_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_139.18e28a96.2b39a63a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/24/2002 4:32:14 AM Central Standard Time, imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk writes: > I don't suppose it's a Mercedes M-Class is it Bill? I really like > mine, even if it the facia does creak a bit Chris, I'm afraid it a Chevrolet Suburban, which is often referred to as a "Cowboy Cadillac." It is the size of a big pickup truck, with middle and rear seats that either fold down or can be removed for those situations where you want to haul some stuff. In my case that usually includes a small camera kit and tripod, but might include an antique or two. It doesn't have 4 wheel drive although many of them do. The main reason I like them is because they are big and I'm a fairly big person. I can sit up straight in them and have enough room to move around. BB --part1_139.18e28a96.2b39a63a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/24/2002 4:32:14 AM Central Standard Time, imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk writes:

I don't suppose it's a Mercedes M-Class is it Bill?  I really like
mine, even if it the facia does creak a bit


Chris, I'm afraid it a Chevrolet Suburban, which is often referred to as a "Cowboy Cadillac."  It is the size of a big pickup truck, with middle and rear seats that either fold down or can be removed for those situations where you want to haul some stuff.  In my case that usually includes a small camera kit and tripod, but might include an antique or two.  It doesn't have 4 wheel drive although many of them do.  The main reason I like them is because they are big and I'm a fairly big person.  I can sit up straight in them and have enough room to move around.  BB --part1_139.18e28a96.2b39a63a_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23509 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 14:03:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 14:03:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 06:04:22 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14590 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:04:07 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.110]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021224140315.LWFS560.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:03:15 -0500 Message-ID: <004e01c2ab55$2b466a00$6e2e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Tom Murphy" , References: Subject: [OM] Links to T32 panel FS, was WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:02:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, Tom. Mike posted a link on Dec 17th. The page says he has / had a T32 calculator panel. There were two version that I know of. One was labeled in feet and the other in meters. If Mike is in the USA, the shipping cost would make it a poor choice. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.htm I don't know what part of the world Mike is in though. Since you 're in Ireland, it may make sense to bookmark the guy in the Netherlands. http://www.wide-angle.nl His on-line catalog shows two of them in stock for 1 Euros each but it doesn't specify how they are labeled. Hope this helps. I hope everyone has a safe Holiday. All the best, Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24095 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 14:52:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 14:52:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 06:53:04 2002 -0800 Received: from netmail01.services.quay.plus.net (netmail01.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.219]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA14633 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:52:49 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 26056 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 14:51:15 -0000 Received: from dyn157-41.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.41.157) by netmail01.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 14:51:15 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:51:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <000601c2ab28$883c7420$5f047ad5@carroljulian> In-Reply-To: <000601c2ab28$883c7420$5f047ad5@carroljulian> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:43:08 -0000, "Julian Davies" wrote: >Trying to distance this from the Logie Baird debate.... > >My understanding is that the NTSC was a branch of the NPL at Teddington. Oh, I don't think so! It just so happens I took time out from uni to work for the BBC when they were doing limited trials of a 405 line NTSC system. The line structure was very coarse but the monitors we used were well set up and the "off-air" signal was literally from "next door", so no phase errors to worry about. >The >UK rejected the results of their deliberations as inadequate, and = quietly >abandoned the whole idea until the Germans (primarily) came up with >PAL.Meanwhile RCA took on the NTSC system, and implemented it as the = only >available system, despite the same concerns over quality. It certainly was some time after that when proper broadcasting began, using a 625 line PAL system. Part of the delay was also because a core network of UHF transmitters had to be established to supplement and replace the VHF ones, with a sufficient "dual standard" time to allow the older VHF receivers to become life expired. In fact a lot of monochrome dual standard (405 line VHF, 625 line UHF) sets were made during those years. A major issue that restricted colour TV technology on both sides of the pond was the need for compatibility: monochrome sets must render a good monochrome picture from colour transmissions and vice-versa. Both NTSC and PAL systems did quite well with this issue, but it is interesting to speculate what might have been if this requirement had not been present. Nadolig Llawen John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24947 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 15:16:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 15:16:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 07:17:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA14683 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:16:46 -0800 Received: from [62.64.232.87] (helo=[62.64.232.87]) by mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18Qqml-000GPK-00; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:15:59 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <000601c2ab28$883c7420$5f047ad5@carroljulian> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:00:55 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Cc: john@coedana.plus.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This OT discussion has been very informative. Thanks to all. Happy Christmas all Chris At 14:51 +0000 24/12/02, john@coedana.plus.com wrote: >On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:43:08 -0000, "Julian Davies" > wrote: > >>Trying to distance this from the Logie Baird debate.... >> >>My understanding is that the NTSC was a branch of the NPL at Teddington. > >Oh, I don't think so! It just so happens I took time out from uni to >work for the BBC when they were doing limited trials of a 405 line >NTSC system. The line structure was very coarse but the monitors we >used were well set up and the "off-air" signal was literally from >"next door", so no phase errors to worry about. > >>The >>UK rejected the results of their deliberations as inadequate, and quietly >>abandoned the whole idea until the Germans (primarily) came up with >>PAL.Meanwhile RCA took on the NTSC system, and implemented it as the only >>available system, despite the same concerns over quality. > >It certainly was some time after that when proper broadcasting began, >using a 625 line PAL system. Part of the delay was also because a core >network of UHF transmitters had to be established to supplement and >replace the VHF ones, with a sufficient "dual standard" time to allow >the older VHF receivers to become life expired. In fact a lot of >monochrome dual standard (405 line VHF, 625 line UHF) sets were made >during those years. > >A major issue that restricted colour TV technology on both sides of >the pond was the need for compatibility: monochrome sets must render a >good monochrome picture from colour transmissions and vice-versa. Both >NTSC and PAL systems did quite well with this issue, but it is >interesting to speculate what might have been if this requirement had >not been present. > > >Nadolig Llawen > > >John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25195 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 15:18:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 15:18:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 07:18:58 2002 -0800 Received: from web13705.mail.yahoo.com (web13705.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.138]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA14687 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:18:43 -0800 Message-ID: <20021224151830.13677.qmail@web13705.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.248.65.200] by web13705.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:18:30 PST Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:18:30 -0800 (PST) From: AG Schnozz Subject: [OM] Gun toting, anti-digital, big SUV driving Holiday greetings To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021224030208.10142.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, Thanks everybody for another good year on the list. It's been fun, furious and fastinating with a few new friendships to boot. We're heading out on Christmas day for points south. We'll spend a few days in the Branson area before heading over to the teaming metropolis of Tulsa. In both locations we'll be day-tripping everywhere with the cameras. I'm looking forward to spending some time down in the hills of southeast Oklahoma. I've got a ton of B&W film ready to be exposed, a bag full of Zuikos focused on the task, the IS-3 is zooming, the OM-2S and OM-4 are spot-on, winders are wound up, and the tripods are standing ready. The flash is a bright spot in the bag, but sadly, the cable-release is only remotely interested. The camera bag is holding its own. The filters do have an altered view of reality, though. The only "heat" I'll be packing is a package of hand-warmers and my wife! It's important to spend some time with the girls. It's been a very rough 4th quarter and we both are exhausted. Who knows if I'll have the same job when I get back, but it's very important that we decompress once in awhile. Happy Holidays and keep looking up. AG-Schnozz __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25474 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 15:24:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 15:24:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 07:25:21 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA14691 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:25:06 -0800 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:24:42 -0500 Message-Id: <200212241024.AA646578468@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've got a gun and a digital camera. I'm not allowed to talk about one and I don't want to talk about the other. So, let me just wish everyone a happy and safe holiday season. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26064 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 16:13:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 16:13:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 08:13:46 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14710 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:13:31 -0800 Received: from 209-122-227-193.s874.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.227.193] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18QrfR-0005iI-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:12:30 -0500 Message-ID: <006401c2ab67$4b1fc670$c1e37ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:12:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-9" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've settling in with the new Microtek 4000dpi scanner. So far so good. I've put up a scan of a shot from the first shuttle launch (a 1000 with a 2X!) Check it out if you have the time. http://www.zuiko.com/13Gal.htm _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26348 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 16:17:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 16:17:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 08:18:16 2002 -0800 Received: from virgo.i-cable.com (virgo.i-cable.com [203.83.111.75]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA14722 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:18:00 -0800 Received: (qmail 19703 invoked by uid 706); 24 Dec 2002 16:16:55 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 16:16:54 -0000 Message-ID: <053a01c2ab68$bd504ca0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> <006401c2ab67$4b1fc670$c1e37ad1@hppav> Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:22:57 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-9" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi John, I got a page not found message. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hermanson" > I've settling in with the new Microtek 4000dpi scanner. So far so good. > I've put up a scan of a shot from the first shuttle launch (a 1000 with a > 2X!) Check it out if you have the time. > > http://www.zuiko.com/13Gal.htm > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26766 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 16:37:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 16:37:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 08:37:49 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14746 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:37:34 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with ESMTP id <20021224163620051006k0c2e>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:36:21 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:36:18 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 2:52 PM +0000 12/24/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:47:53 -0800 >From: Moose >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital > >Joe Gwinn wrote: > > >Comments interspersed below. > > >Likewise > > >>Whoa! Check your assumptions. The Mpix numbers advertised for DCs are approximately the number of 3 color pixels delivered in the output > >>(after all that complicated stuff you did). My 2.1 Mp camera produces 1600x1200 pixel images with 19,200,000 individual 3 channel pixels, so > >>it's really a 1.92Mp camera. > >> > > > >Huh? Check decimal point. Ah: 1600x1200= 1,920,000 pixels, but each pixel is of just one color, red, green, or blue, so we don't have the equal of a camera with 1.93 million tri-color pixels. The ratio of colors is 1:2:1 for R:G:B, so there are 1.92/2= 960000 green pixels, 1.92/4= 480000 blue pixels, and 480000 red pixels. The resolution is set by the green pixels; the other colors are interpolated to fill in the missing values. So, a 2.1 Mpix camera actually has 0.96 Mpix of true tri-color resolution. > > >OK, so fool that I am, I assume when people argue/discuss the number of >Megapixels needed to match 35mm information content that they are >talking about the 3 color pixels in the output produced from processing >the raw signal from the imaging device, not the number of individual, >filtered, image sensing points on the CCD/CMOS/?? sensing device. When I >see camera specs, the number of 3 color output pixels is roughly equal >to the advertised Mp of the device. So you are talking about sensor >design detail and I'm talking about device output, however produced by >interpolation, mixing, mashing or mulching, no? I don't particularly >care about what's underneath, as I'm empirically estimating the number >of advertising spec. Mps needed to produce what I consider a great print >of a large size from the number needed for a smaller print. I realize >what's underneath counts, but I read the reviews and will only consider >a camera with good review results. Not quite. The problem is "marketing pixels". What I call a "tricolor pixel" has three intensity values, one per color. By contrast, a marketing pixel has just one intensity value, allowing only one color per such pixel. The most honest way to state camera capability would be to quote only the count of tricolor pixels, but the marketing intent was to inflate the perceived capability of the camera, so each color is counted separately. How does one translate between tricolor pixel counts and marketing pixel counts? It depends on the camera design. In the high-end studio digital cameras, red, green, and blue pixels are present in equal amounts -- the ratio is 1:1:1. In the consumer and posumer cameras, there are twice as many green pixels as there are red or blue pixels -- the ratio is 1:2:1. Lets take a camera with 2.4 Mpix (marketing pixels): If the ratio is 1:1:1, there are 0.8 million red pixels, 0.8 million green pixels, and 0.8 million blue pixels. The spatial resolution is 0.8 million pixels, with full color fidelity. If the ratio is 1:2:1, there are 0.6 million red pixels, 1.2 million green pixels, and 0.6 million blue pixels. The spatial resolution is 1.2 million pixels, bought at some expense in color fidelity. This increase in spatial resolution, by 1.2/0.8= 1.5, or 50%, is why the 1:2:1 pattern is used. It works because the human eye is less sensitive to blur in red and blue than in green, the color where visual acuity peaks. The cost of a CCD chip is basically driven by its total pixel count, and a 50 0ain in perceived resolution is nothing to sneeze at. >Interestingly, the same simplistic area math says a 3.7Mp output for >11x14 is equivalent to 1.9 Mp for 8x10 and that's the size Mike M. says >gives such good results from the 3.7 Mp (effective) E-10. Steven S. >touts even larger excellent results, but with the aid of special >upscaling software. > >So which number are the folks who come up with the 18Mp as the point >where digital may match 35mm using? They are doing some calculation like the one I did a few postings ago. One assumes a resolution for the film. I chose 50 line pairs (=100 pixels) per millimeter. Then, one computes the numer of resolution cells in the image in question. Each cell contains all three colors, so a cell is a tricolor pixel. Then, convert to markeing pixel counts. > >Actually, one needs always to look for the "optical resolution", as the 1600x1200 may have been interpolated from a lesser number of actual CCD pixels (of any color). The true resolution cannot exceed the optical resolution, regardless of the nominal resolution of the format. Interpolation cannot supply the missing picture detail. > > > > > >>So, using your approach, but adjusted for the way Megapixels are quoted > >>for DCs and adjusting for promotional inflation, you need about 9 Mp to > >>equal 35mm film (even less for 25mm film!) I'm not necessarily agreeing > >>with the 9 MP number here, just disagreeing with your assumptions and 26 > >>Mp conclusion. > >> > >Not so. My claim is that one needs more like 25 Mpix (sum of red, green, and blue pixels in 1:1:1 ratio), which is the equivalent of 8.64, call it 9 million tri-color pixels. > > >I thought that's what I said too, it's just that we're talking different >ways about the numbers. So what is the 14Mp Kodak? I'm guessing that by >your calculations, and assuming 1:1:1 sensor design, that you would call >it a 42Mp sensor? No, the 14 Mpix is probably the marketing pixel count of a 1:2:1 camera, so the true spatial resolution will be about 7 Mpix (green only). As a rule, perhaps except for scientific applications, published pixel counts are marketing, not tricolor. > >>Where it comes to where the rubber meets the road for me, all these calculations don't mean much, it's the images and how people > >>react/interact, "see" them. It's clear to me that digital camera output has certain qualities that differ subjectively from film and scanned > >>film. In the particular case of my eyes and those of friends and family, DC prints are superior to 2720 dpi scanned 35mm prints for certain > >>common subjects at 8x10 and smaller. Assuming that's about the limit for 1.9 Mp, one would need about an advertised 8.4 Mp for 16x20, which is > >>about the limit for sharp 35mm prints using lenses of the quality you assume and reasonable technique. > >> > >> > > > >While beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I would comment that there is a lot of equipment in the chain from scene to photograph in each case, and if any element in the chain isn't up to standard, the photos won't be good. So, I would be cautious about making sweeping generalizations from two photos or two specific sets of equipment. > > >I generally agree, although less for the DC than for the Olys. Most of >the S110 images are ready for printing, except sometimes for cropping, >right out of the camera. Reviews showed that the diminutive S110 had >some compromises in performance compared to its physically larger >siblings, so I don't think I am using some unusually great 2 Mp DC. There seems to be general agreement that 2 Mpix is enough for snapshots, if the camera is well-designed. People who already have and use computers are often drawn to the convenience of a digital snapshot camera, although they are often put off by the amount of equipment and fiddling needed to achieve good results. And knowledge: the photos from my company's XMAS party are terrible, not so much because a 2-Mpix camera was used, but because the people doing the printing don't understand how to use the tools, and are forever exceeding the gamut of the inkjet printer. The photos may also be overexposed, but I would start with the printing. Anyway, peoples' faces are blown out, so the photos look two dimensionsal, with cardboard people. etc. Much worse looking than one would see with a $10 disposable camera and lousy photo processing. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27085 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 16:46:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 16:46:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 08:46:53 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14754 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:46:38 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18QsCT-0004PD-00 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:46:37 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:45:48 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01C2AB31.3D3F48E0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <139.18e28a96.2b39a63a@aol.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C2AB31.3D3F48E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cowboy Cadillac huh! Around here they call Suburbans "Mountain BMW's" with BMW meaning Big Mormon Wagon. I saw the results of a survey a couple of years ago where they asked a bunch of company CEOs what they would drive if they could have only one vehicle. They chose the Suburban. The long wheelbase and good weight distribution makes them great for snowy and icy roads. You can carry a huge OM kit and still have room for the wife. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 5:00 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? In a message dated 12/24/2002 4:32:14 AM Central Standard Time, imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk writes: I don't suppose it's a Mercedes M-Class is it Bill? I really like mine, even if it the facia does creak a bit Chris, I'm afraid it a Chevrolet Suburban, which is often referred to as a "Cowboy Cadillac." It is the size of a big pickup truck, with middle and rear seats that either fold down or can be removed for those situations where you want to haul some stuff. In my case that usually includes a small camera kit and tripod, but might include an antique or two. It doesn't have 4 wheel drive although many of them do. The main reason I like them is because they are big and I'm a fairly big person. I can sit up straight in them and have enough room to move around. BB ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C2AB31.3D3F48E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cowboy=20 Cadillac huh!  Around here they call Suburbans "Mountain BMW's" = with BMW=20 meaning Big Mormon Wagon. I saw the results of a survey a couple of = years ago=20 where they asked a bunch of company CEOs what they would drive if they = could=20 have only one vehicle. They chose the Suburban. The long wheelbase = and good=20 weight distribution makes them great for snowy and icy=20 roads.  You can carry a huge OM kit and still have room for = the wife.=20 /jim
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of NSURIT@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 24, = 2002 5:00=20 AM
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: Re: [OM] = Peace...=20 was Guns and Cameras?

In a message dated = 12/24/2002=20 4:32:14 AM Central Standard Time, imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk = writes:

I don't suppose it's a Mercedes M-Class is it = Bill?  I=20 really like
mine, even if it the facia does creak a bit=20


Chris, I'm afraid it a Chevrolet Suburban, which = is often=20 referred to as a "Cowboy Cadillac."  It is the size of a big = pickup=20 truck, with middle and rear seats that either fold down or can be = removed for=20 those situations where you want to haul some stuff.  In my case = that=20 usually includes a small camera kit and tripod, but might include an = antique=20 or two.  It doesn't have 4 wheel drive although many of them = do. =20 The main reason I like them is because they are big and I'm a fairly = big=20 person.  I can sit up straight in them and have enough room to = move=20 around.  BB ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C2AB31.3D3F48E0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27477 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 17:06:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 17:06:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 09:07:09 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14778 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:06:54 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.103.22734555 (4394) for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:04:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <103.22734555.2b39ed99@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:04:25 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_103.22734555.2b39ed99_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_103.22734555.2b39ed99_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/24/02 10:47:03 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: > You can carry a huge OM kit and still have room for the wife. Not a bad combination. Bill Barber --part1_103.22734555.2b39ed99_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/24/02 10:47:03 AM Central Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes:


You can carry a huge OM kit and still have room for the wife.


Not a bad combination.  Bill Barber --part1_103.22734555.2b39ed99_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27754 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 17:10:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 17:10:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 09:10:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14782 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:10:37 -0800 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:10:13 -0500 Message-Id: <200212241210.AA688718002@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Stupid Olympus Obsession X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In addition to other ways I've found to waste time, I'm a bit of a birdwatcher. There are nine feeders around our house. I had been using the same binoculars for more than 30 years, and so I decided it might be time to upgrade. I shopped around, examined a dozen different brands, from Bushnell to Zeiss, including the way out of my budget stuff like Leica, Kahles, Zwarovski, etc., but I ended up with -- don't get ahead of me; it spoils the story -- a pair of Olympus 8x42 Magellans. They were as good as or better than anything else I looked at, particularly when considering price, and they are perfect for us eyeglass wearers. And, hey, I also got a free Olympus keyring, becoming the first in the neighborhood to have one. Unless through extensive therapy or otherwise I can develop better resistance to the marque, I fear I might someday end up with one of those proctoscope thingys that keep showing up on eBay. How would I ever explain that to the lady of the house? Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28161 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 17:34:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 17:34:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 09:35:14 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14808 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:34:58 -0800 Received: from [217.216.179.34] (cliente-217216179034.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.179.34]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gBOHUf920137 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:30:41 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:29:09 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi, everyone. >It's true. PAL has 625 lines of resolution, compared to 525 for NTSC, >so the resolution is better. Not that either ever really achieved their >full theoretical resolution. Especially on 1/2-inch consumer-level VHS >videotape. >Many US TV sets had more like 250 lines (pixels). Don't forget the 525-625 lines are _vertical_ resolution (horizontal lines), whereas VHS' 250 lines represent the _horizontal_ resolution (pairs of points/pixels on a line). From the 625 lines of PAL, only 575 are visible because the rest is needed for sync pulses -- most TV sets show even less. I'm not sure about NTSC values, but it should have around 480 useful lines. Same for horizontal resolution: the screen only shows about 800f each line. So, 250 "lines" = 500 pixels would show about 400 _visible_ pixels. Another issue is colour resolution. The chroma (colour) signal has _much less_ horizontal resolution than the luminance (B&W) signal. I've read somewhere that for the PAL broadcasting (4.43 MHz colour subcarrier) the figures are 4.5 MHz for luminance and only 1.5 MHz for chroma -- that's 288 and 96 "lines", respectively. I'm afraid that some digital cameras do something similar. When recording to tape, the thing gets much worse... VHS downsamples colour subcarrier to just 627 kHz, so it's no surprise that colours are rendered as fuzzy blobs ;-). IIRC, Beta and Video-8 are somewhat better with 689 and 732 kHz, resp. SuperVHS keeps the 627 kHz, though. Playback circuitry also does "nasty" things with chroma signal, too. >The big difference is that NTSC codes color as the absolute phase of the >color subcarrier, while PAL uses the frame-to-frame difference, so PAL color >is far more robust. AFAIK, the reason is a bit different... PAL uses a, say, "negative" coding for even lines, instead of the "positive" coding of the odd lines of each field. Phase errors will make a colour shift, like NTSC, but with opposite directions between even/odd lines, so the global effect would be negligible. On the other hand, SECAM colour system has a completely different approach: the colour subcarrier is frecuency-modulated. But it halves colour _vertical_ resolution and compatibility with B&W sets is not as good as in NTSC/PAL. >I don't know the image size of Super8, but if it scales from 35mm movie film, >at 24x18, then the image size will be something like 1/4-size, or 6mm by >4.5mm, Here's a list of movie film formats: 8mm: 4.9 x 3.55 mm Super-8: 5.36 x 4 mm 16mm: 10.05 x 7.42 mm 35mm: 16 x 22 mm 70mm: 52.2 x 23 mm >which is the rough equivalent of (6*100)(4.5*100)= 270,000 tricolor pixels >per frame, >or 0.54 Mpix, as digital cameras are rated. In terms of lines, this is >equivalent >to 520 by 520, far more than VHS ever could do. Based on the above table, and assuming a conservative 50 lp/mm (the limit may be higher with the short focal lenghts of Super-8), my calculations give 214400 tri-color pixels, or about 230 lines -- roughly the same of VHS. However, colour reproduction will be better on film. Happy holidays to all, ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28456 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 17:39:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 17:39:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 09:40:23 2002 -0800 Received: from orngca-mls03.socal.rr.com (orngca-mls03.socal.rr.com [66.75.160.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14825 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:40:07 -0800 Received: from davegael (66-74-234-209.san.rr.com [66.74.234.209]) by orngca-mls03.socal.rr.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.3) with SMTP id gBOHdaD09975 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:39:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000401c2ab73$6d6e0230$d1ea4a42@davegael> From: "Dave Dougherty" To: References: <200212241210.AA688718002@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Stupid Olympus Obsession Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:39:35 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >How would I ever explain that to the lady of the house?< With the cost of medical insurance we may all soon need to use one of those "thingys" for a self-administered exam. I have an Olympus Swiss Army-like knife. No binoculars yet, but I have been tempted. I understand, Walt. Dave Dougherty < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29040 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 18:24:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 18:24:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 10:25:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mail02.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail02.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA14844 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:25:09 -0800 Received: (qmail 30523 messnum 226681 invoked from network[159.134.67.128/p67-128.as1.ddk.dundalk.eircom.net]); 24 Dec 2002 18:24:27 -0000 Received: from p67-128.as1.ddk.dundalk.eircom.net (HELO eircom.net) (159.134.67.128) by mail02.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 30523) with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 18:24:27 -0000 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:31:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [OM] WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: Tom Murphy To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <281450-2200212123191539757@M2W095.mail2web.com> Message-Id: <8F198D0A-173B-11D7-B555-000393AD1D20@eircom.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Skip, No I mostly use the T32 with an OM1n so I do need the calculator panel. Thanks for the info though. I think it pushes the switch to the left when you insert the panel. Thanks to the list members who offered to sell me a panel. I have taken up the offer from one of you. This is a really useful list to be a member of. Thanks again. On Monday, December 23, 2002, at 07:15 PM, om@skipwilliams.com wrote: > Do you use the T-32 with a TTL-OTF camera that controls the flash? If > so, > you really don't need the panel. All it does is set the camera to full > manual by pushing the switch all the way to the left. (....my memory > is > right, yes.....left...or right....right?) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29063 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 18:24:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 18:24:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 10:25:27 2002 -0800 Received: from mail04.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail04.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA14848 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:25:10 -0800 Received: (qmail 68469 messnum 1108580 invoked from network[159.134.67.128/p67-128.as1.ddk.dundalk.eircom.net]); 24 Dec 2002 18:24:28 -0000 Received: from p67-128.as1.ddk.dundalk.eircom.net (HELO eircom.net) (159.134.67.128) by mail04.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 68469) with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 18:24:28 -0000 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:47:41 +0000 Subject: [OM] WTB: 35 mm lens hood/shade Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: Tom Murphy To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <281450-2200212123191539757@M2W095.mail2web.com> Message-Id: <097DCDBF-1757-11D7-9545-000393AD1D20@eircom.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, Would anyone have a lens hood/shade for a Zuiko 35 m.m. f2.8/50 m.m. f1.8 for sale? Thanks in anticipation, Tom Murphy Ireland. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29893 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 19:09:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 19:09:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 11:09:55 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14888 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:09:40 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-241-48-12.client.attbi.com[12.241.48.12]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021224190832001003kk0qe>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 19:08:32 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:11:06 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Welcome back, George. Good to have you with us again. Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30169 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 19:11:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 19:11:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 11:11:30 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14892 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:11:14 -0800 Received: from 207-172-160-250.s250.tnt5.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.160.250] helo=xps) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18QuRR-0000zs-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:10:13 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20021224140615.00a92220@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:06:15 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Laugh of the day In-Reply-To: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Check out the Buy-it-now price for EvilBay item #1947331530. Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30634 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 19:42:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 19:42:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 11:42:56 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14906 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:42:41 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP id <20021224194133002000eq3ve>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 19:41:33 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:41:28 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM]: 16MP DC vs film again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 3:02 AM +0000 12/24/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:33:02 +0800 >From: "C.H.Ling" >Subject: Re: [OM]: Dipping our Toe Into Digital, 16MP DC vs film again > >Joe Gwinn wrote: > > > > > > A color camera being used to produce black&white pictures cannot have better resolution than the color with the greatest resolution, typically green. > > > > Because digital cameras are either 1:1:1 or 1:2:1, green is always a good choice for determining spatial resolution. So, I use the green channel, and also compare it directly with B&W only pictures as well. > > > >Yes, I know about the 1:2:1 color filter distribution, but the >resolution seem not much affected by this, I suspected it will only >affect the color accuracy (wrong interpretation of color on fine >details) but every pixel will contribute to the scene details. If all colors don't contribute equally, one gets color noise, so one cannot just count the total pixels regardless of their color. > > > The linearity is probably why good digital cameras are reported to handle skin, sparkles, eyelights, et al, so well. > > > >That is the point and I heard long ago in DC news group that some >professional photography (at least they said they live on this) think >their "new" Nikon 990 is better than their Hass for studio portrait on >output quality. One wonders how this can be so... > > > > > >http://www.accura.com.hk/50-02.jpg (200K) > > > > I looked at the picture, but I don't know how to interpret it. What is the purpose of a lens test slide? To test slide duplicators? > > > >The test was performed in around 1990 to test the performance of my >Zuikos, all shots were taken at around 1:50 or something similar. To >interpret it is easy, you should download it in photo editing >software, there should be dimension information on your software. >Check which point you think you can still identify the lines. I would >say at least the "200" position. Measure the width of this group of >lines, there is total 15lp and at the point "200" the width is 0.2mm, >so 5*15=75lp/mm. Ah. The markings are the width in microns. > > To my eye, the E-10 shot is nicer-looking, but the scanned film has higher resolution. Sort of as expected. So, there you have it. > > > >You really see the scanned film has higher resolution? Yes, it may >look to have more details but to me they are just film grain :-) If you look at very narrow features (like the various metal rods) in the two pictures, the E-10 will show a wide but smooth rod-like object, while the 70mm photo will show a narrower but somewhat noisy image of the same rod-like object. What's happening is that the E-10 is doing a gaussian blur to reduce noise and to supress the CCD pixel pattern (which would otherwise produce jagged edges). The most basic test of resolution is to photograph a high-contrast knife edge, and then to measure the illumination versus distance (perpendicular to the edge) function. The film will win in the present test case, ecen though the film is somewhat noiser (grainier). > > If you have the energy, could you make test shots like these, only with wider dynamic range, and including some specular highlights? Thanks. The claim is that digital does better than film in such situations. > >Ok, I will try it out later but to my experience the E-10 has very >good shadow details (although a bit noise), but for very bright spots >most DC are much poorer than film, it blow out and enlarged the spots. This blow-out is called "blooming" in the CCD literature, and is supposedly solved in modern CCD chips. Blooming is caused by photoelectrons overfilling a CCD pixel and spilling over into adjacent pixels. The newer chips have what amount to overflow drains to divert the excess photoelectrons. (If one wants to know more than is healthy abbout CCDs, Janesick's recent tome on the subject is the scientist's bible.) If one reduces the exposure, the blooming should be reduced, while the linearity and dynamic range of the CCD allow shadow detail to be retained, as the theory goes. So, in the experiments, it might be useful to bracket by one and two stops, for the experience. I guess the problem will be the noise in the shadows. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31225 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 20:28:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 20:28:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 12:28:38 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc02.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14938 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:28:23 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Qvf4-0001e8-00 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:28:22 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Laugh of the day Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:27:33 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.20021224140615.00a92220@pop.erols.com> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca All he needs is one sucker.... /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Stephen Troy Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:06 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Laugh of the day Check out the Buy-it-now price for EvilBay item #1947331530. Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32093 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 21:51:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 21:51:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 13:51:48 2002 -0800 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (murphys.services.quay.plus.net [212.159.14.225]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA15018 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:51:30 -0800 From: john@coedana.plus.com Received: (qmail 23389 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 21:49:57 -0000 Received: from dyn155-36.sftm-212-159.plus.net (212.159.36.155) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 21:49:57 -0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:49:52 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:29:09 +0100, "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" wrote: > >>The big difference is that NTSC codes color as the absolute phase of = the >>color subcarrier, while PAL uses the frame-to-frame difference, so PAL = color >>is far more robust. > >AFAIK, the reason is a bit different... PAL uses a, say, "negative" = coding >for even lines, instead of the "positive" coding of the odd lines of = each >field. Phase errors will make a colour shift, like NTSC, but with = opposite >directions between even/odd lines, so the global effect would be = negligible. > =46rom memory, so-called Simple PAL does exactly what you say, so that if there is a phase shift then alternate lines have a slightly different hue. The effect *can* be visible and is known as Hanover bars. Delay Line PAL, used universally AFAIK, effectively performs the averaging electronically so that all lines are fully corrected for hue errors. John Gruffydd (Mold, Wales, UK) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32549 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 22:19:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 22:19:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 14:20:05 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA15062 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:19:50 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.251]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021224221534.VHHI1642.out004.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:15:34 -0600 Message-ID: <000901c2ab99$faf9b510$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Laugh of the day Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:15:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [141.157.96.251] at Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:15:34 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Check out his other auctions. I think one of our own is bidding on the OM-4. Hope that works out... -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "James N. McBride" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 3:27 PM Subject: RE: [OM] Laugh of the day > All he needs is one sucker.... /jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Stephen Troy > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:06 PM > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] Laugh of the day > > > Check out the Buy-it-now price for EvilBay item #1947331530. > > Steve Troy > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 708 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 23:08:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 23:08:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 15:09:17 2002 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com (f217.sea1.hotmail.com [207.68.163.217]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15117 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:09:02 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:07:51 -0800 Received: from 12.231.249.226 by sea1fd.sea1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:07:51 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.231.249.226] From: "John Cwiklinski" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:07:51 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Dec 2002 23:07:51.0299 (UTC) FILETIME=[486D1D30:01C2ABA1] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Jim wrote: >> Cowboy Cadillac huh! Around here they call Suburbans "Mountain BMW's" with BMW meaning Big Mormon Wagon. << No Jim. Suburbans/Yukon XL's are just called "BMW's" in Salt Lake City, UT and Idaho Falls, ID. Where BMW stands for "Basic Mormon Wagon". :0) Happy Holidays to all. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_eliminateviruses_3mf < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1037 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 23:18:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 23:18:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 15:19:07 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.18]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15137 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:18:51 -0800 Received: from modem-2893.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.27.77] helo=skelly) by cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18QyK0-0008Km-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:18:49 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:18:52 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bimmers are mostly know as TARGETS around here...... -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Cwiklinski Sent: 24 December 2002 23:08 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Jim wrote: >> Cowboy Cadillac huh! Around here they call Suburbans "Mountain BMW's" with BMW meaning Big Mormon Wagon. << No Jim. Suburbans/Yukon XL's are just called "BMW's" in Salt Lake City, UT and Idaho Falls, ID. Where BMW stands for "Basic Mormon Wagon". :0) Happy Holidays to all. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&S U= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_eliminatevi ruses_3mf < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1600 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 00:03:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 00:03:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 16:03:53 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.bayarea.net [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15187 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:03:38 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA09428 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:02:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021224160312.027f8fe8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:04:12 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch In-Reply-To: <053a01c2ab68$bd504ca0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> <006401c2ab67$4b1fc670$c1e37ad1@hppav> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Browse from www.zuiko.com and check out the galleries. The shuttle is some www.zuiko.com/Shuttle.htm At 12:22 AM 12/25/2002 +0800, C.H.Ling wrote: >Hi John, > >I got a page not found message. >From: "John Hermanson" > > > I've settling in with the new Microtek 4000dpi scanner. So far so good. > > I've put up a scan of a shot from the first shuttle launch (a 1000 with a > > 2X!) Check it out if you have the time. > > > > http://www.zuiko.com/13Gal.htm // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2303 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 01:10:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 01:10:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 17:11:20 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15239 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:11:03 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.146] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A62AE42800B4; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 19:13:14 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:08:43 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021224160312.027f8fe8@192.168.100.11> Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/24/2002 4:04:12 PM, "Richard F. Man" wrote: >Browse from www.zuiko.com and check out the galleries. The shuttle is some >www.zuiko.com/Shuttle.htm > Very impressive, John! /S -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2551 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 01:11:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 01:11:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 17:11:45 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA15243 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:11:28 -0800 Received: (qmail 5347 invoked by uid 706); 25 Dec 2002 01:10:21 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 01:10:20 -0000 Message-ID: <005d01c2abb3$44395960$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM]: 16MP DC vs film again Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 09:16:33 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Gwinn" > > If all colors don't contribute equally, one gets color noise, so one cannot just count the total pixels regardless of their color. > May be you are right, I have no test sample support here. > >That is the point and I heard long ago in DC news group that some > >professional photography (at least they said they live on this) think > >their "new" Nikon 990 is better than their Hass for studio portrait on > >output quality. > > One wonders how this can be so... > It was two years ago in rec.photo.digital, he did show us some stunning portraits. I think you don't need a high resolution system for portrait. Good skin tone, low (no) noise, right among of sharpening... that is good enough. Instant result/re-shoot is also important, just like taking Polaroid in MF. BTW, everyone have tried DC to inkjet will agree good quality print is very easy to achieve. > >The test was performed in around 1990 to test the performance of my > >Zuikos, all shots were taken at around 1:50 or something similar. To > >interpret it is easy, you should download it in photo editing > >software, there should be dimension information on your software. > >Check which point you think you can still identify the lines. I would > >say at least the "200" position. Measure the width of this group of > >lines, there is total 15lp and at the point "200" the width is 0.2mm, > >so 5*15=75lp/mm. > > Ah. The markings are the width in microns. > It is just an incident, as I mentioned size information is available in PhotoShop and other softwares, use the tool make the measurment (e.g selecting tool). In PhotoShop you have to set the measurement unit to "cm" first. > > The most basic test of resolution is to photograph a high-contrast knife edge, and then to measure the illumination versus distance (perpendicular to the edge) function. The film will win in the present test case, ecen though the film is somewhat noiser (grainier). > Ok, even film has an edge it is very small. Also, I have to mention the test background, I just try to use a most common good quality film with a normal sence to simulate how we are using our equipment daily. The Zuiko I used for the test is two very best one and they won't be poorer than fix lens in resolution. > > If one reduces the exposure, the blooming should be reduced, while the >linearity and dynamic range of the CCD allow shadow detail to be retained, >as the theory goes. So, in the experiments, it might be useful to bracket >by one and two stops, for the experience. I guess the problem will be the >noise in the shadows. Yes, you are right, reduces exposure will help and the problem will happen in "very" strong spot light. I will try to make a comparison later. May be I'm able to find some night scene samples shot in the pass. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2935 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 01:33:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 01:33:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 17:34:26 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA15263 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:34:08 -0800 Received: (qmail 12231 invoked by uid 706); 25 Dec 2002 01:32:57 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 01:32:57 -0000 Message-ID: <00b401c2abb6$6c768760$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> <006401c2ab67$4b1fc670$c1e37ad1@hppav> <5.2.0.9.0.20021224160312.027f8fe8@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 09:39:09 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks, looks very good for a 2000mm lens. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard F. Man" > Browse from www.zuiko.com and check out the galleries. The shuttle is some > www.zuiko.com/Shuttle.htm > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3370 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 02:00:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 02:00:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 18:00:50 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15276 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:00:34 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2002122501592600300lq76ge>; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 01:59:26 +0000 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:56:58 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <00b401c2abb6$6c768760$0100a8c0@8ag.mshome.net> Message-Id: <26B059D2-17AC-11D7-B198-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You know, growing up in Florida, those early shuttle launches were like exotic camera shows wrapped up in a carnival. There would be thousands of people there all night before the launch. There used to be this strip of road right on the water where everyone parked. I don't think you can park there anymore. Anyway, all night long you could hear radios coming from cars tuned to NASA's information channel. Come dawn the photographers would all start setting up and the variety of bodies and glass would always blow me away. Just tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear. Some people with two or three rigs set up. I went to three or four of the early launches. The last one I went to was a year or two before Challenger and the number of people there was a fraction what it had been for the early launches. An interesting moment in history, though. And a cool photo, too. Nice job. -Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3855 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 02:33:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 02:33:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 18:34:28 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts5.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.163]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15307 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:34:11 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.184]) by simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021225022952.MXUN9402.simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:29:52 -0500 Message-ID: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: Subject: [OM] a few photos Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:30:46 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4358 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 03:12:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 03:12:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 19:12:32 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15322 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 19:12:16 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.118.173]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021225030801.EPCG4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:08:01 -0600 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:07:54 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.118.173] at Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:08:01 -0600 Message-Id: <20021225030801.EPCG4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul>, on 12/24/02 at 10:30 PM, "Wayne Culberson" said: >http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ A splendid start, Wayne! ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5107 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 04:31:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 04:31:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 20:31:35 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA15341 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:31:19 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.148.5f1802a (24895) for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:29:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <148.5f1802a.2b3a8e29@aol.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:29:29 EST Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_148.5f1802a.2b3a8e29_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_148.5f1802a.2b3a8e29_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/24/2002 8:34:28 PM Central Standard Time, waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca writes: > All > criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) > I like it and when your son gets through with yours, could you send him down here to Texas to work on one for me. Like the B&W and my two favorites are the light house and the sea scenic. On the light house I would have cropped the rocks out in the front as IMHO they distract from the overall impact of the photograph. On the scenic, might like to see earlier or later in day and wonder if you tried closing down and slowing the shutter to get a little movement in the water. Bill Barber --part1_148.5f1802a.2b3a8e29_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/24/2002 8:34:28 PM Central Standard Time, waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca writes:

All
criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-)


I like it and when your son gets through with yours, could you send him down here to Texas to work on one for me.  Like the B&W and my two favorites are the light house and the sea scenic.  On the light house I would have cropped the rocks out in the front as IMHO they distract from the overall impact of the photograph.  On the scenic, might like to see earlier or later in day and wonder if you tried closing down and slowing the shutter to get a little movement in the water.  Bill Barber --part1_148.5f1802a.2b3a8e29_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5659 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 05:16:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:16:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 21:16:49 2002 -0800 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA15379 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:16:34 -0800 Received: (qmail 23654 invoked by uid 417); 25 Dec 2002 05:16:32 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:16:32 -0000 Received: from enterprise.SoftHome.net ([204.39.225.135]) (AUTH: LOGIN csdunek@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:16:30 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021224171426.00a2b040@pop.softhome.net> X-Sender: csdunek@pop.softhome.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:15:23 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Charles Sdunek Subject: Re: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? In-Reply-To: <139.18e28a96.2b39a63a@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 06:59 AM 12/24/02, you wrote: >Chris, I'm afraid it a Chevrolet Suburban, which is often referred to as a >"Cowboy Cadillac." It is the size of a big pickup truck, with middle and >rear seats that either fold down or can be removed for those situations >where you want to haul some stuff. In my case that usually includes a >small camera kit and tripod, but might include an antique or two. It >doesn't have 4 wheel drive although many of them do. The main reason I >like them is because they are big and I'm a fairly big person. I can sit >up straight in them and have enough room to move around. BB I'd love a new suburban. Especially a diesel 4x4. Charles Visit the Sdunek family on the web at http://www.angelfire.com/mi/fenriz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5922 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 05:19:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:19:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 21:20:05 2002 -0800 Received: from mta03.fuse.net (mx3.fuse.net [216.68.1.123]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15394 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:19:49 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.32]) by mta03.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021225051857.EAOQ22580.mta03.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:18:57 -0500 Message-ID: <002501c2abd5$1a84f4e0$202e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <20021220175919.12376.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <000c01c2a8cb$6c64ad80$9a2ad451@hades> <006401c2ab67$4b1fc670$c1e37ad1@hppav> <5.2.0.9.0.20021224160312.027f8fe8@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:18:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nice work, John. Lama > www.zuiko.com/Shuttle.htm > > > I've put up a scan of a shot from the first shuttle launch (a 1000 with a > > > 2X!) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6210 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 05:22:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:22:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 21:23:09 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15402 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:22:54 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-220.s474.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.220] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18R3zM-0006QP-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:21:52 -0500 Message-ID: <000b01c2abd5$7eaa02d0$dce27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <114780-2200212022183431625@M2W045.mail2web.com> Subject: Re: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:34:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't have any background on that great piece of glass ;-) _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 1:34 PM Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Rob, It's a great lens, and the photos you get from it will be fabulous (assuming you're a good photographer :-)). It only falls down if you HAVE to have more zoom range than it offers. Otherwise, it's at the top of the heap for early-mid 1990's technology. There's very little raw details about the lens that I've ever seen. Perhaps Gary Reese or John Hermanson has something, as they seeem to have been pretty tuned in to Olympus Japan. Skip Original Message: ----------------- Wrom: KEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJ Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 22:58:39 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Thank you for making the $1075 I just spent seem like a better and better allocation of funds. ;-) Any more information on this "special glass" they used or is it a secret like the sauce McDonalds puts on Big Macs? -Rob (practically camping on my doorstep waiting for this lens to arrive) On Saturday, December 21, 2002, at 10:28 PM, Brian Swale wrote: > Also, with regard to the 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko, as far as I know it is > the first > (and last) of the last Zuiko series of design that used special glass > to get > very accurate colour. So, regardless of its resolution, the colour > delivery > should be spot on. > > Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6241 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 05:22:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:22:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 21:23:13 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15406 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:22:57 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-220.s474.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.220] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18R3zQ-0006QP-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:21:56 -0500 Message-ID: <000c01c2abd5$7f1791b0$dce27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <001901c2aa10$f6d75120$7451fea9@red> Subject: Re: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:35:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yeah, George, welcome back. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott & Barbara" To: Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 6:22 PM Subject: Re: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko > From one lurker to another welcome back. > > Anyone who does not recall George Anderson should check out the link below. > I have never forgotten this one! > > http://www.whitneygallery.com/html/coyote.html > > Cheers > > Scott > > Stone Mountain GA > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: George M. Anderson, Photographer > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:12 AM > Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko > > > > Hi. Been lurking for a short time. Am a returning member to the Oly list. > <> > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6704 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 05:23:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:23:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 21:23:32 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15410 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:23:14 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-220.s474.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.220] helo=hppav) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18R3zg-0006QP-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:22:13 -0500 Message-ID: <001201c2abd5$81abf830$dce27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <004e01c2ab55$2b466a00$6e2e44d8@lhommedieu> Subject: Re: [OM] Links to T32 panel FS, was WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:48:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If all else fails, I sell new T32 panels. www.zuiko.com/sales_motor_macro__flash.htm Scroll down to Flash Group. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Tom Murphy" ; Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 9:02 AM Subject: [OM] Links to T32 panel FS, was WTB: Calculator Panel for T32 Flash > Hi, Tom. > > Mike posted a link on Dec 17th. The page says he has / had a T32 calculator > panel. There were two version that I know of. One was labeled in feet and > the other in meters. If Mike is in the USA, the shipping cost would make it > a poor choice. > http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/for_sale.htm > > I don't know what part of the world Mike is in though. Since you 're in > Ireland, it may make sense to bookmark the guy in the Netherlands. > http://www.wide-angle.nl > His on-line catalog shows two of them in stock for 1 Euros each but it > doesn't specify how they are labeled. > > Hope this helps. I hope everyone has a safe Holiday. > > All the best, > Lama > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7060 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 05:32:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 05:32:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 24 21:33:24 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (snake.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15430 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:33:09 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18R4AG-0005Pn-00 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:33:08 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:32:19 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Ouch.... My BMW is old but I still don't want it to be anyone's target. I like that little car. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of IanG Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 4:19 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Bimmers are mostly know as TARGETS around here...... -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Cwiklinski Sent: 24 December 2002 23:08 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Peace... was Guns and Cameras? Jim wrote: >> Cowboy Cadillac huh! Around here they call Suburbans "Mountain BMW's" with BMW meaning Big Mormon Wagon. << No Jim. Suburbans/Yukon XL's are just called "BMW's" in Salt Lake City, UT and Idaho Falls, ID. Where BMW stands for "Basic Mormon Wagon". :0) Happy Holidays to all. John Cwiklinski _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&S U= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_eliminatevi ruses_3mf < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9176 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 10:04:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 10:04:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 02:04:49 2002 -0800 Received: from web14409.mail.yahoo.com (web14409.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA15560 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 02:04:32 -0800 Message-ID: <20021225100420.58618.qmail@web14409.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [205.188.208.104] by web14409.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 02:04:20 PST Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 02:04:20 -0800 (PST) From: "W. Xato" Subject: [OM] End of an Era To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021224145239.24142.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This post is a little self-centered but I have subscribed to a photo magazine continuously since 1972, first Modern Photography and then Popular Photography. My last issue was November of this year but they sent me a freebie for December probably because they could boast of circulation to their advertisers. It is with some sadness that I will not be receiving my monthly glossy with lots of ads to pore over. But not with the internet and all of you my necessity of a "fix" for information is satisfied. Although at times we have to wade through flame wars and other inanities, on the whole it is worth it not only for the photo stuff but also the comraderie. Thanks to all and to all a happy holiday season. Warren PS. And I save 12 bucks yearly subscription too. ===== Warren Xato For where to go when you know when -PhotoDates-and-Places@yahoogroups.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9852 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 10:06:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 10:06:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 02:06:34 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA15573 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 02:06:17 -0800 Received: from modem-4046.elk.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.76.175.206] helo=skelly) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18R8QZ-0000hD-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 10:06:15 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: [OM] Merry christmas everyone Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 10:06:20 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A very merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Everything is subject to the statement below that my legal advisors have insisted that I attach! Ian Please accept without obligation on the part of the wisher, implied or explicit, our best wishes for a socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practised within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice or secular practices of your choice, with respect to the religious/secular persuasions of other, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. We also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medical uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2003 but with due respect to the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make Great Britain great (not to imply that Great Britain is necessarily greater that any other country or is the only 'Great Britain' in the world) and without regard to the race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee. (an old 'un but still good) < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10522 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 11:07:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 11:07:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 03:07:37 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15608 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 03:07:20 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-46.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.46]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBPB0hP14598; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 00:00:43 +1300 Message-Id: <200212251100.gBPB0hP14598@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: "John Hermanson" , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 00:06:54 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/enriched; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Folks, URL is case-sensitive Try http://www.zuiko.com/13Gal.HTM Great shot! Brian > Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:12:43 -0500 > From: "John Hermanson" < > Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch > > I've settling in with the new Microtek 4000dpi scanner. So far so good. > I've put up a scan of a shot from the first shuttle launch (a 1000 with a > 2X!) Check it out if you have the time. > > http://www.zuiko.com/13Gal.htm > > _________________________________ > John Hermanson www.zuiko.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11448 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 12:14:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 12:14:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 04:14:40 2002 -0800 Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk (pfepb.post.tele.dk [193.162.153.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15699 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 04:14:23 -0800 Received: from get2net.dk (0x503ea020.boanxx10.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.160.32]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECDBF5EF2DB for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 13:14:03 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3E09A339.E5F132EE@get2net.dk> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 13:23:21 +0100 From: Klaus Elmquist Nielsen X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-3 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko References: <20021225100422.9225.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi George, These are some of the most beautiful photos I have seen. Cheers, Klaus At Sunday, December 22, 2002 6:22 PM "Scott & Barbara" wrote: > From one lurker to another welcome back. > > Anyone who does not recall George Anderson should check out the link below. > I have never forgotten this one! > > http://www.whitneygallery.com/html/coyote.html > > Cheers > > Scott > > Stone Mountain GA > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: George M. Anderson, Photographer > To: > Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:12 AM > Subject: RE: [OM] 35 ~ 80 f/2.8 Zuiko > > > > Hi. Been lurking for a short time. Am a returning member to the Oly list. > <> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11933 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 12:45:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 12:45:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 04:46:25 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15719 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 04:46:09 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.15c.18eb81cf (3932) for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 07:44:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <15c.18eb81cf.2b3b0220@aol.com> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 07:44:16 EST Subject: Re: [OM] End of an Era To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_15c.18eb81cf.2b3b0220_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_15c.18eb81cf.2b3b0220_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/25/2002 4:04:51 AM Central Standard Time, xato0@yahoo.com writes: > And I save 12 bucks yearly subscription too. > > The real value inside some of these publication is somewhat limited, however if you have an interest in any you might want to keep an eye on ebay. A year or so ago I bought for around $24 or $25 a three year subscription to 3 magazines (Popular, American and Outdoor Photography). They just keep coming and at a total expense of less than $10, not a bad deal. Also got a couple of free coupons in the magazines for free Kodak Elitechrome Extra. Bill Barber --part1_15c.18eb81cf.2b3b0220_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/25/2002 4:04:51 AM Central Standard Time, xato0@yahoo.com writes:

And I save 12 bucks yearly subscription too.



The real value inside some of these publication is somewhat limited, however if you have an interest in any you might want to keep an eye on ebay.  A year or so ago I bought for around $24 or $25 a three year subscription to 3 magazines (Popular, American and Outdoor Photography).  They just keep coming and at a total expense of less than $10, not a bad deal.  Also got a couple of free coupons in the magazines for free Kodak Elitechrome Extra.  Bill Barber    --part1_15c.18eb81cf.2b3b0220_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12189 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 12:48:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 12:48:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 04:48:44 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15727 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 04:48:28 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.18a.13767b4b (3932) for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 07:46:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <18a.13767b4b.2b3b02ad@aol.com> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 07:46:37 EST Subject: Re: [OM] Merry christmas everyone To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_18a.13767b4b.2b3b02ad_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_18a.13767b4b.2b3b02ad_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/25/2002 4:06:35 AM Central Standard Time, I@nskelly.com writes: > A very merry Christmas and a happy New Year Well, you made my Christmas a bit jollier. Hope you and yours have a Merry one also. Bill Barber --part1_18a.13767b4b.2b3b02ad_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/25/2002 4:06:35 AM Central Standard Time, I@nskelly.com writes:

A very merry Christmas and a happy New Year


Well, you made my Christmas a bit jollier.  Hope you and yours have a Merry one also.  Bill Barber --part1_18a.13767b4b.2b3b02ad_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12899 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 14:02:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 14:02:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 06:02:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15767 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 06:02:29 -0800 Received: from [62.64.204.43] (helo=[62.64.204.43]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18RC2l-000L9t-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 13:57:56 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> References: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 10:56:58 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Good stuff Wayne. I cannot work out why the files are so large, since they are only 600 pixels across; however, that is why they take a while to load. Happy Christmas Chris At 22:30 -0400 24/12/02, Wayne Culberson wrote: >My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try= =2E >Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed >things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience >of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, an= d >the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s= , >all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All >criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) >http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ >Wayne -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13294 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 14:27:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 14:27:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 06:28:11 2002 -0800 Received: from lakemtao04.cox.net (lakemtao04.cox.net [68.1.17.241]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15775 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 06:27:54 -0800 Received: from number2 ([68.10.216.31]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with SMTP id <20021225142339.YPGA22825.lakemtao04.cox.net@number2> for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 09:23:39 -0500 Message-ID: <007601c2ac21$897464c0$0301a8c0@hr.cox.net> From: "Bryan Pilati" To: References: <3E078329.D52089D1@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 09:25:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id GAA15775 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sounds like a lot of the women you know have unresolved psychological issues. They have to take their frustrations out on men by demeaning the= m and what they own. Bryan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 4:42 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? > I always thought it was because both photographic lenses and gun > barrels are phallic symbols... > At the risk of being shot, run over and then photographed I'll add to that phallic analogy the front end of a lot of those SUV's and pickups. Check out the Dodge pickup for example. A lot of women I know think that guys who drive a rig like that are trying to make up for inadequacies in other areas. Mike (ducking) -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14427 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 16:45:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 16:45:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 08:46:11 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts3.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.12]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15812 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 08:45:51 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.24]) by simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021225164133.SJTP22749.simmts3-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:41:33 -0500 Message-ID: <000f01c2ac34$a1832ac0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <148.5f1802a.2b3a8e29@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:42:33 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I like it and when your son gets through with yours, could you send him down > here to Texas to work on one for me. Like the B&W and my two favorites are > the light house and the sea scenic. On the light house I would have cropped > the rocks out in the front as IMHO they distract from the overall impact of > the photograph. On the scenic, might like to see earlier or later in day and > wonder if you tried closing down and slowing the shutter to get a little > movement in the water. Bill Barber > Making pages is what Dan, my son, does for work. Here are a couple links to his work. http://www.connors.ca/ http://www.connors.ca/brunswick/canadaenglish/mainpage.asp Here is another one, but all the pics he took with a Canon G2 which the college supplied for his making the page. I think there is more pictures if you click on "about" . http://www.nbccsj-contracts.ca/ I never know what to do with cropping afterwards, as I'm one of those people who always tries to cram too much into a photo. Often I look for something to put in the foreground as a point of reference, but it doesn't always work. On the one with the waves, I thought of trying some on a tripod, to blur the waves with a slower shutter, but the wind was blowing way too hard for the tripod to stand up (need a better tripod too, but Santa messed up again). Besides, I was having real trouble trying to avoid too much salt spray. I did shoot a whole series that day though. That much wind and that high a tide is quite unusual for that spot. The tides likely vary maybe 30 feet in that spot, and the high tide and best shooting lasted only about 30 minutes. I remember now I was using the OM1n that day, because I remember giving it a good wipe down to get any salt off afterwards. Remember never to buy a used OM1n from me :-). Actually, I protected it pretty carefully. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14688 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 16:46:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 16:46:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 08:47:04 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts7.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.165]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15820 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 08:46:46 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.24]) by simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021225164223.CLEO28476.simmts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:42:23 -0500 Message-ID: <001001c2ac34$bf445ac0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:43:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It was because they were originally saved at 150 dpi from the scanner, not the normal 72 used for the web. They are changed now. Wayne ----- Original Message ----- From: Chris Barker To: Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 6:56 AM Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos >Good stuff Wayne. I cannot work out why the files are so large, >since they are only 600 pixels across; however, that is why they take >a while to load. Happy Christmas Chris < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15783 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 18:55:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 18:55:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 10:55:58 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15872 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 10:55:41 -0800 Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 13:55:12 -0500 Message-Id: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re:[OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! Me? I struck out. Again! No surprise, though. Even Santa thinks I=92ve got too much stuff already, not to mention my wife's frequently muttered opinion. I knew that well had gone dry years ago, just about the time you could no longer buy Sylvania Blue Dots at the drugstore. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16126 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 19:14:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 19:14:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 11:14:55 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15882 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:14:38 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-198-20.client.attbi.com[12.236.198.20]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021225191329002000dogke>; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:13:30 +0000 Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:11:02 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Message-Id: <9C1B627E-183C-11D7-A251-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Heh...well, I got a Fuji 3800. It's no E-20, but I thought it was a really sweet gift for April to put under the tree. It has no provision for saving uncompressed raw or tiff files, which is kind of a bummer, but the compression artifacts at its 2048 x 1536 maximum quality setting aren't *too* bad and the files are only 1.2 Mb. Those xD cards are pretty amazing. I keep wanting to put one on my tongue and wait to see the pretty colors. -Rob On Wednesday, December 25, 2002, at 10:55 AM, Walt Wayman wrote: > Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus > goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- > related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if > it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16436 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 19:23:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 19:23:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 11:23:59 2002 -0800 Received: from web20204.mail.yahoo.com (web20204.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.226.59]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA15890 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:23:42 -0800 Message-ID: <20021225192329.93861.qmail@web20204.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [129.44.116.24] by web20204.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:23:29 PST Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:23:29 -0800 (PST) From: marcus Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <9C1B627E-183C-11D7-A251-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I got 16 rolls of print film. Even I have to admit that my equipment cupboard overfloweth (I will make room for that -3Ti, though). -Marcus > On Wednesday, December 25, 2002, at 10:55 AM, Walt > Wayman wrote: > > > Isn't it about time we started to hear from those > who got Olympus > > goodies, even digital ones, or at least something > photography- > > related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, > even to gloat if > > it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, > please! > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing > List > > < For questions, > mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: > http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16717 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 19:28:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 19:28:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 11:29:17 2002 -0800 Received: from pioneernet.net (mail.pioneernet.net [207.115.64.224]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15902 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:29:00 -0800 Received: from bob [66.147.197.155] by pioneernet.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A6D6DA1C00AA; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:28:22 -0800 From: "Bob Fenstermacher" To: Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 11:29:04 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nice site Wayne-great start. I especially like the second oxcart photo-vg composition. The Outhouse jpeg is great, although I'd be very unsure about using it's facilities. :>o If you have an opportunity to reshoot at that location, perhaps shooting it vertically might work. What a mill! When you can, please add some notes as to locations and the obvious camera tech stuff-you have some unique subjects that are very interesting. Thanks for the photos-Merry Christmas. Bob F -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Culberson Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 6:31 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] a few photos My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17179 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 20:04:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 20:04:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 12:05:10 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15913 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:04:52 -0800 Received: from [195.202.39.182] (mueasb-wan182.citykom.de [195.202.39.182]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA08785 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 21:04:04 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasb-wan182.citykom.de [195.202.39.182] claimed to be [195.202.39.182] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 21:04:10 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca hi, well, the "Christkind" have had a 14mm/3,5 with an OM-Bajonett - i=B4m not sure if it is a goodie, but anyway its a nice game - great view, great step to my 18mm........can anyone tell about? best regards, Christoph Am 25.12.2002 19:55 Uhr schrieb "Walt Wayman" unter : > Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus > goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- > related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if > it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17459 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 20:08:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 20:08:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 12:08:56 2002 -0800 Received: from out003.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15921 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:08:38 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.87]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021225200423.JCZP21770.out003.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 14:04:23 -0600 Message-ID: <001101c2ac50$d14a3de0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Subject: Re: Re:[OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 15:04:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out003.verizon.net from [141.157.99.87] at Wed, 25 Dec 2002 14:04:22 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No OM stuff, or photo stuff here, unless you count the comfy chair I got for the computer desk at which I scan negs and prints made with my OM's. On a related note, I am giving my daughter an OM-2S, 50/18, 28/3.5 and Kiron 80-200 to get here started on her 'artistic' interests. We haven't exchanged gifts yet, so I'm still hoping she likes it! We got a once in a blue moon white Christmas. Caught everyone off guard here, north west of Baltimore MD. Glad tidings to all. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 1:55 PM Subject: Re:[OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! Me? I struck out. Again! No surprise, though. Even Santa thinks I've got too much stuff already, not to mention my wife's frequently muttered opinion. I knew that well had gone dry years ago, just about the time you could no longer buy Sylvania Blue Dots at the drugstore. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18749 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 22:43:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 22:43:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 14:44:13 2002 -0800 Received: from mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.149]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16016 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 14:43:55 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax83-b178.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.23.178]) by mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBPMhqL24742 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 09:43:53 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 09:42:21 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Interesting photos, Wayne. I liked the one of the two bullocks pulling the dray. Reminds me of the early bullock trains we had in Australia at the turn of the century. Used for hauling logs and shipments of wool etc they would have up to five or six pairs of beasts driven by the one "bullocky". These blokes had the reputation of being able to swear constantly for five minutes without repeating themselves once! Magic stuff. Happy Christmas, John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Culberson Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 1:31 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] a few photos My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19438 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 23:51:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 23:51:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 15:52:00 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16062 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 15:51:42 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930315B2A2 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:50:55 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue In-Reply-To: Message from "Timpe, Jim" of "Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:07:08 -0800." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4; Emacs 21.2 Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:50:55 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021225235055.930315B2A2@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message , "Timpe, Jim" writes: >That I can tolerate... it's the cookie crumbs that Santa leaves all over the >place that annoys me.... You got off easily, Jim. Over here, Santa came down the chimney and we've been cleaning it up all morning. :-( Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20079 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 00:59:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 00:59:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 16:59:58 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16089 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 16:59:40 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-19.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.19]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBQ0rCP26401 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:53:12 +1300 Message-Id: <200212260053.gBQ0rCP26401@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:59:34 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) more members pages uploaded X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, Four more members page links uploaded. Carlos, 2 Charles's and Wayne Culberson. Seasons greetings to all Brian http://homepages.caverock.net.nz/~bj/photography/zuikoholics/members.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21240 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 03:20:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 03:20:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 19:20:35 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16125 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:20:17 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-66-140-172-74.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [66.140.172.74]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBQ3Jj9F038994 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 22:19:46 -0500 Message-ID: <001601c2ac8d$80d67620$4aac8c42@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021218235232.24116.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] AG snow Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 21:18:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a recent post, AgSchnozz described a planned trip to Branson and Tulsa. My inlaws live not far from Branson, and at last measurement, 14 inches of snow had fallen. Roads were mostly impassible. Generally an ugly time. Let's all hope he returns intact. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21578 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 03:33:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 03:33:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 19:33:46 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16137 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:33:29 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18ROm0-0006Ij-00 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:33:28 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] AG snow Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:32:38 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <001601c2ac8d$80d67620$4aac8c42@swbell.net> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Please send the snow here. We need more...much more. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Bill Pearce Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 8:19 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] AG snow In a recent post, AgSchnozz described a planned trip to Branson and Tulsa. My inlaws live not far from Branson, and at last measurement, 14 inches of snow had fallen. Roads were mostly impassible. Generally an ugly time. Let's all hope he returns intact. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21924 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 03:48:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 03:48:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 19:49:18 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16162 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:49:01 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-241-48-12.client.attbi.com[12.241.48.12]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021226034753001003nbtte>; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 03:47:53 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 21:50:36 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! Walt Nothing Olympus, Walt, but I did receive a copy of Michael Covington's fine Astrophotography for Amateurs (featuring many shots from his OM-1). Any my charming wife presented me with a nice, new 19-inch monitor that I won't have to crank the brightness and contrast to the stop to work on scanned OM-images in Photoshop (unlike the dented, company-surplussed monitor I am using now). Oh, and more RAM to perform careful unsharp masking on those same scanned OM-images, faster (perhaps trying C. H. Ling's suggested values). But, best of all, all of my family was here and healthy and wanted their pictures taken. Merry Christmas, my friends, Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22276 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 04:03:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 04:03:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 20:04:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16176 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:04:11 -0800 Received: (qmail 30595 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 04:04:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 26 Dec 2002 04:04:21 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0A8330.9080104@speakeasy.net> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 22:18:56 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No camera gear, but my brother sent me a new train calendar. He picked it because it was the one with the most Conrail pictures. I looked, and sure enough- January and February photo credits are for Daniel Troy. Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa (I used to live near Philadelphia) Walt Wayman wrote: > Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus > goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- > related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if > it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22721 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 04:31:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 04:31:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Wed Dec 25 20:31:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp013.mail.yahoo.com (smtp013.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.57]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA16197 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:31:22 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-212-238.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.212.238 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 04:30:36 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0A85EB.2000909@sbcglobal.net> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:30:35 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos References: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nice images. My favorites are the oxen and Sunset Garden. The most of the images could use a bit of levels adjustment, as the lightest and darkest tones in the image don't extend to the light and dark limits of the screen. A little gentle sharpening wouldn't hurt either. I'm sure none of this applies to the originals, just to the limitations/requirements of web publishing. Moose Wayne Culberson wrote: >My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. >Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed >things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience >of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and >the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, >all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All >criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) >http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24968 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 09:46:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 09:46:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 01:46:49 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA16316 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 01:46:31 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-30.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.30]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBQ9dwP21878 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:39:58 +1300 Message-Id: <200212260939.gBQ9dwP21878@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:46:23 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) an OM Christmas X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, Well, I'm feeling pretty happy about at least one thing this season. I can't claim to have made a Zuikoholic convert, but the toe is in the door ;-) My only son is 19 yrs, quite tall at 6 ft 5in (nearly 2 metres), and studying law and commerce at Uni. He has seen me use my gear and I tell him what I'm doing, he has seen his Mother use one of my Rollei 35s she collared about 18 years ago and I've hardly touched since (she carries it everywhere all the time), and his sister use an OM10 and three lenses that she now has. But all he has used is a Panasonic P&S (or is it POS?); a focus-free DX coding auto-wind auto- rewind box. Actually, with care they take recognisable 5x7 shots. But, re OMs etc, he has said he couldn't manage those controls he knows nothing about and his Mother said he's not interested in "that kind of photography". But I've seen some of the shots he attempted on a recent hiking trip using the Panasonic, so I thought otherwise and decided to put him to the test. He also is one of these people who are suspicious of used things - new is usually better ... ... ... So ... I have an OM10 that I am part-way through repairing / refurbishing, I fitted an F.Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 that has served me well for 20 years, two new batteries, and wrapped it up as his Xmas present with a note that I had to have it back to finish fixing it, and also I reserved the right to substitute something else within 3 weeks (I have my eye on a local OM20 that needs slight work - less than the 10 does, and it's in much better condition). To my delight and a little to my surprise he was clearly very pleased that someone would consider him fit to have one of these complicated cameras. And immediately started fiddling with it. So we will schedule some lessons at mutually convenient times. :-)) Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25646 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 10:52:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 10:52:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 02:52:54 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA16346 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 02:52:35 -0800 Received: from [62.64.233.125] (helo=[62.64.233.125]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18RVat-000GAl-00; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:50:27 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <001001c2ac34$bf445ac0$7212a20a@waynecul> References: <000501c2abbd$a5492c80$7212a20a@waynecul> <001001c2ac34$bf445ac0$7212a20a@waynecul> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 06:48:41 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Cc: "Wayne Culberson" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OK, but as Tom Scales pointed out on the List some months ago (2001 perhaps) the file resolution makes no difference to the file size; it's the pixel size that counts. I save all my web files at 600ppi. Chris At 12:43 -0400 25/12/02, Wayne Culberson wrote: >It was because they were originally saved at 150 dpi from the scanner, not >the normal 72 used for the web. They are changed now. >Wayne >----- Original Message ----- >From: Chris Barker >To: >Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 6:56 AM >Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos > > >>Good stuff Wayne. I cannot work out why the files are so large, >>since they are only 600 pixels across; however, that is why they take >>a while to load. > >Happy Christmas > >Chris -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27427 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 13:05:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 13:05:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 05:06:17 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16486 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 05:05:59 -0800 From: NSURIT@aol.com Received: from NSURIT@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.4d.296cfc2d (4560) for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:04:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4d.296cfc2d.2b3c5843@aol.com> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:04:03 EST Subject: [OM] Trade my OM 1 MD cap for same for OM 4 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_4d.296cfc2d.2b3c5843_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_4d.296cfc2d.2b3c5843_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I need a motor drive/battery cap for the OM 4 (the threaded one from the 2S forward) and will swap one for the OM 1 thru 2n. Would also be willing to buy. Please respond off list. Bill Barber --part1_4d.296cfc2d.2b3c5843_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I need a motor drive/battery cap for the OM 4 (the threaded one from the 2S forward) and will swap one for the OM 1 thru 2n.  Would also be willing to buy.  Please respond off list.  Bill Barber --part1_4d.296cfc2d.2b3c5843_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27940 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 13:48:21 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 13:48:21 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 05:48:57 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16503 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 05:48:36 -0800 Received: from default ([62.6.114.114]) by care4free.net ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:43:52 -0000 Message-ID: <000701c2ace5$03076620$7272063e@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:43:40 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No OMs, but I now have an efficient method of carrying my gear into the mountains; a LowePro Mini Trekker. Have just worked out how the bungee things work... I could get 2 bodies and all my lenses in here. It's vast. And now I can carry my tripod in some comfort. Thanks, Fiona. As a wee pre-Christmas splash I treated my YashicaMat to a Rollei lens hood and filters, hood for my second 50/1.8 and a 1-8 screen NIB. Now, if the rain will just stop... All the best of the season, Peace and Safety for all of you, Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25-12-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28258 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 13:55:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 13:55:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 05:56:30 2002 -0800 Received: from tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16521 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 05:56:12 -0800 Received: from modem-144.silicon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.13.144] helo=pbncomputer) by tmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18RYUb-0008WF-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:56:10 +0000 Message-ID: <003501c2ace7$b88d8360$900d883e@pbncomputer> From: "Roger Wesson" To: References: <9C1B627E-183C-11D7-A251-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:04:32 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I got a long-awaited slide projector and a big slide storage box - now I can subject people to slide shows with enormously greater ease! And won't they all be grateful? Roger < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28506 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 13:56:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 13:56:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 05:57:08 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA16525 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 05:56:51 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 26 Dec 2002 05:56:27 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 05:56:27 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] AG snow Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 06:00:21 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Dec 2002 13:56:27.0787 (UTC) FILETIME=[95F14DB0:01C2ACE6] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca He's got a 4wd Jeep, and I believe even his family van is all wheel drive. He should be OK. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Pearce Subject: [OM] AG snow In a recent post, AgSchnozz described a planned trip to Branson and Tulsa. My inlaws live not far from Branson, and at last measurement, 14 inches of snow had fallen. Roads were mostly impassible. Generally an ugly time. Let's all hope he returns intact. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28899 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 14:17:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 14:17:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 06:18:33 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16543 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 06:18:15 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 26 Dec 2002 06:17:52 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 06:16:43 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 06:21:55 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Dec 2002 14:17:52.0646 (UTC) FILETIME=[93C73A60:01C2ACE9] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As others have mentioned, really nice, Wayne. Are the coastal shots of the West or East coast? Looks like Oregon coastal to me. -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Culberson [mailto:waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 6:31 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] a few photos My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29486 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:07:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:07:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:08:05 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16562 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:07:47 -0800 Received: from 216-164-199-64.s64.tnt4.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([216.164.199.64] helo=xps) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18RZaw-0006RQ-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:06:46 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20021226100238.00a838f0@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:02:38 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? In-Reply-To: <20021226105224.25698.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Steve Goss > >No camera gear, but my brother sent me a new train calendar. He picked >it because it was the one with the most Conrail pictures. I looked, and >sure enough- January and February photo credits are for Daniel Troy. > >Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa (I used to live near Philadelphia) Hey Steve - keep looking. There's more than two! Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29771 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:12:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:12:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:12:49 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16570 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:12:31 -0800 Received: from 216-164-199-64.s64.tnt4.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([216.164.199.64] helo=xps) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18RZgU-0007Go-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:12:31 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20021226100835.00a838f0@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:08:35 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? In-Reply-To: <20021226105224.25698.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Walt Wayman" > >Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus >goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- >related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if >it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! I didn't get anything, but I did give my brother a mint M-1 and matching M-System 50/1.4 for Christmas. Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30083 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:21:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:21:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:22:11 2002 -0800 Received: from vir1.relay.fluke.com (vir1.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.25]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16578 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:21:54 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir1.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:21:26 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:20:16 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:25:28 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Dec 2002 15:21:26.0083 (UTC) FILETIME=[74C38930:01C2ACF2] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca would you care to be a 'Big Brother'............ hope your brother was duly blown away. Quite the nice gift you gave. -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Troy I didn't get anything, but I did give my brother a mint M-1 and matching M-System 50/1.4 for Christmas. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30342 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:23:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:23:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:24:04 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts8.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.166]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16586 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:23:46 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.189]) by simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021226151926.WLWI11876.simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:19:26 -0500 Message-ID: <002601c2acf2$523ba960$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:20:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Interesting photos, Wayne. I liked the one of the two bullocks pulling the > dray. Reminds me of the early bullock trains we had in Australia at the turn > of the century. Used for hauling logs and shipments of wool etc they would > have up to five or six pairs of beasts driven by the one "bullocky". These > blokes had the reputation of being able to swear constantly for five minutes > without repeating themselves once! Magic stuff. > > Happy Christmas, > John. These were some I took at Kings Landing here in NB, Canada, which is a recreated village supposed to be set in the 1800's or thereabouts - a tourist trap kind of thing. I think this guy probably had to teach his oxen non four-letter commands, or it might upset the tourists :-) The biggest problem in getting pictures there is trying to frame out all the tourists. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30632 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:29:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:29:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:30:05 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts6.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.164]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16598 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:29:47 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.189]) by simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021226152527.WPTD17938.simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:25:27 -0500 Message-ID: <002b01c2acf3$29bedd80$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:26:27 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca East coast of NB, Canada, about 15 minutes from where I live. The light house sets on one of the many jagged points, that is why it is catching the light of the setting (western of course) sun on the water side. Wayne ----- Original Message ----- From: Timpe, Jim To: Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos > As others have mentioned, really nice, Wayne. Are the coastal shots of the > West or East coast? Looks like Oregon coastal to me. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wayne Culberson [mailto:waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca] > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 6:31 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] a few photos > > > My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. > Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed > things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience > of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and > the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, > all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All > criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) > http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ > Wayne > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30917 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:34:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:34:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:35:19 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16606 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:35:01 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.189]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021226153043.VKYP24006.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:30:43 -0500 Message-ID: <003001c2acf3$e6e08760$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <3.0.2.32.20021226100238.00a838f0@pop.erols.com> Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:31:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >No camera gear, but my brother sent me a new train calendar. He picked > >it because it was the one with the most Conrail pictures. I looked, and > >sure enough- January and February photo credits are for Daniel Troy. > > > >Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa (I used to live near Philadelphia) > > > Hey Steve - keep looking. There's more than two! > > Steve Troy I was looking for this train calendar, and found a couple of some trains in the Canadian Rockies, but couldn't identify who took the pics from the back. It was seal packed, so I couldn't look inside. So how do you identify this calendar? Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31165 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 15:34:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 15:34:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 07:35:35 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16610 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:35:17 -0800 Received: from evtexc06.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.99]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:40:10 -0800 Received: by evtexc06.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:34:53 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 07:38:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Dec 2002 15:40:10.0390 (UTC) FILETIME=[12E72B60:01C2ACF5] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You're a lucky bloke. I'm about three hours from scenic coastline like that. -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Culberson [mailto:waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca] Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 7:26 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos East coast of NB, Canada, about 15 minutes from where I live. The light house sets on one of the many jagged points, that is why it is catching the light of the setting (western of course) sun on the water side. Wayne ----- Original Message ----- From: Timpe, Jim To: Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos > As others have mentioned, really nice, Wayne. Are the coastal shots of the > West or East coast? Looks like Oregon coastal to me. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wayne Culberson [mailto:waynecul@nb.sympatico.ca] > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 6:31 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] a few photos > > > My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. > Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed > things up if you have dial up like I do. Right now it requires the patience > of Job. The B&W are scans of negs, Konica 400 monochrome, taken on OM10, and > the color are scans of slides, Elitechrome 100 extra color, taken with OM2s, > all Zuiko lenses of some length. We hope to expand and improve it soon. All > criticisms welcome, but remember it is Christmas, so be gentle :-) > http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/ > Wayne > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32174 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 17:29:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 17:29:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 09:30:15 2002 -0800 Received: from apollo.email.starband.net (smtp2.starband.net [148.78.247.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16683 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 09:29:57 -0800 Received: from Starband (vsat-148-64-162-241.c005.g4.mrt.starband.net [148.64.162.241]) by apollo.email.starband.net (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id gBQHQ0uA014336 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:26:08 -0500 Message-Id: <200212261726.gBQHQ0uA014336@apollo.email.starband.net> From: "Barry B. Bean" To: "olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:25:04 -0600 X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2502) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;3) In-Reply-To: <3E074549.6070507@achtung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [OM] Guns and Cameras? Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:18:01 +0800, Albert wrote: >1000f all my friends that are [gun] shooters, are also >photographers... I have yet to figure out the reason why, only thing I >can speculate is that they like "shooting" be it a gun or a camera.. > >I'd love to hear the theories though.. I wouldn't go as far as 100%, but a sizeable percentage of my fellow photographers are also shooters. I think its the gear factor. There's nothing like having a new (or even a well used and loved) gadget in your hands. -- Barry B. Bean Bean & Bean Cotton Company Peach Orchard, MO www.beancotton.com www.beanformissouri.org < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32520 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 17:40:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 17:40:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 09:41:09 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16691 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 09:40:50 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.69]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021226173635.INYA4558.pop018.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:36:35 -0600 Message-ID: <001a01c2ad05$558386c0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212260939.gBQ9dwP21878@central.caverock.net.nz> Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) an OM Christmas Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:36:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [141.157.96.69] at Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:36:34 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well done, Brian! I hope your son finds great satisfaction in his new tool. My 21 year old daughter proclaimed to the family that 'now I have a REAL camera!', refering to her OM-2S. She shot two rolls at the family gathering, finding every angle she could. Fun to watch. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Swale" To: Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 4:46 AM Subject: [OM] ( OM ) an OM Christmas > Hi folks, > > Well, I'm feeling pretty happy about at least one thing this season. I can't > claim to have made a Zuikoholic convert, but the toe is in the door ;-) > > My only son is 19 yrs, quite tall at 6 ft 5in (nearly 2 metres), and studying > law and commerce at Uni. > > He has seen me use my gear and I tell him what I'm doing, he has seen his > Mother use one of my Rollei 35s she collared about 18 years ago and I've > hardly touched since (she carries it everywhere all the time), and his sister > use an OM10 and three lenses that she now has. But all he has used is a > Panasonic P&S (or is it POS?); a focus-free DX coding auto-wind auto- > rewind box. Actually, with care they take recognisable 5x7 shots. > > But, re OMs etc, he has said he couldn't manage those controls he knows > nothing about and his Mother said he's not interested in "that kind of > photography". But I've seen some of the shots he attempted on a recent > hiking trip using the Panasonic, so I thought otherwise and decided to put > him to the test. He also is one of these people who are suspicious of used > things - new is usually better ... ... ... So ... > > I have an OM10 that I am part-way through repairing / refurbishing, I fitted an > F.Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 that has served me well for 20 years, two new batteries, > and wrapped it up as his Xmas present with a note that I had to have it back > to finish fixing it, and also I reserved the right to substitute something else > within 3 weeks (I have my eye on a local OM20 that needs slight work - less > than the 10 does, and it's in much better condition). > > To my delight and a little to my surprise he was clearly very pleased that > someone would consider him fit to have one of these complicated cameras. > And immediately started fiddling with it. So we will schedule some lessons > at mutually convenient times. :-)) > > Brian > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 337 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 17:46:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 17:46:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 09:47:24 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16703 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 09:47:06 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Rc65-0004mT-00 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:47:05 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:46:15 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <3.0.2.32.20021226100835.00a838f0@pop.erols.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Santa brought me a very heavy box with an OM3 and some other things including an OM4T, OM2000, 300mm f-4.5, 16mm f-3.5, 28mm f-2, 85mm f-2, 70-210 zoom, 35-70 zoom, T32 flash, Bounce Grip 2, Winder 2, and a whole bunch of filters and other goodies. Unfortunately, I had to cross his palm with a bit of silver to coax delivery. This is the collection of a man who said his vision is getting too bad for manual focus. I'll probably keep the 16mm and the 28mm and re-sell the other items. I just set up an OM-1N and T20 flash with a 50mm lens for my granddaughters to use for a while. When they learn how to use the manual system I'll give them the OM2000 to keep. So far they seem to really be enjoying it. /jim From: "Walt Wayman" > >Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus >goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- >related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if >it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 715 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 18:00:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 18:00:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 10:01:30 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16718 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:01:11 -0800 From: Pschings@aol.com Received: from Pschings@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.4b.28733b9d (16110) for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:59:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from aol.com (mow-m19.webmail.aol.com [64.12.180.135]) by air-id12.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILINID122-1226125915; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:59:15 1900 Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:59:15 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4E923669.652D5DD6.0080BFFB@aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In a message dated 12/26/2002 12:46:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: > I just set up an OM-1N and T20 flash with a 50mm lens for my granddaughters > to use for a while. When they learn how to use the manual > system I'll give them the OM2000 to keep. You let them use an OM-1n and then expect them to give it up for an OM2000? You're cruel... ;-) Paul Schings < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1335 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 18:52:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 18:52:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 10:52:38 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16758 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 10:52:20 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021226183918.JZN214174.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:39:18 -0500 Message-ID: <02fe01c2acff$a433eea0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:54:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:39:18 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus > goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- > related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if > it was an OM-3Ti or some such. But today only, please! > > Walt > > I got an Olympus goodie by having the chance to meet fellow list member Wayne Culberson, his very gracious wife and son on 23 December. Wayne has kindly lent me his T-32 flash for a week or three.We had an interesting conversation on all things Olympus, Mrs Culberson had fresh coffee and home made petit bonbons for us all and Wayne pointed out some of his local photo locations. Not a nicer and more welcoming family could one wish to meet. Thanks Wayne. John Hudson New Brunswick, Canada < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1691 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 19:07:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 19:07:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 11:07:52 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16768 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:07:33 -0800 Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:07:09 -0500 Message-Id: <200212261407.AA1428947248@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) an OM Christmas X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am envious. We have four kids, and most of them have turned out fairly well in spite of us: two PhD's, a DVM, but -- sob -- there's the N*k*n nincompoop. The three smart ones at least all have Olympus cameras, even if the P&S kind. The foolish one, rebellious his whole life, is slowly coming around, though. With age comes wisdom, I suppose, although slowly in the case of some of us. He's always looking through the viewfinder of whatever OM I happen to let him get close to, and then a strange gleam comes into his eyes, which I take to mean, "I wonder what's in your will. Do I get this stuff when you croak?" He's even starting to complain about various aspects of his big, fat N*k*ns (yes, he has more than one), whining about inaccurate autofocus and how hard it is to focus manually since the viewfinder is so dark and crappy. I try not to smile. No, I don't! Hah! I laugh out loud and berate him and his camera, his lenses, even his camera bag and tripod, occasionally his dog, just like a good father should! Good parenting never ends. Congratulations on doing a better job with yours. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Brian Swale" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:46:23 +1300 >Hi folks, > >Well, I'm feeling pretty happy about at least one thing this >season. I can't claim to have made a Zuikoholic convert, but the >toe is in the door ;-) > ---SNIP--- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2173 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 19:41:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 19:41:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 11:42:15 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h012.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA16789 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:41:56 -0800 Received: (cpmta 6399 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 11:40:55 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.240) with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 11:40:55 -0800 X-Sent: 26 Dec 2002 19:40:55 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:40:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Message-ID: <3E0B14F3.4905.2626F836@localhost> In-reply-to: <000701c2ace5$03076620$7272063e@default> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Thursday, December 26, 2002 at 13:43 Donald MacDonald wrote: > No OMs, but I now have an efficient method of carrying my gear into the > mountains; a LowePro Mini Trekker. Have just worked out how the bungee > things work... > > I could get 2 bodies and all my lenses in here. It's vast. ... Sometimes it's better to use something half-vast. Merry Christmas, tOM ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2422 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 19:42:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 19:42:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 11:43:23 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16794 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:43:04 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-04.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.4]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBQJaMP21516; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:36:23 +1300 Message-Id: <200212261936.gBQJaMP21516@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: "Wayne Culberson" , olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:42:51 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Wayne and all, Wayne wrote > My son has started to build me a web page, and we grabbed a few pics to try. > Okay, so we have a long way to go, and it needs a little work to speed things up > if you have dial up like I do. For my preference, I'd like to see a name and description of the photo on each photo page - a little about it. Many of those photos seem to tell a story as well as being photos; it would add to the attraction to have some of that story. And when there are more shots, the details of camera, lens and film if you have them. A great start. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2795 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 19:58:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 19:58:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 11:58:37 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (idscc05.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16818 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 11:58:19 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18Re94-0008CV-00 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:58:18 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:57:28 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <4E923669.652D5DD6.0080BFFB@aol.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Weeeeel, I probably should have said OM2000 or OM2N as both are available. I recently bought an extra OM2N from Tom Scales with this in mind. Hell, maybe they will prefer to use the OM-1N or have both manual and automatic. They make good decisions so I'll let them decide after they experience both. The OM2N operation with the flash works so well that's been my favorite over the years. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Pschings@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 10:59 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? In a message dated 12/26/2002 12:46:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, jnmcbr@srv.net writes: > I just set up an OM-1N and T20 flash with a 50mm lens for my granddaughters > to use for a while. When they learn how to use the manual > system I'll give them the OM2000 to keep. You let them use an OM-1n and then expect them to give it up for an OM2000? You're cruel... ;-) Paul Schings < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3274 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 20:26:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 20:26:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 12:27:34 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp016.mail.yahoo.com (smtp016.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.113]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA16852 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:27:16 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-212-22.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.212.22 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 20:26:29 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0B65F4.90702@sbcglobal.net> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:26:28 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A sideways sort of OM Christmas for me. I have almost every Oly/Zuiko bit I need, and certainly more than I can justify - at least until I want to do something photographically different. My photographic frustration has been my old computer (333Mz, 96Mb, 10Gb). Photoshop just doesn't sing and dance on that, more like crawl and whine. And all those scanned images clogged up the hard drive. Since Oly doesn't make computers........... I now have a non-Oly 2.8Gz, 1Gb, 120Gb XP machine. I also switched from a cable net connection to DSL, significantly increasing internet speed. I'm back to sub-second response time for most of my regular computer tasks most of the time. Wheeee! I hope it will feel fast and capacious for another few years. Now if I can just find the files on that old DOS system I designed years ago and just got a support request on. And how does one set it up to run under NT/XP? I knew all that a while ago. I guess that's the problem with writing something so bulletproof that it can run for years in multiple locations without any problems. Does make me feel good, though. Oly content: all the film scanned and played with is exposed in Olys. Moose Walt Wayman wrote: >Isn't it about time we started to hear from those who got Olympus >goodies, even digital ones, or at least something photography- >related for Christmas? It's okay to brag a bit, even to gloat if >it was an OM-3Ti or some such. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3943 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 21:20:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 21:20:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 13:21:17 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16907 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:20:58 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <2002122621193805300k6aale>; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:19:38 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:19:33 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Comments interspersed below. The table and page references given below come from "Television Engineering Handbook", K. Blair Benson, editor in chief, McGraw-Hill 1985. We've been having the house painted, and my copy was inaccessible until now. At 10:04 AM +0000 12/25/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:29:09 +0100 >From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" >Subject: Re: [OM] On: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (Super8 vs VHS, NTSC, & PAL) > >Hi, everyone. > > >It's true. PAL has 625 lines of resolution, compared to 525 for NTSC, > >so the resolution is better. Not that either ever really achieved their > >full theoretical resolution. Especially on 1/2-inch consumer-level VHS > >videotape. > >Many US TV sets had more like 250 lines (pixels). > >Don't forget the 525-625 lines are _vertical_ resolution (horizontal >lines), whereas VHS' 250 lines represent the _horizontal_ resolution (pairs >of points/pixels on a line). From the 625 lines of PAL, only 575 are >visible because the rest is needed for sync pulses -- most TV sets show >even less. I'm not sure about NTSC values, but it should have around 480 >useful lines. Yes. See next item. >Same for horizontal resolution: the screen only shows about 800f each >line. So, 250 "lines" = 500 pixels would show about 400 _visible_ pixels. Table 4-2 gives the following summary: NTSC: 340 vertical by 330 horizontal, 150,000 resolution elements per raster. PAL: 400 vertical by 390 horizontal, 210,000 resolution elements per raster. SECAM: 400 vertical by 470 horizontal, 250,000 resolution elements per raster. These resolution elements are more or less tricolor, although the color bandwidth is far less than the luminance bandwidth. In NTSC, the luminance bandwidth is about 4.3 MHz, while the chrominance bandwidth is 1.5 MHz (for "I") and 0.5 MHz (for "Q"). (Figures 4-5) >Another issue is colour resolution. The chroma (colour) signal has _much >less_ horizontal resolution than the luminance (B&W) signal. I've read >somewhere that for the PAL broadcasting (4.43 MHz colour subcarrier) the >figures are 4.5 MHz for luminance and only 1.5 MHz for chroma -- that's 288 >and 96 "lines", respectively. I'm afraid that some digital cameras do >something similar. PAL will be similar, but in PAL there is no difference between the I and Q bandwidths, so colors are somewhat more accurately painted. Except that the alternating phase scheme greatly reduces vertical resolution of color. >When recording to tape, the thing gets much worse... VHS downsamples colour >subcarrier to just 627 kHz, so it's no surprise that colours are rendered >as fuzzy blobs ;-). IIRC, Beta and Video-8 are somewhat better with 689 and >732 kHz, resp. SuperVHS keeps the 627 kHz, though. Playback circuitry also >does "nasty" things with chroma signal, too. Yes. This is compared to 1.5 MHz. > >The big difference is that NTSC codes color as the absolute phase of the > >color subcarrier, while PAL uses the frame-to-frame difference, so PAL color > >is far more robust. > >AFAIK, the reason is a bit different... PAL uses a, say, "negative" coding >for even lines, instead of the "positive" coding of the odd lines of each >field. Phase errors will make a colour shift, like NTSC, but with opposite >directions between even/odd lines, so the global effect would be negligible. You are right; I misremembered it. The problem with PAL's alternating-phase scheme is that the resulting averaging reduces the vertical color resolution substantially, basically by a factor of three. (page 4-43) The advantage is rock-solid color, despite the vagaries of free-space transmission in cities. The tradeoff is a good one, given that low resolution is far less disturbing than color oddities and busy edges. >On the other hand, SECAM colour system has a completely different approach: >the colour subcarrier is frequency-modulated. But it halves colour >_vertical_ resolution and compatibility with B&W sets is not as good as in >NTSC/PAL. Yes. SECAM is not much used outside of France (and the former French colonies?). > >I don't know the image size of Super8, but if it scales from 35mm movie film, > >at 24x18, then the image size will be something like 1/4-size, or 6mm by > >4.5mm, > >Here's a list of movie film formats: > >8mm: 4.9 x 3.55 mm >Super-8: 5.36 x 4 mm >16mm: 10.05 x 7.42 mm >35mm: 16 x 22 mm >70mm: 52.2 x 23 mm Thanks. Where did you get the information? 8mm: 4.9 x 3.55 mm = 17.395 square millimeters. 1:1 Super-8: 5.36 x 4 mm = 21.440 square millimeters. 1.233:1 16mm: 10.05 x 7.42 mm = 74.577 square millimeters. 4.287:1 35mm: 16 x 22 mm = 352.0 square millimeters. 17.395:1 70mm: 52.2 x 23 mm = 1200.6 square millimeters. 69.02:1 The 35mm still picture format is 24 x 36 mm= 864.0 square millimeters. > >which is the rough equivalent of (6*100)(4.5*100)= 270,000 tricolor pixels > >per frame, or 0.54 Mpix, as digital cameras are rated. In terms of lines, this is > >equivalent to 520 by 520, far more than VHS ever could do. > >Based on the above table, and assuming a conservative 50 lp/mm (the limit >may be higher with the short focal lenghts of Super-8), my calculations >give 214400 tri-color pixels, or about 230 lines -- roughly the same of >VHS. However, colour reproduction will be better on film. With film, all colors have the same "bandwidth" (that is, resolution). Super8 is (5.36*100)(4*100)= 214,400 tricolor pixels, actually about the same as PAL (as broadcast). With film, all colors have the same "bandwidth" (that is, resolution), so the PAL won't have quite as good color as film. The real problem is that consumer video recorders are far worse than what the NTSC and PAL signals can do, so even Super8 blows most or all consumer video recorders away. Digital recording of High Definition TV (HDTV) should solve this problem, if HDTV ever really arrives. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4272 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 21:32:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 21:32:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 13:33:16 2002 -0800 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16915 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:32:58 -0800 Received: from 24-41-36-20.attbi.cable.earthlink.net ([24.41.36.20] helo=earthlink.net) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18RfcI-0004R6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:32:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3E0B7726.3080901@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 13:39:50 -0800 From: Jim Couch Organization: Spoke & Sprocket User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <200212251355.AA1323499648@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No OM stuff this year, but my daughter gave me a beautiful copy of Ansel Adam's autobiography! Nothing like a book to read Christmas evening! Jim Couch < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5006 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2002 22:41:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 26 Dec 2002 22:41:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 14:42:02 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix4-2.free.fr (postfix4-2.free.fr [213.228.0.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16958 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:41:44 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-15-81-56-64-90.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.64.90]) by postfix4-2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id ADAF8C10B for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:41:41 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] (OT) how to "hack" EOS bodies to use OM lens with adapter. Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:39:34 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122623420201.00856@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi everybody, I use my OM lenses with my OM1-N and with my EOS RT with EOS/OM lens adapter. It works fine, just -1/2 compensation. No compensation in TTL flash. Some EOS bodies are locked by Canon. I have try my adapter on a D60 in a shop and it seems to not work (the seller dont take enough time to be sure and dont let me do the tests). I have found this link but in german. Is anybody able to translate it in english ? If I can find somebody who is able to translate in french I can try to put it in english. http://www.muenster.de/0.000000E+00ansgar-k/gbstlt/index.htm So using EOS digital camera could be possible... waiting for Olympus. Christian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5844 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 00:05:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 00:05:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 16:05:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17035 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:05:36 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b164.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.164]) by mail025.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBR05XF07450 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:05:34 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] a few photos Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:03:58 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-reply-to: <002601c2acf2$523ba960$7212a20a@waynecul> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca And of course they're oxen and not bullocks. We don't have oxen in Oz, the nearest would be water buffalo up in the Northern territory. And speaking of buffalo, at retirement I was working for EDS who's HQ is in Plano, Texas. I understand that they used to have a herd of buffalo on their estate there. Does it still exist? Maybe Texas Bill could clear that up. John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Culberson Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 2:20 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos > Interesting photos, Wayne. I liked the one of the two bullocks pulling the > dray. Reminds me of the early bullock trains we had in Australia at the turn > of the century. Used for hauling logs and shipments of wool etc they would > have up to five or six pairs of beasts driven by the one "bullocky". These > blokes had the reputation of being able to swear constantly for five minutes > without repeating themselves once! Magic stuff. > > Happy Christmas, > John. These were some I took at Kings Landing here in NB, Canada, which is a recreated village supposed to be set in the 1800's or thereabouts - a tourist trap kind of thing. I think this guy probably had to teach his oxen non four-letter commands, or it might upset the tourists :-) The biggest problem in getting pictures there is trying to frame out all the tourists. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6451 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 01:02:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 01:02:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 17:03:25 2002 -0800 Received: from einsteinium.btinternet.com (einsteinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.147]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17070 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 17:03:06 -0800 Received: from host213-122-123-151.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.123.151] helo=personalmyself) by einsteinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18Rir3-0003MG-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 01:00:02 +0000 Message-ID: <000701c2ad43$47b08500$977b7ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: Subject: [OM] OM2 on the BAY Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 00:59:58 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OM2 on E-BAY..1947605692...could be a "bargain" if it just needs to reset the mirror John Duggan, Wales, UK. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6811 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 01:17:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 01:17:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 17:18:33 2002 -0800 Received: from protactinium.btinternet.com (protactinium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.176]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17093 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 17:18:15 -0800 Received: from host213-122-123-151.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.123.151] helo=personalmyself) by protactinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18Rj5h-0003zh-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 01:15:10 +0000 Message-ID: <000d01c2ad45$657b6710$977b7ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 01:15:06 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Gary, I don't know if it is the same book, but I picked up a "mint" copy of Michael Covington's book "Astrophotography for the amateur" in a second hand bookstore in Colo Springs in the summer for the princely sum of $10. Well worth it. Regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 3:50 AM Subject: RE: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > Nothing Olympus, Walt, but I did receive a copy of Michael Covington's fine > Astrophotography for Amateurs (featuring many shots from his OM-1). > > Merry Christmas, my friends, > Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7429 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 02:10:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 02:10:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 18:11:32 2002 -0800 Received: from mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph ([203.104.64.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17137 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 18:11:12 -0800 Received: from titoy (UNKNOWN [203.104.91.64]) by mailrelay2.easycall.com.ph (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id H7RATP00.G86 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:27:25 +0800 Message-ID: <004701c2ad4c$bf5f2a80$405b68cb@titoy> From: "Clemente Colayco" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:07:45 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My wife would not dare give me anything of photography fearing that what she bought I may not approve of. Not so much because she frowns in my photo hobby, but as long as I am buying stuff with money from the sale of other stuff, no problem. So I just bought myself an OM 4T after a year of "deferring gratification" thanks to the enabling post of Skip Williams who pointed me to a BIN OM 4t at USD 295. Now its on its way for a CLA....Can hardly wait to get it in a few more weeks. Happy New Year to you all. Titoy ----- Original Message ----- From: "James N. McBride" To: Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 3:57 AM Subject: RE: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > Weeeeel, I probably should have said OM2000 or OM2N as both are available. I > recently bought an extra OM2N from Tom Scales with this in mind. Hell, maybe > they will prefer to use the OM-1N or have both manual and automatic. They > make good decisions so I'll let them decide after they experience both. The > OM2N operation with the flash works so well that's been my favorite over the > years. /jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Pschings@aol.com > Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 10:59 AM > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > > > In a message dated 12/26/2002 12:46:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, > jnmcbr@srv.net writes: > > > I just set up an OM-1N and T20 flash with a 50mm lens for my > granddaughters > > to use for a while. When they learn how to use the manual > > system I'll give them the OM2000 to keep. > > You let them use an OM-1n and then expect them to give it up for an OM2000? > You're cruel... ;-) > > Paul Schings > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8410 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 03:54:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 03:54:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 19:55:23 2002 -0800 Received: from cognac.propagation.net ([216.97.44.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17236 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 19:55:04 -0800 Received: from mckoy (ppp-67-118-132-241.dialup.irvnca.pacbell.net [67.118.132.241]) by cognac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA16603 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:54:55 -0600 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 23:35:46 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp Message-Id: <20021224233546.76a8922a.tal@renderman.org> Organization: RenderMan Repository X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > From: "IanG" > Subject: RE: [OM] Photoshop curves and unsharp . . . > I normally only produce for monitor display and I've been > sharpening my original file for that.... net result one very > oversharpened file for A4 printing. So.... I'm now rescanning and > sending out an unsharpened file for printing (the labs > recommendation, they will sharpen) and producing smaller files for > display.. Well, I'm hoping that's it. My workflow for unsharp is to always unsharp at the final resolution that the image is being viewed for. So I have my final image saved at its highest resolution but with no unsharp applied. Then for each instance that the image is to be viewed/printed, I resize it to the desired size, then apply unsharp for that size. The main reason for this is that the unsharp values are typically different for different size images. The same image that is to be printed at 8"x10" will have a different unsharp value than its 640 pixel counterpart which is viewed on the web. Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8719 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 04:00:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 04:00:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 20:01:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17244 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:00:50 -0800 Received: (qmail 27678 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 04:01:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail16.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 27 Dec 2002 04:01:03 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0BD42B.4060704@speakeasy.net> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:16:43 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <3.0.2.32.20021226100238.00a838f0@pop.erols.com> <003001c2acf3$e6e08760$7212a20a@waynecul> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >>>No camera gear, but my brother sent me a new train calendar. He picked >>>it because it was the one with the most Conrail pictures. I looked, and >>>sure enough- January and February photo credits are for Daniel Troy. >>> >>>Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa (I used to live near Philadelphia) >>> >> >>Hey Steve - keep looking. There's more than two! >> >>Steve Troy >> > > I was looking for this train calendar, and found a couple of some trains in > the Canadian Rockies, but couldn't identify who took the pics from the back. > It was seal packed, so I couldn't look inside. So how do you identify this > calendar? > Wayne > If it had any Canadian pictures, it wasn't it. On the front: At the top it says "RAILROADS", and then centered underneath, in smaller type "2003" No other verbiage or logos. The picture is of two orange and black BNSF locomotives going right to left over a deck girder bridge. Lead locomotive is #1069, second is #1012. Both are General Electric Dash 9-44CW's, with three axle Hi-adhesion trucks. Photograph by Daniel Troy. On the back, it has thumbnail pictures of all the months, and a larger size view of January's page. The picture is a 3/4 oncoming view from the left of an Amtrak train led by Electromotive Division F40PH #308. Also by Daniel Troy. The calendar is published by Browntrout publishers, of San Francisco, CA. I don't know where Mike got it, but since he lives in Denver, he probably started looking at Caboose Hobbies. Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8976 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 04:04:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 04:04:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 20:05:07 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail14.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.214]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17254 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:04:49 -0800 Received: (qmail 16607 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 04:05:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail14.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 27 Dec 2002 04:05:01 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0BD51D.9000701@speakeasy.net> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:20:45 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <3.0.2.32.20021226100238.00a838f0@pop.erols.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, he has a picture on every month except four. (There are two pictures per page, and one extra for Sept. - Dec. 2002) Stephen Troy wrote: >>From: Steve Goss >> >>No camera gear, but my brother sent me a new train calendar. He picked >>it because it was the one with the most Conrail pictures. I looked, and >>sure enough- January and February photo credits are for Daniel Troy. >> >>Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa (I used to live near Philadelphia) >> > > > Hey Steve - keep looking. There's more than two! > > Steve Troy > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9375 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 04:20:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 04:20:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 20:21:18 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17282 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:20:59 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.46.142]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021227042008.DGPD560.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:20:08 -0500 Message-ID: <01c901c2ad5f$2a65acc0$8e2e44d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <3E06D3C6.741DC7CF@get2net.dk> <3E06D54B.F613C905@accura.com.hk> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:19:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I saw a "digital cable tv" image of a football (played with a pointed, dark brown pigskin in the USA) on a 45" CRT tv at an appliance store. It was a mess. Every edge had over-sharpening artifacts and the non-edge parts of the image had no, (NO) detail at all. Worst of all, gross pixelization was obvious from 15 feet away. I'm not lusting after hi-rez video. (Hi-res audio, yes though.) Lama From: "C.H.Ling" > I think this is called block noise, more obvious in MPEG-1, in MPEG-2 > it has been greatly reduced. It is also related to the > encoding/decoding software/hardware, most Hollywood VCD (MPEG-1) > encoded very well, they look quite acceptable. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9911 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 05:03:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 05:03:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 21:03:49 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA17313 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:03:29 -0800 Received: (qmail 21436 invoked by uid 104); 27 Dec 2002 05:01:56 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 05:01:53 -0000 Message-ID: <004c01c2ad66$0455da80$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021222235408.4420.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <3E06D3C6.741DC7CF@get2net.dk> <3E06D54B.F613C905@accura.com.hk> <01c901c2ad5f$2a65acc0$8e2e44d8@lhommedieu> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:08:37 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm sure what you see is not a typical DVD quality, most (if not all) home theater fans are using DVD and they are simply amazing when projected to 60 or even 100" screen. Sorry to hear your bad experience but it doesn't mean all digital video are that bad. Same for CD, LD, DVD or digital camera, if you have never own one (with reasonable quality) you will never know or accept it. Try it out yourself before saying anything. BTW, I think in US you need to go to some advance area like NY to see the "real" stuffs, some shops just have no idea on how to give a good demo. It also happen sometimes here but most of the larger shops here know how to show off their equipment. The demo video source are the top stuffs. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" > I saw a "digital cable tv" image of a football (played with a pointed, dark > brown pigskin in the USA) on a 45" CRT tv at an appliance store. It was a > mess. Every edge had over-sharpening artifacts and the non-edge parts of > the image had no, (NO) detail at all. Worst of all, gross pixelization was > obvious from 15 feet away. > > I'm not lusting after hi-rez video. (Hi-res audio, yes though.) > > Lama > > From: "C.H.Ling" > > I think this is called block noise, more obvious in MPEG-1, in MPEG-2 > > it has been greatly reduced. It is also related to the > > encoding/decoding software/hardware, most Hollywood VCD (MPEG-1) > > encoded very well, they look quite acceptable. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10484 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 05:49:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 05:49:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Thu Dec 26 21:50:27 2002 -0800 Received: from web20002.mail.yahoo.com (web20002.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.225.47]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA17350 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:50:08 -0800 Message-ID: <20021227054956.96190.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [141.150.119.114] by web20002.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:49:56 PST Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:49:56 -0800 (PST) From: "M. Lloyd" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <004c01c2ad66$0455da80$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca My family was thinknig of getting digital cable. I've seen digital cable and it absolutely stinks. Image quality is not number 1. After explaining this to them and them seeing digital cable at Circut City they agree that even when normal cable has its hiccups it's still better. I like DVD's though even though they may have artifacts and such their convenience, generally clearer picture and better audio (I'm not an audiophile) make them the winner over VHS. Mark Lloyd --- "C.H.Ling" wrote: > I'm sure what you see is not a typical DVD quality, > most (if not all) home > theater fans are using DVD and they are simply > amazing when projected to 60 > or even 100" screen. Sorry to hear your bad > experience but it doesn't mean > all digital video are that bad. > > Same for CD, LD, DVD or digital camera, if you have > never own one (with > reasonable quality) you will never know or accept > it. Try it out yourself > before saying anything. > > BTW, I think in US you need to go to some advance > area like NY to see the > "real" stuffs, some shops just have no idea on how > to give a good demo. It > also happen sometimes here but most of the larger > shops here know how to > show off their equipment. The demo video source are > the top stuffs. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" > > > I saw a "digital cable tv" image of a football > (played with a pointed, > dark > > brown pigskin in the USA) on a 45" CRT tv at an > appliance store. It was a > > mess. Every edge had over-sharpening artifacts > and the non-edge parts of > > the image had no, (NO) detail at all. Worst of > all, gross pixelization > was > > obvious from 15 feet away. > > > > I'm not lusting after hi-rez video. (Hi-res > audio, yes though.) > > > > Lama __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12634 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 10:43:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 10:43:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 02:43:54 2002 -0800 Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr (postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA17672 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 02:43:34 -0800 Received: from max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr (lns-p19-8-81-56-163-41.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.163.41]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 7B918C13B for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:43:31 +0100 (CET) From: fischerchristian To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Santa Claus has left for me a 85/2 and 35/2 in local shop ! Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:30:22 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02122711435100.00962@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello everybody, I wrote few days ago about 75mm Voigt on OM. Some of you answered it will be better to buy a 85/2. Now I get one. It was left in a local shop for 150 Euros. I have also bought a 35/2 for 105 Euros. I hope they will be good. Christian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12992 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 10:58:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 10:58:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 02:59:18 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA17691 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 02:58:58 -0800 Received: from [62.64.239.176] (helo=[62.64.239.176]) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18Rs81-0006l6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:54:10 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <02122711435100.00962@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> References: <02122711435100.00962@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:58:28 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Santa Claus has left for me a 85/2 and 35/2 in local shop ! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well done Christian, those are good prices, provided that they are in good condition. Bonne chance! Chris At 11:30 +0100 27/12/02, fischerchristian wrote: >Hello everybody, > >I wrote few days ago about >75mm Voigt on OM. >Some of you answered it will be >better to buy a 85/2. > >Now I get one. It was left in a local >shop for 150 Euros. I have also bought >a 35/2 for 105 Euros. > >I hope they will be good. > >Christian > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13789 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 12:06:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 12:06:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 04:06:39 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.174]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA17781 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:06:20 -0800 Received: from modem-2936.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.59.120] helo=skelly) by cmailg4.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18RtFp-0004cW-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:06:18 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: [OM] T32 calculator panel Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:06:22 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <02122711435100.00962@max.himmelsberg.ac-nancy-metz.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Somebody was asking after one of these I think : http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=15221&item=19477242 04 Ian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14407 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 12:41:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 12:41:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 04:42:35 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA17797 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:42:16 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021227122938.NUKM4715.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:29:38 -0500 Message-ID: <03bb01c2ad89$f9d7f600$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <20021227054956.96190.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 05:26:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:29:38 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "M. Lloyd" To: Sent: Friday, 27 December, 2002 01:49 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > My family was thinknig of getting digital cable. I've > seen digital cable and it absolutely stinks. Image > quality is not number 1. After explaining this to them > and them seeing digital cable at Circut City they > agree that even when normal cable has its hiccups it's > still better. I like DVD's though even though they may > have artifacts and such their convenience, generally > clearer picture and better audio (I'm not an > audiophile) make them the winner over VHS. But will digital cable improve program content :-) jh > > Mark Lloyd > > --- "C.H.Ling" wrote: > > I'm sure what you see is not a typical DVD quality, > > most (if not all) home > > theater fans are using DVD and they are simply > > amazing when projected to 60 > > or even 100" screen. Sorry to hear your bad > > experience but it doesn't mean > > all digital video are that bad. > > > > Same for CD, LD, DVD or digital camera, if you have > > never own one (with > > reasonable quality) you will never know or accept > > it. Try it out yourself > > before saying anything. > > > > BTW, I think in US you need to go to some advance > > area like NY to see the > > "real" stuffs, some shops just have no idea on how > > to give a good demo. It > > also happen sometimes here but most of the larger > > shops here know how to > > show off their equipment. The demo video source are > > the top stuffs. > > > > C.H.Ling > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" > > > > > I saw a "digital cable tv" image of a football > > (played with a pointed, > > dark > > > brown pigskin in the USA) on a 45" CRT tv at an > > appliance store. It was a > > > mess. Every edge had over-sharpening artifacts > > and the non-edge parts of > > > the image had no, (NO) detail at all. Worst of > > all, gross pixelization > > was > > > obvious from 15 feet away. > > > > > > I'm not lusting after hi-rez video. (Hi-res > > audio, yes though.) > > > > > > Lama > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14696 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 12:49:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 12:49:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 04:50:15 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA17806 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:49:56 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.232.151]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021227124539.FZCS24006.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:45:39 -0500 Message-ID: <001601c2ada6$01fb0680$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <02fe01c2acff$a433eea0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? now meeting OMlist members Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:46:40 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > I got an Olympus goodie by having the chance to meet fellow list member > Wayne Culberson, his very gracious wife and son on 23 December. Wayne has > kindly lent me his T-32 flash for a week or three.We had an interesting > conversation on all things Olympus, Mrs Culberson had fresh coffee and home > made petit bonbons for us all and Wayne pointed out some of his local photo > locations. Not a nicer and more welcoming family could one wish to meet. > Thanks Wayne. > > John Hudson > New Brunswick, Canada > And we had an equal pleasure in meeting John. Next time we hope you bring your wife along too. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15007 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 12:56:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 12:56:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 04:57:14 2002 -0800 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA17814 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:56:55 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-241-48-12.client.attbi.com[12.241.48.12]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021227125542001003knbbe>; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:55:42 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 06:58:25 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000d01c2ad45$657b6710$977b7ad5@personalmyself> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You got the title correctly, John - I was working from memory. Neat book, isn't it? Did you get the second edition (1999)? I think it is a bit more than $10 new. Gary -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Duggan Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 7:15 PM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Gary, I don't know if it is the same book, but I picked up a "mint" copy of Michael Covington's book "Astrophotography for the amateur" in a second hand bookstore in Colo Springs in the summer for the princely sum of $10. Well worth it. Regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 3:50 AM Subject: RE: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > Nothing Olympus, Walt, but I did receive a copy of Michael Covington's fine > Astrophotography for Amateurs (featuring many shots from his OM-1). > > Merry Christmas, my friends, > Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15667 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 14:00:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 14:00:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 06:01:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA17847 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 06:00:49 -0800 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:00:26 -0500 Message-Id: <200212270900.AA1841430798@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think it was Gallagher who said TV needed a different kind of "brightness" knob. Of course, I doubt the "Sledge-o-matic" would survive if that were so. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 05:26:02 -0400 > >But will digital cable improve program content :-) > >jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16382 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 14:07:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 14:07:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 06:08:13 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA17877 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 06:07:54 -0800 Received: from host213-122-193-200.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.193.200] helo=personalmyself) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18Rv6W-00043L-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:04:49 +0000 Message-ID: <000901c2adb0$ea386910$c8c17ad5@personalmyself> From: "John Duggan" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:04:46 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Gary, >From info inside front cover..first pub1985..reprint1986, 1987 twice. Have a Celestion Nextstar 80 with computer control. When I fit OM1n on back it pulls rear of telescope down..:-( Will try to counterbalance with weight on front...Hope it does not overload motors. Now for one of our scarce clear non rainy nights....Regards, John Duggan, Wales, UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 12:58 PM Subject: RE: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > You got the title correctly, John - I was working from memory. Neat book, > isn't it? Did you get the second edition (1999)? I think it is a bit more > than $10 new. > > Gary < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17049 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 14:55:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 14:55:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 06:56:09 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA17962 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 06:55:50 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.4]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021227145134.CXEG1642.out004.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:51:34 -0600 Message-ID: <001f01c2adb7$722939c0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212270900.AA1841430798@mynra.com> Subject: [OM] NOW: Way OT , WAS: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:51:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [141.157.94.4] at Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:51:34 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yep, he said the knob marked 'brightness' "don't work". As crude as the show was, the level of creativity and topical humor made it more lofty than say, The Man Show. I thought the diving invisible elephant was quite inventive. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 9:00 AM Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > I think it was Gallagher who said TV needed a different kind > of "brightness" knob. Of course, I doubt the "Sledge-o-matic" > would survive if that were so. > > Walt > > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 05:26:02 -0400 > > > > >But will digital cable improve program content :-) > > > >jh > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17344 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 15:03:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 15:03:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 07:04:34 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA17976 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:04:14 -0800 Received: from default ([62.7.150.189]) by care4free.net ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:59:29 -0000 Message-ID: <002101c2adb8$bf598d20$bd96073e@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: Re: [OM] An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:59:09 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Tom Trottier wrote: Sometimes it's better to use something half-vast. Och I know, Tom. You'd think after 30 years of it I'd be carrying less, but the packs keep getting bigger. Lighter, but that's to do with the new gear, not how much of it I take! The beauty of the Mini Trekker will be on photo-only trips, or major expeditions when I can carry in two or three loads and work from a base. I do this in our mountains often, it makes for a busy first day or two, but light walking thereafter. I'm not a roadside camper... Happy Hiking, Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25-12-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17876 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 15:41:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 15:41:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 07:41:57 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18020 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:41:37 -0800 Received: from 207-172-160-160.s160.tnt5.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.160.160] helo=bri_acct_sct) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18RwbD-0004JJ-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:40:36 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20021227104032.011e4e90@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:40:32 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Re: train calendars In-Reply-To: <20021227140034.15714.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Wayne Culberson" > >I was looking for this train calendar, and found a couple of some trains in >the Canadian Rockies, but couldn't identify who took the pics from the back. >It was seal packed, so I couldn't look inside. So how do you identify this >calendar? >Wayne > > >From: Steve Goss > >If it had any Canadian pictures, it wasn't it. On the front: >At the top it says "RAILROADS", and then centered underneath, in smaller >type "2003" No other verbiage or logos. The picture is of two orange and >black BNSF locomotives going right to left over a deck girder bridge. >Lead locomotive is #1069, second is #1012. Both are General Electric >Dash 9-44CW's, with three axle Hi-adhesion trucks. Photograph by Daniel >Troy. Browntrout does two railroad calendars - a "US" one and a "Canadian" one. My brother Dan's photos are in both (of course, all taken with OM equipment). Here are links to both on Browntrout's web site so you can see which ones we are all talking about (both cover shots are Dan's). The reproduction on the Canadian cover is *much* better than on the US one. http://www.browntrout.com/calendars/product.asp?MGID=306&IID=3142 photos 1,3,4,5&12 on the back cover grid http://www.browntrout.com/calendars/product.asp?MGID=-1&IID=3118 Jan photo plus 6,9,10&12 on grid plus additional others inside Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18123 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 15:41:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 15:41:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 07:42:21 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18024 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:42:02 -0800 Received: from 207-172-160-160.s160.tnt5.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.160.160] helo=bri_acct_sct) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Rwbd-0004O7-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:41:01 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20021227104059.011e4e90@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:40:59 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: RE: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? In-Reply-To: <20021227140034.15714.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Timpe, Jim" >Subject: RE: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > >would you care to be a 'Big Brother'............ > >hope your brother was duly blown away. Quite the nice gift you gave. > >- -----Original Message----- >From: Stephen Troy > >I didn't get anything, but I did give my brother a mint M-1 and matching >M-System 50/1.4 for Christmas. Jim, Well, I do have two more... Steve < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18766 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 16:23:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 16:23:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 08:23:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.yifansoft.com (qmailr@ns1.yifansoft.com [64.61.26.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA18092 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:23:26 -0800 Received: (qmail 24266 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 16:14:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO computer) (211.44.208.78) by host6.yifansoft.com with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 16:14:15 -0000 Message-ID: <006f01c2adc4$41c4b180$4ed02cd3@computer> From: "Woody K." To: Subject: [OM] OM-4 and MD1 for sale Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 01:21:04 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello list, I'm selling my om-4 and motor drive 1 as the following; - om-4 black, ex, some sign of use, works good, $250 - motor drive 1, ex+, a little signs of use, works good, $75 All prices includes shipping anywhere. Please contact me thru off list. Woody < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19616 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 17:29:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 17:29:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 09:30:06 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18210 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:29:46 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18RyIs-0002Px-00 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:29:46 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: [OM] [OT] Herb Ritts Passing Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:28:51 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The photographic community has lost another famous member. Herb Ritts died of complications of pneumonia at the age of 50. He has photographed many famous people over the years and had a very distinctive style with much of his work in black-and-white. I didn't always care for the way he posed his clients but his work always had lots of impact. /jim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20114 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 17:57:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 17:57:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 09:58:32 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18255 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:58:12 -0800 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:57:48 -0500 Message-Id: <200212271257.AA1274609952@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] NOW: Way more OT ,WAS: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Gallagher had his moments. One of my favorites was about spelling, that there was no "wo" in "one," but "two" had a "wo" it didn't need. Then there was that great philosophical question of, "How come we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?" Of course, I questioned the sanity of people who would pay for front row seats where they had to protect themselves with sheets of plastic from the sledge-o-matic shower. As for The Man Show -- well, they do have lots of beer and juggies jumping on trampolines. What more do you want? Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Mickey Trageser" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:51:28 -0500 >Yep, he said the knob marked 'brightness' "don't work". As crude >as the show was, the level of creativity and topical humor made >it more lofty than say, The Man Show. I thought the diving >invisible elephant was quite inventive. >-Mickey < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20541 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 18:15:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 18:15:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 10:16:17 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18283 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:15:57 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Rz1Y-0000OL-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 19:15:56 +0100 Received: from [80.130.166.149] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18Rz1X-0001tq-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 19:15:56 +0100 Message-ID: <3E0C9905.1050400@doro-foto.de> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 19:16:37 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <3.0.5.32.20021227104059.011e4e90@pop.erols.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id KAA18283 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Stephen Troy schrieb: > Well, I do have two more... > Steve M1 or brothers? ;) cheers :Doro --=20 Pers=F6nlichkeiten werden nicht durch sch=F6ne Reden geformt, sondern durch Arbeit und eigene Leistung. Albert Einstein < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20840 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 18:22:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 18:22:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 10:22:52 2002 -0800 Received: from cognac.propagation.net ([216.97.44.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18295 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:22:32 -0800 Received: from mckoy (ppp-67-118-134-25.dialup.irvnca.pacbell.net [67.118.134.25]) by cognac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA21872 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:22:28 -0600 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:20:16 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Message-Id: <20021227112016.393efa28.tal@renderman.org> Organization: RenderMan Repository X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. Is the normal behavior? Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21099 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 18:24:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 18:24:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 10:24:45 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18303 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:24:25 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.187]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021227182010.FHMI1439.out001.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:20:10 -0600 Message-ID: <000d01c2add4$96700170$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212271257.AA1274609952@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] NOW: Way more OT ,WAS: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:20:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [141.157.96.187] at Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:20:09 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, heck. I didn't say The Man Show was without merit, only that Gallagher's show was more creative. I like those merits. Bouncing.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [OM] NOW: Way more OT ,WAS: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) > Gallagher had his moments. One of my favorites was about > spelling, that there was no "wo" in "one," but "two" had a "wo" it > didn't need. Then there was that great philosophical question > of, "How come we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?" > > Of course, I questioned the sanity of people who would pay for > front row seats where they had to protect themselves with sheets > of plastic from the sledge-o-matic shower. > > As for The Man Show -- well, they do have lots of beer and juggies > jumping on trampolines. What more do you want? > > Walt > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "Mickey Trageser" > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:51:28 -0500 > > >Yep, he said the knob marked 'brightness' "don't work". As crude > >as the show was, the level of creativity and topical humor made > >it more lofty than say, The Man Show. I thought the diving > >invisible elephant was quite inventive. > >-Mickey > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21372 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 18:25:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 18:25:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 10:26:10 2002 -0800 Received: from vir2.relay.fluke.com (vir2.relay.fluke.com [129.196.184.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18308 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:25:51 -0800 Received: from evtexc01.tc.fluke.com ([129.196.128.66]) by vir2.relay.fluke.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:30:45 -0800 Received: by evtexc01.tc.fluke.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:24:17 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Timpe, Jim" To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:29:23 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Dec 2002 18:30:45.0640 (UTC) FILETIME=[12002080:01C2ADD6] Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca normal behaviour. The metering for manual match needle operation is in the top... light entering through the viewfinder is a potential source of metering errors if you're shooting manually. An eye cup helps. If you're shooting on automatic, it's a moot point as the metering happens off the film plane in the innards of the camera. -----Original Message----- From: Tal Lancaster [mailto:tal@renderman.org] Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 11:20 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. Is the normal behavior? Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22683 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 20:57:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 20:57:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 12:58:16 2002 -0800 Received: from pop015.verizon.net (pop015pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA18451 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:57:56 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.117.218]) by pop015.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021227205340.EWNV21001.pop015.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:53:40 -0600 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:52:38 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021227054956.96190.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop015.verizon.net from [151.198.117.218] at Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:53:40 -0600 Message-Id: <20021227205340.EWNV21001.pop015.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <20021227054956.96190.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com>, on 12/26/02 at 09:49 PM, "M. Lloyd" said: >My family was thinknig of getting digital cable. I've >seen digital cable and it absolutely stinks. Image >quality is not number 1 [snip] Obviously this varies from region to region and from cable company to cable company. In this area, the difference is like night and day. But I choke on the cost of the bloody thing every month [grin]. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23109 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 21:15:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 21:15:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 13:16:21 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18478 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:16:01 -0800 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:15:32 -0500 Message-Id: <200212271615.AA1962606900@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Tired of a crappy picture, I went, pissed off, converters in hand, to quit the local cable company, intending to get a dish instead. A really patient cable company lady soothed my ruffled feathers and talked me into digital, which was hooked up within 72 hours. I couldn't be happier unless they let me have it free. It is indeed like night and day compared to what we had before. I guess it depends on the company. We had AT&T Broadband, but I think we've just been sold to Comcast. Whatever. It works. I've recorded stuff on SVHS that is almost -- not quite, but almost -- as good on replay as DVD. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: ll.clark@verizon.net Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:52:38 -0500 >In <20021227054956.96190.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com>, on 12/26/02 > at 09:49 PM, "M. Lloyd" said: > >>My family was thinknig of getting digital cable. I've >>seen digital cable and it absolutely stinks. Image >>quality is not number 1 > >[snip] > >Obviously this varies from region to region and from cable >company to cable company. In this area, the difference is like >night and day. But I choke on the cost of the bloody thing every >month [grin]. > > >----------------------------------------------------------- >llclark / edgewater, nj / usa >-------------------------------------------------------- > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23355 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 21:18:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 21:18:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 13:19:29 2002 -0800 Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (johnson.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.177]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18482 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:19:09 -0800 From: zuikosis@mindspring.com Received: from smui07.slb.mindspring.net ([199.174.114.17]) by johnson.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18S1sM-0001vP-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:18:38 -0500 Received: by smui07.slb.mindspring.net id QAA0000032142; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:16:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:16:48 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 208.54.218.23 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Walt - My new area in (Arkansas) has poor reception. Does this work for E-mail and Web Browsing ? On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:15:32 -0500 Walt Wayman wrote: > Tired of a crappy picture, I went, pissed off, > converters in hand, > to quit the local cable company, intending to > get a dish instead. > A really patient cable company lady soothed my > ruffled feathers > and talked me into digital, which was hooked up > within 72 hours. > > I couldn't be happier unless they let me have > it free. It is > indeed like night and day compared to what we > had before. I guess > it depends on the company. We had AT&T > Broadband, but I think > we've just been sold to Comcast. Whatever. It > works. I've > recorded stuff on SVHS that is almost -- not > quite, but almost -- > as good on replay as DVD. > > Walt > > ---------- Original Message > ---------------------------------- > From: ll.clark@verizon.net > Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:52:38 -0500 > > >In , on > 12/26/02 > > at 09:49 PM, "M. Lloyd" said: > > > >>My family was thinknig of getting digital > cable. I've > >>seen digital cable and it absolutely stinks. > Image > >>quality is not number 1 > > > >[snip] > > > >Obviously this varies from region to region > and from cable > >company to cable company. In this area, the > difference is like > >night and day. But I choke on the cost of the > bloody thing every > >month [grin]. > > > > > >----------------------------------------------------------- > >llclark / edgewater, nj / usa > >-------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23670 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 21:29:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 21:29:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 13:30:35 2002 -0800 Received: from hitchcock.mail.mindspring.net (hitchcock.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18490 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:30:16 -0800 From: zuikosis@mindspring.com Received: from smui08.slb.mindspring.net ([199.174.114.50]) by hitchcock.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18S237-0005Yz-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:29:45 -0500 Received: by smui08.slb.mindspring.net id QAA0000019949; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:29:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:29:44 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Red Sun Pillar Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 208.54.218.23 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Listers ! My name is Hank Hogan I think that I'm back on the list. I've been mostly using an Olympus IS3 DLX for the last two years. Yesterday I saw and photographed what I think is called a sun pillar. It appeared just after sunset as a vertical column of deep red light bouncing off the clouds between 6:15 and 6:25 PM I set the camera gently down on my Toboggon style cap on on a meter high stone bridge railing and snapped a couple of 180mm shots on Fuji 100 print film. I'll send them off to Ofoto when I find a mailer. Awhile back I was in digest mode and I got to buy Paul Farrar's flash gizmo for the IS3 DLX I really wanted to score an IS/L B300 teleconverter but that wasn't in the cards. Does anyone know where I can get one of these ? -- Hank < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23944 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 21:32:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 21:32:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 13:33:21 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18494 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:33:02 -0800 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:32:38 -0500 Message-Id: <200212271632.AA1867317518@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Cable internet connection is available, but I didn't sign up for that. We've got Bell South DSL -- or at least we will have as soon as I get off my lazy butt an hook it up and install the filters and modem. Walt---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: zuikosis@mindspring.com Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:16:48 -0500 >Walt - My new area in (Arkansas) has poor reception. >Does this work for E-mail and Web Browsing ? > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24272 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 21:42:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 21:42:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 13:42:55 2002 -0800 Received: from pop016.verizon.net (pop016pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18520 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:42:35 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.117.218]) by pop016.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021227213820.EEAG20431.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:38:20 -0600 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:36:37 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212271615.AA1962606900@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop016.verizon.net from [151.198.117.218] at Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:38:20 -0600 Message-Id: <20021227213820.EEAG20431.pop016.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <200212271615.AA1962606900@mynra.com>, on 12/27/02 at 04:15 PM, "Walt Wayman" said: > It works. I've >recorded stuff on SVHS that is almost -- not quite, >but almost -- >as good on replay as DVD. I had the same experience, and congratulations on being an svhs user [you know the difference!]. But even when the svhs machine was out for service and I had to fall back on an older vhs machine, the picture was stunning [minus the detail, of course, and the sharpness of svhs]. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24711 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 22:07:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 22:07:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 14:08:00 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp011.mail.yahoo.com (smtp011.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.31]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA18555 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:07:40 -0800 Received: from adsl-216-100-136-149.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.136.149 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 22:06:54 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0CCEFF.10700@sbcglobal.net> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:06:55 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Dipping our Toe Into Digital (LONG) References: <200212271632.AA1867317518@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Rather than put filters all over the house, I just put one in the basement where all the lines tap off the incoming line. I connected all lines but one through one side of the filter and the line to the computer to the other. Works great and no little 'dongles' hanging about the house. The filter(s) do have to be installed before the modem will find sync and connect. Moose Walt Wayman wrote: >Cable internet connection is available, but I didn't sign up for that. We've got Bell South DSL -- or at least we will have as >soon as I get off my lazy butt an hook it up and install the filters and modem. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25087 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 22:26:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 22:26:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 14:26:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18571 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:26:24 -0800 Received: (qmail 8776 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 22:26:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail16.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 27 Dec 2002 22:26:33 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0CD690.8050400@speakeasy.net> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:39:12 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus-digest Subject: [OM] What in the world is going on here? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca As seen on our favorite auction site-- http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948257164 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948256802 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948256250 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948255622 As the trash collector said to the sewage tank cleaner, "something just doesn't smell right about this". Steve < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25643 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 23:09:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 23:09:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 15:10:02 2002 -0800 Received: from out001.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.140]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18643 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:09:43 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.136]) by out001.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021227230527.GLVP1439.out001.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 17:05:27 -0600 Message-ID: <001501c2adfc$7216b5d0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <3E0CD690.8050400@speakeasy.net> Subject: Re: [OM] What in the world is going on here? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:05:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [141.157.99.136] at Fri, 27 Dec 2002 17:05:27 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Looks like a bot gone bad... Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Goss" To: "olympus-digest" Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 5:39 PM Subject: [OM] What in the world is going on here? > As seen on our favorite auction site-- > > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948257164 > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948256802 > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948256250 > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948255622 > > As the trash collector said to the sewage tank cleaner, "something just > doesn't smell right about this". > > > Steve > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26101 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 23:35:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 23:35:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 15:36:22 2002 -0800 Received: from meredith.dementia.org (root@TMP-MEREDITH.andrew.cmu.edu [128.2.10.56]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18679 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:36:02 -0800 Received: from alycia.dementia.org (ALYCIA.DEMENTIA.ORG [128.2.12.45]) by meredith.dementia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBRNZKe15875 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:35:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:35:07 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Dapoz To: olympus-digest Subject: Re: [OM] What in the world is going on here? In-Reply-To: <3E0CD690.8050400@speakeasy.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, USER_AGENT_PINE version=2.43 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Steve Goss wrote: > As seen on our favorite auction site-- > > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948257164 > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948256802 > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948256250 > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1948255622 > > As the trash collector said to the sewage tank cleaner, "something just > doesn't smell right about this". eBay had a free listing day on the 26'th. It looks like this seller opened up a bunch of fake auctions with the intent of filling them in later so that they'll save a few bucks ont he auction insertion fee. It kind of makes you wonder what else they skimp on to save a few dollars. When trying to sell $500+ plus items it really pays to look a little more professional than this. -mark < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26479 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 23:54:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 23:54:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 15:55:03 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.189]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18709 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:54:43 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18S4JO-0003o4-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:54:42 +0100 Received: from [80.130.166.149] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18S4JO-0006qp-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:54:42 +0100 Message-ID: <3E0CE86C.5050801@doro-foto.de> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:55:24 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] What in the world is going on here? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA18709 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mark Dapoz schrieb: >>=20 >>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1948257164 >>=20 >>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1948256802 >>=20 >>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1948256250 >>=20 >>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D1948255622 >> >>As the trash collector said to the sewage tank cleaner, "something just= =20 >>doesn't smell right about this". >=20 >=20 > eBay had a free listing day on the 26'th. It looks like this seller op= ened up > a bunch of fake auctions with the intent of filling them in later so th= at > they'll save a few bucks ont he auction insertion fee. It kind of make= s you > wonder what else they skimp on to save a few dollars. When trying to s= ell > $500+ plus items it really pays to look a little more professional than= this. look at the *sellers feedback. she just had bought the 40 herself... cheers :Doro --=20 Pers=F6nlichkeiten werden nicht durch sch=F6ne Reden geformt, sondern durch Arbeit und eigene Leistung. Albert Einstein < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27667 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 02:08:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 02:08:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 18:09:12 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA18821 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:08:46 -0800 Received: (qmail 13732 invoked by uid 706); 28 Dec 2002 02:07:41 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 02:07:40 -0000 Message-ID: <00c801c2ae16$cacc5ee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021227112016.393efa28.tal@renderman.org> Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:14:02 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, it is normal for OM1,2,2n, especially if you have a slow lens in front, eyecup can help if you don't wear glasses. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tal Lancaster" > > I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing > that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye > into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my > face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > > Is the normal behavior? > > Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? > > > Tal > -- > Tal Lancaster > talrmr@pacbell.net > http://www.renderman.org/RMR > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28700 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 04:01:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 04:01:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 20:01:55 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA18925 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:01:34 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-33.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.33]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBS3s6O16960 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:54:06 +1300 Message-Id: <200212280354.gBS3s6O16960@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:00:52 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Rampant Zuikoholism strikes again post Xmas, pre New Year X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, Zuikoholism is seemingly confirmed as a significant scourge of a minority segment of the populace, in its own way rivalling gambolling (have I got that right? ;-) ) and alcoholism at this stressful time of year. It bit me hard this last week. I have just won an OM20 (=OMG) with case, reported with an intermittent shutter fault, for the princely sum of $NZ42 p+p incl. (=USD 21). See http://www.trademe.co.nz/structure/auction_detail_expired.asp?id=2522698 If I can get this little machine to work, my son will get it in lieu of the OM10 I showed him. Having a case with it is a nice bonus. Also, I finally succumbed to the lure of a Zuiko 200/4, and snagged one for $NZ 135 (= USD 67 approx). Santa's present to me. The seller also repairs cameras and lenses and gave this one a CLA prior to auctioning it. ;-( or ;-) http://www.trademe.co.nz/structure/auction_detail_expired.asp?id=2520458 My daughter got a book from me on how to creatively visualise photographs, lots of nice pics. And I got a nice bottle of Cognac from my son. That should be my lot for the year. Not because my Zuikoholism is in any way in remission; just that the year is nearly all used up. I hope there's another year coming soon. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29899 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 06:25:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 06:25:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 22:26:12 2002 -0800 Received: from pioneernet.net (mail.pioneernet.net [207.115.64.224]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19003 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:25:52 -0800 Received: from bob [66.147.197.146] by pioneernet.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id A3D839800F8; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:25:28 -0800 From: "Bob Fenstermacher" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:25:39 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <00c801c2ae16$cacc5ee0$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks to both of you for asking the question and for the answer. I have the same phenomenon on my OM-1MD. It's an unusual thing to see the meter drop the closer you get to the eyepiece but it obviously reads light reflecting off my face through the viewfinder. I asked my local "expert". "No clue-never heard of such a thing"...a very prestigious Seattle store too. Bob F on Whidbey. . -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of C.H.Ling Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 6:14 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Yes, it is normal for OM1,2,2n, especially if you have a slow lens in front, eyecup can help if you don't wear glasses. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tal Lancaster" > > I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing > that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye > into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my > face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > > Is the normal behavior? > > Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? > > > Tal > -- > Tal Lancaster > talrmr@pacbell.net > http://www.renderman.org/RMR > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30256 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 06:40:30 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 06:40:30 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Fri Dec 27 22:41:11 2002 -0800 Received: from mta01ps.bigpond.com (mta01ps.bigpond.com [144.135.25.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19023 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:40:50 -0800 Received: from parents ([144.135.25.75]) by mta01ps.bigpond.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 mta01ps Jul 16 2002 22:47:55) with SMTP id H7TH4V00.B18 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:38:55 +1000 Received: from BPH-D2-p-250-229.tmns.net.au ([144.134.250.229]) by PSMAM03.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V3.0n 83/5764459); 28 Dec 2002 16:38:55 Message-ID: <008d01c2ae3b$ca669860$0100a8c0@parents> From: "Terry and Tracey" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Red Sun Pillar Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:38:51 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Glad to see you back Hank. Your not the only one on the lookout for a B300! Foxy ----- Original Message ----- Hello Listers ! My name is Hank Hogan I think that I'm back on the list. I've been mostly using an Olympus IS3 DLX for the last two years. I really wanted to score an IS/L B300 teleconverter but that wasn't in the cards. Does anyone know where I can get one of these ? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31242 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 08:28:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 08:28:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 00:29:39 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA19052 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:29:18 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-46.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.46]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBS8MIO32207 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:22:18 +1300 Message-Id: <200212280822.gBS8MIO32207@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:29:08 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) 35-80 Zuiko details X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, Over the last couple of weeks several people mentioned they had seen few authoritative details about the glass of the Zuiko 35-80 f/2.8. Here are some details I tripped over just now. " www.olympus.com/files/omlens.pdf Olympus Zuiko ...... 35mm~80mm 2.8 - 22 16 Elements 14 Groups ED glass & High Refractive glass formula constant no. 63-30 degree angle of view minimum focus 0.6m / 2.0' weight 650g / 22.9 oz. length 99mm filters 62mm Catalog No. 103-450 This remarkable Zuiko lens sets a new standard of optical precision in zoom lens design. By using both Extra Low Dispersion glass and High Refractive Index glass lenses, Olympus developed a zoom that rivals many single focal length lenses. In the past few years this style zoom lens has become a popular all around lens for general photography. Its fast 2.8 aperture allows for good low light performance, while its 35mm~80mm range gives added flexibility." Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31615 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 08:49:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 08:49:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 00:50:39 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA19065 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:50:18 -0800 Received: (qmail 3993 invoked by uid 706); 28 Dec 2002 08:49:13 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 08:49:09 -0000 Message-ID: <00f301c2ae4e$e183f980$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] What in the world is going on here? Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:55:31 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know a little about her, she just bough some camera straps from me and it took a week for bargain and another week to finish the transaction. A few dollars seems quite important for her :-) May be she want to do some buy and sell to get a few dollars from it. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Dapoz" > > eBay had a free listing day on the 26'th. It looks like this seller opened up > a bunch of fake auctions with the intent of filling them in later so that > they'll save a few bucks ont he auction insertion fee. It kind of makes you > wonder what else they skimp on to save a few dollars. When trying to sell > $500+ plus items it really pays to look a little more professional than this. > -mark < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32479 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:24:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:24:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:24:48 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA19097 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:24:27 -0800 Received: from [62.64.167.1] (helo=[62.64.167.1]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18SEDV-000OzW-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:29:17 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 07:25:37 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca No, it's a well-known phenomenon Bob, as you seem to realise. The meter cells in the OM1 are affected by light from the lens side and the viewfinder side. Likewise in the OM2, except that once you release the shutter in automatic the mirror blocks off the light from the viewfinder and the OTF metering takes over completely. I use an eyecup on my OM1N, with a corrective lens installed so replace my spectacles. I can use my eyecup with my specs on, but it is less satisfactory. I hate needing specs, I used to have such wonderful eyesight, but now I need light and the right size of writing without them. I used to be able to read the adverts in Amateur Photographer, but now I need a magnifying glass! Chris At 22:25 -0800 27/12/02, Bob Fenstermacher wrote: >Thanks to both of you for asking the question and for the answer. I have th= e >same phenomenon on my OM-1MD. It's an unusual thing to see the meter drop >the closer you get to the eyepiece but it obviously reads light reflecting >off my face through the viewfinder. > >I asked my local "expert". "No clue-never heard of such a thing"...a very >prestigious Seattle store too. > >Bob F on Whidbey. > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32728 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:24:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:24:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:25:07 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA19100 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:24:46 -0800 Received: from [62.64.167.1] (helo=[62.64.167.1]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18SEDX-000OzW-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:29:20 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200212280354.gBS3s6O16960@central.caverock.net.nz> References: <200212280354.gBS3s6O16960@central.caverock.net.nz> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 07:30:25 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Rampant Zuikoholism strikes again post Xmas, pre New Year Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 17:00 +1300 28/12/02, Brian Swale wrote: >Hi folks, > >Zuikoholism is seemingly confirmed as a significant scourge of a minority >segment of the populace, in its own way rivalling gambolling (have I got th= at >right? ;-) ) and alcoholism at this stressful time of year. Since you ask Brian, no ;-). It's gambling... unless you mean rolling around playfully in the grass ... =2E..and perhaps you do :>). >It bit me hard this last week. > But you're enjoying it eh? Happy New Year. Chris -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32734 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:24:27 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:24:27 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:25:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA19103 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:24:48 -0800 Received: from [62.64.167.1] (helo=[62.64.167.1]) by mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18SEDU-000OzW-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:29:16 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E035DE4.3020909@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> References: <3E035DE4.3020909@worldtraveller.f9.co.uk> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 07:17:21 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Well, I have obtained permission (from my wife, I have not asked work yet) to take a day off on Sunday 19 January, so is anyone else up for a meeting mid-morning (1030?) somewhere picturesque? London seems favourite, although IanG might find the wait for a ride on the London Eye rather a turnoff (I have in the past climbed to the roof(ves) of the Ministry of Defence, which is probably 50-100ft lower). Chris At 18:13 +0000 20/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Sundays are a good day for photography I reckon. Can I suggest >Sunday 19th January as a possible date? The 'morning photography >followed by hearty lunch' plan sounds great. > >Roger > >Sam Shiell wrote: > >>But seriously folks...... >> >>Sunday's are best for me, and (I think) I'm fairly free for the >>next few months..... >> >>Sam >> >> -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 811 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:26:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:26:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:26:49 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp011.mail.yahoo.com (smtp011.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.31]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA19107 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:26:29 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-24-41.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.24.41 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:25:43 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0D7C27.3010101@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:25:43 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Rampant Zuikoholism strikes again post Xmas, pre New Year References: <200212280354.gBS3s6O16960@central.caverock.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I hope the OM20 works for you. It's a better camera than the OM-10. I bought one for parts, but all that was wrong was batteries. Good deal on the 200/4!! Moose Brian Swale wrote: >Hi folks, > >Zuikoholism is seemingly confirmed as a significant scourge of a minority >segment of the populace, in its own way rivalling gambolling (have I got that >right? ;-) ) and alcoholism at this stressful time of year. > >It bit me hard this last week. > >I have just won an OM20 (=OMG) with case, reported with an intermittent >shutter fault, for the princely sum of $NZ42 p+p incl. (=USD 21). See > >http://www.trademe.co.nz/structure/auction_detail_expired.asp?id=2522698 > >If I can get this little machine to work, my son will get it in lieu of the OM10 I >showed him. Having a case with it is a nice bonus. > >Also, I finally succumbed to the lure of a Zuiko 200/4, and snagged one for >$NZ 135 (= USD 67 approx). Santa's present to me. The seller also repairs >cameras and lenses and gave this one a CLA prior to auctioning it. ;-( or ;-) > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1058 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:28:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:28:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:29:33 2002 -0800 Received: from aries.i-cable.com (aries.i-cable.com [203.83.111.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA19111 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:29:11 -0800 Received: (qmail 26118 invoked by uid 706); 28 Dec 2002 10:28:07 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:28:06 -0000 Message-ID: <019901c2ae5c$b3fcab20$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: Subject: [OM] FS: Olympus 2-4 focusing screen Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:34:28 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, I have two new OM 2-4 focusing screen for sales, $39.9 each including international shipping FCFS. Any one interested please contact me of list : chling@accura.com.hk. Happy New Year! C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1332 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:30:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:30:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:31:27 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp013.mail.yahoo.com (smtp013.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.57]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA19115 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:30:59 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-24-41.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.24.41 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:30:13 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0D7D36.1040102@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:30:14 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) 35-80 Zuiko details References: <200212280822.gBS8MIO32207@central.caverock.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Nothing significant added to what's already in the eSIF. Moose Brian Swale wrote: >Hi folks, > >Over the last couple of weeks several people mentioned they had seen few >authoritative details about the glass of the Zuiko 35-80 f/2.8. > >Here are some details I tripped over just now. > >" www.olympus.com/files/omlens.pdf > >Olympus Zuiko ...... 35mm~80mm 2.8 - 22 >16 Elements 14 Groups >ED glass & High Refractive glass formula constant no. >63-30 degree angle of view >minimum focus 0.6m / 2.0' >weight 650g / 22.9 oz. >length 99mm >filters 62mm >Catalog No. 103-450 >This remarkable Zuiko lens sets a new standard of optical precision in zoom >lens design. By using both Extra Low Dispersion glass and High Refractive >Index glass lenses, Olympus developed a zoom that rivals many single focal >length lenses. In the past few years this style zoom lens has become a >popular all around lens for general photography. Its fast 2.8 aperture allows >for good low light performance, while its 35mm~80mm range gives added >flexibility." > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1774 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 10:55:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 10:55:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 02:56:21 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA19132 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:56:00 -0800 Received: from modem-3199.baboon.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.28.127] helo=skelly) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18SEdJ-0003Zb-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:55:58 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:56:09 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id CAA19132 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I can't do Sunday mornings :-( otherwise I would love to join you... Lond= on Eye or not. The only excercise I get is searching for a little white ball= in a muddy field and that particular morning I'm in a competition. Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: 28 December 2002 07:17 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Well, I have obtained permission (from my wife, I have not asked work yet) to take a day off on Sunday 19 January, so is anyone else up for a meeting mid-morning (1030?) somewhere picturesque? London seems favourite, although IanG might find the wait for a ride on the London Eye rather a turnoff (I have in the past climbed to the roof(ves) of the Ministry of Defence, which is probably 50-100ft lower). Chris At 18:13 +0000 20/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Sundays are a good day for photography I reckon. Can I suggest >Sunday 19th January as a possible date? The 'morning photography >followed by hearty lunch' plan sounds great. > >Roger > >Sam Shiell wrote: > >>But seriously folks...... >> >>Sunday's are best for me, and (I think) I'm fairly free for the >>next few months..... >> >>Sam >> >> -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4087 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 15:30:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 15:30:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 07:31:11 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19341 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 07:30:50 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.95.13]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021228152634.GPFW1642.out004.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:26:34 -0600 Message-ID: <000b01c2ae85$7f597e10$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:26:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [141.157.95.13] at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:26:34 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I experienced the same thing with an OM-10 while standing in the sunlight and shooting into a bumper-car amusement ride which was quite dark. I knew the readings weren't right and cupped my hand around the viewfinder and my face to get a reading, then shot manual (with the adapter). I was surprised by the effect. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Fenstermacher" To: Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 1:25 AM Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > Thanks to both of you for asking the question and for the answer. I have the > same phenomenon on my OM-1MD. It's an unusual thing to see the meter drop > the closer you get to the eyepiece but it obviously reads light reflecting > off my face through the viewfinder. > > I asked my local "expert". "No clue-never heard of such a thing"...a very > prestigious Seattle store too. > > Bob F on Whidbey. > > . > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of C.H.Ling > Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 6:14 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > > > Yes, it is normal for OM1,2,2n, especially if you have a slow lens in front, > eyecup can help if you don't wear glasses. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tal Lancaster" > > > > > I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing > > that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye > > into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my > > face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > > > > Is the normal behavior? > > > > Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? > > > > > > Tal > > -- > > Tal Lancaster > > talrmr@pacbell.net > > http://www.renderman.org/RMR > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5001 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 16:08:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 16:08:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 08:08:49 2002 -0800 Received: from out006.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19390 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:08:29 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.16]) by out006.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021228160413.SHFM19982.out006.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:04:13 -0600 Message-ID: <001f01c2ae8a$c209d7a0$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212280822.gBS8MIO32207@central.caverock.net.nz> <3E0D7D36.1040102@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) 35-80 Zuiko details Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:04:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out006.verizon.net from [141.157.94.16] at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:04:13 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca There is, however, a significant error in the pdf file. It lists a 24/2.0 with a 92 degree angle of view. Probably should have read 21/3.5. -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Moose" To: Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 5:30 AM Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) 35-80 Zuiko details > Nothing significant added to what's already in the eSIF. > > Moose > > Brian Swale wrote: > > >Hi folks, > > > >Over the last couple of weeks several people mentioned they had seen few > >authoritative details about the glass of the Zuiko 35-80 f/2.8. > > > >Here are some details I tripped over just now. > > > >" www.olympus.com/files/omlens.pdf > > > >Olympus Zuiko ...... 35mm~80mm 2.8 - 22 > >16 Elements 14 Groups > >ED glass & High Refractive glass formula constant no. > >63-30 degree angle of view > >minimum focus 0.6m / 2.0' > >weight 650g / 22.9 oz. > >length 99mm > >filters 62mm > >Catalog No. 103-450 > >This remarkable Zuiko lens sets a new standard of optical precision in zoom > >lens design. By using both Extra Low Dispersion glass and High Refractive > >Index glass lenses, Olympus developed a zoom that rivals many single focal > >length lenses. In the past few years this style zoom lens has become a > >popular all around lens for general photography. Its fast 2.8 aperture allows > >for good low light performance, while its 35mm~80mm range gives added > >flexibility." > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5278 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 16:13:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 16:13:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 08:14:24 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound02.telus.net [199.185.220.221]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19394 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:14:03 -0800 Received: from homebody.telusplanet.net ([209.89.93.190]) by priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021228161017.ZEDD21763.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@homebody.telusplanet.net> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:10:17 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021228090625.00bcf920@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:10:17 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? In-Reply-To: <20021227112016.393efa28.tal@renderman.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:20 AM 12/27/2002 -0800, Tal Lancaster wrote: >I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing >that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye >into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my >face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > >Is the normal behavior? > >Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? One of the reasons, yes. This phenomenon is not unique to the OM-1 and its variants -- all older TTL metering SLRs did this. I've experienced the same problem with the Canon Ftb, older Nikons, older Pentaxes (Spotmatic comes to mind), etc. Newer SLRs do not read all the light coming off of the primary mirror, but use a secondary mirror (or some other arrangement) to ensure that the only light getting to the meter is the light coming through the front objective, instead of every opening in the system. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5738 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 16:44:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 16:44:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 08:45:14 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.cruzio.com (root@mail.cruzio.com [63.249.95.37]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19421 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:44:53 -0800 Received: from andersongeorge (dsl3-63-249-86-145.cruzio.com [63.249.86.145]) by mail.cruzio.com with SMTP id IAA05727 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:44:37 -0800 (PST) From: "George M. Anderson, Photographer" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:44:18 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If I understand the problem correctly, ie the meter needle drops as you move your eye toward the eyepiece, that means there's *less* light getting to the meter. The reason is that your face is now blocking the eyepiece so no light is 'leaking' in there. George > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Bob Fenstermacher > Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 10:26 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > > > Thanks to both of you for asking the question and for the answer. > I have the > same phenomenon on my OM-1MD. It's an unusual thing to see the meter drop > the closer you get to the eyepiece but it obviously reads light reflecting > off my face through the viewfinder. > > I asked my local "expert". "No clue-never heard of such a thing"...a very > prestigious Seattle store too. > > Bob F on Whidbey. > > . > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of C.H.Ling > Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 6:14 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > > > Yes, it is normal for OM1,2,2n, especially if you have a slow > lens in front, > eyecup can help if you don't wear glasses. > > C.H.Ling > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tal Lancaster" > > > > > I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing > > that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye > > into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my > > face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > > > > Is the normal behavior? > > > > Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? > > > > > > Tal > > -- > > Tal Lancaster > > talrmr@pacbell.net > > http://www.renderman.org/RMR > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6134 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:03:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:03:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:03:58 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19440 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:03:37 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021228165041.EPWE148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:50:41 -0500 Message-ID: <003401c2ae91$7d9b0ec0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021228090625.00bcf920@mail.telusplanet.net> Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:52:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:50:41 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garth Wood" To: Sent: Saturday, 28 December, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > At 11:20 AM 12/27/2002 -0800, Tal Lancaster wrote: > > >I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing > >that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye > >into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my > >face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > > > >Is the normal behavior? > > > >Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? > > > One of the reasons, yes. This phenomenon is not unique to the OM-1 and its > variants -- all older TTL metering SLRs did this. I've experienced the > same problem with the Canon Ftb, older Nikons, older Pentaxes (Spotmatic > comes to mind), etc. Newer SLRs do not read all the light coming off of > the primary mirror, but use a secondary mirror (or some other arrangement) > to ensure that the only light getting to the meter is the light coming > through the front objective, instead of every opening in the system. > > Garth Whereabouts in the run of OM models did the "light getting in the eye piece" problem get laid to rest so that only the light entering the lens affected the TTL metering system. Just curious. John Hudson > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6431 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:08:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:08:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:08:45 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19448 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:08:24 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18SKRj-000586-00 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:08:23 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:07:33 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id JAA19448 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca If you would quit whacking those little white balls they would be easier = to find. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of IanG Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 3:56 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops I can't do Sunday mornings :-( otherwise I would love to join you... Lond= on Eye or not. The only excercise I get is searching for a little white ball= in a muddy field and that particular morning I'm in a competition. Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: 28 December 2002 07:17 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Well, I have obtained permission (from my wife, I have not asked work yet) to take a day off on Sunday 19 January, so is anyone else up for a meeting mid-morning (1030?) somewhere picturesque? London seems favourite, although IanG might find the wait for a ride on the London Eye rather a turnoff (I have in the past climbed to the roof(ves) of the Ministry of Defence, which is probably 50-100ft lower). Chris At 18:13 +0000 20/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Sundays are a good day for photography I reckon. Can I suggest >Sunday 19th January as a possible date? The 'morning photography >followed by hearty lunch' plan sounds great. > >Roger > >Sam Shiell wrote: > >>But seriously folks...... >> >>Sunday's are best for me, and (I think) I'm fairly free for the >>next few months..... >> >>Sam >> >> -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6730 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:13:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:13:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:14:08 2002 -0800 Received: from randall.mail.atl.earthlink.net (randall.mail.atl.earthlink.net [207.69.200.237]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19464 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:13:47 -0800 From: zuikosis@mindspring.com Received: from smui03.slb.mindspring.net ([199.174.114.22]) by randall.mail.atl.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18SKWR-000532-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:13:15 -0500 Received: by smui03.slb.mindspring.net id MAA0000008334; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:13:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:13:14 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Re: Digital, Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 208.54.218.23 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Okay, I know how you feel, but remember the days are getting longer, soon it may be too hot to do any work ! So hook it up and enjoy ! I'm enjoying my 1 hour of internet at the public library on an excellent system that was donated to the Clarksville, AR Library by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. On the Olympus front I saw an genuine Zuiko 40mm lens for sale in Pasadena a few years ago for forty dollars but it was sold before I returned in a Zuikotic frenzy. Fortunately I was able to get a Vivitar 135mm(f2.8)imitation Zuiko for nineteen dollars. Has anyone tried a B300 on a f2,8 135 mm (phi=55mm)? Roger __ ? Hans __ ? -- Hank < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7071 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:27:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:27:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:28:42 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19472 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:28:21 -0800 Received: from host-66-81-221-106.rev.o1.com ([66.81.221.106] helo=D35CRW11) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18SKl1-0005w6-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:28:20 -0800 Message-ID: <003201c2ae96$8382ccb0$6add5142@D35CRW11> From: "William Latham" To: References: <019901c2ae5c$b3fcab20$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: Olympus 2-4 focusing screen Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:28:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Josun C.H. If they're not both sold, I'd like one. My address is: Bill Latham 66 Tahoe Circle Novato, Ca 94947 Please let me know what the total would be. Or if you're interested, I have a bunch of Oly rfs in various states of repair for trade. Thanks in advance Bill Latham Art Sword Restoration ----- Original Message ----- From: "C.H.Ling" To: Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 2:34 AM Subject: [OM] FS: Olympus 2-4 focusing screen > Hi all, > > I have two new OM 2-4 focusing screen for sales, $39.9 each including > international shipping FCFS. Any one interested please contact me of list : > chling@accura.com.hk. > > Happy New Year! > > C.H.Ling > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7455 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:48:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:48:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:49:34 2002 -0800 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19489 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:49:13 -0800 Received: from host-66-81-221-106.rev.o1.com ([66.81.221.106] helo=D35CRW11) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18SL5D-0002jU-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:49:12 -0800 Message-ID: <003f01c2ae99$6ddf8670$6add5142@D35CRW11> From: "William Latham" To: References: <019901c2ae5c$b3fcab20$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> <003201c2ae96$8382ccb0$6add5142@D35CRW11> Subject: Re: [OM] FS: Olympus 2-4 focusing screen Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:49:10 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OH NUTS. Off list, of course. Apologies to all. Bill Latham ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Latham" To: Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 9:28 AM Subject: Re: [OM] FS: Olympus 2-4 focusing screen > Josun C.H. > > If they're not both sold, I'd like one. My address is: > Bill Latham > 66 Tahoe Circle > Novato, Ca 94947 > > Please let me know what the total would be. Or if you're interested, I have > a bunch of Oly rfs in various states of repair for trade. > > Thanks in advance > Bill Latham > Art Sword Restoration > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "C.H.Ling" > To: > Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 2:34 AM > Subject: [OM] FS: Olympus 2-4 focusing screen > > > > Hi all, > > > > I have two new OM 2-4 focusing screen for sales, $39.9 each including > > international shipping FCFS. Any one interested please contact me of list > : > > chling@accura.com.hk. > > > > Happy New Year! > > > > C.H.Ling > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7765 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:57:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:57:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:58:25 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19493 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:58:04 -0800 Received: from homebody.telusplanet.net ([209.89.93.190]) by priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021228175419.KBKU1559.priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net@homebody.telusplanet.net> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:54:19 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021228105140.00b48f98@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:54:18 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? In-Reply-To: <003401c2ae91$7d9b0ec0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers. com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021228090625.00bcf920@mail.telusplanet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 12:52 PM 12/28/2002 -0400, John Hudson wrote: [snip] >Whereabouts in the run of OM models did the "light getting in the eye piece" >problem get laid to rest so that only the light entering the lens affected >the TTL metering system. > >Just curious. OM-2S and above, to the best of my knowledge. One of the many reasons I was so excited about the OM-4 when it was first announced -- the "light spill" effect was one of the very few gripes I had about the OM-1 and -2 and their variants. This is all probably in the eSIF, too. Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8011 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:58:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:58:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 09:59:01 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19497 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:58:40 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-39.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.39]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBSHpYO01882 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 06:51:35 +1300 Message-Id: <200212281751.gBSHpYO01882@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 06:58:29 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) subscribers X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, BTW, I have told the vendor of the Zuiko 200 I bought, about this group, and also about TOPE, and I have some interest from him. His membership could be mutually beneficial. He is Jim Cather. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8390 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 18:15:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 18:15:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 10:16:05 2002 -0800 Received: from care4free.net ([217.32.175.192]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19511 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:15:43 -0800 Received: from default ([213.1.40.24]) by care4free.net ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:10:55 -0000 Message-ID: <000501c2ae9c$a92c9e40$182801d5@default> From: "Donald MacDonald" To: Subject: [OM] Mini-Trekker Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:10:45 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca So I had an experimental walkabout indoors with a loaded Mini Trekker. First, load up your pack. YashicaMat 124, OM1n, OM2n; Zuikos 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/2, 135/2.8, 300/4.5; Ten rolls of film for 35mm, 5 for 120; Manfrotto 055NAT2 tripod with 222NAT head. Hmm, not bad. Quite light without the 'pod, which significantly increases the load in the hand. On the back, though, it feels great; well-balanced and easy to carry. Without the 'pod it's an insignificant load. An hour or so going about normal business was little trouble, though you tend to forget about that tripod in a tight corner... Definitely an important addition to my armoury. Huge Visa bill this month, though. Other goodies will have to wait. Donald. Donald Neil MacDonald, BA DipLIS www.bigmac1st.freeserve.co.uk --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25-12-02 < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9940 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 21:15:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 21:15:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 13:16:27 2002 -0800 Received: from pop017.verizon.net (pop017pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19625 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 13:16:06 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.119.15]) by pop017.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021228211150.XNJI10203.pop017.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 15:11:50 -0600 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:10:18 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop017.verizon.net from [151.198.119.15] at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 15:11:50 -0600 Message-Id: <20021228211150.XNJI10203.pop017.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In , on 12/28/02 at 07:25 AM, Chris Barker said: > I hate needing specs, I used to have such >wonderful eyesight, but now I need light and the right size of writing >without them. I used to be able to read the adverts in Amateur >Photographer, but now I need a magnifying glass! "Heh, heh, heh...welcome to the graying population," he cackled as he rubbed his gnarled fingers in intricate, intertwining patterns as twisted as the evil smile on his age-lined face. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10416 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 21:49:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 21:49:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 13:50:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19653 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 13:50:15 -0800 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:49:51 -0500 Message-Id: <200212281649.AA2042822964@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You can intertwine your fingers? What a lucky old fart you are! Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: ll.clark@verizon.net Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:10:18 -0500 >"Heh, heh, heh...welcome to the graying population," he cackled >as he rubbed his gnarled fingers in intricate, intertwining >patterns as twisted as the evil smile on his age-lined face. > > >----------------------------------------------------------- >llclark / edgewater, nj / usa >-------------------------------------------------------- > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10991 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 22:34:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 22:34:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 14:35:26 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19693 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:35:05 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.119.15]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021228223050.QYDC4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:30:50 -0600 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:26:14 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <200212281649.AA2042822964@mynra.com> Subject: [OM] Oh where, oh where has my little cap gone? X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [151.198.119.15] at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:30:50 -0600 Message-Id: <20021228223050.QYDC4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I've snagged a 135 mm, f/2.8 Zuiko from KEH that was labelled "bargain," just to see what the condition might be. Frankly, I can't tell it from a lens that I would be tempted to label as "excellent." After looking with a very keen eye, I did notice a tiny cleaning mark on the front lens element and an even tinier ding on the filter screw threads. This led KEH to downgrade the price to $72, maybe not a Fang, but surely a "bargain." It came without caps. I had a spare rear cap, but I lack a spare 55 mm front cap. Anyone know where I can find one, Oly preferred, other brands accepted if not? ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11299 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 22:40:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 22:40:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 14:40:50 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19705 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:40:29 -0800 Received: (qmail 811 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 22:40:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail11.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 28 Dec 2002 22:40:38 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0E2C0B.9090206@speakeasy.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:56:11 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oh where, oh where has my little cap gone? References: <20021228223050.QYDC4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I mostly find them at camera shows. Failing that, the Wolf Camera outlet center in Dallas occasionally has one. ll.clark@verizon.net wrote: > I've snagged a 135 mm, f/2.8 Zuiko from KEH that was labelled > "bargain," just to see what the condition might be. Frankly, I can't > tell it from a lens that I would be tempted to label as "excellent." > After looking with a very keen eye, I did notice a tiny cleaning mark on > the front lens element and an even tinier ding on the filter screw > threads. This led KEH to downgrade the price to $72, maybe not a Fang, > but surely a "bargain." > > It came without caps. I had a spare rear cap, but I lack a spare 55 mm > front cap. Anyone know where I can find one, Oly preferred, other > brands accepted if not? > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > llclark / edgewater, nj / usa > -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11629 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 22:54:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 22:54:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 14:55:31 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA19718 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:55:10 -0800 Received: from adsl-216-100-136-167.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.136.167 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 22:54:25 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0E2BA2.5020508@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:54:26 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Oh where, oh where has my little cap gone? References: <20021228223050.QYDC4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca John H. still shows them available new for $8 at Moose ll.clark@verizon.net wrote: >I've snagged a 135 mm, f/2.8 Zuiko from KEH<> > >It came without caps. I had a spare rear cap, but I lack a spare 55 mm >front cap. Anyone know where I can find one, Oly preferred, other >brands accepted if not? > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12072 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 23:17:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 23:17:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 15:18:08 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19736 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 15:17:47 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBSNGRV60445; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 23:16:27 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.112.202] (195-74-112-202.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.112.202]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBSNGPo60389; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 23:16:25 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E0E2C0B.9090206@speakeasy.net> References: <20021228223050.QYDC4558.pop018.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> <3E0E2C0B.9090206@speakeasy.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 22:59:58 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: Re: [OM] Oh where, oh where has my little cap gone? Cc: Steve Goss Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca They sell them new in the UK for =A35 sterling. Chris At 16:56 -0600 28/12/02, Steve Goss wrote: >I mostly find them at camera shows. Failing that, the Wolf Camera >outlet center in Dallas occasionally has one. > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12975 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 00:46:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 00:46:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 16:47:37 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19811 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:47:16 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh158.interisland.net [12.17.134.158]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBT0hOs21096 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:43:24 -0800 Message-ID: <3E0E3F8C.8B815B2A@interisland.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:19:24 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: [OM] Help! what can I do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id QAA19811 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just dug out some old slides to scan and the results really stink. Scanner is the HP PhotoSmart and film is an old experiment (and mistake) with Seattle Film Works. Can i salvage this? See train example below. I get three color edges like the layers of the film are somehow affecting the scanner. Slides project OK, considering that everything about this film is crap. Scanner scans old Kodachromes just fine. Any ideas? Next thing I'm going to do is to try to find the negatives that came with these slides. Probably out in some dusty box in the shop. Remember what a great idea it was to have both prints _and_ slides? Gheez! What a sucker I was. I made the mistake of taking a roll of this junk on a trip to Central America in 1986. The trains were in a round house in Guatemala. We also visited Frida Kahlo's house in Coyoacan and unfortunately those shots are on this same roll. We just saw the movie "Frida" which made me think to pull out the pictures. I have one shot of my wife and daughter in Frida's garden which I'd like to print (daughter then 6, has just graduated from college!) Any help appreciated. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/train.JPG Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13630 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 01:40:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 01:40:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 17:41:03 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h008.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.236]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA19824 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:40:42 -0800 Received: (cpmta 24600 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 17:39:41 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.236) with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 17:39:41 -0800 X-Sent: 29 Dec 2002 01:39:41 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 20:39:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] Poor boy's 35-80/2.8 Message-ID: <3E0E0C0C.31385.31BC2F35@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3344&item=1948526587 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14186 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 02:28:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 02:28:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 18:29:40 2002 -0800 Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19857 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:29:19 -0800 Received: from user-uinj2ql.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.139.85] helo=[165.121.139.54]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18STCA-0003yw-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:28:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: kveader@mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021227140034.15714.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021227140034.15714.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:46:24 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Ken Subject: [OM] Re: Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, I've been lurking for quite some time, and this topic made me decide to come "out" for a message or two.I have an OM1n and an OM2n (which is presently on indefinate loan to my ex). I used these two cameras for a year or so after I got into the hobby, and my intreat waned after some negative critacisim from a Pro friend of mine. At some point I got to thinking that I wanted a newer camera that was full-auto for the point and shoot stuff that I had resigned myself to viewing as my maximum potential, but also wanted to get a system camera in case I wanted to spend money on lenses and whatnot in the future. I wound up with a Cannon A2. Very nice, but a bit big for toting around on motorcycle trips, and I never bought more for it that a 28-80mm lens. I also never learned the diferance between all the settings on it, and never remamber that I can choose "action" "Landscape" or "Portrait" mode on the thing when I'm actually taking the darn pictures.I was getting all of my film developed on print and CD, and most of the prints I didn't like, so I was paying for bad pictures AND digital images. I thought that a digital camera would be a better solution and for Christmas I got a D-550z. It's a nice little camera, and I enjoy using it. Of course there is a but here. I'm not sure how any of you feel, but I love the idea of being able to shoot a picture, and in less than 5 minutes, having it posted on the web for my family to see (mostly kid pics, obviously). At the same time though, taking a digital image seems to cheapen the whole idea of photography to me. There is nothing definative and lasting, like a negative. One stray EMP or hard drive crash and the image is gone forever. Oh, you can burn a disc (which will be obsoleate technology in ten years) or do something else to make an archive, but it's not FILM. I think I'll retire the Cannon for now, as it's PS functions have now gone digital, and I'll drag out the old OM 1n and take a class and get more practice on my "real" photography. I guess that that is all I have to say. I had a good Christmas, if not a great one, and sincearly whish that you all had a good or better holiday as well. Best wishes Ken kveader@earthlink.net Haverhill MA < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14433 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 02:29:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 02:29:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 18:30:12 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19861 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:29:51 -0800 Received: from 216-164-193-33.s287.tnt2.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([216.164.193.33] helo=xps) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18STC6-0003fp-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:28:50 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20021228212437.00a891a0@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: sctroy@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32) Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:24:37 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Stephen Troy Subject: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? In-Reply-To: <20021228153033.4138.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? > >Stephen Troy schrieb: > >> Well, I do have two more... > >> Steve > >M1 or brothers? ;) > >cheers >:Doro That would be M-1's. When my parents had me, they said "we can do better." Then along came my brother. Then my parents said "screw it - let's just get a dog." Steve Troy < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14811 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 02:49:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 02:49:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 18:50:26 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19874 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:50:05 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA60829 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:49:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021228184950.0812adc0@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:50:37 -0800 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.20021228212437.00a891a0@pop.erols.com> References: <20021228153033.4138.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:24 PM 12/28/2002 -0500, Stephen Troy wrote: >... >That would be M-1's. > >When my parents had me, they said "we can do better." > >Then along came my brother. > >Then my parents said "screw it - let's just get a dog." >... THREE M-1s? Ohmygod, can I be adopted? // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15090 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 02:52:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 02:52:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 18:53:42 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA19878 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:53:20 -0800 Received: (qmail 16364 invoked by uid 104); 29 Dec 2002 02:51:51 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 02:51:50 -0000 Message-ID: <010701c2aee6$31fa6600$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021228090625.00bcf920@mail.telusplanet.net> <003401c2ae91$7d9b0ec0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:58:40 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, the OM40, 2sp, 3, 4 and Ti are without this problem. Also, the 60s' Pen FT is free from this problem too. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> > > Whereabouts in the run of OM models did the "light getting in the eye piece" > problem get laid to rest so that only the light entering the lens affected > the TTL metering system. > > Just curious. > > John Hudson > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15368 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 02:59:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 02:59:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 19:00:38 2002 -0800 Received: from pop017.verizon.net (pop017pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.210]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19890 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 19:00:16 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.119.15]) by pop017.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021229025601.YNUJ10203.pop017.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 20:56:01 -0600 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:55:06 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <3E0E2BA2.5020508@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Oh where, oh where has my little cap gone? X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop017.verizon.net from [151.198.119.15] at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 20:56:01 -0600 Message-Id: <20021229025601.YNUJ10203.pop017.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <3E0E2BA2.5020508@sbcglobal.net>, on 12/28/02 at 02:54 PM, Moose said: >John H. still shows them available new for $8 at [smacking forehead] Of course! Now, why didn't I think of that? ...and thanks to the several others for some further obvious solutions that I didn't take time to consider! ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16347 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 04:47:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 04:47:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 20:48:10 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp016.mail.yahoo.com (smtp016.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.113]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA19982 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 20:47:48 -0800 Received: from adsl-209-76-222-71.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@209.76.222.71 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 04:47:02 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0E7E48.9060604@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 20:47:04 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Help! what can I do? References: <3E0E3F8C.8B815B2A@interisland.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know nothing about the Photosmart, but if they project without this effect, it must be a result of the scanning process. Maybe the angle at which the light goes through? I notice the image is reversed. Have you tried putting the slide in flipped around? Maybe there's something about how the scanner focuses (angke of surface reflection perhaps?) and which side of the backing the emulsion is on? If depth of field is very shallow and focused on the wrong side of the film, who knows what odd effect might result. Just a stab in the dark. Moose Mike wrote: >Just dug out some old slides to scan and the results really stink. >Scanner is the HP PhotoSmart and film is an old experiment (and mistake) >with Seattle Film Works. Can i salvage this? See train example below. I >get three color edges like the layers of the film are somehow affecting >the scanner. Slides project OK, considering that everything about this >film is crap. Scanner scans old Kodachromes just fine. Any ideas? Next >thing I'm going to do is to try to find the negatives that came with >these slides. Probably out in some dusty box in the shop. Remember what >a great idea it was to have both prints _and_ slides? Gheez! What a >sucker I was. I made the mistake of taking a roll of this junk on a trip >to Central America in 1986. The trains were in a round house in >Guatemala. We also visited Frida Kahlo's house in Coyoacan and >unfortunately those shots are on this same roll. We just saw the movie >"Frida" which made me think to pull out the pictures. I have one shot of >my wife and daughter in Frida's garden which I'd like to print (daughter >then 6, has just graduated from college!) Any help appreciated. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16823 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 05:24:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 05:24:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sat Dec 28 21:25:04 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20009 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 21:24:43 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.99.182]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021229052027.SBOA4558.pop018.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 23:20:27 -0600 Message-ID: <004c01c2aef9$fff3c250$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <3E0E3F8C.8B815B2A@interisland.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Help! what can I do? Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 00:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [141.157.99.182] at Sat, 28 Dec 2002 23:20:27 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id VAA20009 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Mike, I seem to recall that SFW made slides from the negative film you shot (5247?). Perhaps they fouled up the print to slides. Do the slides have t= he color fringe, or is it just in the scan? If the slides have the fringe, s= ee if you can find the negs and scan them. You would still have some color w= ork to do, since the negative substrate has a different mask color. If the slides don't have the fringe, be sure that the slide is mounted properly = in the carrier, or whatever your scanner uses. Improperly aligned slides can scan poorly. Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 7:19 PM Subject: [OM] Help! what can I do? Just dug out some old slides to scan and the results really stink. Scanner is the HP PhotoSmart and film is an old experiment (and mistake) with Seattle Film Works. Can i salvage this? See train example below. I get three color edges like the layers of the film are somehow affecting the scanner. Slides project OK, considering that everything about this film is crap. Scanner scans old Kodachromes just fine. Any ideas? Next thing I'm going to do is to try to find the negatives that came with these slides. Probably out in some dusty box in the shop. Remember what a great idea it was to have both prints _and_ slides? Gheez! What a sucker I was. I made the mistake of taking a roll of this junk on a trip to Central America in 1986. The trains were in a round house in Guatemala. We also visited Frida Kahlo's house in Coyoacan and unfortunately those shots are on this same roll. We just saw the movie "Frida" which made me think to pull out the pictures. I have one shot of my wife and daughter in Frida's garden which I'd like to print (daughter then 6, has just graduated from college!) Any help appreciated. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/train.JPG Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19382 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 11:21:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 11:21:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 03:21:46 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp.supercable.es (smtp.supercable.es [212.79.128.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA20171 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 03:21:24 -0800 Received: from [217.216.179.34] (cliente-217216179034.cm128.alanpa.supercable.es [217.216.179.34]) by smtp.supercable.es (Switch-2.0.1/Switch-2.0.1) with ESMTP id gBTBH2G23226 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:17:02 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: cjss@pop.supercable.es Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:16:28 +0100 To: Lista de correo Olympus From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" Subject: [OM] My web page is running Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello, everyone. There's still _a lot_ of work to do (esp. for the Gallery), but my web page is now working. The URL of the English version is . OM content: "most" pics are taken with Oly gear ;-) Best regards, ... Carlos J. Santisteban < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25539 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 13:07:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 13:07:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 05:08:34 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA20366 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 05:08:11 -0800 Received: from [195.202.40.14] (mueasc-wan014.citykom.de [195.202.40.14]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA24727 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:07:23 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasc-wan014.citykom.de [195.202.40.14] claimed to be [195.202.40.14] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:07:22 +0100 Subject: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi folks, some a year ago i was on the list, now the OM-System seems to be ended by OLYMPUS, but "OM lives!" - so i will take part of the dialog here. Between 1982 and 1996 i worked as a professionel, in 35mm, since my first OM-2 in 1979, always with the OM-System. Today mostly just for fun. Some of my pictures you may look here: Some backstage-photos of the great american jazz-musician Don Cherry: Some pictures from the late Miles Davis in concert: a little gallery of my NSU Ro 80: and my lovely ;-) Beemer: Have a good time, so long with regards, Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26785 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 15:41:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 15:41:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 07:42:18 2002 -0800 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.183]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA20424 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 07:41:50 -0800 Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18SfZV-0005b3-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:41:49 +0100 Received: from [80.130.163.11] (helo=doro-foto.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18SfZV-0003pG-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:41:49 +0100 Message-ID: <3E0F17E7.5030209@doro-foto.de> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:42:31 +0100 From: =?windows-1250?Q?Doroth=E9e_Rapp?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-DE; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? References: <3.0.2.32.20021228212437.00a891a0@pop.erols.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Stephen Troy schrieb: > That would be M-1's. > > When my parents had me, they said "we can do better." > > Then along came my brother. > > Then my parents said "screw it - let's just get a dog." ;) Shouldn't you be careful now? Maybe your brother will be on the list soon :) cheers :Doro < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27160 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 16:02:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 16:02:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 08:03:22 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r09.mx.aol.com (imo-r09.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.105]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20439 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 08:03:00 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.11.5d1641b (3948) for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:01:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <11.5d1641b.2b40763c@aol.com> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:01:00 EST Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_11.5d1641b.2b40763c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_11.5d1641b.2b40763c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is an honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists". Susan Sontag Rich --part1_11.5d1641b.2b40763c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie.  Basically it is an honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists".
Susan Sontag

Rich




 --part1_11.5d1641b.2b40763c_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27836 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 16:55:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 16:55:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 08:56:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20505 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 08:55:42 -0800 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:55:18 -0500 Message-Id: <200212291155.AA1403584836@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca But Susan Sontag didn't know about Photoshop. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Doggre@aol.com Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:01:00 EST > >"Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it >is an honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to >approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of >with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists". >Susan Sontag > >Rich > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28591 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:08:37 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:08:37 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:09:23 2002 -0800 Received: from mhub-c2.tc.umn.edu (mhub-c2.tc.umn.edu [160.94.128.45]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20551 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:09:01 -0800 Received: from tc.umn.edu (x128-101-250-67.dialup.umn.edu [128.101.250.67]) by mhub-c2.tc.umn.edu with ESMTP for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:05:13 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3E0F2C72.64002060@tc.umn.edu> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:10:12 -0600 From: "Dean C. Hansen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] site for sun pillars Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] x128-101-250-67.dialup.umn.edu #+LO+TR Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hank recently noted photographing a "sun pillar." For more on sun pillars, see http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/eyes/pillars.htm Dean < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28869 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:12:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:12:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:12:59 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (outbound03.telus.net [199.185.220.222]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20555 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:12:37 -0800 Received: from quincunx.telusplanet.net ([209.89.93.190]) by priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021229170851.BFTQ6027.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@quincunx.telusplanet.net> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:08:51 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021229100800.02355ea8@pop.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@pop.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:08:50 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie In-Reply-To: <200212291155.AA1403584836@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:55 AM 12/29/2002 -0500, Walt Wayman wrote: >But Susan Sontag didn't know about Photoshop. "Yeah, baby! Now that's what *I'm* talkin' 'bout!" ;-) Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29217 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:28:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:28:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:29:10 2002 -0800 Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20567 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:28:48 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021229171550.DTAB148587.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:15:50 -0500 Message-ID: <002301c2af5e$1d213f60$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <11.5d1641b.2b40763c@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:17:06 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0020_01C2AF3C.95B28B40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:15:50 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0020_01C2AF3C.95B28B40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Presumably the quote is from her book "On Photography"=20 jh ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doggre@aol.com=20 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca=20 Sent: Sunday, 29 December, 2002 12:01 PM Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is an = honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach = nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy = swagger of self-dubbed "artists". Susan Sontag Rich ------=_NextPart_000_0020_01C2AF3C.95B28B40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Presumably the quote is from her book "On Photography"
 
jh
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Doggre@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, 29 December, 2002 = 12:01=20 PM
Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't = Lie


"Only with effort can the camera be forced to = lie.  Basically it is an honest medium, so the photographer is = much more=20 likely to approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, = instead of=20 with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists".
Susan=20 = Sontag

Rich




<= /HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0020_01C2AF3C.95B28B40-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29497 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:32:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:32:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:33:28 2002 -0800 Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.74]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20575 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:33:06 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021229172003.PXLJ214174.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:20:03 -0500 Message-ID: <002f01c2af5e$b6bcac40$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: <200212291155.AA1403584836@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:21:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:20:03 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" To: Sent: Sunday, 29 December, 2002 12:55 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie > But Susan Sontag didn't know about Photoshop. > > Walt .....betcha that Annie Liebowitz does ! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29745 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:33:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:33:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:34:35 2002 -0800 Received: from www-ma1.iocus.com (www-ma1.iocus.com [208.254.43.4]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20579 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:34:13 -0800 Received: (from www@localhost) by www-ma1.iocus.com (8.11.6/8.11.0) id gBTHZgg00997; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:35:42 -0500 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:35:42 -0500 Message-Id: <200212291735.gBTHZgg00997@www-ma1.iocus.com> X-Mailer: Iocus iMail X-Originating-IP: 172.159.122.35 From: mms@cameraleather.com To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Help! what can I do? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="W59CL4:tiNy6kX:.2:et()sRwdBe3Wpt8TEwBww7z3:nNemRVhjbND4PPO)PByYFfkGuMl" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --W59CL4:tiNy6kX:.2:et()sRwdBe3Wpt8TEwBww7z3:nNemRVhjbND4PPO)PByYFfkGuMl Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Mike, All you need do to remove the color fringing is a "hard" reboot of your PhotoSmart. Unplug the scanner at the wall socket, then plug it it back in after a minute or so. The fringing only happens when the scanner is in slide mode. You're right about the original negs---they will give you a better scan because they are originals, and also because the PhotoSmart is a much better negative scanner than a slide scanner. Also, the so-called slides are heavily cropped when printed, in addition to the little bit lost by the slide mount. I don't know how SFW sent you the negs, but I know Dale Labs wound them up tight in little red cannisters, and they are a pain in the ass to flatten and scan. Good luck. Morgan .. --W59CL4:tiNy6kX:.2:et()sRwdBe3Wpt8TEwBww7z3:nNemRVhjbND4PPO)PByYFfkGuMl-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30023 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:35:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:35:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:36:18 2002 -0800 Received: from out005.verizon.net (out005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.143]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20583 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:35:55 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.96.229]) by out005.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021229173139.FOTP19422.out005.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:31:39 -0600 Message-ID: <003701c2af60$2349de40$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <11.5d1641b.2b40763c@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:31:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0034_01C2AF36.384165E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out005.verizon.net from [141.157.96.229] at Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:31:39 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C2AF36.384165E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well I suppose we would have to define what 'lie' means in the sense of = a camera. If we assume that the camera only reports what light = variations it recieved, then the statement would be true. But if we = attribute the subjective human perspective to what the camera reports, = it lies all the time. How many times has a photo been snapped and the = picture taker say that the photo does not resemble what they saw?=20 I think you have to know your 'camera' (to include lens, light, film and = processor) to make the outcome speak your vision, which may be the truth = -or not. Isn't it more difficult to achieve the 'truth' we saw on film? = If we could capture that visible magic easily, would there be anything = special about it? The 'camera' has no soul of its own. As such it is not truthful or a = liar any more than a brush, pencil or clay. I don't think a photographer = has the right to claim the '...approach to nature in a spirit of = inquiry, of communion...' any more than the painter or sculptor. It = isn't the tool or medium that creates the art. It's the human = perspective and talent directing available tools and mediums. -Mickey ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doggre@aol.com=20 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca=20 Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is an = honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach = nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy = swagger of self-dubbed "artists". Susan Sontag Rich ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C2AF36.384165E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well I suppose we would have to define = what 'lie'=20 means in the sense of a camera. If we assume that the camera only = reports what=20 light variations it recieved, then the statement would be true. But if = we=20 attribute the subjective human perspective to what the camera reports, = it lies=20 all the time. How many times has a photo been snapped and the picture = taker say=20 that the photo does not resemble what they saw?
 
I think you have to know your 'camera' = (to include=20 lens, light, film and processor) to make the outcome speak your vision, = which=20 may be the truth -or not. Isn't it more difficult to achieve the 'truth' = we saw=20 on film? If we could capture that visible magic easily, would there be = anything=20 special about it?
 
The 'camera' has no soul of its own. As = such it is=20 not truthful or a liar any more than a brush, pencil or clay. I don't = think a=20 photographer has the right to claim the '...approach to nature in a = spirit=20 of inquiry, of communion...' any more than the painter or sculptor. = It=20 isn't the tool or medium that creates the art. It's the human = perspective and=20 talent directing available tools and mediums.
 
-Mickey
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Doggre@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 = 11:01=20 AM
Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't = Lie


"Only with effort can the camera be forced to = lie.  Basically it is an honest medium, so the photographer is = much more=20 likely to approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, = instead of=20 with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists".
Susan=20 = Sontag

Rich




<= /HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C2AF36.384165E0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30273 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 17:38:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 17:38:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 09:39:31 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20587 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:39:08 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh170.interisland.net [12.17.134.170]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBTHZGs20070 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:35:16 -0800 Message-ID: <3E0F333D.529D2956@interisland.net> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:39:09 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] Help! what can I do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Just dug out some old slides to scan and the results really stink.... > replies: > ...Have you tried putting the slide in flipped around?... > Yep, same results and worse. > ...Do the slides have the color fringe, or is it just in the scan?... > The slides seem to project ok, no fringe, at least not noticeable. They are in standard paper mounts and are sucked into the scanner just like any other slide. The color layers are shifted in the scan due to reflections or something(?) Steve Goss was able to correct the shifted green color layer via software. A capability I don't have at this point. I'll try scanning the negatives today if I can find them. If that fails I'll have to upgrade my image editor I guess. Mike < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30702 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 18:03:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 18:03:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 10:04:13 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts2.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.11]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20599 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:03:50 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.149.32]) by simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021229175932.ODLG24006.simmts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 12:59:32 -0500 Message-ID: <003001c2af64$341e8140$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: Subject: [OM] winter exchange photo Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:00:40 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I received my exchange photo from Bill Barber on Friday. His 8x10 photo is just beautiful, and will be taking a spot on my wall at the office. You should all be able to see it soon online at the exchange site. When I picked it up at the post office, I was very pleased to see his name on the mailer, and knew I had an extra lucky draw on this exchange, not that this is a competition or anything. But Bill is the list member who steered me toward the OM2s, which has become my most used and favorite OM now. I doubt I'll ever get out of mine what he gets out of his, but this photo will be reminder of a goal to strive toward. Thanks, Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30970 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 18:05:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 18:05:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 10:06:10 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20603 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:05:48 -0800 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:05:24 -0500 Message-Id: <200212291305.AA1415971140@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I am on the verge of retiring after 30+ years as a court reporter. Obviously, and naturally, I know literally hundreds of lawyers. As a prelude to retirement, a couple of years ago I began to offer certain photographic services geared to the needs of the legal community. It is proving to be both fun and lucrative. I just don't want it to become full-time. But I digress. Now to the point: I advise all my lawyer clients to challenge ANY photograph offered in evidence at trial by an opponent if it is in any way whatsoever detrimental to their case. I tell them they should strenuously object based upon the generally common knowledge of the trickery possible through digital photographic manipulation and demand that an original negative or transparency be produced to authenticate the picture being challenged. Whether or not the objection is sustained by the court, it still provides a great point to raise in argument to the jury, because almost everyone nowadays has at least seen enough tricked up TV commercials to realize you can't necessarily believe it just because you saw a picture of it. Earlier this month, on the same day, I had TWO lawyer clients thank me for this bit of advice because they believe they prevailed in cases they were trying at least in part because their opponents used digital photographs and couldn't sufficiently authenticate them and had to fume and fidget while enduring bombast and charges of computerized chicanery in closing argument. In keeping with my advice, I provide the negatives with all photographs, which gives me an added bonus: I don't have to keep up with all this crap! I deliver the photographs, the negatives, and the bill, and then I go to the bank and forget about it. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31321 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 18:21:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 18:21:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 10:22:32 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts4.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20611 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:22:09 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.149.32]) by simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021229181752.UEZR19301.simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:17:52 -0500 Message-ID: <003f01c2af66$c33d61a0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <11.5d1641b.2b40763c@aol.com> <003701c2af60$2349de40$0200a8c0@ctx> Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:18:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Well I suppose we would have to define what 'lie' means in the sense of a camera. snip >The 'camera' has no soul of its own. As such it is not truthful or a liar any more than a brush, >pencil or clay. I don't think a photographer has the right to claim the '...approach to nature in a >spirit of inquiry, of communion...' any more than the painter or sculptor. It isn't the tool or >medium that creates the art. It's the human perspective and talent directing available tools and >mediums. >-Mickey My camera lies all the time. Worst of all it even lies to me. I tell it what to do, it agrees, then goes and does its own thing anyway. It tilts the horizon when I had it straight, it includes things in the background that weren't there, it changes the colors to suit itself.... It not only lies, it mutilates, people even, even commits murder - cuts off peoples feet and sometimes even their heads. My camera is so bad I sometimes think it is beyond hope. The only time it tells the truth is when I use it for self portrait. I can't make it lie then for the life of me, which is why you've never seen one of those yet. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31810 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 18:52:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 18:52:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 10:52:52 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20652 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:52:29 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.20.5d4ee25 (4584) for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:48:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20.5d4ee25.2b409d6b@aol.com> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:48:11 EST Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_20.5d4ee25.2b409d6b_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_20.5d4ee25.2b409d6b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Walt wrote: >"But Susan Sontag didn't know about Photoshop." Oh, thanks Walt. I needed that long belly laugh SO badly. But I do agree with the general philosophy Sontag expresses in that quote. "Spirit of inquiry, ...communion"... that's exactly how I feel out in nature, packing an OM. It's a spiritual quest, of sorts, and the OM is an honest medium with which to record that quest. Rich --part1_20.5d4ee25.2b409d6b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Walt wrote:
>"But Susan Sontag didn't know about Photoshop."

Oh, thanks Walt.  I needed that long belly laugh SO badly.

But I do agree with the general philosophy Sontag expresses in that quote.  "Spirit of inquiry, ...communion"... that's exactly how I feel out in nature, packing an OM.  It's a spiritual quest, of sorts, and the OM is an honest medium with which to record that quest.

Rich

 --part1_20.5d4ee25.2b409d6b_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32089 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 18:57:05 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 18:57:05 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 10:57:52 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-m08.mx.aol.com (imo-m08.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.163]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20657 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 10:57:29 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.1bb.b8d719c (4584) for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:55:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1bb.b8d719c.2b409f2b@aol.com> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:55:39 EST Subject: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1bb.b8d719c.2b409f2b_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_1bb.b8d719c.2b409f2b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christoph wrote: snip >Some pictures from the late Miles Davis in concert: snip Thanks Christoph. That's how I remember Miles. I saw him just a year or so before he died. His band was full of talented "kids" he was giving a start. Unlike his usually somber pose, he was chewing a huge wad of gum, smiling, having a ball. Always changing, trying something new, never playing the same stuff. He was the coolest. OM lives, as you said, as Miles does. Many parallels could be drawn: genius, forging new paths, etc. Rich --part1_1bb.b8d719c.2b409f2b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christoph wrote:

snip
>Some pictures from the late Miles Davis in concert:
<http://www.fortunecity.de/kraftwerk/manowar/705/Miles-Galerie/Milesthumbs.h
tm>
snip

Thanks Christoph.  That's how I remember Miles.  I saw him just a year or so before he died.  His band was full of talented "kids" he was giving a start.  Unlike his usually somber pose, he was chewing a huge wad of gum, smiling, having a ball.  Always changing, trying something new, never playing the same stuff.  He was the coolest.

OM lives, as you said, as Miles does.  Many parallels could be drawn: genius, forging new paths, etc.

Rich --part1_1bb.b8d719c.2b409f2b_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32376 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 19:04:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 19:04:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 11:05:26 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20663 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:05:03 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D527458DC8 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:04:49 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021229165526.27888.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021229165526.27888.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:04:47 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: OM2n & light meter problem? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> > >Whereabouts in the run of OM models did the "light getting in the eye piece" >problem get laid to rest so that only the light entering the lens affected >the TTL metering system. For TTL metering, you were always safe from light coming through the eyepiece, because the eyepiece is sealed off by the mirror during TTL metering. The OM-2(n) has two independent metering systems: 1) TTL, and 2) off the viewing screen. It is only the latter that is affected by light from the eyepiece. One other thing to look out for, the viewing-screen metering is also affected by super-bright viewing screens. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32653 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 19:05:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 19:05:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 11:06:30 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20667 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:06:08 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-40.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.40]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBTIwiO29773; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:58:45 +1300 Message-Id: <200212291858.gBTIwiO29773@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: kveader@earthlink.net, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:05:52 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] Re: Re: An OM-3Ti for Christmas? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Ken Welcome to the group. As you will realise by now, stay around a while and you will pick up the information and encouragement you need. Just ignore negative feedback from those who would put you down, and get on with what you want to do. Brian > Hi all, > > I've been lurking for quite some time, and this topic made me decide > to come "out" for a message or two.I have an OM1n and an OM2n (which > is presently on indefinate loan to my ex). I used these two cameras > for a year or so after I got into the hobby, and my intreat waned > after some negative critacisim from a Pro friend of mine. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 474 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 19:10:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 19:10:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 11:11:39 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20671 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:11:16 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-46.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.46]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBTJ3mO30121; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:03:49 +1300 Message-Id: <200212291903.gBTJ3mO30121@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: watershed@interisland.net, olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:10:53 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [OM] Help! what can I do? X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Mike, If you can't find a solution to this problem through management of your scanner, since the slides apparently project OK, I suggest you get out your macro lens and photograph these slides using slide film. Brian > Just dug out some old slides to scan and the results really stink. > Scanner is the HP PhotoSmart and film is an old experiment (and mistake) > with Seattle Film Works. Can i salvage this? See train example below. I > get three color edges like the layers of the film are somehow affecting > the scanner. Slides project OK, < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 843 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 19:24:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 19:24:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 11:25:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20690 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:25:11 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D8558DCC for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:24:57 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021229165526.27888.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021229165526.27888.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:24:54 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Help! what can I do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Mike > >Just dug out some old slides to scan and the results really stink. >Scanner is the HP PhotoSmart and film is an old experiment (and mistake) >with Seattle Film Works. First off, the HP PhotoSmart is not a wonderful scanner. As an inexpensive compromise that will do both prints and slides, it's okay with optimal material, but "salvage jobs" demand more than a ~$400 scanner can deliver. Second off, did you get negatives, too? If so, scan those. I believe SFW was neg film, which was contact printed on itself to make slides. If so, your slides are "second generation" and inferior to the negs. I have some such film from Dale Labs that the slides were unusable, but the negs resulted in images good enough to sell. These are from that sort of film: These make nice 4"x6" prints, 8"x10" starts to go soft, although the last one has been sold as large as 16"x20". Before digital processing, they were pale and washed-out. I spent tens of hours salvaging them. >Remember what >a great idea it was to have both prints _and_ slides? Gheez! What a >sucker I was. Yea, I made the same mistake. You can't turn them into Kodachromes via digital magic, but you CAN salvage something useful from them. First, if it is very important to you, pay to have the scan done on a better scanner. (Or go buy a better film-only scanner -- expect to pay at least $1000 for a decent one.) You need lots of dynamic range and low noise to salvage bad film. Then you need to "normalize" the data. When you look at the histograms, you will see big gaps on both ends, and worse yet, these gaps will not line up in the three colors. You can try the various "auto" corrections first: auto contrast will not introduce color shifts, auto levels will tend to correct existing color shifts. Then touch-up using curves, re-size, sharpen, and print. Good luck! -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1232 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 19:40:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 19:40:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 11:41:44 2002 -0800 Received: from rly-ip03.mx.aol.com (rly-ip03.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20710 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 11:41:17 -0800 Received: from logs-wn.proxy.aol.com (logs-wn.proxy.aol.com [205.188.197.135]) by rly-ip03.mx.aol.com (v89.10) with ESMTP id RELAYIN7-1229143615; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:36:15 -0500 Received: from Uyihcvsjr (AC8F81CB.ipt.aol.com [172.143.129.203]) by logs-wn.proxy.aol.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with SMTP id gBTJQpY313277 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:26:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:26:52 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200212291926.gBTJQpY313277@logs-wn.proxy.aol.com> From: clintonr To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Happy new New year MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=U89928g560OENJL4OpP1FT X-Apparently-From: NEWBANG@aol.com Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Network Associates WebShield SMTP V4.5 on proxy detected virus Exploit-MIME.gen.exe in attachment unknown from and it was Cleaned and Quarantined. . < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2127 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 21:05:46 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 21:05:46 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 13:06:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mail0.ewetel.de (mail0.ewetel.de [212.6.122.10]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20777 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:06:09 -0800 Received: from 2fast4you (dialin-fl-71251.ewetel.net [212.6.71.251]) by mail0.ewetel.de (8.12.1/8.12.1) with SMTP id gBTKw7sM019820 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 21:58:08 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <001001c2af7d$0d6c4f50$fb4706d4@2fast4you> From: "Peter Koch" To: Subject: [OM] Color of an OM-3 Display Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 21:58:33 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AF85.6E3ABE90" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-CheckCompat: OK Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AF85.6E3ABE90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, my name is Peter Koch and i am from Oldenburg in Germany, this town = is near Bremen. In 1988 i bought an OM-3 and now i noticed, that any other OM-3 in = Germany has an blue-grew display with white points and an red flash = ready LED. My OM-3, serialnumber 1010301, has an orange diplay with white points = and an green flash ready LED. It seemed to be the only one in germay. Did anybody know the reason ? Is it a very early one oder a camera from the japan market? Peter Koch 12 Letheblick Wardenburg 26203 Germay ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AF85.6E3ABE90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, my name is Peter Koch and i am from = Oldenburg=20 in Germany, this town is near Bremen.
 
In 1988 i bought an OM-3 and now i = noticed, that=20 any other OM-3 in Germany has an blue-grew display with white points and = an red=20 flash ready LED.
 
My OM-3, serialnumber 1010301, has an = orange diplay=20 with white points and an green flash ready LED.
 
It seemed to be the only one in=20 germay.
 
Did anybody know the reason = ?
 
Is it a very early one oder a camera = from the japan=20 market?
 
Peter Koch
 
12 Letheblick
 
Wardenburg 26203
 
Germay
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AF85.6E3ABE90-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2378 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 21:09:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 21:09:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 13:09:49 2002 -0800 Received: from covert.brown-ring.iadfw.net (covert.black-ring.iadfw.net [209.196.123.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20781 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:09:27 -0800 From: clintonr@mail.airmail.net Received: from ppp01-512.algx.iadfw.net ([207.136.25.4] helo=mail.airmail.net) by covert.iadfw.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18Skhq-0004yw-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:10:46 -0600 Message-ID: <3E0F63E7.E542D871@mail.airmail.net> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:06:48 -0600 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] [OT] Apologies, Good news, Sad news Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca First, my apologies to all those friends and associates I've neglected over the past few weeks. I've been busy on all fronts, without a moment to spare, but I felt that my customers and creditors came first, at least business-wise. On the home front, yes, my wife is expecting again -- at least for now. Her C-section is scheduled for noon tomorrow (Monday), so while I may be exhausted now, you might say it's only beginning! I'm going to try and post a few shots on olyfix.com when I can, not just of the new baby but my 3 year old, too. But the sad news is that an Olyphile that some of you may have known appears to have passed away. I was told by one of our customers that a note he had mailed to Gary Cox was returned with a letter from his son with this information. Shortly thereafter a package we had shipped to him was also returned undeliverable so it would appear to be true. Clint < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2655 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 21:10:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 21:10:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 13:11:37 2002 -0800 Received: from mail020.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail020.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.135]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20785 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:11:14 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail020.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBTLB2Q15628 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:11:03 +1100 Message-Id: <200212292111.gBTLB2Q15628@mail020.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:11:02 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Doggre@aol.com wrote: > > > "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is > an honest > medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach nature in > a > spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy swagger of > > self-dubbed "artists". > Susan Sontag > More of the "Gospel according to Sontag". More pretentious crap ! Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2945 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 21:17:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 21:17:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 13:17:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.137]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20795 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:17:26 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBTLHOF02593 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:17:24 +1100 Message-Id: <200212292117.gBTLHOF02593@mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:17:24 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Doggre@aol.com wrote: > > > Thanks Christoph. That's how I remember Miles. I saw him just a > year or so > before he died. His band was full of talented "kids" he was giving a > start. > Unlike his usually somber pose, he was chewing a huge wad of gum, > smiling, > having a ball. Always changing, trying something new, never playing > the same > stuff. He was the coolest. > > OM lives, as you said, as Miles does. Many parallels could be drawn: > genius, > forging new paths, etc. > Susan Sontag on photography ? I'd rather hear what Miles Davis has to say. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3532 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 21:57:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 21:57:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 13:58:21 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (root@dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20853 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:57:58 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18SlRV-0001gf-00 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:57:57 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:57:07 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2AF4A.8EC4D460" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <11.5d1641b.2b40763c@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2AF4A.8EC4D460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It's disappointing to think that she might make money writing this sophomoric drivel. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Doggre@aol.com Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 9:01 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is an honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists". Susan Sontag Rich ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2AF4A.8EC4D460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It's=20 disappointing to think that she might make money writing this sophomoric = drivel.=20 /jim
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of Doggre@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 = 9:01=20 AM
To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: [OM] = Cameras Don't=20 Lie


"Only with effort can the camera be = forced to=20 lie.  Basically it is an honest medium, so the photographer is = much more=20 likely to approach nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, = instead of=20 with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed "artists".
Susan=20 = Sontag

Rich




<= /HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2AF4A.8EC4D460-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3881 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 22:05:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 22:05:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 14:06:44 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20871 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:06:21 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.94.225]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021229220205.KQTS1642.out004.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:02:05 -0600 Message-ID: <001c01c2af85$eb6cea50$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: <200212292111.gBTLB2Q15628@mail020.syd.optusnet.com.au> Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 17:02:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [141.157.94.225] at Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:02:05 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Amen, brother! -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wayne Harridge" To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 4:11 PM Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie > More of the "Gospel according to Sontag". > > More pretentious crap ! > > > Wayne Harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4131 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 22:07:42 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 22:07:42 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 14:08:30 2002 -0800 Received: from meredith.dementia.org (root@TMP-MEREDITH.andrew.cmu.edu [128.2.10.56]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20875 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:08:07 -0800 Received: from alycia.dementia.org (ALYCIA.DEMENTIA.ORG [128.2.12.45]) by meredith.dementia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBTM7ae10861 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 17:07:36 -0500 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 17:07:30 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Dapoz To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Color of an OM-3 Display In-Reply-To: <001001c2af7d$0d6c4f50$fb4706d4@2fast4you> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT_PINE version=2.43 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On Sun, 29 Dec 2002, Peter Koch wrote: > In 1988 i bought an OM-3 and now i noticed, that any other OM-3 in Germany has an blue-grew display with white points and an red flash ready LED. > > My OM-3, serialnumber 1010301, has an orange diplay with white points and an green flash ready LED. > > It seemed to be the only one in germay. > > Did anybody know the reason ? There were two types of LCD displays used in the OM-3 (and probably also the OM-4). The newer LCD has a blue mask applied to it to increase the contrast between the display output and the background. The older LCD didn't have this mask and appears to be more black and white. I've never seen an orange display, but it's possible that somone has added an orange mask to an older B&W LCD to try and make it easier to read. Luckily the new blue mask LCD used in the OM-4Ti is compatible with the older circuit used in the OM-3/4 so the old B&W displays can be upgraded. As for the flash ready LED, I thought they were all green in the OM-3's -mark < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4547 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 22:31:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 22:31:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 14:31:47 2002 -0800 Received: from mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.171]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20883 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:31:24 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBTMVMN09079 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:31:22 +1100 Message-Id: <200212292231.gBTMVMN09079@mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:31:22 +1100 Subject: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear Zs, I got bitten by the old T flash draining the OM-2S(P) battery a few days ago. Since I don't use flash that much (and I have a few other OM bodies to use) I'm not going to get the OM-2S(P) modified. I was just wondering if the OM-4 suffers from the same affliction ? Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4929 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 22:48:24 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 22:48:24 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 14:49:12 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20904 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:48:48 -0800 Received: from [195.202.40.33] (mueasc-wan033.citykom.de [195.202.40.33]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA29241 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:48:01 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasc-wan033.citykom.de [195.202.40.33] claimed to be [195.202.40.33] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:48:02 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <200212292117.gBTLHOF02593@mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Am 29.12.2002 22:17 Uhr schrieb "Wayne Harridge" unter : >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> Doggre@aol.com wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Thanks Christoph. That's how I remember Miles. I saw him just a >> year or so=20 >> before he died. His band was full of talented "kids" he was giving a >> start. =20 >> Unlike his usually somber pose, he was chewing a huge wad of gum, >> smiling,=20 >> having a ball. Always changing, trying something new, never playing >> the same=20 >> stuff. He was the coolest. >>=20 >> OM lives, as you said, as Miles does. Many parallels could be drawn: >> genius,=20 >> forging new paths, etc. >>=20 >=20 > Susan Sontag on photography ? I'd rather hear what Miles Davis has to sa= y. >=20 > Wayne Harridge >=20 Yeah, that=B4s it - "Bird lives" - and even so Miles - he had the sixth, or seventh, sense for other genious musicians, first of all Coltrane; i think Miles give them all freedom, to play their really soul, to touch the hearts of all of us, who could hear. Susan Sontag, maybe - i=B4m thinking more to Eilton Erickson, the method of "modelling" - i think Miles had had the possibility to give his "sidemen" the power to realize their own "dream", their own "sound", a view into thei= r "soul". Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5224 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 22:54:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 22:54:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 14:55:43 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20912 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:55:20 -0800 Received: from [195.202.40.33] (mueasc-wan033.citykom.de [195.202.40.33]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA31086 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:55:18 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasc-wan033.citykom.de [195.202.40.33] claimed to be [195.202.40.33] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:55:19 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <11.5d1641b.2b40763c@aol.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3124050919_99991" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Diese Nachricht ist im MIME-Format. Da Ihr Mailreader dieses Format nicht untersttzt, knnte diese Nachricht ganz oder teilweise unlesbar sein. --B_3124050919_99991 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Am 29.12.2002 17:01 Uhr schrieb "Doggre@aol.com" unter : > > "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is an honest > medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach nature in a spirit > of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy swagger of self-dubbed > "artists". > Susan Sontag > > Rich > > > > > IMHO: 1. Any true photo lies. 2. The recipient appointed the sense of a message, not the messanger. Christoph --B_3124050919_99991 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Am 29.12.2002 17:01 Uhr schrieb "Doggre@aol.com&qu= ot; unter <Doggre@aol.com>:


"Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie.  Basically it = is an honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach nat= ure in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy swagger = of self-dubbed "artists".
Susan Sontag

Rich






IMHO:

1. Any true photo lies.

2. The recipient appointed the sense of a message, not the messanger.


Christoph
  --B_3124050919_99991-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5622 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 23:11:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 23:11:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 15:12:16 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20933 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:11:53 -0800 Received: from [195.202.40.33] (mueasc-wan033.citykom.de [195.202.40.33]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA08231 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 00:11:51 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasc-wan033.citykom.de [195.202.40.33] claimed to be [195.202.40.33] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 00:11:51 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Color of an OM-3 Display From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001001c2af7d$0d6c4f50$fb4706d4@2fast4you> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3124051911_159838" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Diese Nachricht ist im MIME-Format. Da Ihr Mailreader dieses Format nicht untersttzt, knnte diese Nachricht ganz oder teilweise unlesbar sein. --B_3124051911_159838 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Hi Peter, my OM-3 has serialnumber 1009719 and a green flashlight too. The display looks orange with the illumination-lamp, but blue-grey without illumination, and in both cases white points. guat goan, Christoph Am 29.12.2002 21:58 Uhr schrieb "Peter Koch" unter : > Hi, my name is Peter Koch and i am from Oldenburg in Germany, this town is > near Bremen. > > In 1988 i bought an OM-3 and now i noticed, that any other OM-3 in Germany has > an blue-grew display with white points and an red flash ready LED. > > My OM-3, serialnumber 1010301, has an orange diplay with white points and an > green flash ready LED. > > It seemed to be the only one in germay. > > Did anybody know the reason ? > > Is it a very early one oder a camera from the japan market? > > Peter Koch > > 12 Letheblick > > Wardenburg 26203 > > Germay > > --B_3124051911_159838 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [OM] Color of an OM-3 Display Hi Peter,

my OM-3 has serialnumber 1009719 and a green flashlight too. The display lo= oks orange with the illumination-lamp, but blue-grey without illumination, a= nd in both cases white points.

guat goan, Christoph


Am 29.12.2002 21:58 Uhr schrieb "Peter Koch" unter <Peter.Koch= @ewetel.net>:

Hi, my name is Peter K= och and i am from Oldenburg in Germany, this town is near Bremen.
In 1988 i bought an OM-3 and now i= noticed, that any other OM-3 in Germany has an blue-grew display with white= points and an red flash ready LED.
My OM-3, serialnumber 1010301, has= an orange diplay with white points and an green flash ready LED.
It seemed to be the only one in ge= rmay.
Did anybody know the reason ?
Is it a very early one oder a came= ra from the japan market?
Peter Koch
12 Letheblick
Wardenburg 26203
Germay


 --B_3124051911_159838-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6101 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 23:42:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 23:42:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 15:43:37 2002 -0800 Received: from shockwave.systems.pipex.net (shockwave.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.9]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20955 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:43:13 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by shockwave.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 36061160010F7 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:43:06 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:43:05 -0000 Message-ID: <001701c2af94$08dcbda0$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA20955 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is getting way OT, but I got my father "The Essential Miles Davis" (Double CD) for Xmas. Was a little wary as this usually involves having = to sit through it on Xmas Day, but this is one CD I don't regret getting him= !! Very very cool stuff. Especially his early stuff, for me, was great. Oh well, I guess I'm a little behind some of you guys in your knowledge o= f Miles, so I'll leave it there for now. Hope everyone had good holidays, btw. Jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca= ] On Behalf Of Christoph Sent: 29 December 2002 22:48 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS Am 29.12.2002 22:17 Uhr schrieb "Wayne Harridge" unter : > > > > >> Doggre@aol.com wrote: >> >> >> Thanks Christoph. That's how I remember Miles. I saw him just a >> year or so >> before he died. His band was full of talented "kids" he was giving a >> start. >> Unlike his usually somber pose, he was chewing a huge wad of gum, >> smiling, >> having a ball. Always changing, trying something new, never playing >> the same >> stuff. He was the coolest. >> >> OM lives, as you said, as Miles does. Many parallels could be drawn: >> genius, >> forging new paths, etc. >> > > Susan Sontag on photography ? I'd rather hear what Miles Davis has to say. > > Wayne Harridge > Yeah, that=B4s it - "Bird lives" - and even so Miles - he had the sixth, = or seventh, sense for other genious musicians, first of all Coltrane; i thin= k Miles give them all freedom, to play their really soul, to touch the hear= ts of all of us, who could hear. Susan Sontag, maybe - i=B4m thinking more to Eilton Erickson, the method = of "modelling" - i think Miles had had the possibility to give his "sidemen" the power to realize their own "dream", their own "sound", a view into th= eir "soul". Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6537 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 00:05:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 00:05:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 16:06:23 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20971 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:06:00 -0800 Received: from modem-3854.crocodile.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.47.14] helo=skelly) by cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18SnRO-0002Zn-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 00:05:58 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 00:06:12 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200212292231.gBTMVMN09079@mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm convinced that mine does but others seem to disagree with me Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Harridge Sent: 29 December 2002 22:31 To: olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca Subject: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain Dear Zs, I got bitten by the old T flash draining the OM-2S(P) battery a few days ago. Since I don't use flash that much (and I have a few other OM bodies to use) I'm not going to get the OM-2S(P) modified. I was just wondering if the OM-4 suffers from the same affliction ? Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6972 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 00:27:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 00:27:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 16:27:54 2002 -0800 Received: from bbaer.muenster.de (bbaer.muenster.de [195.202.32.20]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21013 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:27:31 -0800 Received: from [195.202.34.233] (mueasa-wan233.citykom.de [195.202.34.233]) by bbaer.muenster.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA06246 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 01:26:44 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: bbaer.muenster.de: Host mueasa-wan233.citykom.de [195.202.34.233] claimed to be [195.202.34.233] User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 01:26:44 +0100 Subject: Re: [OM] Some pictures out of OMZUIKOS From: Christoph To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001701c2af94$08dcbda0$0800a8c0@reac.local> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Am 30.12.2002 0:43 Uhr schrieb "Jon Mitchell" unter : > Oh well, I guess I'm a little behind some of you guys in your knowledge o= f > Miles, so I'll leave it there for now. There is a fantastic book about the record sessions for his great masterwor= k "Kind of blue" - written by Ashley Kahn, =A92000, Da Capo Press, New York. The german edition at "Zweitausendeins" from Rogner & Bernhard. Great stuff, to read while listening "Kind of Blue" - that=B4s "Head-cinema" ;-)) Christoph < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7317 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 00:41:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 00:41:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 16:41:49 2002 -0800 Received: from postman.bayarea.net (postman.BAYAREA.NET [205.219.84.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21029 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:41:26 -0800 Received: from nuwa.imagecraft.com (209-128-106-110.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.106.110]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA28211 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:40:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richard@imagecraft.com) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20021229163839.027a49c8@192.168.100.11> X-Sender: richard@192.168.100.11 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:41:59 -0800 To: oly From: "Richard F. Man" Subject: [OM] focusing using ground glass vs. micro/split prism Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have almost always relied only on the micro/split prism for focusing. However, recently I am getting to like to use the ground glass portion better. It's really cool when the image just snaps into place, as by magic. One question, is it possible for the two focusing mechanism to "disagree?" I was taking pictures using the Zuiko 180/2.8 coupled with the 2x converter and I thought there are times that the focus point is slightly different. I don't have 20/20 vision, but I can do without glasses, if this matters. Thanks! // richard On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site. [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ] < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8889 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 03:38:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 03:38:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 19:39:38 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts12-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts12.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.56]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21254 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:39:15 -0800 Received: from [64.229.246.166] by tomts12-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021230033524.XRRA25415.tomts12-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.246.166]> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:35:24 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:35:31 -0500 Subject: Re: [OM] Res wars continue From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021223200021.31423.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > From: "om@skipwilliams.com" > Too many people worry about ... > Not enough people worry about lighting, camera shake, tripods, vibration > reduction, composition, proper focus, proper exposure, proper processing, > or capturing the "decisive moment" Good point. While there's some merit to tech specs to avoid spending money and time on something that isn't going to give the results you want, it's easy to get stuck on them, and this stuff is more important. I have to remind myself that the most important things I can give my photography are time and effort - not money. Equipment can help, but it's secondary and no subsititute. Easy to forget when time is short. BTW, our club holds the same sort of session, but with slides so there's less barrier to participating. Every month I join 6-8 people and am expected to bring 5 or 6 slides. Critique is mostly anonymous and always constructive. Furthermore, everyone is expected to take a turn at critiquing. It's one of the best things I do for my photography. Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9201 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 03:47:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 03:47:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 19:48:36 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts11.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.55]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21258 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:48:13 -0800 Received: from [64.229.246.166] by tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021230034427.URJN8221.tomts11-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.246.166]> for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:44:27 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:44:34 -0500 Subject: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021223200021.31423.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi - BTW, is this an OM group or an Olympus group? My Stylus Epic just croaked. I took it to a dance performance, practiced twice setting up no-flash and spot (in the light so I could do it in the dark) and it just totally ceased responding when opened. It seemed to get warm, the battery was totally drained when tested, and a new battery didn't help. I sort of suspect an internal short. Anybody seen this before? I had to go buy an OM-4T as a replacement... :-) Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9450 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 03:49:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 03:49:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 19:50:00 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA21263 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:49:37 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-213-202.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.213.202 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 03:48:51 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0FC223.3020409@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:48:51 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie References: <200212291305.AA1415971140@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Congrats on your upcoming retirement. I heartily recommend it. I can't imagine where I found the time for all that work! Walt Wayman wrote: >Earlier this month, on the same day, I had TWO lawyer clients >thank me for this bit of advice because they believe they >prevailed in cases they were trying at least in part because their >opponents used digital photographs and couldn't sufficiently >authenticate them and had to fume and fidget while enduring >bombast and charges of computerized chicanery in closing argument. > I suppose it would be foolish to ask if this contributed to 'justice' in the form of an accurate determination of guilt or innocence? >In keeping with my advice, I provide the negatives with all >photographs, which gives me an added bonus: I don't have to keep >up with all this crap! I deliver the photographs, the negatives, >and the bill, and then I go to the bank and forget about it. > Nice idea, but not really all that solid. I'm sure C.H., with his 'film printer' could provide a nice neg 'after the fact' from a digitally altered image. A negative shot from a print of a digitally altered image could be made by any number of us. The digital 'signature' in the data file output from a DC, as was discussed a bit ago, might actually be more defensible. At least as Albert described it, it sounded more bulletproof to me than an 'original' piece of film. Moose < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10148 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 04:50:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 04:50:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 20:51:41 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA21340 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 20:51:18 -0800 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:50:49 -0500 Message-Id: <200212292350.AA665649182@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Moose Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:48:51 -0800 >I suppose it would be foolish to ask if this contributed >to 'justice' in the form of an accurate determination of guilt or >innocence? Justice? What's that got to do with anything? Yes, the notion of justice is a noble concept, but it often has little connection with what comes out of the legal system. Remember, these are decisions being made by a dozen folks too stupid to get out of jury duty. :-) >The digital 'signature' in the data file output from a DC, as was >discussed a bit ago, might actually be more defensible. At least >as Albert described it, it sounded more bulletproof to me than >an 'original' piece of film. Maybe, maybe not, but good luck explaining that concept to a jury, some of whom don't have the attention span of a flea even during the odd moments they're not sleeping. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10835 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 06:03:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 06:03:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 22:04:24 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h014.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.242]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA21412 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:04:01 -0800 Received: (cpmta 11806 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2002 22:03:00 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.242) with SMTP; 29 Dec 2002 22:03:00 -0800 X-Sent: 30 Dec 2002 06:03:00 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 01:02:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] Adorama has a 180/2.8 for $300, but it looks a little rough. Message-ID: <3E0F9B43.25502.37D39B9A@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3344&item=1948768511 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 11757 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 07:46:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 07:46:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Sun Dec 29 23:46:51 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp013.mail.yahoo.com (smtp013.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.57]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA21486 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:46:28 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-27-176.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.27.176 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 07:45:42 -0000 Message-ID: <3E0FF9A8.7090301@sbcglobal.net> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:45:44 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie References: <200212292350.AA665649182@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's what I thought. Just checking ;-) Moose Walt Wayman wrote: >---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- >From: Moose >Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:48:51 -0800 > > > >>I suppose it would be foolish to ask if this contributed >>to 'justice' in the form of an accurate determination of guilt or >>innocence? >> >> > >Justice? What's that got to do with anything? Yes, the notion of >justice is a noble concept, but it often has little connection >with what comes out of the legal system. Remember, these are >decisions being made by a dozen folks too stupid to get out of >jury duty. :-) > > > >>The digital 'signature' in the data file output from a DC, as was >>discussed a bit ago, might actually be more defensible. At least >>as Albert described it, it sounded more bulletproof to me than >>an 'original' piece of film. >> >> > >Maybe, maybe not, but good luck explaining that concept to a jury, >some of whom don't have the attention span of a flea even during >the odd moments they're not sleeping. > >Walt > > > > > > >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12832 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 09:58:31 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 09:58:31 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 01:59:20 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.yifansoft.com (qmailr@ns1.yifansoft.com [64.61.26.50]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA21545 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 01:58:56 -0800 Received: (qmail 32156 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 09:49:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO computer) (218.50.156.5) by host6.yifansoft.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 09:49:38 -0000 Message-ID: <000201c2afea$09871150$059c32da@computer> From: "Woody K." To: Subject: [OM] Re: OM-4 and MD1 for sale Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:55:04 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi again, I'm asking only $275 includes shipping for both things. If interested email me. Regards, Woody ----- Original Message ----- From: "Woody K." To: Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 1:21 AM Subject: OM-4 and MD1 for sale Hello list, I'm selling my om-4 and motor drive 1 as the following; - om-4 black, ex, some sign of use, works good, $250 - motor drive 1, ex+, a little signs of use, works good, $75 All prices includes shipping anywhere. Please contact me thru off list. Woody < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 13679 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 11:26:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 11:26:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 03:27:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA21596 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 03:27:21 -0800 Received: from [62.64.219.214] (helo=[62.64.219.214]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18Sy39-000AO7-00; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:25:40 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219025439.026e9970@192.168.100.11> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219025439.026e9970@192.168.100.11> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:08:42 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Cc: "Richard F. Man" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I know it's a little while since Richard posted this, but that film (The Two Towers, the second of the Lord of the Rings trilogy) restored my faith in cinema. It put much of what the large film houses produce into the shade. I have not enjoyed a film so much since The English Patient. I know that there was a load of computer generated graphics, but the scenery was majestic. I just hope that the place is not now ruined by thoughtless or insensitive tourism - like many other beautiful parts of the world, I gather. I really would like to visit myself, however, so that I can make some lovely photos and enjoy the scenery. Chris At 02:57 -0800 19/12/02, Richard F. Man wrote: >For the kiwi Olympus listers - you folks sure live in a beautiful >country! We went to the opening show tonight, with friends in >costumes! This pic is taken with the C-3000, not quite an OM. My OM >pictures will be developed tomorrow/today. > >http://www.dragonsgate.net/cosplay/Costume_Studio/LOTRgang.jpg > -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15790 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 14:25:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 14:25:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 06:26:46 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA21804 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 06:26:23 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <2002123014251005300k70h3e>; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:25:10 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:25:08 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] Article on the proposed OlyDak 4/3" camera Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On page 9 of the Winter 2002 issue of the UK magazine "Which Camera?" there is a half-page article titled "New digital standards - Kodak, Olympus & Fuji seek digital compatibility", with picture of Olympus' mockup of their proposed 4/3 inch camera. It looks somewhat like a Nik*n with built-in motor drive. Nothin in the article not already discussed on the reflector already. Claim is that a prototype body (which may look nothing like the mockup) will be exhibited publically in Spring 2003, with "manufacturer delivery" in Summer 2003. One assumes that lenses will become available in the same time frame, although this was not discussed. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16179 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 14:46:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 14:46:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 06:47:40 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA21819 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 06:47:17 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA23747 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:47:13 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] more updates to the WE02 site Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:42:52 -0600 Message-ID: <004701c2b011$bd32c970$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks to all who have submitted images and information to the winter exchange 2002 site. Updates can be seen here: http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/Asides/OM-2002/OM-2002.htm Please feel free to contact me with any errors. Thanks! Bob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16576 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 15:00:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 15:00:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 07:01:44 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp13.singnet.com.sg (smtp13.singnet.com.sg [165.21.6.33]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21868 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:01:20 -0800 Received: from t1m3b5 (bb-203-125-22-192.singnet.com.sg [203.125.22.192]) by smtp13.singnet.com.sg (8.12.6/8.12.6) with SMTP id gBUF1CxQ017337 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:01:13 +0800 Message-ID: <007c01c2b014$139d36e0$c0167dcb@t1m3b5> From: "TMLee" To: References: <000201c2afea$09871150$059c32da@computer> Subject: [OM] ....... Re: OM-4 and MD1 for sale...... Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:59:38 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear Woody... I am interested in the OM-4 body.... U have any pics of it so I can view online .... peace TMLee > Hi again, I'm asking only $275 includes shipping for both things. If > interested email me. > Regards, Woody > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Woody K." > To: > Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 1:21 AM > Subject: OM-4 and MD1 for sale > > > Hello list, > > I'm selling my om-4 and motor drive 1 as the following; > > - om-4 black, ex, some sign of use, works good, $250 > - motor drive 1, ex+, a little signs of use, works good, $75 > > All prices includes shipping anywhere. Please contact me thru off list. > > Woody > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16833 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 15:01:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 15:01:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 07:02:05 2002 -0800 Received: from pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21877 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:01:40 -0800 Received: from bspearce (adsl-65-68-1-23.dsl.wchtks.swbell.net [65.68.1.23]) by pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with SMTP id gBUF14kD301006 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:01:05 -0500 Message-ID: <001401c2b012$cbba9da0$17014441@swbell.net> From: "Bill Pearce" To: References: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: [OM] susan, miles Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:50:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca "Only with effort can the camera be forced to lie. Basically it is an = honest medium, so the photographer is much more likely to approach = nature in a spirit of inquiry, of communion, instead of with the saucy = swagger of self-dubbed "artists". Susan Sontag What a total load of crap. This kind of pretentious bs is the result of a knowlege of photography restricted to p&s cameras and bad family photos. Did the photos of the civil war battlefields with carefully arranged corpses speak with a truth not to be found in a painting? Ours is just a subset of visual arts, a means of communication. we communicate what we choose to communicate, not the camera. And yes, I would rather hear Miles Davis speak to this, as it would be a vastly shorter response. And no, I don't want to hear any Marsalis brother, because it would be even longer than sontag. Bill Pearce < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17176 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 15:17:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 15:17:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 07:18:19 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21883 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:17:55 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with ESMTP id <200212301516420520062jpse>; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:16:42 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:16:39 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On page 37 of the January 2003 issue of "Popolar Photography & Imaging" magazine (the "& Imaging" part is new) there is a letter to the editor ("Proof: John B") where one John B questions Pop Photo's contention that the information content of a 35mm frame is 20-30 Mpixels (these will be marketing pixels), because he personally gets better photos with digital cameras. One assumes that his camera has far fewer mpix, although this isn't stated. The letter was in response to an editorial in the November 2002 issue of Pop Photo. The Editors' answer more or less recapitulates our computations, albeit with less math detail, summarizing that 24 Mpix is for handheld SLR shots, while 30 Mpix is for "optimal" situations. All this with ASA 100 color negative and slide films and a top-of-the-line 50mm lens set to its optimum aperture, with camera on a heavy tripod with remote cable release. No mention of mirror lockup. Under less rigorous conditions, or with a 35mm point&shoot, one gets 6-12 Mpix. In my analyses, I used 50 line pairs per millimeter as the typical performance of lenses, a conservative number, and ended up with 18 Mpix. Pop Photo instead tried to estimate the best that could be done in practice, and got about double that. Assuming that the 30 Mpix is for a camera of 1:2:1 ratio, this is the equivalent of 15 million tricolor pixels, and the frame will be about 4743 x 3162. In all cases, the color accuracy of digital exceeds that of any film Pop Photo has tested. Pop Photo goes on to conclude that the lack of film grain plus the greater color accuracy leads many to choose "digital enlargements" over "film-based enlargements". This part threw me. Who was talking of enlargement only? We were talking of the relative merits of film and digital cameras, and one could read their conclusion to endorse scanning of the negatives, which is not supported by their other points. Perhaps the missing logical step is to note that at current price levels, the cheaper route to digital is to use a 35mm film camera and scan the negatives. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17828 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:13:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:13:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:14:30 2002 -0800 Received: from ottmex.cdic.ca (breaker.cdic.ca [209.217.114.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21945 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:14:01 -0800 Received: by ottmex with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:13:38 -0500 Message-ID: From: William Clark To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:13:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I would disagree with scanning negatives. Who wants to wait and wait for 30 meg files to scan, then dust and scratch removal, then photoshop, and on we go. If I were to scan, I would scan slides, which the Epson 2450 does beautifully. You save $ and time with a film scanner. People will use digcams to get rid of teh intermediary scanning steps...I sure do. -Bill -----Original Message----- From: Joe Gwinn [mailto:joegwinn@attbi.com] Sent: December 30, 2002 10:17 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in On page 37 of the January 2003 issue of "Popolar Photography & Imaging" magazine (the "& Imaging" part is new) there is a letter to the editor ("Proof: John B") where one John B questions Pop Photo's contention that the information content of a 35mm frame is 20-30 Mpixels (these will be marketing pixels), because he personally gets better photos with digital cameras. One assumes that his camera has far fewer mpix, although this isn't stated. The letter was in response to an editorial in the November 2002 issue of Pop Photo. The Editors' answer more or less recapitulates our computations, albeit with less math detail, summarizing that 24 Mpix is for handheld SLR shots, while 30 Mpix is for "optimal" situations. All this with ASA 100 color negative and slide films and a top-of-the-line 50mm lens set to its optimum aperture, with camera on a heavy tripod with remote cable release. No mention of mirror lockup. Under less rigorous conditions, or with a 35mm point&shoot, one gets 6-12 Mpix. In my analyses, I used 50 line pairs per millimeter as the typical performance of lenses, a conservative number, and ended up with 18 Mpix. Pop Photo instead tried to estimate the best that could be done in practice, and got about double that. Assuming that the 30 Mpix is for a camera of 1:2:1 ratio, this is the equivalent of 15 million tricolor pixels, and the frame will be about 4743 x 3162. In all cases, the color accuracy of digital exceeds that of any film Pop Photo has tested. Pop Photo goes on to conclude that the lack of film grain plus the greater color accuracy leads many to choose "digital enlargements" over "film-based enlargements". This part threw me. Who was talking of enlargement only? We were talking of the relative merits of film and digital cameras, and one could read their conclusion to endorse scanning of the negatives, which is not supported by their other points. Perhaps the missing logical step is to note that at current price levels, the cheaper route to digital is to use a 35mm film camera and scan the negatives. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18138 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:22:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:22:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:23:28 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21953 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:23:04 -0800 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:22:39 -0500 Message-Id: <200212301122.AA2935750924@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Really way OT Q and rant X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Why is one of the greatest, most profound and inspiring motion pictures of the Twentieth Century suddenly no longer available on DVD? This is a travesty, not to mention an abomination and absolute disgrace! As those who write letters to the editor so frequently say, I am outraged! I suspect a conspiracy of some sort, one quite likely reaching to the highest levels of any number of governments, at least those of the United States and Great Britain. I=92ve got "Holy Grail" and "Life of Brian" on DVD, but "The Meaning of Life" is no longer available new! Is this some sort of dastardly PC plot, a vast no-wing conspiracy? Used DVDs of this paragon of cinematic art are selling for over $100, even on the Bay thing. This is unconscionable! I demand...well, I demand that somebody do something! OM content: I have some of that stuff. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18417 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:26:02 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:26:02 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:26:52 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21970 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:26:28 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-203-11.client.attbi.com[12.236.203.11]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002123016252105200fi489e>; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:25:21 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:22:59 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca New Zealand is a magical place, IMO. I was there for a while in '98 and came away loving it. There are tourists in places like Wellington (which reminds me a lot of the bay area without the traffic and overdevelopment) and Auckland, but it's a really sparsely populated nation and if you're looking for natural beauty it's everywhere. I've really considered living there. -Rob On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 02:08 AM, Chris Barker wrote: > I know that there was a load of computer > generated graphics, but the scenery was majestic. I just hope that > the place is not now ruined by thoughtless or insensitive tourism - > like many other beautiful parts of the world, I gather. > > I really would like to visit myself, however, so that I can make some > lovely photos and enjoy the scenery. > > Chris < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18681 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:29:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:29:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:30:33 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21982 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:30:09 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-203-11.client.attbi.com[12.236.203.11]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20021230162901053003lo38e>; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:29:01 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:26:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] susan, miles Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <001401c2b012$cbba9da0$17014441@swbell.net> Message-Id: <793B56A6-1C13-11D7-BBC0-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Heh...the Miles I met in the 80's would probably grumble an incomprehensible string of profanities and then smash a camera to emphasize his point. -Rob On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 06:50 AM, Bill Pearce wrote: > And yes, I would rather hear Miles Davis speak to this, as it would be > a > vastly shorter response. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19128 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:50:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:50:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:51:03 2002 -0800 Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22007 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:50:39 -0800 Received: from ctx ([141.157.95.192]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP id <20021230164623.WWXF4558.pop018.verizon.net@ctx> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:46:23 -0600 Message-ID: <003401c2b022$fa402680$0200a8c0@ctx> From: "Mickey Trageser" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:46:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop018.verizon.net from [141.157.95.192] at Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:46:23 -0600 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Bill, In my experience, scanning negs and slides are equally arduous. What makes the difference for you? -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Clark" To: Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 11:13 AM Subject: RE: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in > I would disagree with scanning negatives. Who wants to wait and wait for 30 > meg files to scan, then dust and scratch removal, then photoshop, and on we > go. If I were to scan, I would scan slides, which the Epson 2450 does > beautifully. You save $ and time with a film scanner. People will use > digcams to get rid of teh intermediary scanning steps...I sure do. > > -Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Gwinn [mailto:joegwinn@attbi.com] > Sent: December 30, 2002 10:17 AM > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in > > > On page 37 of the January 2003 issue of "Popolar Photography & Imaging" > magazine (the "& Imaging" part is new) there is a letter to the editor > ("Proof: John B") where one John B questions Pop Photo's contention that the > information content of a 35mm frame is 20-30 Mpixels (these will be > marketing pixels), because he personally gets better photos with digital > cameras. One assumes that his camera has far fewer mpix, although this isn't > stated. The letter was in response to an editorial in the November 2002 > issue of Pop Photo. > > The Editors' answer more or less recapitulates our computations, albeit with > less math detail, summarizing that 24 Mpix is for handheld SLR shots, while > 30 Mpix is for "optimal" situations. All this with ASA 100 color negative > and slide films and a top-of-the-line 50mm lens set to its optimum aperture, > with camera on a heavy tripod with remote cable release. No mention of > mirror lockup. Under less rigorous conditions, or with a 35mm point&shoot, > one gets 6-12 Mpix. > > In my analyses, I used 50 line pairs per millimeter as the typical > performance of lenses, a conservative number, and ended up with 18 Mpix. > Pop Photo instead tried to estimate the best that could be done in practice, > and got about double that. > > Assuming that the 30 Mpix is for a camera of 1:2:1 ratio, this is the > equivalent of 15 million tricolor pixels, and the frame will be about 4743 x > 3162. > > In all cases, the color accuracy of digital exceeds that of any film Pop > Photo has tested. > > Pop Photo goes on to conclude that the lack of film grain plus the greater > color accuracy leads many to choose "digital enlargements" over "film-based > enlargements". This part threw me. Who was talking of enlargement only? > We were talking of the relative merits of film and digital cameras, and one > could read their conclusion to endorse scanning of the negatives, which is > not supported by their other points. > > Perhaps the missing logical step is to note that at current price levels, > the cheaper route to digital is to use a 35mm film camera and scan the > negatives. > > Joe Gwinn > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19377 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:52:54 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:52:54 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:53:45 2002 -0800 Received: from ottmex.cdic.ca (breaker.cdic.ca [209.217.114.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22011 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:53:21 -0800 Received: by ottmex with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:52:58 -0500 Message-ID: From: William Clark To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:52:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I get better results with slides, which makes the difference for me. If I am going to spend time doing this stuff, then I want the best result possible with minimal troubles. You are right though, it is just as ardous, but my experience is better with slides (quicker) -Bill -----Original Message----- From: Mickey Trageser [mailto:vze3m2s8@verizon.net] Sent: December 30, 2002 11:46 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Bill, In my experience, scanning negs and slides are equally arduous. What makes the difference for you? -Mickey ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Clark" To: Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 11:13 AM Subject: RE: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in > I would disagree with scanning negatives. Who wants to wait and wait for 30 > meg files to scan, then dust and scratch removal, then photoshop, and on we > go. If I were to scan, I would scan slides, which the Epson 2450 does > beautifully. You save $ and time with a film scanner. People will use > digcams to get rid of teh intermediary scanning steps...I sure do. > > -Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Gwinn [mailto:joegwinn@attbi.com] > Sent: December 30, 2002 10:17 AM > To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in > > > On page 37 of the January 2003 issue of "Popolar Photography & Imaging" > magazine (the "& Imaging" part is new) there is a letter to the editor > ("Proof: John B") where one John B questions Pop Photo's contention that the > information content of a 35mm frame is 20-30 Mpixels (these will be > marketing pixels), because he personally gets better photos with digital > cameras. One assumes that his camera has far fewer mpix, although this isn't > stated. The letter was in response to an editorial in the November 2002 > issue of Pop Photo. > > The Editors' answer more or less recapitulates our computations, albeit with > less math detail, summarizing that 24 Mpix is for handheld SLR shots, while > 30 Mpix is for "optimal" situations. All this with ASA 100 color negative > and slide films and a top-of-the-line 50mm lens set to its optimum aperture, > with camera on a heavy tripod with remote cable release. No mention of > mirror lockup. Under less rigorous conditions, or with a 35mm point&shoot, > one gets 6-12 Mpix. > > In my analyses, I used 50 line pairs per millimeter as the typical > performance of lenses, a conservative number, and ended up with 18 Mpix. > Pop Photo instead tried to estimate the best that could be done in practice, > and got about double that. > > Assuming that the 30 Mpix is for a camera of 1:2:1 ratio, this is the > equivalent of 15 million tricolor pixels, and the frame will be about 4743 x > 3162. > > In all cases, the color accuracy of digital exceeds that of any film Pop > Photo has tested. > > Pop Photo goes on to conclude that the lack of film grain plus the greater > color accuracy leads many to choose "digital enlargements" over "film-based > enlargements". This part threw me. Who was talking of enlargement only? > We were talking of the relative merits of film and digital cameras, and one > could read their conclusion to endorse scanning of the negatives, which is > not supported by their other points. > > Perhaps the missing logical step is to note that at current price levels, > the cheaper route to digital is to use a 35mm film camera and scan the > negatives. > > Joe Gwinn > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19647 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 16:55:09 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 16:55:09 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 08:55:59 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (root@idscc05.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22019 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:55:36 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18T3CR-0006Oo-00 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:55:35 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:54:45 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca The New Zealanders like people to come visit but do not want people to move there. They've seen what has happened to other beautiful places when the affluent from other countries move in and take over. If you want to live there you better have a skill they really need. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of R. Jackson Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:23 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers New Zealand is a magical place, IMO. I was there for a while in '98 and came away loving it. There are tourists in places like Wellington (which reminds me a lot of the bay area without the traffic and overdevelopment) and Auckland, but it's a really sparsely populated nation and if you're looking for natural beauty it's everywhere. I've really considered living there. -Rob <<< Skip < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20028 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 17:14:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 17:14:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 09:15:43 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes44.telusplanet.net (defout.telus.net [199.185.220.240]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22040 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:15:20 -0800 Received: from homebody.telusplanet.net ([209.89.93.190]) by priv-edtnes44.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021230171134.CHJU591.priv-edtnes44.telusplanet.net@homebody.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:11:34 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021230100939.00b279f0@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:11:33 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 09:54 AM 12/30/2002 -0700, Jim McBride wrote: >The New Zealanders like people to come visit but do not want people to move >there. They've seen what has happened to other beautiful places when the >affluent from other countries move in and take over. If you want to live >there you better have a skill they really need. Amazing how that works the world over with each nationality's respective country. You'll find the same reaction from Canadians, Americans, Brits, Spaniards, the French, Russians, Brazilians, etc., etc., etc. ... Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20355 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 17:22:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 17:22:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 09:23:20 2002 -0800 Received: from nemesis.systems.pipex.net (nemesis.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.8]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22060 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:22:55 -0800 Received: from jonpc1 (81-86-191-224.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.191.224]) by nemesis.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F0C3160080CC for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:22:44 +0000 (GMT) From: "Jon Mitchell" To: Subject: RE: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:22:47 -0000 Message-ID: <000101c2b028$129302c0$0800a8c0@reac.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id JAA22060 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sunday 19th is good for me too. Any more firm plans ? My gf may come along too, if there are no objections ! I gave her an OM-= 30 I had kicking around a while back, in an attempt to get her interested in OM. She enjoys taking pics, but lacks experience with a camera with "rea= l controls" (previously had a "disposable" with which she exhibited a good = eye for a shot, but the quality from them was poor). My hope is that if she is interested in OM then I won't get "the look" wh= en I get more OM gear !!! Some hope ... ! Jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca= ] On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: 28 December 2002 07:17 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] London gathering - was London camera shops Well, I have obtained permission (from my wife, I have not asked work yet) to take a day off on Sunday 19 January, so is anyone else up for a meeting mid-morning (1030?) somewhere picturesque? London seems favourite, although IanG might find the wait for a ride on the London Eye rather a turnoff (I have in the past climbed to the roof(ves) of the Ministry of Defence, which is probably 50-100ft lower). Chris At 18:13 +0000 20/12/02, Roger Wesson wrote: >Sundays are a good day for photography I reckon. Can I suggest >Sunday 19th January as a possible date? The 'morning photography >followed by hearty lunch' plan sounds great. > >Roger > >Sam Shiell wrote: > >>But seriously folks...... >> >>Sunday's are best for me, and (I think) I'm fairly free for the >>next few months..... >> >>Sam >> >> -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko ... a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20664 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 17:30:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 17:30:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 09:31:27 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22072 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:31:03 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-203-11.client.attbi.com[12.236.203.11]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002123017295505200fhr93e>; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:29:55 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:27:33 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually, the Kiwis make it pretty easy on you. First off, you don't have to be a citizen to live there. They have really liberal laws concerning residences for businessmen. And if you want to emigrate as a citizen they have a points system. I can't recall the specifics, but you have to have a minimum number of points and you get points for things like college degrees and years spent in trade unions. You also, however, get points for every $10k you're bringing into the country. It's seems to be structured so that the affluent can move there freely. Struck me as kind of strange, but I guess I should have expected it. -Rob On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 08:54 AM, James N. McBride wrote: > The New Zealanders like people to come visit but do not want people to > move > there. They've seen what has happened to other beautiful places when > the > affluent from other countries move in and take over. If you want to > live > there you better have a skill they really need. /jim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20970 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 17:38:14 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 17:38:14 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 09:39:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22092 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:38:40 -0800 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:38:16 -0500 Message-Id: <200212301238.AA1465319748@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Generally speaking, the world over, since the memory of man runneth not to the contrary, the affluent can move more freely. The affluenter you are the freelier you can go to the more better places. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "R. Jackson" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:27:33 -0800 [SNIP] >It's seems to be structured so that the affluent can move there >freely. Struck me as kind of strange, but I guess I should have >expected it. > >-Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21301 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 17:45:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 17:45:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 09:45:56 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22120 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:45:32 -0800 Received: from attbi.com (12-236-203-11.client.attbi.com[12.236.203.11]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <2002123017442505300k71vde>; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:44:25 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:42:03 -0800 Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: "R. Jackson" To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <200212301238.AA1465319748@mynra.com> Message-Id: <017EBE9A-1C1E-11D7-ABC1-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think I've just found my Quote of the Month. ;-) -Rob On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 09:38 AM, Walt Wayman wrote: > Generally speaking, the world over, since the memory of man > runneth not to the contrary, the affluent can move more freely. > The affluenter you are the freelier you can go to the more better > places. > > Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21562 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 17:46:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 17:46:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 09:47:25 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22124 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:47:01 -0800 Received: from modem-4035.elk.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.76.175.195] helo=skelly) by cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18T40B-0007vf-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:46:59 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:47:16 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200212301238.AA1465319748@mynra.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yep, affluent good, effluent not good. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Walt Wayman Sent: 30 December 2002 17:38 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Generally speaking, the world over, since the memory of man runneth not to the contrary, the affluent can move more freely. The affluenter you are the freelier you can go to the more better places. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "R. Jackson" Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:27:33 -0800 [SNIP] >It's seems to be structured so that the affluent can move there >freely. Struck me as kind of strange, but I guess I should have >expected it. > >-Rob < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22548 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 19:10:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 19:10:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 11:11:00 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22243 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:10:36 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B416A58F04 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:10:22 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:10:18 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Chris Barker > >I know it's a little while since Richard posted this, but that film >(The Two Towers, the second of the Lord of the Rings trilogy) >restored my faith in cinema. Seconded! If anything, it's outdone the first movie -- I can't wait until next Christmas! I got the 4-CD set of The Fellowship for Christmas, which I watched before going to Two Towers. The additional CDs -- basically an extended "the making of" movie -- are incredible! The prep work was amazing. They basically re-created the whole movie three times -- on storyboards, with rough computer animation, and with actors. As far as props, costumes, etc. -- they MADE everything from scratch -- real armour, real weapons, many miniature scenes (as opposed to paintings) etc. They scoured the world for people capable of making lost arts. The swords were fascinating. They made several different copies out of different materials -- real steel, light aluminum, foam plastic -- but the actors pretty much preferred the "real" weapons. There are some great scenes that show the actors working on blue screen, then with the miniatures stripped in, then with computer-generated stuff added. Over 3000 people worked on these films! Requisite on-topic content: I doubt an OM was used in these movies. :-( -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22823 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 19:13:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 19:13:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 11:14:12 2002 -0800 Received: from central.caverock.net.nz (root@central.caverock.net.nz [210.55.207.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22257 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:13:46 -0800 Received: from caverock.net.nz (tc1-15.caverock.net.nz [210.55.206.15]) by central.caverock.net.nz (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBUJ5sO27785 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:05:55 +1300 Message-Id: <200212301905.gBUJ5sO27785@central.caverock.net.nz> From: "Brian Swale" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:13:11 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: [OM] ( OM ) OT - Zuikoholism in the New Year 2003 X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello everybody, Thanks very much to one and all for your company during the year about to end. These times no new day seems quite right if I don't have my morning OM digest fix along with a mug or two of coffee. May you each and all have a successful and enjoyable New Year 2003, with lots of OM and Olympus magic, learning and new achievements. I look forward to having your company. Brian < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23165 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 19:21:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 19:21:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 11:21:54 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (root@dns2.onewest.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22269 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:21:31 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18T5Te-0001oq-00 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:21:30 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:20:40 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That's interesting. My perspective is very limited (as usual) and came primarily from a girlfriend that married a Kiwi. They went to NZ to spend a winter there as ski instructors and were strongly discouraged from moving there by a variety of people. Maybe they didn't want any more wild-assed ski instructors. I have some friends that live part of the year in Australia and they have never experienced that sentiment. Most countries welcome foreign investment if they can get it without incurring foreign control. That's easier said than done. /jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of R. Jackson Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 10:28 AM To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Actually, the Kiwis make it pretty easy on you. First off, you don't have to be a citizen to live there. They have really liberal laws concerning residences for businessmen. And if you want to emigrate as a citizen they have a points system. I can't recall the specifics, but you have to have a minimum number of points and you get points for things like college degrees and years spent in trade unions. You also, however, get points for every $10k you're bringing into the country. It's seems to be structured so that the affluent can move there freely. Struck me as kind of strange, but I guess I should have expected it. -Rob On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 08:54 AM, James N. McBride wrote: > The New Zealanders like people to come visit but do not want people to > move > there. They've seen what has happened to other beautiful places when > the > affluent from other countries move in and take over. If you want to > live > there you better have a skill they really need. /jim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23690 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 19:59:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 19:59:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 12:00:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mmp-3.gci.net (mmp-3.gci.net [208.138.130.134]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22326 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:59:58 -0800 Received: from [66.58.167.65] ([66.58.167.65]) by mmp-3.gci.net (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id H7Y7CT02.15V for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:55:41 -0900 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:55:33 -0900 Subject: [OM] Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives From: "Kenneth J. Gill" To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello Zuiko Lovers, I've been scanning some negatives, to find that if could only wash away the tiny specks I might get a cleaner result and would not have to use photoshop. Does any have some guidance on available kits or solutions? Ken Visit my home site: http://home.gci.net/~gillfoto/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24232 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 20:32:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 20:32:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 12:33:03 2002 -0800 Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net (flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.232]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22367 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:32:39 -0800 Received: from user192.net082.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([209.26.112.192] helo=oemcomputer) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18T6a2-000126-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:32:10 -0800 Message-ID: <034f01c2b042$b6ab3980$010000c0@oemcomputer> From: "Jamie Costello" To: References: <200212301122.AA2935750924@mynra.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Really way OT Q and rant Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:33:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Isn't it "The Meaning of Life" that has the funniest scene ever committed to celluloid: "Your mint, sir."? Jamie Fort Myers, FL < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24662 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 20:52:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 20:52:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 12:53:35 2002 -0800 Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22407 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:53:11 -0800 Received: from cr117268a ([24.233.98.157]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.06 201-253-122-126-106-20020509) with ESMTP id <20021230204028.TODS4715.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@cr117268a> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:40:28 -0500 Message-ID: <01db01c2b041$1e620ba0$9d62e918@nbmn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> From: "John Hudson" <13874@rogers.com> To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:22:04 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.233.98.157] using ID <13874@rogers.com> at Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:40:28 -0500 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kenneth J. Gill" To: Sent: Monday, 30 December, 2002 03:55 PM Subject: [OM] Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives > Hello Zuiko Lovers, > I've been scanning some negatives, to find that if could only wash away the > tiny specks I might get a cleaner result and would not have to use > photoshop. > > Does any have some guidance on available kits or solutions? > Ken I cut my rolls of negatives into strips of six for storage in archival quality plastic sleeves. This minimizes them attracting bits of dust and dirt. Prior to scanning I may give them a very short puff of canned air at an angle from about 10" or a very very light one way polish with a piece of clean lint free silk like material I found at a fabric shop. What ever I do I am very careful not to scratch to negatives. Scanning a residual spec of dust on the negative can be dealt with in Photoshop whereas a scratched negative is damaged for life. jh < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25055 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 21:06:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 21:06:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 13:07:22 2002 -0800 Received: from mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.160]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22429 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:06:58 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBUL6us17797 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:06:56 +1100 Message-Id: <200212302106.gBUL6us17797@mail019.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:06:56 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Kenneth J. Gill wrote: > > Hello Zuiko Lovers, > I've been scanning some negatives, to find that if could only wash > away the > tiny specks I might get a cleaner result and would not have to use > photoshop. > > Does any have some guidance on available kits or solutions? > Ken > You could try: http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/poladsr.html It's free, seems to work reasonably well. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25498 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 21:32:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 21:32:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 13:33:09 2002 -0800 Received: from fw.sls.bc.ca (unknown13.onlink.net [209.105.222.139] (may be forged)) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA22471 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:32:44 -0800 Message-Id: <200212302132.NAA22471@fw.sls.bc.ca> From: Josh Lohuis To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] One Hacker's Love Date: Mon,30 Dec 2002 16:32:46 PM X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=#r0xx# Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --#r0xx# Content-Type: text/html charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi,
check the attached love screensaver
and feel the fragrance of true love.. --#r0xx# Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=love.scr Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="love.scr" --#r0xx#-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25893 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 21:43:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 21:43:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 13:44:46 2002 -0800 Received: from onlink15.onlink.net (onlink15.onlink.net [206.108.253.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA22533 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:44:18 -0800 Received: (mail 16450 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 21:42:58 -0000 Received: from unknown13.onlink.net (HELO telepro) ([209.105.222.139]) (envelope-sender ) by onlink15.onlink.net with SMTP for ; 30 Dec 2002 21:42:58 -0000 Message-ID: <003c01c2b04c$6c114770$8bde69d1@telepro> From: "Josh Lohuis" To: References: <200212302132.NAA22471@fw.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] One Hacker's Love Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:42:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sorry about this folks. I'm having some virus problems... as you can see. Happy New Year, Josh Lohuis ----- Original Message ----- From: Josh Lohuis To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 11:32 AM Subject: [OM] One Hacker's Love hi, check the attached love screensaver and feel the fragrance of true love.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26198 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 21:50:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 21:50:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 13:51:46 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA22538 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:51:22 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-24-43.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.24.43 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 21:50:37 -0000 Message-ID: <3E10BFAF.5050805@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:50:39 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Virus Alert!! - One Hacker's Love References: <200212302132.NAA22471@fw.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just received this through the list server with a 'screen saver' attachment, love.scr. I didn't open it. I have full current antivirus protection, but take no unnecessary chances. Sender was ostensibly "josh1@onlink.net". Looks like somebody with Josh in their addressbook has a virus. Moose Josh Lohuis wrote: > hi, > check the attached love screensaver > and feel the fragrance of true love.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26561 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:03:07 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:03:07 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:03:57 2002 -0800 Received: from pop015.verizon.net (pop015pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22564 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:03:33 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.116.7]) by pop015.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021230215918.PVYO21001.pop015.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:59:18 -0600 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:59:13 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <3E0F63E7.E542D871@mail.airmail.net> Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] Apologies, Good news, Sad news X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at pop015.verizon.net from [151.198.116.7] at Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:59:17 -0600 Message-Id: <20021230215918.PVYO21001.pop015.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <3E0F63E7.E542D871@mail.airmail.net>, on 12/29/02 at 03:06 PM, clintonr@mail.airmail.net said: >But the sad news is that an Olyphile that some of you may have known >appears to have passed away. Might we now who it is? ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26841 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:07:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:07:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:08:25 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22568 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:08:01 -0800 Received: from chatschaturjan86@netscape.net by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.b3.666a126 (16239) for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:05:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from netscape.net ([63.146.251.245]) by air-in03.mx.aol.com (v90.10) with ESMTP id MAILININ33-1230170557; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:05:57 -0500 Message-ID: <3E10EE57.5090201@netscape.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:09:43 -0800 From: Andy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (nscd2) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT: The Two Towers References: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I saw this opening morning at 12.01 A.M.. Great movie, wonderful cast. I don't like it as well as I did the first because if you read the book, you'll notice one wildly different plot change. Also, we had people at the first showing in full costume, including larde 12 foot staffs. We had to yell several times for them to put them down so we could see the picture, as they were sitting in front of us. Andy in OM-barren VA -- Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27159 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:18:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:18:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:18:54 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.115]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA22576 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:18:30 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-112-27-115.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.112.27.115 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:17:44 -0000 Message-ID: <3E10C608.3070002@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:17:44 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Scanning slides vs. negs (was How many pixels in a 35mm film image) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca A couple of years of reading this list hs convinced me that both ease of use and quality of results in scanning film are highly variable across hardware, software and wetware. Film scanning is not a mature consumer technology like bicycles, automobiles, water faucets, door knobs, etc., where virtually anyone fimiliar with the operation of some examples can readily use different examples with fully satisfactory results. Some of us report that slides are easier than negs. Others report that negs are easy, but slides 'impossible', and so on. The basic process, reading light intensity of 3 colors, is inherently neutral to whether the subject is a positive or negative image of the light reflected from some scene elsewhere in space-time, scrawlings on a piece of clear plastic, coffee stains on newspaper, etc. etc. Some observations from my experience and reading about the experiences of others: It seems likely to me that all curent, major brand scanners are capable of equal quality results from either form of film. The time to make one scanning pass is the same for either form of film. Noise in the dark areas of finished scans/prints is more noticable/annoying than in the light areas. Thus slides are more sensitive to scanner noise at high source densities than are negs. and may require more scanning passes or lower noise scanners to produce visually equal results from scenes with substantial very dark areas. On my particular scanner, slides with dark areas may take longer than negs because of the need for multiple passes. This is apparently less of an issue with some of the latest scanners. The software that runs the scanner can make a big difference in results. Vuescan gives better results with my scanner than the software provided with it. Preferrences and predjudices often affect how people perceive the world. Two people using the same hardware and software may experience the process and results quite differently: A person who is emotionally predisposed to feel slides are superior may be perfectly happy spending several hours learning how to get excellent scanning results from slides and feel rewarded by the effort. Presented with the need to scan negative film, towards which he/she has emotionally negative feelings, a few minutes spent learning to get the (possibly unconsciously) expected unsatisfactory results may lead to the emotionally satisfying conclusion that negs are harder to scan and give poorer results. The reverse scenario will be played out by other individuals. Although speculative as to any one of us, these kinds of factors underly enormous portions of human behavior. Without them the whole business of branding and advertising would be almost unrecognizably different. Moose William Clark wrote: >I get better results with slides, which makes the difference for me. If I >am going to spend time doing this stuff, then I want the best result >possible with minimal troubles. You are right though, it is just as ardous, >but my experience is better with slides (quicker) > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27520 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:31:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:31:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:32:29 2002 -0800 Received: from syn1.syntegra.com.au ([203.102.221.67]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22584 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:32:04 -0800 Received: from cfpnt01.cfp.com.au (mail.cfppar01.cfp.com.au [10.84.250.16]) by syn1.syntegra.com.au (/) with ESMTP id gBUMO4U16377 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:24:04 +1100 (EST) Received: by cfpnt01.cfp.com.au with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:31:05 +1100 Message-ID: <18B69D7B7C1DCA4FA9EB45E8376FC8472F56EA@cfpnt01.cfp.com.au> From: Marc Lawrence To: "'olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca'" Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:31:04 +1100 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > R. Jackson [mailto:jackson.robert.r@attbi.com] wrote: > New Zealand is a magical place, IMO.... I would rate Queenstown, NZ & its surrounds as one of the most beautiful places in the world (and coming from an Aussie, who is required by Australian law to never have anything nice to say about Kiwis or where they come from, or, if you do, to claim that it/they are actually Australian, that is saying something! G'day Brian ) The only OM content is that NZed is one place where I hope to do a photographic tour eventually (and it's just a small hope across the water). Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27797 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:35:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:35:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:36:38 2002 -0800 Received: from out005.verizon.net (out005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.143]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22590 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:36:14 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.116.7]) by out005.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021230223158.KUQI19422.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:31:58 -0600 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:31:42 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021230215918.PVYO21001.pop015.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] Apologies, Good news, Sad news X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out005.verizon.net from [151.198.116.7] at Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:31:58 -0600 Message-Id: <20021230223158.KUQI19422.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <20021230215918.PVYO21001.pop015.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>, on 12/30/02 at 04:59 PM, ll.clark@verizon.net said: >Might we now who it is? That should be "...Might we know who it is?" of course. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28094 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:43:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:43:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:44:07 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22604 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:43:43 -0800 Received: from homebody.telusplanet.net ([209.89.89.110]) by priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021230223958.WGLF1559.priv-edtnes61.telusplanet.net@homebody.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:39:58 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021230153859.00b2f390@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:39:58 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Really way OT Q and rant In-Reply-To: <034f01c2b042$b6ab3980$010000c0@oemcomputer> References: <200212301122.AA2935750924@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 03:33 PM 12/30/2002 -0500, Jamie Costello wrote: >Isn't it "The Meaning of Life" that has the funniest scene ever committed to >celluloid: "Your mint, sir."? "It's waffer thin, m'sieu." ;-) Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28415 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:50:28 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:50:28 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:51:19 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22613 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:50:55 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA20699; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:50:54 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] new additions to the WE02 site Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:46:31 -0600 Message-ID: <008b01c2b055$4df00700$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/Asides/OM-2002/OM-2002.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28672 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 22:54:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 22:54:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 14:55:16 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22621 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:54:52 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D705B298 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:54:15 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] Apologies, Good news, Sad news In-Reply-To: Message from ll.clark@verizon.net of "Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:31:42 CDT." <20021230223158.KUQI19422.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4+dev; Emacs 21.2 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:54:15 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021230225415.85D705B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <20021230223158.KUQI19422.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>, ll.clark@verizon.net writes: [Snipped ..] >>Might we now who it is? > >That should be "...Might we know who it is?" of course. Clint already said it - Gary Cox. > From: clintonr@mail.airmail.net > Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:06:48 -0600 > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] [OT] Apologies, Good news, Sad news [Snipped] > But the sad news is that an Olyphile that some of you may have known > appears to have passed away. I was told by one of our customers that a > note he had mailed to Gary Cox was returned with a letter from his son > with this information. Shortly thereafter a package we had shipped to > him was also returned undeliverable so it would appear to be true. > > Clint Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28995 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:00:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:00:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:01:04 2002 -0800 Received: from out004.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.142]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22637 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:00:40 -0800 From: ll.clark@verizon.net Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([151.198.116.7]) by out004.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.20 201-253-122-126-120-20021101) with ESMTP id <20021230225624.PGDN1642.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:56:24 -0600 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:56:17 -0500 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In-Reply-To: <20021230225415.85D705B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] Apologies, Good news, Sad news X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for Windows v2.35w/35 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out004.verizon.net from [151.198.116.7] at Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:56:24 -0600 Message-Id: <20021230225624.PGDN1642.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In <20021230225415.85D705B298@yellow3.eunet.si>, on 12/31/02 at 09:54 AM, VS said: >Clint already said it - Gary Cox. Sorry; senior moment there. ----------------------------------------------------------- llclark / edgewater, nj / usa -------------------------------------------------------- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29268 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:02:58 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:02:58 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:03:48 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22651 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:03:24 -0800 Received: from interisland.net ([12.17.134.60]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBUMxRV18481 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:59:28 -0800 Message-ID: <3E10D0B8.5C8400C@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:03:20 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: re: [OM] help! what can I do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA22651 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Mike, > > All you need do to remove the color fringing is a "hard" reboot of your PhotoSmart. Unplug the scanner at the wall socket, then >plug it it back in after a minute or so. The fringing only happens when the scanner is in slide mode. > > You're right about the original negs---they will give you a better scan because they are originals, and also because the >PhotoSmart is a much better negative > scanner than a slide scanner. Also, the so-called slides are heavily cropped when printed, in addition to the little bit lost by the >slide mount. I don't know how > SFW sent you the negs, but I know Dale Labs wound them up tight in little red cannisters, and they are a pain in the ass to flatten and scan. Good luck. > > Morgan > I have isolated the problem to the scanner itself, e.g. same problem with slides that previously scanned ok. So I'll give the hard boot idea a shot and cross my fingers. Although I have rebooted the computer and all with no change. I also recalibrated the scanner with the card that comes with it. I realize that this scanner is old and never the best but it's bought and paid for and another is far in the future, after a computer upgrade at the least and a new car for my wife. It'll take way more than the $100+ I've got in this scanner to get back in the game. So far the results with it have been fine and there is no problem with negs. But now I'm worried that I won't be able to scan that stack of old slides. I guess a scanner with more dynamic range would be better for slides anyway. Good thing those Kodachromes are immortal :>) I dug out the original SFW negatives and you are right, tightly wound little springs. I was able to get them to feed easier upside down. Color was way off into the blue/magenta area but I was able to do a reasonable correction by practically maxing out the yellow/orange. Here is a direct scan, no modification except to convert for screen. Also the train picture from the negative. Much better this time. Hopefully I'll add more as I get time. These winter days lend themselves to this activity. http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/LatinAmerica/MexCentralAm/ Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29519 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:03:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:03:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:04:22 2002 -0800 Received: from onlink1.onlink.net (onlink1.onlink.net [206.108.253.70]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA22655 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:03:58 -0800 Received: (mail 31021 invoked by uid 506); 30 Dec 2002 23:00:18 -0000 Received: from unknown13.onlink.net (HELO telepro) ([209.105.222.139]) (envelope-sender ) by onlink1 with SMTP for ; 30 Dec 2002 23:00:18 -0000 Message-ID: <006701c2b057$393122c0$8bde69d1@telepro> From: "Josh Lohuis" To: References: <200212302132.NAA22471@fw.sls.bc.ca> <3E10BFAF.5050805@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: [OM] Virus Alert!! - One Hacker's Love Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:00:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi again, Does anyone know anything about this worm? I can't find any info on it, and my virus scanning software (new and up-to date) does not detect it. Any help would be appreciated. Josh Josh Lohuis wrote: hi, check the attached love screensaver and feel the fragrance of true love.. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 29796 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:05:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:05:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:06:38 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22659 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:06:13 -0800 Received: from interisland.net ([12.17.134.60]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBUN2JV18674 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:02:19 -0800 Message-ID: <3E10D164.22F7322D@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:06:12 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id PAA22659 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > The only time it (the camera) tells the truth is when I use it for self portrait..... > Funny, that's when mine lies the worst. It dresses me in a wig with grey thinning hair, big nose and glasses. Can't trust the #$%@ mirror any more either :>) Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30153 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:23:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:23:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:24:30 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp25.singnet.com.sg (smtp25.singnet.com.sg [165.21.101.224]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22663 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:24:05 -0800 Received: from t1m3b5 (bb-203-125-17-52.singnet.com.sg [203.125.17.52]) by smtp25.singnet.com.sg (8.12.6/8.12.6) with SMTP id gBUNO2bx018623 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 07:24:03 +0800 Message-ID: <009601c2b05a$51f5be80$34117dcb@t1m3b5> From: "TMLee" To: References: <000201c2afea$09871150$059c32da@computer> <007c01c2b014$139d36e0$c0167dcb@t1m3b5> Subject: Re: [OM] ....... Re: OM-4 and MD1 for sale...... Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 07:22:28 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca OOps... sorry , thi sshld be offline... peace TMLee ----- Original Message ----- From: "TMLee" To: Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 10:59 PM Subject: [OM] ....... Re: OM-4 and MD1 for sale...... > Dear Woody... > I am interested in the OM-4 body.... > > U have any pics of it so I can view online .... > > peace > TMLee > > > > > > Hi again, I'm asking only $275 includes shipping for both things. If > > interested email me. > > Regards, Woody > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Woody K." > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 1:21 AM > > Subject: OM-4 and MD1 for sale > > > > > > Hello list, > > > > I'm selling my om-4 and motor drive 1 as the following; > > > > - om-4 black, ex, some sign of use, works good, $250 > > - motor drive 1, ex+, a little signs of use, works good, $75 > > > > All prices includes shipping anywhere. Please contact me thru off list. > > > > Woody > > > > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30507 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:38:17 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:38:17 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:39:08 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22678 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:38:43 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.35.17]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021230233751.FGE25244.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:37:51 -0500 Message-ID: <001c01c2b05c$72cb4880$112344d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:37:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi Ken, Since I've been scanning I've found that I need to be as careful with dust removal as I ever was when making 11x14" prints in the darkroom. I've tried to just brush the dust them with a soft brush. Doing this step by itself often leaves dozens of pieces of dust on the negative. Rather than trying to save time by cleaning quickly, and having to reclean after a dusty scan, I've decided that a very careful cleaning of each strip of 6 is actually a time-saver. You can buy a brush at a camera store for lenses and negatives; mine also has a completely useless air syringe attached. Here's what I do. I get my C-41 negs developed but not cut. When I get a new set of negs home, I hang them with a weight to encourage them to straighten out. I bought a Teflon-coated pan for baking brownies. It has a plastic lid that attaches with snaps. The Teflon surface doesn't react to liquid film cleaner. In the pan, I store my cotton gloves, anti-static gun, and film holders for the scanner. I wipe off a counter space, set everything out, and put on a pair of cotton gloves, bought from a camera store. I wipe off the inside of the baking pan with film cleaner in case I need to clean negs there. I cut off my first set of six negs (starting with frame 1) and....... 1. Use a Milty static-eliminator gun (formerly the Zerostat, formerly the Discwasher static gun) in both directions according to the directions. This involves aiming the gun at the strip from about a foot away, then very slowly squeezing and slowly "un-squeezing" the handle. 2. Use the negative brush lightly on both sides. 3. Use compressed air from a can on both sides. As others have mentioned, you hold the gun's nozzle level and tilt the negative so the air stream blows across the surface. If I tilt the nozzle from "level to the horizon", the can belches propellant across the negative. I don't think it's harmful but it sure doesn't help anything. That works for me. I don't use the liquid film cleaner unless the first scan shows a finger smudge from the old days before I started buying cotton gloves. I scan that strip, putting the raw scans in a dedicated folder. After the scan, I sleeve the strip, then cut off the next strip. When I first open a raw scan, I save it immediately to a new folder so the raw scan is still available. The scans I do by hand at home are far better than the drugstore scans sold locally under the Kodak "Picture CD" logo. As we've discussed before, "Picture CD" quality seems to vary all over the map. What's available to me is lousy for concert pictures. Your needs and local quality will be different. Lama > Hello Zuiko Lovers, > I've been scanning some negatives, to find that if could only wash away the > tiny specks I might get a cleaner result and would not have to use > photoshop. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 30921 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 23:55:39 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:55:39 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 15:56:29 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA22712 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:56:05 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-213-188.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.213.188 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 23:55:20 -0000 Message-ID: <3E10DCE8.6040908@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:55:20 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Virus Alert!! - One Hacker's Love References: <200212302132.NAA22471@fw.sls.bc.ca> <3E10BFAF.5050805@sbcglobal.net> <006701c2b057$393122c0$8bde69d1@telepro> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca It's probably not on your machine. Many Outlook/OE virii look through the addressbook on the infected computer and fill in both addressees and senders names from there, thus hiding the actual source as they scatter infected messages across the net. It is almost certainly from someone who has your address in their addressbook, but not necessarily someone on the list, as pairing of addressee and sender names is random. Some on the list are capable of decoding the messages to see where they really came from, but not me. Moose Josh Lohuis wrote: >Hi again, > > Does anyone know anything about this worm? I can't find any info on it, >and my virus scanning software (new and up-to date) does not detect it. >Any help would be appreciated. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 31691 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:08:35 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:08:35 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 16:09:26 2002 -0800 Received: from yellow3.eunet.si (postfix@ns.jasico.si [207.235.5.156]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22750 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:09:01 -0800 Received: from ns.jasico.si (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yellow3.eunet.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846B35B298 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:08:30 +1100 (EST) To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Virus Alert!! - One Hacker's Love In-Reply-To: Message from "Josh Lohuis" of "Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:00:18 CDT." <006701c2b057$393122c0$8bde69d1@telepro> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.0+cvs; nmh 1.0.4+dev; Emacs 21.2 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:08:30 +1100 From: VS Message-Id: <20021231000830.846B35B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca In message <006701c2b057$393122c0$8bde69d1@telepro>, "Josh Lohuis" writes: Hi Josh, > Does anyone know anything about this worm? I can't find any info on it, >and my virus scanning software (new and up-to date) does not detect it. >Any help would be appreciated. You caught a fairly fresh one, here's more details on it: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.yaha.k@mm.html Cheers, Saso < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32050 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:16:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:16:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 16:16:51 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22762 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:16:27 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh27.interisland.net [12.17.134.27]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBV0CXV23382 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:12:33 -0800 Message-ID: <3E10E1D7.31C1F787@interisland.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:16:23 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Here's a question for the experts on the list. Did Jackson have the Orks speak with an Aussie accent? My ear isn't attuned to the subtleties of these foreign languages :>) Mike < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32466 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:37:32 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:37:32 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 16:38:23 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp016.mail.yahoo.com (smtp016.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.113]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA22786 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:37:59 -0800 Received: from adsl-216-100-136-249.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@216.100.136.249 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:37:13 -0000 Message-ID: <3E10E6B9.5060402@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:37:13 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] help! what can I do? References: <3E10D0B8.5C8400C@interisland.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Your scanning software should have a function for scanning negative film which adjusts for the orange mask and gives balanced color output. If it doesn't, and you plan to scan a lot of old negs, you should try Viewscan . Even if it does, you should try Viewscan. Viewscan supports the Photosmart. It comes with specific info on the mask characteristics on many films, but not yours, I suspect. Better yet, for your purposes, it is possible to adjust it to any film base color using a small clear area, even the space between frames. The current version is available for free download and testing. I paid the $40 for the full version and unlimited upgrades and feel it's one of the best software deals I've received. Moose Mike wrote: >I dug out the original SFW negatives and you are right, tightly wound >little springs. I was able to get them to feed easier upside down. Color > >was way off into the blue/magenta area but I was able to do a reasonable > >correction by practically maxing out the yellow/orange. Here is a direct > >scan, no modification except to convert for screen. Also the train >picture from the negative. Much better this time. Hopefully I'll add >more as I get time. These >winter days lend themselves to this activity. >http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/LatinAmerica/MexCentralAm/ > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 32717 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:38:44 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:38:44 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 16:39:35 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22790 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:39:11 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FEB58F55 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:38:56 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021230235544.30972.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021230235544.30972.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:38:54 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "Kenneth J. Gill" > >I've been scanning some negatives, to find that if could only wash away the >tiny specks I might get a cleaner result and would not have to use >photoshop. > >Does any have some guidance on available kits or solutions? Try PEC-12 and PECWipes. Available in pro photo stores. PEC-12 is the only thing I've found that will remove Sharpie(TM) permanent markers. Don't put too much on -- just one drop is all that's needed. Too much can cause a white film as it evaporates. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 584 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:44:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:44:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 16:44:55 2002 -0800 Received: from priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (outbound01.telus.net [199.185.220.220]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22809 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:44:31 -0800 Received: from homebody.telusplanet.net ([209.89.89.110]) by priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20021231004046.YLYH1598.priv-edtnes62.telusplanet.net@homebody.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:40:46 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021230173923.00b6f6a8@mail.telusplanet.net> X-Sender: garth@mail.telusplanet.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:40:45 -0700 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Garth Wood Subject: Re: [OM] Virus Alert!! - One Hacker's Love In-Reply-To: <20021231000830.846B35B298@yellow3.eunet.si> References: <006701c2b057$393122c0$8bde69d1@telepro> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 11:08 AM 12/31/2002 +1100, you wrote: >In message <006701c2b057$393122c0$8bde69d1@telepro>, "Josh Lohuis" writes: > >Hi Josh, > > > Does anyone know anything about this worm? I can't find any info on it, > >and my virus scanning software (new and up-to date) does not detect it. > >Any help would be appreciated. More importantly, the List software did what it was supposed to do, and stripped all the content out of the screensaver payload. The .SCR file I received was zero-length, which is why my virus scanning software didn't complain (and why ZoneAlarm didn't bother to re-name it for safety...). Garth < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1083 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:13:34 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 01:13:34 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 17:14:25 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA22854 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:14:00 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1041297175!2255 Received: (qmail 30696 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:12:56 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-12.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 01:12:56 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBV0hXf23111 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:43:34 +0800 Message-ID: <3E10EE19.70BDBFF7@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:08:41 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Scanning slide and negative is no comparison, slide is ten times better for sure! Provided you have a good film scanner with D-range>3.6 and low noise. Scanning slide get accurate color reproduction, negative never, different negative gives different color response curve, you can never get the exact color/tone, what you can do is to adjust for what it looks "good" can't say accurate. So far all negative are grainy when scanned except the discontinued Ektar 25, slides has much less grain. The only advantage of negative is the wide latitude, when you under or over exposed a frame you can still get back the details during scanning. C.H.Ling William Clark wrote: > > I get better results with slides, which makes the difference for me. If I > am going to spend time doing this stuff, then I want the best result > possible with minimal troubles. You are right though, it is just as ardous, > but my experience is better with slides (quicker) > > -Bill > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1400 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:24:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 01:24:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 17:25:36 2002 -0800 Received: from mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22868 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:25:11 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax80-b051.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.8.51]) by mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBV1P8H14173 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:25:09 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:23:25 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca G'day Andrew, If your Epic has run out of warranty and you've got a quote for repair that's only a little short of the national debt, just go and buy another. The Stylus Epic has got to be the best value on the market for a P&S. I must have put a hundred rolls through mine since late '99 and it hasn't let me down yet. Regards cancelling the flash, I'm reminded of a night on Kangaroo Island below South Australia. We'd gone on a walking tour of a fairy penguin nesting area and the guide, a very dedicated environmentalist lady, insisted on flashless photography. Apparently the penguins are traumatised by the light. Well, the flash cancelling button is, as you know, pretty well buried on the rear panel and though I'd pressed it the required twice, the bloody thing went off amid cries of, "Shame!", and, "There's always one!". I've forgotten just what the guide said but it wasn't nice. Very embarrassing. The shot came out alright, though... John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Andrew Gullen Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 2:45 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic Hi - BTW, is this an OM group or an Olympus group? My Stylus Epic just croaked. I took it to a dance performance, practiced twice setting up no-flash and spot (in the light so I could do it in the dark) and it just totally ceased responding when opened. It seemed to get warm, the battery was totally drained when tested, and a new battery didn't help. I sort of suspect an internal short. Anybody seen this before? I had to go buy an OM-4T as a replacement... :-) Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1712 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:33:29 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 01:33:29 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 17:34:20 2002 -0800 Received: from mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22873 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:33:55 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax80-b051.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.8.51]) by mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id gBV1XrH27124 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:33:53 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:32:09 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <200212291305.AA1415971140@mynra.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca G'day Walt, Welcome to the wonderful world of retirement. After a short while you'll wonder how you ever had the time for work! Having read your many and excellent messages to the list, I wonder if you'll be setting down in print some memoirs of those thirty years in court. Surely there's a great number of interesting stories you could tell? John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Walt Wayman Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 5:05 AM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie I am on the verge of retiring after 30+ years as a court reporter. Obviously, and naturally, I know literally hundreds of lawyers. As a prelude to retirement, a couple of years ago I began to offer certain photographic services geared to the needs of the legal community. It is proving to be both fun and lucrative. I just don't want it to become full-time. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 1988 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:38:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 01:38:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 17:39:46 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22877 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:39:22 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-241-48-12.client.attbi.com[12.241.48.12]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with SMTP id <2002123101381405200fgt9ce>; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 01:38:14 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:41:04 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Good thing there are no thunderstorms on Kangeroo Island, John - else we'd have naturally traumatised penguins. . . Gary Edwards (in Arlington, Texas where we have thunderstorms even in December. Nice lightning strike a hundred meters in front of me on the freeway today, but I was busy driving so no OM-picture.) -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Wheeler Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 7:23 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic G'day Andrew, If your Epic has run out of warranty and you've got a quote for repair that's only a little short of the national debt, just go and buy another. The Stylus Epic has got to be the best value on the market for a P&S. I must have put a hundred rolls through mine since late '99 and it hasn't let me down yet. Regards cancelling the flash, I'm reminded of a night on Kangaroo Island below South Australia. We'd gone on a walking tour of a fairy penguin nesting area and the guide, a very dedicated environmentalist lady, insisted on flashless photography. Apparently the penguins are traumatised by the light. Well, the flash cancelling button is, as you know, pretty well buried on the rear panel and though I'd pressed it the required twice, the bloody thing went off amid cries of, "Shame!", and, "There's always one!". I've forgotten just what the guide said but it wasn't nice. Very embarrassing. The shot came out alright, though... John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Andrew Gullen Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 2:45 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic Hi - BTW, is this an OM group or an Olympus group? My Stylus Epic just croaked. I took it to a dance performance, practiced twice setting up no-flash and spot (in the light so I could do it in the dark) and it just totally ceased responding when opened. It seemed to get warm, the battery was totally drained when tested, and a new battery didn't help. I sort of suspect an internal short. Anybody seen this before? I had to go buy an OM-4T as a replacement... :-) Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2321 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:45:33 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 01:45:33 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 17:46:24 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail17.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.217]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22889 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:46:00 -0800 Received: (qmail 15753 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 01:46:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO speakeasy.net) (stevegoss@[64.81.113.27]) (envelope-sender ) by mail17.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP for ; 31 Dec 2002 01:46:12 -0000 Message-ID: <3E10FA4C.8040400@speakeasy.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:00:44 -0600 From: Steve Goss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus-digest Subject: [OM] Microtek 35t? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is an 1800 dpi slide scanner, and seems to be going for about the same price as the Olympus ES-10. I know the ES-10 is not well regarded, but what about this Microtek? Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 2732 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 02:07:59 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 02:07:59 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 18:08:50 2002 -0800 Received: from cognac.propagation.net ([216.97.44.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22920 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:08:25 -0800 Received: from mckoy (ppp-67-118-133-19.dialup.irvnca.pacbell.net [67.118.133.19]) by cognac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA19992 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:08:21 -0600 Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:17:08 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Message-Id: <20021229231708.3c62b01d.tal@renderman.org> In-Reply-To: <20021228153033.4138.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021228153033.4138.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Organization: RenderMan Repository X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 28 Dec 2002 15:30:33 -0000 owner-olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca (olympus-digest) wrote: > Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:29:23 -0800 > From: "Timpe, Jim" > Subject: RE: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > > normal behaviour. The metering for manual match needle operation is > in the top... light entering through the viewfinder is a potential > source of metering errors if you're shooting manually. An eye cup > helps. If you're shooting on automatic, it's a moot point as the > metering happens off the film plane in the innards of the camera. Ah thanks. I hadn't used the OM2n in a while and I didn't recall noticing this before. And yes it was when I was in manual mode. That is good to know that automatic doesn't have this problem. I guess, I could shoot in auto and use the exposure compensation dial. Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3091 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 02:20:16 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 02:20:16 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 18:21:08 2002 -0800 Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22940 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:20:43 -0800 Received: from host213-123-19-74.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.123.19.74] helo=Inwin) by tungsten.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18TByH-0002sb-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:17:33 +0000 Message-ID: <003c01c2b073$0e13c720$4a137bd5@Inwin> From: "CyberSimian" To: "Olympus Mailing List" Subject: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:17:49 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ------Original message------ >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:02:23 -0500 >From: "Walt Wayman" >Subject: Re: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question >This is all very interesting, but it's kind of like asking >someone what time it is and being given instructions for building >a clock. The question was which way round to put the glass back >in the ring, and my answer was the essence of simplicity AND was >correct: Just look through the damn thing! Apologies Walt, you are quite correct! (But I did try my method before posting my previous comments!) The method that I described can be used to determine the way to fit a loose polarising filter without having to use a subject that reflects polarised light. But when the subject DOES reflect polarised light and the filter is fitted reversed, the polarised light from the subject strikes the randomising element first, which destroys the polarisation, so when the light emerges from the randomising element and strikes the polarising element, there is no (or little) effect. Hence, when looking at a subject reflecting polarised light and rotating the polariser, there IS a difference in the appearance of the subject between correct fitting and reversed fitting (which is precisely what you said). Apologies once again. -- from Cy in the UK < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3474 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 02:37:55 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 02:37:55 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 18:38:46 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp011.mail.yahoo.com (smtp011.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.31]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA22960 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:38:22 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-214-85.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.214.85 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 02:37:36 -0000 Message-ID: <3E1102F3.6000401@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:37:39 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? References: <20021228153033.4138.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> <20021229231708.3c62b01d.tal@renderman.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What you see in the viewfinder will still be affected by light through the viewfinder when in Auto mode. The camera will expose TTL without any effect from the stray light through the viewfinder, but it may not fire at the shutter speed show in the viewfinder. Moose Tal Lancaster wrote: >Ah thanks. > >I hadn't used the OM2n in a while and I didn't recall noticing this >before. And yes it was when I was in manual mode. > >That is good to know that automatic doesn't have this problem. I guess, >I could shoot in auto and use the exposure compensation dial. > > >Tal > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 3943 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 03:07:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 03:07:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 19:08:45 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp015.mail.yahoo.com (smtp015.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.59]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA22995 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:08:20 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-214-85.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.214.85 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 03:07:35 -0000 Message-ID: <3E1109F9.1090606@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:07:37 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in References: <3E10EE19.70BDBFF7@accura.com.hk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca That is your experience. Mine is different. Both types of film scan equally well for me. Using Vuescan with its film specific unmasking for negative film gives me color balance I find to be just as accurate as scanning slides. Of course, we know that slide films all have color balances that are different from each other and different, some quite different, from what the eye saw in the scene. I am not claiming 'true' colors, just no more inaccurate than slide film. My experience with a 2700dpi scanner is that grain is about the same, and not a problem at any reasonable print size, with either type of film, taking into account film speed factors. What do you mean by "accurate"? With slide film, one can compare the scanned image to the slide itself to determine the 'accuracy' of the scan, but that is simply redefining the source for comparison from the original scene to the slide. It is theoretically possible for a scan of a neg to be a more accurate representation of the color of the original scene than a scan of a slide of the same scene that is true to the slide, but not to the scene photographed. Considering that light in the 'real ' world is never the same from one moment to the next, this kind of stuff could only be meaningfully studied in a highly controlled lab setting. Since I'm interested in a photograph that recreates the image I have in my mind, I'll skip the lab and go out and smell and photograph the flowers. As I said in my last post, scanning is not cut and dried, but quite variable across hardware, software and user. Moose C.H.Ling wrote: >Scanning slide and negative is no comparison, slide is ten times >better for sure! Provided you have a good film scanner with >D-range>3.6 and low noise. Scanning slide get accurate color >reproduction, negative never, different negative gives different color >response curve, you can never get the exact color/tone, what you can >do is to adjust for what it looks "good" can't say accurate. So far >all negative are grainy when scanned except the discontinued Ektar 25, >slides has much less grain. > >The only advantage of negative is the wide latitude, when you under or >over exposed a frame you can still get back the details during >scanning. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4231 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 03:13:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 03:13:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 19:14:39 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.40]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA23007 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:14:14 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.18a.13b923fa (17377) for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:09:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <18a.13b923fa.2b426480@aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:09:52 EST Subject: [OM] Help! Lost a Digest To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_18a.13b923fa.2b426480_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_18a.13b923fa.2b426480_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My Windoze machine locked up on the link to the site about solar pillars and puked out Digest #3786 in the process of rebooting. Can someone please forward a copy of that digest to me? I'd sure appreciate it. Thanks in advance, Rich --part1_18a.13b923fa.2b426480_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My Windoze machine locked up on the link to the site about solar pillars and puked out Digest #3786 in the process of rebooting.  Can someone please forward a copy of that digest to me?  I'd sure appreciate it.

Thanks in advance,

Rich --part1_18a.13b923fa.2b426480_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 4655 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 03:26:23 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 03:26:23 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 19:27:15 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA23040 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:26:50 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1041305166!434 Received: (qmail 32435 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 03:26:07 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-12.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 03:26:07 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBV2uif25877 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:56:44 +0800 Message-ID: <3E110D43.379F4295@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:21:39 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighsin References: <3E10EE19.70BDBFF7@accura.com.hk> <3E1109F9.1090606@sbcglobal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Moose wrote: > > That is your experience. Mine is different. Both types of film scan > equally well for me. Using Vuescan with its film specific unmasking for > negative film gives me color balance I find to be just as accurate as > scanning slides. Of course, we know that slide films all have color > balances that are different from each other and different, some quite > different, from what the eye saw in the scene. I am not claiming 'true' > colors, just no more inaccurate than slide film. My experience with a > 2700dpi scanner is that grain is about the same, and not a problem at > any reasonable print size, with either type of film, taking into account > film speed factors. > Even with 2700dpi scanner I can see the grain different at 1:1 (100%) on monitor. With 4000dpi it is even more, for example the 160NC and Kodak Gold 100 is quite grainy when scanned. Fuji superia 100 is better and Fuji Reala may be the smoothest 100 film but it has warn color balance when scanned. I have tried many many different films. I have Vuescan for three years, it can balance the color to day light but it cannot render the actual scene, example magic hour shoot will be failed in auto color correction. The more creative your work the more easy you get a wrong color with such auto correction. I don't see how good the film type in Vuescan work, you can try to use the same frame of negative and select different film type, I can only see very little different. > What do you mean by "accurate"? With slide film, one can compare the > scanned image to the slide itself to determine the 'accuracy' of the > scan, but that is simply redefining the source for comparison from the > original scene to the slide. It is theoretically possible for a scan of > a neg to be a more accurate representation of the color of the original > scene than a scan of a slide of the same scene that is true to the > slide, but not to the scene photographed. Considering that light in the > 'real ' world is never the same from one moment to the next, this kind > of stuff could only be meaningfully studied in a highly controlled lab > setting. Since I'm interested in a photograph that recreates the image I > have in my mind, I'll skip the lab and go out and smell and photograph > the flowers. > > As I said in my last post, scanning is not cut and dried, but quite > variable across hardware, software and user. > > Moose > The word "accurate" is relative, slide is very inaccurate when compared to DC. But for film comparison, there is no discussion, see why almost all professional (except news, portrait and wedding) use slide you will know, especially for product shoots. C.H.Ling ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5202 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 04:07:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 04:07:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 20:08:28 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp02.fuse.net (mx4.fuse.net [216.68.1.133]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23083 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:08:03 -0800 Received: from lhommedieu ([216.68.40.9]) by smtp02.fuse.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with SMTP id <20021231040712.CBJT25244.smtp02.fuse.net@lhommedieu> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:07:12 -0500 Message-ID: <000701c2b082$13f733c0$092844d8@lhommedieu> From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" To: "Oly List" Subject: [OM] Hood for 35ED,EC,ECR,RC Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:07:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Someone has new-old-stock (nos) Lens Hood for Olympus 35ED,EC,ECR,RC on the bay, Item # 1948253106. No connection. Lama < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5497 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 04:14:01 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 04:14:01 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 20:14:53 2002 -0800 Received: from mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.149]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23087 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:14:28 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBV4ERL13433 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:14:27 +1100 Message-Id: <200212310414.gBV4ERL13433@mail022.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.64] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:14:27 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > C.H.Ling wrote: > > Scanning slide and negative is no comparison, slide is ten times > better for sure! Provided you have a good film scanner with > D-range>3.6 and low noise. Scanning slide get accurate color > reproduction, negative never, different negative gives different > color > response curve, you can never get the exact color/tone, what you can > do is to adjust for what it looks "good" can't say accurate. So far > all negative are grainy when scanned except the discontinued Ektar > 25, > slides has much less grain. > > The only advantage of negative is the wide latitude, when you under > or > over exposed a frame you can still get back the details during > scanning. > I agree - I've just completed scanning several hundred images going back up to 20 years old, just selecting some important frames. This was an horrendous task due to different film manufacturer (Kodak, Fuji, Agfa), different emulsions from each manufacturer and a variety of lighting (daylight, stage, flash). Most of the images were colour neg with a few Kodachrome. The Kodachrome was a breeze, the colour negs were all over the place with colour balance, fortunately most of the images included faces so I was able to get a reference from the skin tones. The worst film if I remember correctly was Kodak Ektar 1000 (?), the mask didn't even look like normal colour neg. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 5815 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 04:24:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 04:24:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 20:25:38 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23103 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:25:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:24:50 -0500 Message-Id: <200212302324.AA2388001068@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Vuescan, an HP S20, and me X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have an HP S20. A month or so ago I coughed up the $40 for Vuescan. After trying it for a half dozen or so scans, I was not particularly impressed. For one thing, it seemed a lot slower than the HP software, so I gave up on it. Since some of you keep singing its praises, it looks like maybe I need to go back and try it again. Maybe I didn't have both feet on the floor. As for the S20, it ain't the greatest, but I've got no real complaints. I've had mine over three years now and have had zero problems -- except for the time Max (one of our cats) whizzed on it, and then it only needed cleaning. Most of my scans are from trannies, Provia 100 and 400 or Kodachrome 64, but I've gotten pretty good results from Fuji NPS and NPC too. Walt < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6086 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 04:25:20 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 04:25:20 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 20:26:12 2002 -0800 Received: from mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.172]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23107 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:25:47 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBV4PkH17060 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:25:46 +1100 Message-Id: <200212310425.gBV4PkH17060@mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:25:45 +1100 Subject: Re: [OM] Microtek 35t? Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Steve Goss wrote: > > This is an 1800 dpi slide scanner, and seems to be going for about > the > same price as the Olympus ES-10. I know the ES-10 is not well > regarded, > but what about this Microtek? > I have the Microtek 35T+, 1950 dpi, started out ok but seems to be deteriorating, making more mechanical noise, and more seriously - CCD noise. Mine is probably 4+ years old by now, so not bleeding edge by any means ! 1800 dpi is ok for web and small prints (A4 and smaller). See if you can do some test scans before committing. I think most of the Polaroid scanners were/are made by Microtek Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6483 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 04:42:47 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 04:42:47 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 20:43:38 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA23119 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:43:14 -0800 Received: from adsl-67-122-212-225.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO sbcglobal.net) (dreammoose@67.122.212.225 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 04:42:28 -0000 Message-ID: <3E112030.9020609@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:42:24 -0800 From: Moose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighsin References: <3E10EE19.70BDBFF7@accura.com.hk> <3E1109F9.1090606@sbcglobal.net> <3E110D43.379F4295@accura.com.hk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca C.H.Ling wrote: >Even with 2700dpi scanner I can see the grain different at 1:1 (100%) >on monitor. With 4000dpi it is even more, for example the 160NC and >Kodak Gold 100 is quite grainy when scanned. > Certainly I can see the grain at 1000n the monitor, but that doesn't mean much to me. On my monitor, that's equivalent to a 20x30" print. I don't believe I've printed that large, even accounting for cropping. Even at that size, I don't find the grain a problem. On the right side of this image is a 1000iece of a scan of a Kodak Gold 400 negative. Even at this magnification, grain is only noticable in the sky and I don't find it objectionable. Assuming you do find the grain objectionable, it's just a matter of different standards/needs. >Fuji superia 100 is >better and Fuji Reala may be the smoothest 100 film but it has warn >color balance when scanned. I have tried many many different films. I >have Vuescan for three years, it can balance the color to day light >but it cannot render the actual scene, example magic hour shoot will >be failed in auto color correction. > No, daylight balance doesn't work for many images. It only works for, you guessed it, images shot in the middle of the day with the sun out! I never use it. Neutral balance is what you want, it makes no adjustments to color other than reversing the channels and subtracting the mask color. In Neutral, you can even set the neutral tone, if necessary. I don't because I make final adjustments in Photoshop, but a real accuracy hound could put a gray card in the first frame of any series, balance neutral to that, lock the settings and scan the other images from the same series with very high accuracy. All this is explained in the Viewscan help file under the 'Adjusting Color Balance ', 'Batch Scanning ' and 'Advanced Workflow Suggestions' headings. >The more creative your work the >more easy you get a wrong color with such auto correction. I don't see >how good the film type in Vuescan work, you can try to use the same >frame of negative and select different film type, I can only see very >little different. > Of course there is very little difference, most of the masks are quite similar. I thought you were takling about subtle color balance problems. >>What do you mean by "accurate"? With slide film, one can compare the >>scanned image to the slide itself to determine the 'accuracy' of the >>scan, but that is simply redefining the source for comparison from the >>original scene to the slide. It is theoretically possible for a scan of >>a neg to be a more accurate representation of the color of the original >>scene than a scan of a slide of the same scene that is true to the >>slide, but not to the scene photographed. Considering that light in the >>'real ' world is never the same from one moment to the next, this kind >>of stuff could only be meaningfully studied in a highly controlled lab >>setting. Since I'm interested in a photograph that recreates the image I >>have in my mind, I'll skip the lab and go out and smell and photograph >>the flowers. >> >>As I said in my last post, scanning is not cut and dried, but quite >>variable across hardware, software and user. >> >>Moose >> >> >> > >The word "accurate" is relative, slide is very inaccurate when compared to DC. > Agreed. Although I still occasionally make color adjustments to DC images to match my idea of what the subject looked like to me - or perhaps should have looked like ;-) > But for film comparison, there is no discussion, see why almost all professional (except news, portrait and wedding) use >slide you will know, especially for product shoots. > I've used a lot of slide film. I shot it almost exclusively for many years. Wonderful stuff. People who like it should use it. It has clear advantages for many uses over negative. I'm just arguing that it isn't inherently any more color accurate than negative film. I believe there are at least 3 reasons, other than inherent color accuracy, that many professionals use slide film. 1. Personal, institutional and industry habit and reproduction equipment requirements. 2. They and their clients like to look at the film images directly when evaluating them - for composition, sharpness, etc. in addition to color accuracy. Loupes, light tables and projectors don't work with negs and cheap, automated prints are very poor measures of what is actually on the film. 3. Storage, retrieval and handling are easier with slides. You can just pick up the sheet holder and see which is which at a glance. For someone using digital darkroom and storage, either either original form is equal. I also don't find neg film granier, but I don't wish to argue that, as I don't have the interest to make careful comparisons. It is interesting that slides are reversal film that is first developed as a negative, then chemically reversed. How can that make the grain smaller? Aren't the original clumps formed in the negative processing? Just curiosity, not an arguement, 'cause I don't know enough about it. And by the way, I consider that extra latitude to be a major advantage, but that's just for me. Moose < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 6935 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 05:14:00 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 05:14:00 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 21:14:51 2002 -0800 Received: from mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.148]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA23141 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:14:26 -0800 Received: from webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.116]) by mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBV5EJs09730 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:14:19 +1100 Message-Id: <200212310514.gBV5EJs09730@mail024.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [203.11.81.63] as user wayneharridge@optusnet.com.au by webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP; From: Wayne Harridge To: "olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca" Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:14:19 +1100 Subject: Re: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighsin Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Moose wrote: > > > > Of course there is very little difference, most of the masks are > quite > similar. I thought you were takling about subtle color balance > problems. > Not from my experience. Mask colour/density is quite different between Fuji/Kodak, however mask colour/density seems fairly consistent within a manufacturer's film range, e.g. only slight adjustment required between Kodak Gold 100 and Portra 160NC. Wayne Harridge http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7186 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 05:14:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 05:14:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 21:15:04 2002 -0800 Received: from mail16.messagelabs.com (mail16.messagelabs.com [64.124.170.131]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA23145 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:14:39 -0800 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: chling@accura.com.hk X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-16.messagelabs.com!1041311629!874 Received: (qmail 32401 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 05:13:50 -0000 Received: from timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (202.134.64.241) by server-12.tower-16.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 05:13:50 -0000 Received: from accura.com.hk (ip-141-111-134-202.rev.dyxnet.com [202.134.111.141]) by timpani.hk.dyxnet.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id gBV4iQf27366 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:44:27 +0800 Message-ID: <3E112676.E5959E85@accura.com.hk> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:09:10 +0800 From: "C.H.Ling" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Vuescan, an HP S20, and me References: <200212302324.AA2388001068@mynra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, Vuescan is much slower than the original software, the post processing time after scanning is long, it depends on CPU speed, even a 2.4GHz P4 looks slow. If you have a machine slower than 1GHz, don't try to scan a 60MB file, it takes a year to complete. C.H.Ling Walt Wayman wrote: > > I have an HP S20. A month or so ago I coughed up the $40 for > Vuescan. After trying it for a half dozen or so scans, I was not > particularly impressed. For one thing, it seemed a lot slower > than the HP software, so I gave up on it. Since some of you keep > singing its praises, it looks like maybe I need to go back and try > it again. Maybe I didn't have both feet on the floor. > > As for the S20, it ain't the greatest, but I've got no real > complaints. I've had mine over three years now and have had zero > problems -- except for the time Max (one of our cats) whizzed on > it, and then it only needed cleaning. Most of my scans are from > trannies, Provia 100 and 400 or Kodachrome 64, but I've gotten > pretty good results from Fuji NPS and NPC too. > > Walt > > ________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com ________________________________________________________________________ < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 7505 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 05:23:25 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 05:23:25 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 21:24:17 2002 -0800 Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA23149 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:23:52 -0800 From: Doggre@aol.com Received: from Doggre@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id w.55.34e3f034 (17377) for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:21:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <55.34e3f034.2b428374@aol.com> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:21:56 EST Subject: [OM] Attention Aussies! To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_55.34e3f034.2b428374_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --part1_55.34e3f034.2b428374_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm watching a tv program on old steam railroad equipment in New South Wales. In Dorrigo? They've got a heck of a good start on a rail museum. Many old engines, some over 100 years old. Would make a great photographic expedition for somebody so disposed, hint, hint. The mainline RR looks beautifully maintained. Dang that country's flat! Did you give all the mountains to NZ? G'day, Rich --part1_55.34e3f034.2b428374_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm watching a tv program on old steam railroad equipment in New South Wales.  In Dorrigo?  They've got a heck of a good start on a rail museum.  Many old engines, some over 100 years old.  Would make a great photographic expedition for somebody so disposed, hint, hint.  The mainline RR looks beautifully maintained.  Dang that country's flat!  Did you give all the mountains to NZ?

G'day, Rich --part1_55.34e3f034.2b428374_boundary-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8125 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 06:09:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 06:09:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 22:10:02 2002 -0800 Received: from snowflake.apdata.com.au (cerberus.apdata.com.au [202.14.95.17]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23219 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:09:37 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost.apdata.com.au [127.0.0.1]) by snowflake.apdata.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAAAB52767 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:39:20 +1030 (CST) Received: by snowflake.apdata.com.au (Postfix, from userid 1024) id A085052764; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:39:09 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic In-Reply-To: from "Gary L. Edwards" at "Dec 30, 2002 7:41: 4 pm" To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:39:09 +1030 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20021231060909.A085052764@snowflake.apdata.com.au> From: davidt@apdata.com.au (David Thatcher) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-10 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Oh well, those penguin-huggers ( ;-) ) will be in a serious funk today... some major thunderstorms right across south australia yesterday afternoon. DavidT Adelaide, South Australia > Good thing there are no thunderstorms on Kangeroo Island, John - else we'd > have naturally traumatised penguins. . . > > Gary Edwards (in Arlington, Texas where we have thunderstorms even in > December. Nice lightning strike a hundred meters in front of me on the > freeway today, but I was busy driving so no OM-picture.) > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Wheeler > Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 7:23 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: RE: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic > > > G'day Andrew, > > If your Epic has run out of warranty and you've got a quote for repair > that's only a little short of the national debt, just go and buy another. > The Stylus Epic has got to be the best value on the market for a P&S. I must > have put a hundred rolls through mine since late '99 and it hasn't let me > down yet. > > Regards cancelling the flash, I'm reminded of a night on Kangaroo Island > below South Australia. We'd gone on a walking tour of a fairy penguin > nesting area and the guide, a very dedicated environmentalist lady, insisted > on flashless photography. Apparently the penguins are traumatised by the > light. Well, the flash cancelling button is, as you know, pretty well buried > on the rear panel and though I'd pressed it the required twice, the bloody > thing went off amid cries of, "Shame!", and, "There's always one!". I've > forgotten just what the guide said but it wasn't nice. Very embarrassing. > > The shot came out alright, though... > > John. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Andrew Gullen > Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 2:45 PM > To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > Subject: [OM] Olympus Stylus Epic > > > Hi - > > BTW, is this an OM group or an Olympus group? > > My Stylus Epic just croaked. I took it to a dance performance, practiced > twice setting up no-flash and spot (in the light so I could do it in the > dark) and it just totally ceased responding when opened. It seemed to get > warm, the battery was totally drained when tested, and a new battery didn't > help. I sort of suspect an internal short. Anybody seen this before? > > I had to go buy an OM-4T as a replacement... :-) > > Regards, > Andrew > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 8498 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 06:25:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 06:25:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 22:26:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mta07ps.bigpond.com (mta07ps.bigpond.com [144.135.25.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23238 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:26:07 -0800 Received: from parents ([144.135.25.84]) by mta07ps.bigpond.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 mta07ps Jul 16 2002 22:47:55) with SMTP id H7Z0GC00.8YP for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:24:12 +1000 Received: from PIPP-p-203-54-231-158.prem.tmns.net.au ([203.54.231.158]) by psmam06.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V3.0n 110/9014489); 31 Dec 2002 17:24:12 Message-ID: <008a01c2b095$3bd585a0$0100a8c0@parents> From: "Terry and Tracey" To: References: <55.34e3f034.2b428374@aol.com> Subject: Re: [OM] Attention Aussies! Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:11:22 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Actually Dorrigo is very mountainous (by our standards anyway). The rail group up there got the old railroad for next to nothing so I believe. I saw something on the box about it a few years ago. Heaps of trains, not enough time to fix them! Foxy ----- Original Message ----- I'm watching a tv program on old steam railroad equipment in New South Wales. In Dorrigo? They've got a heck of a good start on a rail museum. Many old engines, some over 100 years old. Would make a great photographic expedition for somebody so disposed, hint, hint. The mainline RR looks beautifully maintained. Dang that country's flat! Did you give all the mountains to NZ? < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9353 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 07:54:48 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 07:54:48 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Mon Dec 30 23:55:40 2002 -0800 Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA23308 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:55:15 -0800 Received: from attglobal.net (slip-12-65-144-160.mis.prserv.net[12.65.144.160]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2002123107535120106stapfe>; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 07:53:52 +0000 Message-ID: <3E114D0D.B76B804B@attglobal.net> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:53:49 -1000 From: "Andres E. Mukk" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (OS/2; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] OM System Equipment Dealers Worldwide Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hello List, Just found your list a few weeks ago and subscribed. As a Zuikoholic since the OM-1 and someone who lived in Tokyo from 1987-1992, I enjoy finding and visiting the few remaining shops that sell new OM system equipment as well as those that deal in used OM system equipment, particularly in Japan. After 10 years away, I was able to visit Tokyo four times in 2002 and found several stores in Tokyo (in Ginza and Nishi-Shinjuku) with good selections of new and used OM system bodies, lenses, and other equipment. Surprisingly, despite the relatively poor U.S. dollar to Japanese yen exchange rate, I found some really good deals on equipment in really good condition. Unlike buying from E-bay or online stores, it was great to be able to actually test out lenses on my OM-4Ti before I bought anything. The Ginza used photo equipment stores even waive Japan's Value Added Tax on purchases when you present a valid foreign passport. I was wondering if anyone is maintaining a web site of stores, both brick and mortar and online, that deal in Olympus OM system equipment, as I travel extensively, in Asia, North America, and sometimes Europe. I have to admit that searching for and finding the stores that deal OM system equipment in international cities I visit is almost as much fun as finding a great buy on a piece I'm looking for. As for Japan, probably due to the depressed economy, there's a significant market for used photo equipment. I was pleased to note that the inventory for used OM system equipment when I was there wasn't too big, and the prices, while reasonably competitive in some cases with North America, weren't a "fire sale" either, indicating that the Zuikoholics there probably aren't all dumping their OM system equipment just yet. Over the course of my stays, I visited several shopes repeatedly and noticed that turnover for some items was particularly brisk and I wasn't the only one carefully examining the OM system display cases. If any of you will be traveling to the Tokyo area and would like directions to the used equipment stores I found, please feel free to contact me. Best regards and Happy New Year, Andy Mukk Honolulu, Hawaii < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9806 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 08:23:03 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 08:23:03 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 00:23:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA23327; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:23:30 -0800 Received: from [62.64.200.108] (helo=[62.64.200.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18THej-0002Vl-00; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:21:46 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E10E1D7.31C1F787@interisland.net> References: <3E10E1D7.31C1F787@interisland.net> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:19:37 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" From: Chris Barker Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I did not notice any NZ or Oz accents. The only strange accent was Samwise Gamgee's. In the Fellowship of the Ring, he was a good English West Country boy. At the start of the Two Towers, he was gentle Harvard, going through a bit of pretend Irish to West Country again. Not that an antipodean accent is strange, but it might not have suited Orcs ;-). Chris At 16:16 -0800 30/12/02, Mike wrote: >Here's a question for the experts on the list. > >Did Jackson have the Orks speak with an Aussie accent? My ear isn't >attuned to the subtleties of these foreign languages :>) > >Mike -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 9808 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 08:23:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 08:23:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 00:23:55 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA23327; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:23:30 -0800 Received: from [62.64.200.108] (helo=[62.64.200.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18THej-0002Vl-00; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:21:46 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E10E1D7.31C1F787@interisland.net> References: <3E10E1D7.31C1F787@interisland.net> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:19:37 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca, "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" From: Chris Barker Subject: RE: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I did not notice any NZ or Oz accents. The only strange accent was Samwise Gamgee's. In the Fellowship of the Ring, he was a good English West Country boy. At the start of the Two Towers, he was gentle Harvard, going through a bit of pretend Irish to West Country again. Not that an antipodean accent is strange, but it might not have suited Orcs ;-). Chris At 16:16 -0800 30/12/02, Mike wrote: >Here's a question for the experts on the list. > >Did Jackson have the Orks speak with an Aussie accent? My ear isn't >attuned to the subtleties of these foreign languages :>) > >Mike -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10077 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 08:23:18 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 08:23:18 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 00:24:09 2002 -0800 Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA23330 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:23:41 -0800 Received: from [62.64.200.108] (helo=[62.64.200.108]) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18THeh-0002Vl-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:21:44 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021231000830.846B35B298@yellow3.eunet.si> References: <20021231000830.846B35B298@yellow3.eunet.si> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:19:48 +0000 To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] OT, pl of virus, was One Hacker's Love Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Just in case anyone is interested, "virus" is originally a Latin noun (meaning "slime" among other things), but it was of the neuter gender. The plural of a neuter Latin noun ending in -us also ended in -us (rather than -i for masculine nouns whose singular ended in -us). So, if anyone is tired of contorting their tongues, or their keyboard fingers, around a -ii ending for "virus" - "virii" - they have an excuse to resort to either the Latin plural "virus" or the anglicised plural "viruses". To add strength to their cause of dropping the invented plural, they might mention to officious critics that the stem of "virus" would preclude adding an "i" to the changing endings as with "virii". If you are still reading... I have always thought that "syllabus" was a neuter Latin noun and have therefore resisted the temptation to refer to anything other than "syllabuses". But my 20 year-old Shorter Oxford Dictionary tells me that the etymology is less straightforward. It was apparently a misprint ("syllabos") from "sittybos" in a 1470 edition (of the Dictionary I assume). A spurious Latin word emerged thereafter, with a Greek version being invented later. The consequence is that we have a choice of plurals, neither of which is based on a classical language (except for a loose connection with the Latin for "syllable", "syllaba"). I know that this will have excited many people, but I urge you to calm yourself in preparation for your celebrations of the passing of 2002. It is somehow more interesting to be starting a new, asymetric year... down with palindromes! A wafer-thin mint m'sieu? Chris -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 10977 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 09:23:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 09:23:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 01:24:33 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (isp2.blissnet.com [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA23366 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 01:24:08 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18TId0-0003o8-00 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:24:02 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: [FS][OM] OM-3 Bodies For Sale Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:22:50 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I have two OM-3 bodies and only need one. One has had quite a lot of use and the other is almost like new with little use. The more heavily used body has brassing on the edges and corners. The newer one is almost unmarked. Both function very well with no problems. If you are interested in buying one of these contact me off-list please. My list of stuff for sale has prices and links to photos. The prices are negotiable. http://www.onewest.net/~jnmcbr/eqforsale.htm Happy New Year to you all. /jim < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 12910 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 13:08:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 13:08:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 05:09:31 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts4.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.13]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23482 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 05:09:06 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([142.166.249.62]) by simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021231130449.PZC19301.simmts4-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:04:49 -0500 Message-ID: <001401c2b0cd$5d29cd00$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: <3E10EE19.70BDBFF7@accura.com.hk> <3E1109F9.1090606@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighsin Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:05:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > What do you mean by "accurate"? With slide film, one can compare the > scanned image to the slide itself to determine the 'accuracy' of the > scan, but that is simply redefining the source for comparison from the > original scene to the slide. > Moose I've been wondering about this as well, as I'm just getting started in this experience of scanning. Do I adjust for accuracy to the print, which is what the photo finisher, or worse, the printing machine, thought it should be? Or do I adjust for how the slide film "interpreted" the scene, which is dependent on the saturation, etc., of the film used? Or do I adjust for how I remember the scene? Or how it should have been had a less or more saturated (read more accurate, whatever that is) film been used? Or do I just go ahead and make a picture I like, and forget about any supposed accuracy? Here is one I battled with, where 2 different cameras and 2 different films were used to make 3 photographs of the same scene. I quit trying to make them match exactly when it dawned on me they were all an interpretation of what was constantly changing light conditions anyways. http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/waynecul/gallery/sunsetovenhead.html (you'll have to clink the link "throwing rocks" below the first picture to see the other 2) Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 14502 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 16:12:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 16:12:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 08:13:39 2002 -0800 Received: from tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts6.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.26]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23652 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:13:13 -0800 Received: from [64.229.245.152] by tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021231160933.KAIW12438.tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@[64.229.245.152]> for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:09:33 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:09:40 -0500 Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos From: Andrew Gullen To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20021226105224.25698.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca (I'm trying to catch up after going away for Christmas. Phew.) > From: "Wayne Culberson" > I never know what to do with cropping afterwards, as I'm one of those people > who always tries to cram too much into a photo. Often I look for something > to put in the foreground as a point of reference, but it doesn't always > work. Some nice work though. I especially like "wintersnowwhite", the stream shot. One of the best photography teachers and authors around lives near you (if you're in NB, you can't be that far apart :-) ). Check out http://www.freeman-patterson.com/ His books and seminars are excellent; he's one of the few good photographers who can write well. I like a lot of his photography and his "philosophy" of photography as well. He's very good on visual design of photographs. Others who have taken his week-long courses speak very highly of them. Regards, Andrew < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 15345 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 17:30:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 17:30:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 09:30:59 2002 -0800 Received: from hitchcock.mail.mindspring.net (hitchcock.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.23]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23738 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:30:34 -0800 From: zuikosis@mindspring.com Received: from smui03.slb.mindspring.net ([199.174.114.22]) by hitchcock.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18TQDK-00033m-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:30:02 -0500 Received: by smui03.slb.mindspring.net id MAA0000020333; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:30:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:30:02 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Need help on cleaning some old 35mm Negatives Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 208.54.218.25 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Dear Kenneth & Jan, I've used a little actinic brown glass bottle of Kodak negative cleaner which is actually normal hexane. It has worked great for color slides, negatives. I just dip a cotton tip swab / wooden stick into the bottle and dab a little on the spot or spots I want to remove. It stinks but it works well. -- Hank Hogan < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16007 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 18:29:19 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 18:29:19 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 10:30:12 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23782 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:29:47 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-61.s996.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.61] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18TR89-0000LJ-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:28:45 -0500 Message-ID: <004f01c2b0fa$7b8a77e0$3de47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:28:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thank you. I think this film scanner is quite a value. It is the Microtek 4000T. Due to the release for the 4000TF, the T can be found for around $600, not bad for 4000 dpi. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "siddiq" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 8:08 PM Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch > 12/24/2002 4:04:12 PM, "Richard F. Man" wrote: > > >Browse from www.zuiko.com and check out the galleries. The shuttle is some > >www.zuiko.com/Shuttle.htm > > > > Very impressive, John! > > /S > -- > .sig > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16259 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 18:29:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 18:29:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 10:30:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23786 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:30:13 -0800 Received: from 209-122-228-61.s996.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.228.61] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18TR9Y-0000YJ-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:30:13 -0500 Message-ID: <005901c2b0fa$afb91490$3de47ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <26B059D2-17AC-11D7-B198-000393B6F4F4@attbi.com> Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:30:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca We were set up right in front of the elevated broadcast towers for CBS, NBC and ABC. As I recall, ABC had originally set there tower up facing away from the launch pad. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. Jackson" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 8:56 PM Subject: Re: [OM] First shuttle launch > You know, growing up in Florida, those early shuttle launches were like > exotic camera shows wrapped up in a carnival. There would be thousands > of people there all night before the launch. There used to be this > strip of road right on the water where everyone parked. I don't think > you can park there anymore. Anyway, all night long you could hear > radios coming from cars tuned to NASA's information channel. Come dawn > the photographers would all start setting up and the variety of bodies > and glass would always blow me away. Just tens of thousands of dollars > worth of gear. Some people with two or three rigs set up. I went to > three or four of the early launches. The last one I went to was a year > or two before Challenger and the number of people there was a fraction > what it had been for the early launches. An interesting moment in > history, though. > > And a cool photo, too. Nice job. > > -Rob > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 16713 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 18:55:49 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 18:55:49 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 10:56:43 2002 -0800 Received: from sting.siteprotect.com (sting.siteprotect.com [64.26.0.89]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23803 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:56:17 -0800 Received: from rgg ([216.146.80.97]) by sting.siteprotect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA21123 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:56:17 -0600 From: "gries" To: Subject: [OM] even more on-line entries! Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:51:51 -0600 Message-ID: <000501c2b0fd$b04d5df0$0a01a8c0@gnrarch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 17 entries! http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/Asides/OM-2002/OM-2002.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17279 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 19:41:22 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 19:41:22 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 11:42:16 2002 -0800 Received: from cognac.propagation.net ([216.97.44.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23858 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:41:50 -0800 Received: from mckoy (ppp-67-118-134-237.dialup.irvnca.pacbell.net [67.118.134.237]) by cognac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA21209 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:41:39 -0600 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:59:01 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Message-Id: <20021231095901.3dd35630.tal@renderman.org> In-Reply-To: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021230112700.13731.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Organization: RenderMan Repository X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 30 Dec 2002 11:27:00 -0000 owner-olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca (olympus-digest) wrote: > Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:05:24 -0500 > From: "Walt Wayman" > Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie > [snip ..snip] > I tell them they should strenuously object based upon the > generally common knowledge of the trickery possible through > digital photographic manipulation and demand that an original > negative or transparency be produced to authenticate the picture > being challenged. Actually, I don't even think a negative or transparency would be sufficient proof. Who is to say that said evidence is the "original"? One could manipulate the image digitally and then just dump it back out to film. > Whether or not the objection is sustained by > the court, it still provides a great point to raise in argument to > the jury, because almost everyone nowadays has at least seen > enough tricked up TV commercials to realize you can't necessarily > believe it just because you saw a picture of it. Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 17306 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 19:41:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 19:41:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 11:42:20 2002 -0800 Received: from cognac.propagation.net ([216.97.44.1]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23857 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:41:49 -0800 Received: from mckoy (ppp-67-118-134-237.dialup.irvnca.pacbell.net [67.118.134.237]) by cognac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA21230 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:41:43 -0600 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:50:19 -0800 From: Tal Lancaster To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: RE: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Message-Id: <20021231105019.1deef666.tal@renderman.org> Organization: RenderMan Repository X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca On 30 Dec 2002 23:55:44 -0000 owner-olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca (olympus-digest) wrote: > > Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:13:38 -0500 > From: William Clark > Subject: RE: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo > weighs in > > I would disagree with scanning negatives. Who wants to wait and wait > for 30 meg files to scan, then dust and scratch removal, then > photoshop, and on we go. If I were to scan, I would scan slides, > which the Epson 2450 does beautifully. You save $ and time with a > film scanner. People will use digcams to get rid of teh intermediary > scanning steps...I sure do. > > - -Bill For me, scanning isn't so painful. My Nikon 4000 takes care of cleaning up dust and scratches while scanning, through its infrared channel (Actually there is a rare slide that crops up that it doesn't handle well and then I will have to get my hands dirty). Also, I find I don't need to "manipulate" the scan very often. This includes adjusting the Levels or Curves in photoshop. The times, I do need to make adjustments, are either because: (In order of frequency) I screwed up the exposure The resultant scan had color or contrast issues Something about the slide itself didn't capture what I recalled from the shoot. However, as I tend to print large images, my source files, from the scans, are more in the 120M range. I guess this also gives me more incentive to get the exposures and scans correct from the start so there is less need to fix them in photoshop. [snip] Tal -- Tal Lancaster talrmr@pacbell.net http://www.renderman.org/RMR < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18357 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:01:56 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:01:56 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:02:49 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23903 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:02:24 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0E459E31 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:02:10 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:02:07 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Virus Alert!! - One Hacker's Love Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Garth Wood > >The .SCR file I >received was zero-length... I don't think it was actually a ".SCR" file, anyway. Most of these virii count on users turning off file extension visibility. So they name them things like "FOO.TXT.BAT" or "PIC.SCR.EXE" or "SEXY.JPG.COM" The GUI strips off the last extension, making the user think it's something harmless. Of course, not only is my Mac not infectible by these things, but I see these normally "hidden" extensions. You may want to turn off filename extension hiding if you routinely get email attachments that you WANT to open. This will help you weed out the real picture from Aunt Babe from the fake one her virus sent you... :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18674 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:11:41 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:11:41 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:12:34 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23907 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:12:04 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3DAA59E36 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:11:39 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:11:37 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Vuescan, an HP S20, and me Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "C.H.Ling" > >If you have a machine slower than 1GHz, don't >try to scan a 60MB file, it takes a year to complete. Well, that would depend on a lot of other factors, though, right? My 54MB film scans on MacOS 9 with a 200MHz CPU and 384MB RAM take under a minute with an LS-2000. Whatever machine/OS you have, stuff it with RAM for best performance. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 18927 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:12:40 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:12:40 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:13:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23912 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:13:08 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B4E059E38 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:12:56 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:12:53 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus Stylus Epic Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: davidt@apdata.com.au (David Thatcher) > >Oh well, those penguin-huggers ( ;-) ) will be in a serious funk >today... Who mentioned Linux? :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19178 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:13:26 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:13:26 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:14:20 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23916 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:13:54 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-20.s274.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.20] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18TSkv-0007WB-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:12:54 -0500 Message-ID: <000801c2b108$f4dd1720$14e27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <20021227112016.393efa28.tal@renderman.org> Subject: Re: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:01:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Yes, it's common for stray eyepiece light to affect meter position, though it won't affect auto exposure. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tal Lancaster" To: Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 2:20 PM Subject: [OM] OM2n & light meter problem? > > I was shooting with my OM2n in rather sunny conditions. I kept noticing > that my meter would drop a couple of stops the closer I brought my eye > into the eyepiece. It was acting like the light was reflecting off my > face back into the eyepiece and effecting the meter readings. > > Is the normal behavior? > > Is this the reason people use eyepiece cups? > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19429 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:13:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:13:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:14:37 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23920 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:14:11 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-20.s274.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.20] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18TSlC-0007WB-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:13:10 -0500 Message-ID: <001201c2b108$f90def90$14e27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <001001c2af7d$0d6c4f50$fb4706d4@2fast4you> Subject: Re: [OM] Color of an OM-3 Display Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:27:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Display lcd is aging and turning yellow, my 4T is doing that. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Koch" To: Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 3:58 PM Subject: [OM] Color of an OM-3 Display Hi, my name is Peter Koch and i am from Oldenburg in Germany, this town is near Bremen. In 1988 i bought an OM-3 and now i noticed, that any other OM-3 in Germany has an blue-grew display with white points and an red flash ready LED. My OM-3, serialnumber 1010301, has an orange diplay with white points and an green flash ready LED. It seemed to be the only one in germay. Did anybody know the reason ? Is it a very early one oder a camera from the japan market? Peter Koch 12 Letheblick Wardenburg 26203 Germay < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19442 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:13:45 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:13:45 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:14:39 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23924 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:14:13 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-20.s274.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.20] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18TSlD-0007WB-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:13:12 -0500 Message-ID: <001301c2b108$f976c380$14e27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:38:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I think the 4 flash led IS powered by the camera batteries. (same for 4T, Ti). There is NO fix for it. My 4T measures 0.7 ma with meter on, T32 in shoe turned off, Turn flash on and drain goes to 2.6 ma, more than 3X as high. I'll bet plain 4 is similar. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "IanG" To: Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 7:06 PM Subject: RE: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain > I'm convinced that mine does but others seem to disagree with me > > Ian > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Harridge > Sent: 29 December 2002 22:31 > To: olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca > Subject: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain > > > Dear Zs, > > I got bitten by the old T flash draining the OM-2S(P) battery a few days > ago. > Since I don't use flash that much (and I have a few other OM bodies to use) > I'm > not going to get the OM-2S(P) modified. > > I was just wondering if the OM-4 suffers from the same affliction ? > > > Wayne Harridge > > http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 19504 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:13:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:13:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:14:43 2002 -0800 Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23928 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:14:17 -0800 Received: from 209-122-226-20.s274.apx1.nyw.ny.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.226.20] helo=hppav) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18TSlI-0007WB-00 for olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:13:16 -0500 Message-ID: <001601c2b108$faaf1c70$14e27ad1@hppav> From: "John Hermanson" To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021219025439.026e9970@192.168.100.11> Subject: Re: [OM] OT: The Two Towers Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:45:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca What a GREAT film. My wife and I have seen it twice already, helped along by a free movie pass that came with the special extended version DVD of the first film. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Barker" To: Cc: "Richard F. Man" Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 5:08 AM Subject: [OM] OT: The Two Towers I know it's a little while since Richard posted this, but that film (The Two Towers, the second of the Lord of the Rings trilogy) restored my faith in cinema. It put much of what the large film houses produce into the shade. I have not enjoyed a film so much since The English Patient. I know that there was a load of computer generated graphics, but the scenery was majestic. I just hope that the place is not now ruined by thoughtless or insensitive tourism - like many other beautiful parts of the world, I gather. I really would like to visit myself, however, so that I can make some lovely photos and enjoy the scenery. Chris < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20209 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:17:08 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:17:08 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:18:01 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23932 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:17:36 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46AEB59E39 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:17:22 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:17:17 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: OT: The Two Towers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: Chris Barker > >The only strange accent was Samwise Gamgee's. If you watch the interviews on the four-DVD set, you'll note that he was one of the few "Mercans" in the movie. It seems to be easier for "English" speakers (Mel Gibson, Nicole Kidman, et. al.) to fake "Mercan" than the other way around. Liv Taylor was another Mercan in Fellowship, and to my ear, she had an authentic Elvish accent as Arwen. :-) -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20484 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:20:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:20:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:21:00 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23936 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:20:34 -0800 Received: from interisland.net (fh81.interisland.net [12.17.134.81]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBVKG0N15955 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:16:06 -0800 Message-ID: <3E11FBED.6C388FB@interisland.net> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:19:58 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] help! what can I do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id MAA23936 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Moose > and you plan to scan a lot of old negs, you should try Viewscan... > I've been meaning to give it a try and maybe now is a good time. The HP software is able to correct negatives but I do each one individually by eye. My grief now is the aberations when scanning slides. Could it be the power supply? Mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 20827 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:27:10 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:27:10 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:28:04 2002 -0800 Received: from simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (simmts8.bellnexxia.net [206.47.199.166]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23948 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:27:38 -0800 Received: from waynecul ([207.179.149.237]) by simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20021231202321.LLIL11876.simmts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@waynecul> for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:23:21 -0500 Message-ID: <002e01c2b10a$a24c64a0$7212a20a@waynecul> From: "Wayne Culberson" To: References: Subject: Re: [OM] a few photos Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:24:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > One of the best photography teachers and authors around lives near you (if > you're in NB, you can't be that far apart :-) ). Check out > > http://www.freeman-patterson.com/ > > His books and seminars are excellent; he's one of the few good photographers > who can write well. I like a lot of his photography and his "philosophy" of > photography as well. He's very good on visual design of photographs. Others > who have taken his week-long courses speak very highly of them. > > Regards, > Andrew I used to live in Hampton, which was just a few miles from Shampers Bluff, where Freeman Patterson lives. I have read several of his books, and went once to a slide show he put on in Hampton for a benefit sort of thing. We live about 2 hours from him now. Yes, he definitely knows his stuff about photography. But as far as I can find out, he uses M*n*lt* cameras, preferring the manual ones like XD11, or something. So can he be that smart? :-) :-). Seriously, several people have recommended his course, and I'm sure there is lots I could learn, but time and money has usually discouraged me. Wayne < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21078 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:28:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:28:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:29:44 2002 -0800 Received: from mailhost.bytesmiths.com (dns.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.194]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23956 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:29:19 -0800 Received: from [66.93.41.195] (macg4.bytesmiths.com [66.93.41.195]) by mailhost.bytesmiths.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E0459E3E for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:29:05 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jan@mail.bytesmiths.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:29:01 -0800 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Jan Steinman Subject: [OM] Re: even more on-line entries! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca >From: "gries" > >http://www.nothingrhymeswithorange.com/gries/Asides/OM-2002/OM-2002.htm I don't know how this is supposed to look, but it is indecipherable using Navigator on a Mac. I'd suggest you test it on more browsers, or lighten-up on the tricky JavaScript. -- : Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): : Bytesmiths -- artists' services: : Buy My Step Van! < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 21386 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 20:34:04 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 20:34:04 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 12:34:57 2002 -0800 Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.173]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23968 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:34:31 -0800 Received: from modem-2604.dasyure.dialup.pol.co.uk ([81.78.58.44] helo=skelly) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18TT5o-00034y-00 for olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:34:29 +0000 From: "IanG" To: Subject: RE: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:34:42 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001301c2b108$f976c380$14e27ad1@hppav> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 'phew, I feel better now.... thought I was imagining it... and yep mine is a plain old OM4. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of John Hermanson Sent: 31 December 2002 19:38 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: Re: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain I think the 4 flash led IS powered by the camera batteries. (same for 4T, Ti). There is NO fix for it. My 4T measures 0.7 ma with meter on, T32 in shoe turned off, Turn flash on and drain goes to 2.6 ma, more than 3X as high. I'll bet plain 4 is similar. _________________________________ John Hermanson www.zuiko.com Camtech, Olympus Sales & Service since 1977 21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743-4714 631-424-2121 For Free Olympus manuals, please call 1-800-221-3000 _________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "IanG" To: Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 7:06 PM Subject: RE: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain > I'm convinced that mine does but others seem to disagree with me > > Ian > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Wayne Harridge > Sent: 29 December 2002 22:31 > To: olympus @ Zuiko . sls . bc . ca > Subject: [OM] T32 causing camera battery drain > > > Dear Zs, > > I got bitten by the old T flash draining the OM-2S(P) battery a few days > ago. > Since I don't use flash that much (and I have a few other OM bodies to use) > I'm > not going to get the OM-2S(P) modified. > > I was just wondering if the OM-4 suffers from the same affliction ? > > > Wayne Harridge > > http://members.optusnet.com.au/~w_harridge > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > > > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22055 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 21:24:53 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 21:24:53 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 13:25:47 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24014 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:25:22 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.102] (h000502eb4974.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.221.162]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with ESMTP id <2002123121241305100h8l3je>; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:24:13 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: joegwinn@mail.attbi.com Message-Id: Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:24:11 -0500 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Joe Gwinn Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca At 7:41 PM +0000 12/31/02, olympus-digest wrote: >Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:59:01 -0800 >From: Tal Lancaster >Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie > >On 30 Dec 2002 11:27:00 -0000 >owner-olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca (olympus-digest) wrote: > > > Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:05:24 -0500 > > From: "Walt Wayman" > > Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie > > >[snip ..snip] As for Susan Sontag, I think she was discussing photography as she knew it in the 1950s and 1960s, not as it would become after the 1980s. Ms Sontag was an essay writer, not a scientist, and her stock in trade is psychological insight. I have no opinion on how well she did this, but very many people found her writings worthwhile or at least interesting, enough people that she was able to make a very good living of it. Very few people can do this. > > I tell them they should strenuously object based upon the > > generally common knowledge of the trickery possible through > > digital photographic manipulation and demand that an original > > negative or transparency be produced to authenticate the picture > > being challenged. > >Actually, I don't even think a negative or transparency would be >sufficient proof. Who is to say that said evidence is the "original"? >One could manipulate the image digitally and then just dump it back out >to film. Non-digital photos can be faked, and often were. Even with Photoshop, it's pretty hard to make a fake that will withstand expert scrutiny. Even non-experts will notice that the photo just doesn't look quite right, although the non-experts may not be able to put their finger on exactly what's wrong until an expert points it out. > > Whether or not the objection is sustained by > > the court, it still provides a great point to raise in argument to > > the jury, because almost everyone nowadays has at least seen > > enough tricked up TV commercials to realize you can't necessarily > > believe it just because you saw a picture of it. It has been true for some time that photographs are not accepted in a court of law, unless the photographer or some other authoritative source is able to testify as to the veracity of the photo being offered as evidence. The more serious the crime, the more airtight the evidence must be. For murder cases, the photographer must be able to testify to an unbroken chain of trusted custody from shutter release to courtroom, or the photo will be rejected as no better than hearsay. This is because if there is any question about the provenance of the photo, "beyond reasonable doubt" excludes the photo. I got this info from an old Kodak instructional pamphlet on taking evidence photos, written in the late 1960s if I recall. I read it in the 1970s. It had all manner of advice on how to ensure that the photos are accepted as evidence. Kodak may still offer a descendant of this pamphlet, on their website, where there is a section devoted to law enforcement.. Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 22735 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 22:20:51 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 22:20:51 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 14:21:45 2002 -0800 Received: from mynra.com ([164.109.174.118]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA24055 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:21:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:20:55 -0500 Message-Id: <200212311720.AA280297802@mynra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Walt Wayman" To: Subject: Re: [OM] Cameras Don't Lie X-Mailer: Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca You need a more up-to-date instructional pamphlet. The law changes as people, and the courts, become more accustomed to new technology, and if that pamphlet was ever accurate, it's sure not now. Today, all that is required for a photograph to be admitted into evidence, whether in a murder trial or a $200 small claims case, is that someone testify that it truly and accurately depicts the scene it purports to portray. That's it, nothing more. It's done every day. Any argument thereafter would go to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility. And chain of custody generally applies only to fungible items, usually not something unique or readily distinguishable from something similar. Walt ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Joe Gwinn Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:24:11 -0500 > >It has been true for some time that photographs are not accepted >in a court of law, unless the photographer or some other >authoritative source is able to testify as to the veracity of the >photo being offered as evidence. The more serious the crime, >the more airtight the evidence must be. > >For murder cases, the photographer must be able to testify to an >unbroken chain of trusted custody from shutter release to >courtroom, or the photo will be rejected as no better than >hearsay. This is because if there is any question about the >provenance of the photo, "beyond reasonable doubt" excludes the >photo. > >I got this info from an old Kodak instructional pamphlet on >taking evidence photos, written in the late 1960s if I recall. I >read it in the 1970s. It had all manner of advice on how to >ensure that the photos are accepted as evidence. Kodak may still >offer a descendant of this pamphlet, on their website, where >there is a section devoted to law enforcement.. > >Joe Gwinn < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23148 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 22:43:52 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 22:43:52 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 14:44:46 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.freeola.enta.net (mail.freeola.enta.net [195.74.96.155]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA24088 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:44:20 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id gBVMgqb49022; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:42:52 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Received: from [195.74.106.157] (195-74-106-157.dial.entanet.co.uk [195.74.106.157]) by mail.freeola.enta.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gBVMgno48966; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:42:50 GMT (envelope-from imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sr0112752-006@mail.freeola.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:43:21 +0000 To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca From: Chris Barker Subject: [OM] Re: OT: The Two Towers Cc: Jan Steinman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Liv Tyler could do very little wrong, although I thought her rival for Aragorn's affections was rather special :-). Chris At 12:17 -0800 31/12/02, Jan Steinman wrote: > >From: Chris Barker >> >>The only strange accent was Samwise Gamgee's. > >If you watch the interviews on the four-DVD set, you'll note that he >was one of the few "Mercans" in the movie. > >It seems to be easier for "English" speakers (Mel Gibson, Nicole >Kidman, et. al.) to fake "Mercan" than the other way around. > >Liv Taylor was another Mercan in Fellowship, and to my ear, she had >an authentic Elvish accent as Arwen. :-) -- <|_:-)_|> C M I Barker Cambridgeshire, Great Britain. =95 +44 (0)7092 251126 mailto:imagopus@threeshoes.co.uk http://www.threeshoes.co.uk http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko =2E.. a nascent photo library. < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 23512 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 22:55:57 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 22:55:57 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 14:56:51 2002 -0800 Received: from picard.skynet.be (picard.skynet.be [195.238.3.88]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA24101 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:56:25 -0800 Received: from marcsimo (78.155-136-217.adsl.skynet.be [217.136.155.78]) by picard.skynet.be (8.11.6/8.11.6/Skynet-OUT-2.20) with SMTP id gBVMtp921891 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:55:51 +0100 (MET) (envelope-from ) Message-ID: <005001c2b11f$b7750fc0$587ffea9@marcsimo> From: "marc simon" To: "Olympus mailing list" Subject: [OM] wishes Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:55:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Hi all, best wishes for the New Year, a lot of nice pictures, some new "toys" who knows perhaps some "digital host" for our beloved Zuikos... All the best for you and your families regards marc namur Belgium < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 24096 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 23:47:06 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 23:47:06 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 15:48:01 2002 -0800 Received: from smtpout.ev1.net (smtpout.ev1.net [207.44.129.132]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA24117 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:47:35 -0800 Received: from desktop [63.93.82.166] by smtpout.ev1.net (SMTPD32-6.06) id AD00C5E00076; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:49:20 -0600 From: siddiq To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:45:14 -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Subject: Re: [OM] Re: OT: The Two Towers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca 12/31/2002 2:43:21 PM, Chris Barker wrote: >Liv Tyler could do very little wrong, although I thought her rival >for Aragorn's affections was rather special :-). > >Chris > >At 12:17 -0800 31/12/02, Jan Steinman wrote: >> >From: Chris Barker >>> >>>The only strange accent was Samwise Gamgee's. >> >>If you watch the interviews on the four-DVD set, you'll note that he >>was one of the few "Mercans" in the movie. >> >>It seems to be easier for "English" speakers (Mel Gibson, Nicole >>Kidman, et. al.) to fake "Mercan" than the other way around. >> >>Liv Taylor was another Mercan in Fellowship, and to my ear, she had >>an authentic Elvish accent as Arwen. :-) arwen had a better part in the first movie (riding across the river given chase by the dark riders). this movie, they could have done w/o all that mushy stuff. gawd, no place for wasting so much screen time on *that* when there be battles to be fought, arrr. however, i must concur with chris that eowyn's character was masterfully acted and a whole lot easier on the eyes than arwen :) heck, if you want to kill some time, head over to IMDB.com and read the (multiple) threads on "arwen vs eowyn (vs galadriel), who's prettier" /S -- .sig < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 25819 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 03:24:50 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 03:24:50 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 19:25:45 2002 -0800 Received: from dns2.onewest.net (dns1.srv.net [199.104.81.3]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24343 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:25:19 -0800 Received: from dsl.11.id.onewest.net ([198.60.98.11] helo=hppav) by dns2.onewest.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18TZVP-00011D-00 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:25:19 -0700 From: "James N. McBride" To: Subject: [FS][OM] Zuiko 85mm f-2 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:24:27 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I'm getting ready to put my 85mm f-2 lens on EB*Y unless someone on the list wants it. Please contact me off list if interested. Stuff for sale is at: http://www.onewest.net/~jnmcbr/eqforsale.htm < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26097 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 03:27:38 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 03:27:38 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 19:28:33 2002 -0800 Received: from mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au [210.49.20.162]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24348 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:28:06 -0800 Received: from z4z3k2 (sdcax82-b160.dialup.optusnet.com.au [211.28.77.160]) by mail023.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id h013S3i26737 for ; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 14:28:03 +1100 From: "John Wheeler" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Attention Aussies! Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 14:26:16 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2B1A1.BEAAA2A0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <55.34e3f034.2b428374@aol.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2B1A1.BEAAA2A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit G'day Rich, Haven't been to the Dorrigo museum but here is a link. Incidently, I'm surprised you say that area is flat. Dorrigo is between Coffs Harbour on the north NSW coast and Armidale, a university town on the other side of The Great Dividing Range which runs up and down eastern Oz. So Dorrigo is really on top of this range and is very beautiful country but also quite hilly. (Yeah, I know, our mountains are just little hills to you guys). http://www.dsrm.org.au/ Another steam railway museum, closer to Sydney is at Thirlmere (about one and a half hours drive). I have been there, but not for some twenty years, and actually took some shots but with an M3 (which I know don't count :-). They have a good number of exhibits including some nineteenth century stuff. Their official site as follows. http://www.nswrtm.org/ John. -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of Doggre@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 4:22 PM To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] Attention Aussies! I'm watching a tv program on old steam railroad equipment in New South Wales. In Dorrigo? They've got a heck of a good start on a rail museum. Many old engines, some over 100 years old. Would make a great photographic expedition for somebody so disposed, hint, hint. The mainline RR looks beautifully maintained. Dang that country's flat! Did you give all the mountains to NZ? G'day, Rich ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2B1A1.BEAAA2A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
G'day=20 Rich,
 
Haven't been to the Dorrigo museum but here = is=20 a link.
 
Incidently, I'm surprised you say that area = is flat.=20 Dorrigo is between Coffs Harbour on the north NSW coast and Armidale, a=20 university town on the other side of The Great Dividing Range which runs = up and=20 down eastern Oz. So Dorrigo is really on top of this range and is very = beautiful=20 country but also quite hilly. (Yeah, I know, our mountains are just = little hills=20 to you guys).
 
http://www.dsrm.org.au/
=
 
Another steam railway museum, closer to Sydney is at Thirlmere = (about one=20 and a half hours drive). I have been there, but not for some twenty=20 years, and actually took some shots but with an M3 (which I = know don't=20 count :-). They have a good number of exhibits including some nineteenth = century=20 stuff. Their official site as follows.
 
http://www.nswrtm.org/
 
John.
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca = [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On=20 Behalf Of Doggre@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, = 2002 4:22=20 PM
To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca
Subject: [OM] = Attention=20 Aussies!


I'm watching a tv = program on old=20 steam railroad equipment in New South Wales.  In Dorrigo?  = They've=20 got a heck of a good start on a rail museum.  Many old engines, = some over=20 100 years old.  Would make a great photographic expedition for = somebody=20 so disposed, hint, hint.  The mainline RR looks beautifully=20 maintained.  Dang that country's flat!  Did you give all the = mountains to NZ?

G'day, Rich =
------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C2B1A1.BEAAA2A0-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26378 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 03:30:11 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 03:30:11 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 19:31:06 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA24352 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:30:40 -0800 Received: (qmail 18551 invoked by uid 104); 1 Jan 2003 03:29:10 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 03:29:09 -0000 Message-ID: <00c001c2b146$eda5fa60$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021231194134.17433.qmail@zuiko.sls.bc.ca> Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Vuescan, an HP S20, and me Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 11:36:08 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca I don't have the LS2000 anymore, just test the LS4000, ignore auto focus and auto exposure timing, with a 2.4GHz PC and 768MB RAM Window ME. No ICE and filters. auto crop in vuescan, similar cropping in Nikon SW. Vuescan - 61 seconds for scan, 29 seconds for saving the cropped file. Nikon original software, color management off - 51 seconds total. ICE on Vuescan - 70 seconds for scan, 50 seconds for saving the crop. Nikon original software, color management off - 81 seconds total. The crop file saving time in Vuescan is depends on the CPU speed, it was very slow when I was running a 500MHz AMD (one year ago) and 256MB RAM. It probably took four times in the post saving time. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Steinman" > >From: "C.H.Ling" > > > >If you have a machine slower than 1GHz, don't > >try to scan a 60MB file, it takes a year to complete. > > Well, that would depend on a lot of other factors, though, right? > > My 54MB film scans on MacOS 9 with a 200MHz CPU and 384MB RAM take under a minute with an LS-2000. > > Whatever machine/OS you have, stuff it with RAM for best performance. > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 26672 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 03:38:13 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 03:38:13 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 19:39:08 2002 -0800 Received: from sitar.i-cable.com (sitar.i-cable.com [203.83.111.72]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA24356 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:38:41 -0800 Received: (qmail 22954 invoked by uid 104); 1 Jan 2003 03:37:09 -0000 Received: from cm61-18-220-154.hkcable.com.hk (HELO p41) (61.18.220.154) by 0 with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 03:37:08 -0000 Message-ID: <00df01c2b148$0b524d60$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> From: "C.H.Ling" To: References: <20021231105019.1deef666.tal@renderman.org> Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighs in Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 11:44:08 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tal Lancaster" > > For me, scanning isn't so painful. > Also, I find I don't need to "manipulate" the scan very often. This > includes adjusting the Levels or Curves in photoshop. The times, I do > need to make adjustments, are either because: > > (In order of frequency) > I screwed up the exposure > The resultant scan had color or contrast issues > Something about the slide itself didn't capture what I recalled from the > shoot. > Are you talking about negative or slide? Interesting, with my LS4000 and all type of negative I used, I need 1000hotoshop level and curve adjustment. I don't think they got wrong exposure as I mostly shoot slide and never found any problem. C.H.Ling < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27162 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 04:12:43 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 04:12:43 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 20:13:38 2002 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24375 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:13:12 -0800 Received: from athalon (12-241-48-12.client.attbi.com[12.241.48.12]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <2003010104120505100ofaire>; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 04:12:05 +0000 From: "Gary L. Edwards" To: Subject: RE: [OM] Re: Vuescan, an HP S20, and me Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:14:59 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <00c001c2b146$eda5fa60$9adc123d@8ag.mshome.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca -----Original Message----- From: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca [mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca]On Behalf Of C.H.Ling I don't have the LS2000 anymore, just test the LS4000, ignore auto focus and auto exposure timing, with a 2.4GHz PC and 768MB RAM Window ME. No ICE and filters. auto crop in vuescan, similar cropping in Nikon SW. Vuescan - 61 seconds for scan, 29 seconds for saving the cropped file. Nikon original software, color management off - 51 seconds total. Another datum: Nikon LS-30 Coolscan III (SCSI), no ICE, same full frame OM-shot E-6 transparency scanned at 2700 dpi: NikonScan 3.1 - 23 s either standalone or using import function directly from Photoshop 6.0 Vuescan 7.5.69 - 56 s to scan, approximately 20 seconds to store TIF and open in Photoshop. Run on an AMD Athlon XP+ 1700 with 1 gig SDRAM, running Win 2k Pro, all other applications closed. I was surprised at the results; I use both programs to scan (depending on the slide/negative) and had failed to notice the disparity in scanning time. I still like Vuescan, and it often produces better scans (it did for this example). Only with release 3 has Nikonscan become a usable piece of software; 2.5 was horrid. Gary Edwards < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 27904 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 05:29:12 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 05:29:12 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 21:30:06 2002 -0800 Received: from fw.sls.bc.ca (unknown13.onlink.net [209.105.222.139] (may be forged)) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA24447 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:29:39 -0800 Message-Id: <200301010529.VAA24447@fw.sls.bc.ca> From: Josh Lohuis To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Subject: [OM] You are so sweet Date: Wed,01 Jan 2003 00:29:40 PM X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=#r0xx# Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca --#r0xx# Content-Type: text/html charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi,
check the attached love screensaver
and feel the fragrance of true love.. --#r0xx# Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=love.scr Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="love.scr" --#r0xx#-- < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28257 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 05:31:15 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 05:31:15 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 21:32:10 2002 -0800 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h008.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.236]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA24493 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:31:44 -0800 Received: (cpmta 27660 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 21:30:43 -0800 Received: from 24.157.74.204 (HELO abacurial) by smtp.abacurial.com (209.228.33.236) with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 21:30:43 -0800 X-Sent: 1 Jan 2003 05:30:43 GMT From: "tOM Trottier" Organization: http://Abacurial.com To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 00:30:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OM] 300/4.5 4 $255 Message-ID: <3E1236B1.5917.9F5BD26@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3344&item=1949121886 ---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ---- ,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8 (*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html > From owner-olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Wed Jan 28 12:20:17 CET 2004 Delivered-To: olympus@zuiko.sls.bc.ca Received: (qmail 28666 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2003 05:57:36 -0000 Received: from www.sls.bc.ca (HELO proxy.sls.bc.ca) (139.142.66.3) by zuiko.sls.bc.ca with SMTP; 1 Jan 2003 05:57:36 -0000 Received: FROM fw.sls.bc.ca BY proxy.sls.bc.ca ; Tue Dec 31 21:58:31 2002 -0800 Received: from lopez.interisland.net (lopez.interisland.net [12.17.134.7]) by fw.sls.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24506 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:58:05 -0800 Received: from interisland.net ([12.17.134.106]) by lopez.interisland.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h015s9P13243 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:54:09 -0800 Message-ID: <3E128371.B7955DEB@interisland.net> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:58:09 -0800 From: Mike Organization: needs improvement X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "olympus-digest@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca" Subject: Re: [OM] help! what can I do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fw.sls.bc.ca id VAA24506 Sender: owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca Thanks to whomever suggested I unplug the scanner from the wall and then plug it back in after a while. That fixed the aberation problem. I generally disconnect the power from the back of the scanner when I'm not using it but disconnecting the other end requires a dive under the desk and so the power supply is always on. Bad idea I guess. At any rate thanks, I'm back in business scanning these old travel slides. mike -- Latitude 48=B0 32' North, Longitude 123=B0 7' West < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@Zuiko.sls.bc.ca > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >