[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[nikomat:01331] Nikon ML (world-wide)
よしだ＠ないこん＆東工大 です．
Nikon ML への 参加手続きは，アドレス
majordomo@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
に
subscribe nikon-digest
と，１行だけ書いて出せばＯＫです．
当然かも知れないけど，最新カメラの話題のほうが多いです．
> Please follow this URL for more information:
>
> http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/~ard/photo/nikon
>
> Addresses:
>
> Submissions: nikon@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
> Administrivia: majordomo@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
> Human: owner-nikon@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
ダイジェスト判となって 0.5〜3通／日 の 割合で 送られてきます．
最新版を末尾に添付します．
----
Koji Yoshida
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 03:49:28 +1200
Message-Id: <199603211549.DAA18776@ogre.cs.waikato.ac.nz>
From: owner-nikon-digest@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
To: nikon-digest@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
Subject: nikon-digest V1 #354
Reply-To: nikon@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
Errors-To: owner-nikon-digest@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
Precedence: bulk
nikon-digest Friday, 22 March 1996 Volume 01 : Number 354
######################################################################
#
# This is the Nikon digest.
#
# Subjects covered in this volume:
#
# Re: Cameras or Lenses
# Best Nikon for forest research projects?
# Re: Zoom or Fixed Focal - Quality
# Nikon F4 modifications
# N90s Defective
# Re: nikon wide angle
# Nikon pola filter
# Re: F601 Value.
# Re: nikon-digest V1 #352
# Re: serial number
# xx-300mm zoom; F601/N6006 discontinued?; good lenses, bodies, or skills first?
# N90s problem reports
# TTL with ice, white walls
# Re: Extension tubes
# Re: Nikon vs. Third Party 70mm-300mm zooms
# Re: Portrait Lens Recommendation, etc.
# Re: 75-300mm zooms
#
# If a thread is no longer Nikon-specific, please take it to e-mail.
#
# Nikon email addresses:
#
# Postings: nikon@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
# List maintenance: majordomo@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
# Human: owner-nikon@majordomo.cs.waikato.ac.nz
#
# Please refer to:
#
# http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/~ard/nikon/
# ftp://ftp.cs.arizona.edu/people/bmtong/photo/nikon.faq
#
######################################################################
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Dr. Walter Pietsch" <walter@zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:35:06 +0900
Subject: Re: Cameras or Lenses
>From: cliveb@cosmos-uk.org (Clive Bubley)
>Neither cameras, nor lenses create images.
>People do!
>Without us, the equipment is just a collection of metal, plastic and glass.
>No more. No less.
>
I completely agree that the human brain "creates" images. BUT lenses are
still necessary to "reproduce" the reality. Hence, the original poster made
exactly the point that it's finally up to the lens which determines the
optical quality and not the camera. I would prefer to spend big bucks on
many top lenses than on cameras and recommend it to everybody who can't
afford both at the same time. If you have 10 cameras and 1 lens you will see
the limit of possibilities whereas with 10 lenses and 1 camera ... unlimited!
Walter
http://www.zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~walter/nikon.html
------------------------------
From: mmcclell@ptialaska.net
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 21:49:48 -0900
Subject: Best Nikon for forest research projects?
First, thanks to all of you who contribute to this digest;
I recently subscribed and I have been reading the archives
as time permits and I have found a wealth of useful
information. Second, I have a question regarding the best
Nikon SLR for use by my field research crews. I am a
forest ecologist studying the temperate rainforests of
southeast Alaska and I need rugged (Nikon!), reliable, and
reasonably lightweight photo gear to document site
conditions, often under dense forest cover. The cameras
should be reasonably moisture resistant, easy to operate
for beginners, yet capable of producing pro-quality images
on 35mm slide film. Built-in flash would be useful and
matrix metering would help with tricky light-and-shadow
patterns in the forest. I tried a 'point & shoot' camera
(Olympus Infinity Zoom) and was terribly disappointed with
the results. The F4s and FM are what I use for my
personal shooting, but I think the N90, N70, or N50 --
paired with a moderately fast zoom lens (wide angle to
medium telephoto) -- would be a better outfit for use by
my photographically-challenged crew. Any comments? I'm
especially interested in anyone's experience with these
cameras under similar weather conditions (cool and wet).
Also, which lens would be suitable?. Thanks.
Dr. Mike McClellan
USFS Forestry Sciences Laboratory
Juneau, Alaska
------------------------------
From: "Dr. Walter Pietsch" <walter@zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:56:19 +0900
Subject: Re: Zoom or Fixed Focal - Quality
From: XIANGLONG YUAN <yuanx@bigvax.alfred.edu>
Which way to go if I want optical quality? Is it really true that fixed
focal lens are better in optic than zooms provided the similar price
range? some1 said that nowadays the difference betw them is not very
obvious?
Assuming a similar price range I believe that fixed focals are still
slightly better (especially when used wide open) than zooms. It's just
easier to correct all optical errors for one focal length! But indeed
differences have become very small. Lenses like the 20-35/2.8 and
80-200/2.8D are really very close to fixed focals and I don't hesitate to
use them at f/2.8! But they cost a hell.
If you buy a 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8 and 35/2 you still pay less than for the
20-35/2.8 and get the extra f-stop at 35mm!
Walter
http://www.zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~walter/nikon.html
------------------------------
From: "Dr. Walter Pietsch" <walter@zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:15:01 +0900
Subject: Nikon F4 modifications
I am aware of 4 minor modifications (re-engineering) of the F4:
1) the switch for metering modes to avoid mistakenly changes
2) some strengthening of the metal body
3) finder has double security to be removed - you need to press the release
button until finder is 3/4 off
4) Also the finder now has an extra hole in the hot shoe for the security pin
off the SB25 etc. flash unit.
5) Mr. Shuuji OKABE bought a NIKON F4 and its number is 2562408.
He bought it in the first week of Octber 1995.
Walter
http://www.zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~walter/nikon.html
------------------------------
From: "'ToPster' T. Lertpanyavit" <topl@u.washington.edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 00:25:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: N90s Defective
Just for the record, I've an N90s and it hasn't died on me once. Bought it
when it first came out, and I'm using lithium AAs in it. I've only put
about 30 rolls through it in the half year that I've had it, but it hasn't
done anything it shouldn't do; not even the stuff that the initial batch
is supposed to do (show a low battery indication even when the battery
level is not low). Who knows, maybe my camera is the odd case instead of
those who have had problems :).
- --
THANAPOOM LERTPANYAVIT
topl@u.washington.edu - http://weber.u.washington.edu/~topl
Dept. of Electrical Engineering - University of Washington
------------------------------
From: "Dr. Walter Pietsch" <walter@zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:54:30 +0900
Subject: Re: nikon wide angle
>From: beaton@is.nyu.edu (Dana Beaton)
>I want to fill in the focal lengths between my old 20mm 3.5 AIS and 50mm (I
>am satisfied with the 35-80D from 50 to 80mm).
>
>Will I have to go with primes to escape barreling?
Unless you go with the 20-35/2.8 (nearly invisible), yes.
I prefer using a zoom
>but, will I have to consider getting 24mm and 35mm primes instead? (I have
>already heard the 28mm prime is not exciting.)
>
The AF-D 28mm/2.8 is a new optical design and also provides CRC - it should
be up-to-date now.
Consider the AF-D 24mm/2.8 as one of the sharpest Nikon wide angles!
Walter
http://www.zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~walter/nikon.html
------------------------------
From: "Kristiaan.DAout" <kdaout@uia.ua.ac.be>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:49:47 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Nikon pola filter
Hello,
I just bought a Nikon pola filter for my 24 mm AF Sigma lens (on an
F-801). It is the special one for wide angle lenses (front is much wider
than 52 mm), but it is a LINEAR one.
Can anybody explain me if I can expect problems with focussing and/or
metering ? Everybody seems to agree that jou MUST use a circular
polarisation
filter with AF camera's, but I have been using a cheap linear one for
a long time and never encountered such problems on any of my slides.
Thanks.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Kristiaan D'Aout
E-mail: kdaout@uia.ua.ac.be
------------------------------
From: Robert Harrowfield <harrowr@ihug.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 22:59:44 +1200
Subject: Re: F601 Value.
> From: "Hugh Grierson" <Hugh.Grierson@trimble.co.nz>
> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 10:22:12 +1200
> Subject: N6006/F601
> Ditto. Just to make my decision harder I also had the choice of a
> used F801 (N8008) for about the same price as a new 601, each a
> couple of hundred dollars less than a new F70. I got the 601. Each
> person will have different priorities but for me it was:....
> I give the N6006/F601 two thumbs up for value for money.
I agree, I looked at all the above options, and decided a new F70 was just too expensive
for me at my stage in photography. Also I hate the interface!! If Nikon put anything like
it on the F5 there will be a large scale move to Cannon by the pro's in my eyes.
Between the F801 and the F601, the 801 was a little sturdier, 1/250 flash sync (i dont
really need, prefer avail light photog anyway) and better autofocus (IMHO)were the 801
advantages, with the lack of onboard flash counting against it (i do use it at parties).
Im sure the 801 has other majors advantages, but i cant remember now. Anyway, the final
diciding factor was a deal I came across in a shop, on on-behalf sale of:
F-601, 70-210D f4~5.6, 35-70 3.3~4.5? + 50 f1.8 all in MINT!!!! condition for $1050 kiwi
dollars. I figured I could always hock the body if I didnt like it without losing any
money, but I wouldnt part with it now.
Mind you, Im not overly fussed with the slow/picky autofocus and I havent really had a
lot of success with the matrix mode. Do any pros use matrix metering if they have the
time to work on a shot. It is good for that snapshot type situation though.
Rob Harrowfield
harrowr@ihug.co.nz
------------------------------
From: Ed Yost <eyost@nando.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 09:42:12 -0500
Subject: Re: nikon-digest V1 #352
>From: ToxicChuck@aol.com
>Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 10:52:51 -0500
>Subject: Extension Tubes/Info request
>
>Hi Everyone,
>
>Considering it is nearly income tax time in the USA, I will not be buying a
>macro lens anytime soon. But would my fellow Nikon Digesters suggest a good
>site or a good book that would explain extension tubes, their uses and their
>limitations for macro flower photography with my 105mm f1.8 lens. (Or even my
>300mm f4.5 "Iron Horse.")
Charles a good applications reference manual is John Shaw's Close-Ups in
Nature. He discusses
theory of close-up photography as well as applications for different
types of subjects.
Ed
------------------------------
From: Ed Yost <eyost@nando.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 09:46:08 -0500
Subject: Re: serial number
>
>From: LAN@mksinfo.qc.ca (Phan, Lan)
>Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 15:03:00 EST
>Subject: Nikon serial number
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I know that by looking at the serial number of the
> Nikon F2, we can know the production year, for example
> the F2 with the serial number 78XXXXX... has been produced
> in 1978 and so on. But what about other bodies ?
>
> I checked the serial number on my FE2 and can't see any
> valid year in any of the numbers.
>
> Someone is selling a Nikon F4s that he said he bought it
> 2 years ago, how is the serial number working on the F4s ?
> can i tell which year the F4s has been made by looking
> at the serial number or do i have to ask to see the invoice ?
>
The serial number story with F2 cameras will get you close to knowing
when the camera was actually manufactured. Given that they could have
started a serial number run a year before the "year" indicated in the
number and that number series could follow a year afterwards, only means
that it could get you close.
The serial numbers for current products has no trend. There is no way to
determine when the product was made by the serial number.
Ed
------------------------------
From: Jim MacKenzie <dusyk&barlow@cabler.cableregina.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 08:51:18 -0600
Subject: xx-300mm zoom; F601/N6006 discontinued?; good lenses, bodies, or skills first?
> From: taroger@singnet.com.sg
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 01:09:17 +0000
> Subject: Nikon vs. Third Party 70mm-300mm zooms
>
> I would like to purchase a 70mm-300mm zoom for travel to use on my F90X body.
> Actually, the lens I would *really* like is the Nikkor ED 300MM F4s(IF) because of
> its reported sharpness and relatively wide maximum aperture. Unfortunately, this
> lens is even heavier than the Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8D and expensive (although I could
> probably live with the expensive). Therefore, something like the Nikkor 75-300
> f/4.5-5.6S looks attractive because of its much lower weight and cost (although
> smaller maximum aperture).
Generally speaking, xx-300mm zooms are pretty good performers but tend to weaken noticeably at
the 300mm setting, which is probably the lens' most useful setting. (I own a Tamron 90-300mm
f/4.5-5.6, and it certainly exhibits this characteristic; the new Tamron 70-300 replacement is
slightly worse at 300 than mine, the Nikkor is better but the same generalization applies). If
you want a 300 and you make 11x14s a lot you may be better with a 300/4 or 300/5.6 prime lens.
However, my Tamron is really light and handy, focuses quickly and is more than good enough for my
purposes.
> From: Floyd Warren <fwarren@mail.ameritel.net>
> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:41:14 +0000
> Subject: Re: N6006 (F601) over N70 (F70)
>
> I recently went through the same decision processes about whether to buy the
> N50, N70, or buy the out of production N6006. The decision was an easy one
> once I tested all models. The N70 was an excellent camera but only slightly
> better than the N6006 and considerably more expensive. The N50 shouldn't
> even be a Nikon! I think Nikon's decision to discontinue the N6006 and
> N8008 was not a good one for the consumer, although I am sure it was an
> excellent business decision with a significant price increase on a slightly
> better camera. I bought the N6006 with a 35-85 zoom, a flash, and a bag for
> less than the N70 would have cost.
For the record, only the F801S/N8008S was discontinued. The F601/N6006 is still in production in
Thailand and is very much part of Nikon's product line. I own one and agree with you (although I
prefer my F90).
> From: cliveb@cosmos-uk.org (Clive Bubley)
> Date: 19 Mar 1996 17:02:19 GMT
> Subject: Nikon Digest: 2 replies
>
> Re:
> From: Jim MacKenzie : Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:53:09 -0600
>
> >I would buy the best and most useful lens you can afford, along with the
> most basic body you'd be happy with. Why? Cameras don't create images,
> lenses do.
>
> I take issue with you here, Jim.
> Neither cameras, nor lenses create images.
> People do!
> Without us, the equipment is just a collection of metal, plastic and glass.
> No more. No less.
Point taken, definitely true; however, Nikon doesn't sell photographers so the person asking this
question is limited to the ability to buy good quality hardware. Good skills with lousy
equipment will result in decent to good photographs, but good skills combined with excellent
hardware will result in better photographs a good portion of the time. I think he would be
well-served to buy better lenses, a decent body and practice a lot than buy a Kodak disposable
and a lot of Nikon School dates. *grin*
Jim
------------------------------
From: szoubok@bway.net (Sergej Zoubok)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 10:14:53 -0500
Subject: N90s problem reports
OK, now I'm a little worried too. Just as I'm all set to order my N90s the
list has seen a series of complaints and concerns about this camera.
Whenever I see this kind of thing I can never decides how to interpret it.
Is it a case of:
(a) for every complaint there are many more who have similar problems
OR
(b) we're more likely to hear from people who are having problems than
those who are not.
Any thoughts?
Thanks for your time.
Sergej
P.S. not everyone has been clear about the kind of problems they've
experienced (aside from low power capacity of batteries). Could you please
be more specific?
- --------
Sergej Zoubok
szoubok@bway.net
sqz1909@is2.nyu.edu
------------------------------
From: lchrist@wolf.ces.ncsu.edu (Lisa Christensen)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 09:51:58 EST
Subject: TTL with ice, white walls
Timothy Rogers,
Sorry I can't help you with the "D" system, but I can tell you about
shooting with TTL. With all the white ice of a skating rink and the
background of a white wall, your flash on TTL will read all of that white
and try to expose it as gray, putting out enough light to do just that. To
use TTL in that situation, you need to adjust your ASA 1-2 stops to
compensate. If you're using 400 speed, try setting your dial around 100 or
160. Hope this helps!
Lisa
Lisa Christensen
Photographer
Multimedia Team - Ag. Communications
NCSU
------------------------------
From: Scott Burnside System Admin <scottb@lausd.k12.ca.us>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:21:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Extension tubes
Charles,
The books by John Shaw are excellent. He has one specifically for
closeup photography. He uses mainly Nikon equipment, so you'll get a
lot of excellent tips from him. One sad thing is that Nikon no longer
makes the PN-11 extension tube. This would be an excellent extension
tube for your 300 (it has 52.5mm of extension) because it has a tripod
socket and a rotating tripod collar. If you find one on the used market
snap it up!(They may be a few new ones around)
If the filter size on your 105F1.8 is 62mm you might consider the 5T/6T
closeup lenses (3T/4T for 52mm). The neat thing about these is that you
don't lose any light like you would with extension tubes, and they
should get you close enough to get some beautiful closeups of flowers
and such.
Hope this helps,
Scott D. Burnside
> From: ToxicChuck@aol.com
> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 10:52:51 -0500
> Subject: Extension Tubes/Info request
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Considering it is nearly income tax time in the USA, I will not be buying a
> macro lens anytime soon. But would my fellow Nikon Digesters suggest a good
> site or a good book that would explain extension tubes, their uses and their
> limitations for macro flower photography with my 105mm f1.8 lens. (Or even my
> 300mm f4.5 "Iron Horse.")
<SNIP>
>
> Thanks, (Go UConn Huskies!)
> Charles (ToxicChuck@aol.com)
> http://members.aol.com/toxicchuck/
------------------------------
From: Scott Burnside System Admin <scottb@lausd.k12.ca.us>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:34:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Nikon vs. Third Party 70mm-300mm zooms
Timothy,
If you're going to blow you images up to 11X14 or bigger you're going
to want the best quality lens available. That's the Nikon 300 F4.
With that said, another lens you might want to look at is the Tokina
100-300 F4 AF-D. It's in Tokina's pro line and they are excellent. This
is a fairly new lens, but the people I've talked to who have seen it
say it's an excellent lens. There are also rumors about a Nikon 100-300
F4 AF-D lens.
As for the the lenses in the 75-300 range, I have seen images from the
Nikon version and have found them to be acceptable. I have also seen
images from the Sigma and was not as impressed. I have not seen side by
side comparisons of these lenses, but the Sigma did seem softer. I have
seen side by side comparisons with the Nikon 300 and the Nikon 75-300.
There is a difference, the 300 prime is sharper. In addition the 300
with the TC-14B gives you an outstanding 420 F5.6 lens. The 75-300 gets
a little hard to focus with a teleconverter, and for me, unacceptably
slow. But that's mainly because I shoot ASA 50 and 100 speed films
almost exclusively.
Hope this helps,
Scott D. Burnside
> From: taroger@singnet.com.sg
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 01:09:17 +0000
> Subject: Nikon vs. Third Party 70mm-300mm zooms
>
> I would like to purchase a 70mm-300mm zoom for travel to use on my
> F90X body. Actually, the lens I would *really* like is the Nikkor
> ED 300MM F4s(IF) because of its reported sharpness and relatively
> wide maximum aperture.
<SNIP>
> //------------------------------------------------------------------
> // Timothy A. Rogers
> // taroger@singnet.com.sg
> // Singapore
------------------------------
From: Scott Burnside System Admin <scottb@lausd.k12.ca.us>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:44:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Portrait Lens Recommendation, etc.
Pedro,
Stick with you first instinct and go with the 105 F2.8 Micro AF-D. The
105 is considered an excellent focal length for portraits and you can't
beat the vact that it goes to 1:1 without any help. I have used this
lens and the 105 F2.8 MF Micro. I loved the manual focus lens because
it had a solid feel to it, and I found it easier to move the metal
aperture ring as opposed to the AF plastic aperture ring (I could get
finer control between f-stops). But, the MF could only get me to 1:2,
which meant I had to go to extension tubes, closeup filters and
teleconverters to get to 1:1 (not necessarily all at once, but you get
the idea).
This lens is great for portraits, although some people complain that it
may be a bit too sharp for protraits! It's a good focal length, it
doesn't flatten the subject too much. The only drawback might be in
tight spaces, you have to move a bit farther away then you would with a 85.
Hope this helps,
Scott D. Burnside
> From: Pedro Riveron <pedro.pa.riveron@ae.ge.com>
> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 14:30:00 -0800
> Subject: Portrait Lens Recommendation, etc.
>
> Hello fellow Nikoners. I'm considering buying a new lens mostly for taking
> portraits, and some macro work. I'm hoping that someone(s) on this list would
> share information on the lenses I'm considering that could help me in my decision.
> In order of preference the following are the ones I'm considering:
>
> Nikon 105mm f2.8 Micro AF D (pricey, and why AF since even with
> my N90 I focus manually for portraints)
> Nikon 105mm f2.? Micro MF (good luck finding one, right?)
> Tokina 100mm f2.8 Macro AF (decent value but need extender for 1:1
> macro reproduction ratio)
> Sigma 90mm f2.8 Macro AF (lowest cost solution, no personal bad
> experience with one other Sigma lens owned)
> Tamaron 35-105mm f2.8 AF (pricey, not sure of reproduction ratio
> for macro)
<SNIP>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Pedro Riveron
> <pedro.pa.riveron@ae.ge.com>
------------------------------
From: Graham Scott <Graham.Scott@src.bae.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 15:34:37 GMT
Subject: Re: 75-300mm zooms
On 20/3/96 Timothy Rogers wrote,
>is there any visible difference between the performance
>of the Nikkor 75-300 and the similarly speced Sigma and Tokina?
I have owned both the Sigma 70-300mm Apo Macro and the 75-300 Nikkor. Optically there is little discernible difference between the two. Mechanically there is a world of difference. Guess which is miles better and worth every extra penny!
To be serious, the reviews which I have read of all these optics generally place the Nikkor above the others at the 200-300mm end, outside of this range there is little to choose between them. If you are after critical sharpness from any of these optics at 300mm you are probably looking at f/11-16. If you are after quality look at the Nikkor 300 f/4 against the Sigma f/4 Apo Macro. If you intend to use the optic infrequently the Sigma might last the distance.
I can see the difference in quality between my Nikkor zoom at 300/5.6 against my Sigma 400/5.6 prime, the Sigma is just discenably better to the critical eye. If Nikon had an AF 400/5.6 I most probably would have bought that instead for the build quality improvement.
Cheers,
Graeme Scott
P.S. I replaced the Sigma zoom with the Nikkor because the Sigma couldn't focus properly on my F90X at the long end of the zoom, the focussing on the Sigma 400/5.6 is a bit ropey too!
------------------------------
End of nikon-digest V1 #354
***************************
####################################################################
# #
####################################################################