Re: stop-down
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 13:29:22 +0100 From: "Chris Utech" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: stop-down [v04.n354/2] Message: 2 Hi ! I have an F2 (Photomic S) and a 500mm reflex lens, which means that I have to use stop-down metering. Can anyone enlighten me about the term stop-down metering? Does it just mean that you actually calculate the right shutter speed when the meter is set at the wrong f-stop? Or did I miss some snazzy feature enabling me to stop-down? No, stop down metering means that the lens is stopped down to the taking aperature prior to letting the camera compute the correct shutter speed. Why do you ask this question with respect to a lens which has a fixed aperature? Jim
Re: PK-13 extension ring
I said: Nope, you need the PN-11 to get to 1:1 with this lens. It has a 55mm extension. That information was incorrect. The 105mm MF lens requires the PN-11 to get to 1:1. If the PK-13 has 27.5 mm of extension, then it will be required to get the 55mm lens to 1:1. Jim
Re: PK-13 extension ring
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 16:01:31 +0200 From: Marc Femenia [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PK-13 extension ring [v04.n345/8] Message: 8 Hello everybody! I have been offered the possibility of buying a 55/2.8 micro with a PK-13 extension ring. I think that with this combo a ratio of 1:1 reproduction can be obtained. Nope, you need the PN-11 to get to 1:1 with this lens. It has a 55mm extension. I am not very much into macro photography, but I think I could begin with this combo. My question is the following: Is it possible to use this extension ring in other lenses?, in which lenses works best (i.e. wide-angles, teles...)?, Any extension tube can be used with any lens. All it is is a spacer. I haven't used mine with wide-angle lenses. Is it difficult to use ?, i.e. does the focusing and metering differ very much from shooting without extension ring? Focusing is different. TTL exposure is not affected. I have at present the following lenses: 24/2.0; 35-70/3.5; 50-135/3.5. From the little I know, the smallest focal length of the lens gives a stronger macro effect. Would that mean that with the 24/2.0 I would get greater magnification than with the 55 micro?, or may be the lens has to be one of these "micros"? Look at the instruction sheet that came with the lens to see how big you can get. The 50-135 has a "macro" function would that be enough? Not unless you are satisfied with a 1:4 size. Jim
Re: Blue Skies and filter stacking
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 17:21:17 +0530 From: "Amarendra N Kolipakam" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Blue Skies and filter stacking [v04.n345/3] Message: 3 snip Now, the main subject of the post: I was shooting some landscapes with my N70 + 35-80 4-5.6 AF-D setup a while ago and saw that the whole picture exposed perfectly, but the skies got washed out. The lens already had a 1A Quantaray filter on it. After some thought, I went and got a Marumi UV filter, and used it instead of the 1A. The skies are still washed out. I also took some shots with the UV filter stacked on top of the 1A. Still, the skies are not as good as I want them. So, # Which is better? 1A or UV? The difference is hard to tell. # Can they be stacked? Yes # Is a polarizer the only answer? As far as I know, yes. It will definitely darken blue skies, and the effect is visible in the viewfinder. # Does the AF and metering system of N70 work well only with a circular polarizer? Nikon says so, and I see little reason to argue with them about this issue. # I don't see filters made by Nikon on their websites or at BH. Does Nikon recommend any filters? You haven't looked carefully at the BH web. Nikon does in fact sell filters. # Is the lens I use not good enough to produce super blue skies? Of course. # Is it more difficult to get blue skies near the equator than away from it (due to the angle of sunrays etc) ? Don't know. I don't live near the equator. Jim
Re: New AF-S 400/4.5
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 15:31:51 +0200 From: Walter Freiberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: New AF-S 400/4.5 ??? [v04.n344/11] Message: 11 Hi all I heard that Moose Peterson should have claimed in his newsletter, that Nikon were about to introduce a new 400/4.5 AF-S lens that weighs only slightly more than 1000g (37 oz). Is there anything true about this rumour? Especially: (1) Is it true that Moose P. claimed this in his newsletter? and (2) if so, where did he get this information from? Just curious Walter The person who told you that didn't read the entire newsletter in which Moose clearly stated that the announcement was an April Fools day joke. It was posted on April 1 Jim
Re: Dirt seen thru the view finder on an F5 [v04.n305/19]
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 17:45:21 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Nicholson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Dirt seen thru the view finder on an F5 [v04.n305/19] Message: 19 In general what can people do to maintain viewing clarify on an F5. Same as any other SLR. You clean the screen and the mirror. I'm told it's unwise to clean the mirror or the screen but the Nikon rapair place in my area said just the opposite. I'm willing to bet that the mirror on the F5 can take a lot of punishment. If it will, it is the only SLR like that that I have ever seen. Is compressed air appropriate for an F5? Yes Sending cameras to Nikon is out of the question. And why would you even consider this? This is a user function. I seldom find dirt on the mirror, but it is quite common to find things on the screens. Jim
Re:Even More Questions Re TC 14B
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 14:55:38 -0600 From: "Stan Lipnowski" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:Even More Questions Re TC 14B [v04.n287/13] Message: 13 Using the 300 F4, TC 14B and an F70 my display blinks F - -. This is on A, S, P, and M. What is the reasoning for this ith the TC 14 B? TIA Stan The TC14B converts all lenses to AI-S. What you see is the normal documented behaviour of your camera with an AI-S lens attached. Jim
Re: some manual focus lens questions [v04.n235/25]
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 22:07:14 -0800 From: Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: some manual focus lens questions [v04.n235/25] Message: 25 I have been shopping for the following prime lenses and I'd appreciate if someone would describe the _optical_ differences, if any, between the following lenses: 24/2.8 AIS vs. AF 24/2.8D None 28/2.8 AIS vs. AF 28/2.8D 35/2 AIS vs. AF 35/2D Don't know Which of these lenses, other than the 24/2.8D, have Close Range Correction? Perhaps the Af 28/2.8D Is the 28/2 manual focus (AIS?) sharper than the 28/2.8? (either the AF-D or the AIS?) Don't know, but doubtful Also, why are many MF Nikkors more expensive than brand new AF-D Nikkors? Like I saw a used 24/2.8 AIS for $380 where the new one goes for $290 at BH. Collectibles? The MF lenses feel better when you focus them. The MF lenses are all metal; many of the AF lenses aren't. Jim
Re: V4.216/23: flimsy flash feet on NIKON flash etc.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 11:30:07 +1100 From: Tony Balm [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: V4.216/23: flimsy flash feet on NIKON flash etc. [v04.n218/25] Message: 25 It's not a bad idea to have a weak point to break rather than damage the camera, this I can accept. What I have trouble accepting is that you can't buy a new flash foot or other parts for a SB24 others because they are older than 6 or 10 years for which parts must be made available. My beef - a $20.00 flash foot that CANT be purchased turns into a $600 - 700.00 new flash. Where is the economy in that? If a flash or other item has designed OR found weak points then there needs to be a much better arrangement for spare parts not just by Nikon but rather the entire industry. To all the people with equipment over the 6 - 10 years, be warned, parts are not guaranteed. The flash that is most famous for broken feet is the Vivitar 283. In fact a cottage industry has been created for the sole purpose of supplying replacement feet. (My 283 never suffered a broken foot though). The 6 - 10 year parts availability problem though is very real and not just for feet. Maybe some interprising souls will setup manufacturing replacement feet. Jim
Re: Circular Polarizing Filter for F3? [v04.n202/3]
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:24:19 +0100 From: "Thomas Buro" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Circular Polarizing Filter for F3? [v04.n202/3] Message: 3 Title says it all: Does the F3 require a circular Polarizing Filter for correct exposure? No AF Cameras need it for correct focus. Some cameras which measure TTL through the mirror (as the F3) could get into problems. Linear Filters are cheaper, but circular ones can be used on any camera. (Did Nikon produce linear filters?) Thomas I have never had a problem with exposure on my F3 while using linear polarisers. I don't know whether Nikon produced linear filters or not. I suppose that they did. Jim
Re: Good Lense for Portraits? [v04.n200/30]
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:44:42 -0500 From: MIKE MOORE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Good Lense for Portraits? [v04.n200/30] Message: 30 I'm considering buying a 105mm 2.8 D AF Micro-Nikkor for portraits. I'll be coupling it to a N70. Good choice? I shoot mostly BW if it matters. Also anyone know if there is an abundance of these lenses in good shape used? Thanks, Mike Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] It is great for portraits. However, at normal distances it isn't sharper than the AIS 105 f2.5. Sorry, don't believe there are many of these lenses available on the used market. You could try Del's for example. Jim
Re: Commnets requested on Nikor 300mm f4 EDIF [v04.n198/31]
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 22:56:08 -0500 From: Mike Rohde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Commnets requested on Nikor 300mm f4 EDIF [v04.n198/31] Message: 31 Looking to buy a 300mm lense. Can't afford the f2.8 nikors. Was wondering what everyone thought of the 300mm f4 nikor. When using in day light shooting wild life what film speed (ISO) do most folks use. My 300mm f4 is very sharp and (unlike the other things) is light enough that I can hand hold the camera + lens in reasonably good light. During the daytime, I use Velvia. In the late afternoon (which is when I find the most interesting shots) I use EPL. Jim
Re: How to take Sepia Photos?
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 22:09:46 -0800 From: Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How to take Sepia Photos?? [v04.n183/20] Message: 20 I know this isn't nikon specific but, I know of no better place to ask. I am going to be doing a photo shoot for a friends parents and they want some of the pictures to be Sepia colored, but I have no idea how to do this. My first idea was to use a Sepia Filter, but wouldn't that take away the white color, making everything brown? Is Sepia done in the printing process? or an accessory to the lens? Any information is greatly appreciated. Thanks in Advance Jason You obtain sepia prints by applying a sepia toner to black and white prints. Numerous books on black and white printing describe the process in great detail. Jim
Re: Particle of dust in my N90s
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:50:47 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cande V Ananth) Subject: Particle of dust in my N90s [v04.n166/15] Message: 15 Folks: I own an N90s, and I just noticed that there is a small black particle (perhaps dust) when I look through the view finder. Admittedly, this does not harm my pictures, but its bothering me. I looked on the mirror (didn't touch or attempt to clean the mirror), the lens, and the view finder, but am unable to locate the dust particle. I'd appreciate any pointers as to how I can clean this particle. Thanks. Cande Ananth Perhaps it is stuck to the screen. Screens are removable if you have the correct tool. Anyway, take the screen out. Look on it and on the prism. Clean the screen with lens cleaner. If you are careful, you can clean the mirror with an air blower (or can of compressed air). I can certify from experience that you don't ever touch the screen! Jim
Re: 35/2 and 50/1.8 vs 35-80 for sharpness
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 13:13:18 PST From: Michael Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 35/2 and 50/1.8 vs 35-80 for sharpness [v04.n160/15] Message: 15 Hi folks, I bought a 35/2.0 and a 50/1.8 recently. They're both great lenses to use and I'm growing to love them already. However, I decided to do a simple test on them to compare their sharpness against a 35-80/4.0-5.6 zoom. I was expecting the primes to be noticeably sharper. I placed an open dictionary on a chair. The lenses were mounted on an N2020 (F501), all set at f/8 aperture. I manually focussed for each shot (using the electronic rangefinder of the N2020 as an aid) and used an SB-26 bounced off the ceiling for lighting, as it was indoors at night. The film was Fuji Superia Reala ISO 100. I got 4x6 prints and examined them under a Peak 10x Loupe. This is an effective 42x enlargement of the negative. To my amazement, I could detect no real difference in sharpness between the primes and the zoom. The 50mm prime seemed a tiny bit sharper than the zoom set to 50mm and the zoom set to 35mm seemed a tiny bit sharper than the 35mm prime! Note that the zoom had a slight disadvantage, as its max aperture is f/4.0 and so was harder to focus than the primes. I was both amazed and disappointed (for my primes; it has given me new faith in my 35-80mm zoom). Do these results make sense? Has technology brought zooms to the point where they're not really less sharp than (expensive) primes? I know the primes are faster and allow low-light photography, but using sharpness as the only criterion, is there any real difference anymore? Anybody care to comment. While there may not be that much difference between the lenses you mentioned, this test does not shed much light. Your test does not evaluate just the lenses. Instead, it evaluates the lenses, the film, the enlarger lens, and the paper. Repeat your test with slide film that is known for its high resolution. My choices would be Velvia or K25. If you must use print film, get something like the ultra high resolution black and white film. Only look at the negatives. Jim
Re: Metal Hood for 50/1.8 AIS [v04.n157/21]
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 15:14:15 +0100 From: "Thomas Buro" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Metal Hood for 50/1.8 AIS [v04.n157/21] Message: 21 On a website I found that you should use the HR-2 for the 50mmAF1.8, and 50AIS1.2 (orHS-9) or the HR-1 (orHS12) for the 50mmAIS1.4. The website is www.zaiko.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~walter/nikon.html I guess HR is rubber and HS is steel. So you should search for the HS-9 or 12 It is "R" for rubber, but it is "S" for snap on. The metal hoods are most likely aluminum. Perversely, the "N" hoods are screw in type. I have used an HR-1 with the 50mm f1.4 for quite some time. One should not rely on a hood as a protection against damage regardless of its type. Jim
Re: PK-3 on N90s [v04.n151/1]
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:51:27 +1300 (NZDT) From: "Lars E. Anderson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PK-3 on N90s [v04.n151/1] Message: 1 The N90s manual says that the PK-3 ring cannot be used on the N90s. Why not? Will it cause damage? Can the PK-3 need to be modified to fit? Ths PK3 is a non-AI accessory. You cannot mount it to the N90S without (potentially) causing damage to the camera, the extension tube, or both.. It might be possible to modify it (make it AI'd). You must also consider whether the PK3 is compatible with AI lenses (all AF lenses are also AI). If it is not, then both sides of the PK3 need to be modified. Frankly, I would not bother with this old piece of gear. Just buy its replacement the PK13. Jim
Re: the uses of the F5/F100 focus system
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 22:12:37 +0800 From: miguel n nacianceno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: the uses of the F5/F100 focus system [v04.n152/25] Message: 25 Dear guys, I'm a little curious here. I use an F90x and an FM2n and I've never had the chance to use an F5 (much more the new F100). I do know its autofocus system is more advance, having Dynamic AF, selectable AF areas, AF sensors and the like. Being inexperienced as I am, and only getting to read some Nikon catalogues, I get the impression that all these AF features make these cameras real suitable for sports, wildlife and other fast action photography. Are these AF features useful for, lets say, landscape, architectural, or studio photography? Enlighten me please. Thanks guys! Here is my 2 cents worth. The F5 and F100 focus faster than an N90s. They also have a more advanced AF system because they allow use of more than one focus point. For the uses you mentioned, AF speed is not important at all. It could be that more than one focus point would make a difference in utility of the camera. However, I haven't seen anyone make that point. With respect to wild life photography, the AF speed of the N90S is adequate. I read on Moose Peterson's web site that he considers the multiple AF focus point capability of the F5 essential to successful photography. So, you might consider switching to either the F5 or the F100 because they feature multiple AF focus points. As for me, I don't intend to switch anytime soon. I haven't exhausted the capability of the N90S yet. Jim
Re: sharpness: Nikkor lens versus film [v04.n150/14]
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 12:01:33 - From: "John Partis" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: sharpness: Nikkor lens versus film [v04.n150/14] Message: 14 Anyone any thoughts on comparison of lens sharpness versus film? What I mean is - if I have a 55mm microNikkor (renowned for its sharpness, and ignoring close focusing advantage) and use 800ASA film -should I bother about the lens quality? Why not use a lesser 50mm lens (e.g. Series E)? This is hard to analyze since the film makers don't advertise film resolution anymore, and the camera manufacturers never have. Once upon a time I subscribed to Modern Photography which published lens tests that showed resolution figures. It was a rare lens indeed which could resolve finer than 70 lines per mm. Once upon a time, Kodak published film resolution values. The best films (not ASA800) could resolve 125 lines per mm. So, I conclude that lens sharpness is still very important. If these conditions are still true, then lens sharpness is extremely important. Having said all that, I believe you will find that the mentioned lens is not sharper than the others at normal distances. These macro lenses are far superior though for extreme closeup shots. Jim
Re: how 'bout these lenses? [v04.n150/17]
Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 21:02:56 +0800 From: miguel n nacianceno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: how 'bout these lenses? [v04.n150/17] Message: 17 Hey guys, My dad was kind enough to lend/give me some of his lenses. I haven't had the time to do some enlargement comparison so I'd like really to hear your comments and feedback. The two lenses I have are the: AF Nikkor 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF Nikkor 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 They aren't D lenses btw. Also, a few questions: What does the limit/full switch on the 75-300 lens mean/do? And does the orange M on the 35-105 mean macro? If so, how does it fare in macro work? You use the limit/full switch to keep the AF motor from trying distances that you know are not appropriate. For example, you are shooting elk outdoors. You had better be some distance from them else you won't live very long. In this case, it makes no sense to allow the camera to cycle all the way to the very closest setting. You can prevent this by suitable control of the switch. I don't own the 35-105, but if it works like many of the others, this is indeed the macro switch. None of these lenses is as sharp as a dedicated lens nor will they focus as close. These lenses should instead be called close focusing, because such a name would be more correct. Jim
Re: Nikon 75-300 [v04.n143/23] [v04.n146/31]
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:50:01 PST From: Michael Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Nikon 75-300 [v04.n143/23] [v04.n146/31] Message: 31 snip I'm an amateur without much experience, but I have the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO macro lens and I love it. I find it every bit as sharp as, say, the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D for 4x6 prints. Folks, comparing lenses based on 4x6 prints. Almost any 35mm camera will yield very good 4x6 prints. Compare these lenses using either slide film or 8x10 or larger prints. These separate the good lenses from the excellent lenses. Jim
Re: Longer exposure in the A mode on F3. [v04.n145/4]
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 10:49:12 +0600 From: "Anil Advani" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Longer exposure in the A mode on F3. [v04.n145/4] Message: 4 The F3 CANNOT be set to any exposure longer than 8 seconds - regardless if in "A" or "M" mode! The only way to shoot longer exposures than 8 seconds [for the F3] is to use the "B" [bulb] setting and physically hold down the shutter release button, with your finger or with a cable release, for as long an exposure you need. Of course, you can't set the shutter time at more than 8 seconds. And, of course, you can take as much time as you wish with the B setting. However, when I last shot some photos using nothing more than moonlight, if the time was 8 seconds or less, it must have been the longest 8 seconds in history. It seemed more like 30 seconds. I understood that the F3 worked as you described, but my experience makes me think that mine can set the shutter time at much longer than 8. Sorry, I didn't look at the LCD because the light was too low. Jim
Re: Troubleshooting my FG [v04.n142/2]
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 09:56:07 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Troubleshooting my FG [v04.n142/2] Message: 2 snip I am having some trouble with my Nikon FG and was hoping someone here could help me identify it. The problem has been present for a few years but recently has started to happen more often. I got so tired of having (relatively speaking) good photos ruined that I finally saved up my quarters, went out and bought a N50. Nice camera for my level needs. Sure, I had a good excuse to upgrade but I still like my FG. Let me try to describe the problem. Typically on a 4X6 photo I randomly get two orange colored bands running vertically through the photo. The first band, starting about three quarters of an inch from the left side of the photo, is pretty wide (about an inch and a half) and fades out on either side. The second band, which is always to the right of the wide band, about an inch and a quarter away, is thinner (about an eighth of an inch thick) and fades to the left side but has an abrupt ending on it's right side. This sounds like a shutter problem. If the shutter curtains move sideways, the one or the other of them is dragging. snip Some other information that may be helpful is I've noticed the problem happens mostly when I am NOT using the dedicated flash (SB-15). The problem crops up about 20% of the time without the flash and about 3% of the time when I am using the flash. Again, it is a random problem. This is further indication of a shutter problem. snip Anyway, what I'm trying to do is decide whether I should invest in getting the FG fixed and have two cameras or if I should just stick with my new N50. If it's possible, and not too expensive, I'd like to have the FG repaired. You may be shocked to find out how much it will cost. Most of the cameras are not designed to be easily repairable. Plus, if I am correct, parts may be hard to find because the FG has been discontinued for quite some time. Alas, parts get hard to find just when they are needed the most. I would consign the FG to camera heaven. Jim
Re: Longer exposure in the A mode on F3. [v04.n140/17]
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 12:48:04 +0800 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Longer exposure in the A mode on F3. [v04.n140/17] Dear All: I just bought a used F3, and tried it yesterday. When I set exposure in the A mode, I found that the shutter could not close if the exposure time was longer than 8 seconds. Does anyone have this experience? Is it within the spec or I need to have it repaired? Any advice will be appreciated. I own two F3's and neither shows this problem. In fact, it seems to me that the automatic exposure control will set the shutter speed at far longer than just 8 seconds. It has been some time since I have shot any moon photos though. Jim
Re: Flash advice, please [v04.n140/19]
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 23:24:00 -0600 (CST) From: Coleman Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Flash advice, please [v04.n140/19] I have recently asked the list advice on the N90s and also several different lenses. I have received numerous replies and some great advice. Many thanks to all of you who have been so kind to share their thoughts. I neglected to ask about strobes. I am a serious amateur, using an EL and most of the time a 43-86 lens. Most of the flash pictures I take are at receptions or parties, of people. I have been using a Vivitar 285. Now that my eyes are older (as if I'm not) I am moving to an N90s and probably a 24-120 D lens for starters. I assume that the SB 28 strobe is the best choice. If anyone has any thoughts on flash units I would appreciate hearing from you, and you can email me privately at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Coleman Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wharton, Texas Sorry, "best choice" is highly subjective. Only you can decide that. In my case, I chose the SB27. However, I can see where other people would prefer the SB28. Either one offers more capability than the 285 because they will give you TTL exposure control. FYI, I used a 283 for more than 20 years. I replaced it with an SB16 for my F3 and never looked back. Jim
Re: Ever tried to fix a broken FM meter?
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 10:48:23 +0100 From: Eertmans Nicolas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Ever tried to fix a broken FM meter? [3] Hi, Last week, I sent my FM for repair. After a fall, the meter ceased to function. Well, the camera is already back but not fixed... parts are not available anymore (at least that's what Nikon says). It is now a 100% mechanical camera ;-) I'willing to have a look inside to see if I can't help myself... Anybody ever done that? I haven't tried fixing my own cameras. It is very frustrating that parts for discontinued cameras are no longer available just when they need them. My dead Canon FT is just one example. Parts for the shutter aren't available (and haven't been for at least 10 years). Next question: Once you get inside, how will you know which parts are needed? Also, who will sell you any (if there are any anywhere)? Assuming you know which parts are needed, and you can find them, how will know that the fixed meter is calibrated correctly? It would be cheaper and more reliable to buy a hand held meter. Jim
Re: F3HighPoint specs or features?
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 14:45:43 GMT From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (N H) Subject: F3HighPoint specs or features? [16] I'm considering swapping my Nikkormat FS and 8008s for a single camera and am thinking a F3Highpoint is what I need. Where can I find a spec sheet or general features of the F3. BH's web site is a good place. Your N8008s has a high eyepoint finder. Jim
