NIKON IS A TAMRON? > Why do you own Nikon? Surely it's not just to pay more money > for a lens that is made by Tamron? In part, I own Nikon because > of the lenses -- because I can expect consistancy from Nikkor > to Nikkor in terms of colour and contrast. > Now, the one thing that hasn't been proposed is that the Tamron > lens has Nikon glass! ... possible? Maybe. I used to work in a factory that made dry dog food. Tyey had bags from all different manufacturers, and they would assembled certain amounts of each food item in the bags. Some of the dog foods out there are exactly the same except one has more little red pieces and another has more little brown pieces. But the price is waaaay different. Like I said I worked there so I know it to be fact. I bet the same could be said for designer jeans and the designs on the pockets. Did you know that the Leica R series bodies, like R3, R4, R5, were made by Minolta? Yup, that's right! Does it make the camera any less leica and any more Minolta? Does it bring down Leica and bring up Minolta? To some it does. Some glass is as every bit as good as the Nikon glass, but a lens is more than glass. Can it stand up to heat and cold, will the CPU in the lens be the SAME in off brand lenses as in Nikon's? Will the software be exactly the same? Will it be backward compatible, a problem off brand lens makers have with C gear? When you say the Nikon is a rebadged Tamron, does it bring up Tamron and take down Nikon? Well walk into a Nikon service center with a Tamron and see how far you get. Put your Nikon and Tamron on www.ebay.com for sale and see if the Tamron gets near what the Nikon does. Even if the glass was exactly the same, consider the software, the mount, the lens markings, the warranty, the service, the compatibility, the equity. ----------------------------- FLASH DURATIONS >> Flash Intensity Flash duration >> >> 1 1/60s >> 1/2 1/125s >> 1/4 1/250s >> 1/8 1/500s >> 1/16 1/1000s >> 1/32 1/2000s >> 1/64 1/4000s >> >> >>Anything wrong? > >Yes. This would mean that if you were using more than 1/4 power you could synch >at any speed. Since the flash would be on for 1/250 of a second or longer, it >would be on for the entire duration of the exposure, and so we would not have >synch problems at high speeds. But we do. > >Flash durations are realy, realy short - way shorter than any shutter speed. >Maybe 1/100,000 or so. Actually the fully manual flash is about 1/1000th. Most flash units do not go any lower power than 1/25,000th. Some will hit 1/50,000th and they are used to stop bullets in flight and the like. 1/100,000 is a very fast flash and while I have no doubt they are out there, you will not find that on an everyday flash unit. lso once you start gettig into 1/25,000th, if there is no other light, then you have to consider reciprocity failure. Robert in Redlands
