I've been offered a pair of mint extension tubes for about half retail and
am considering grabbing them. I mainly want them to do close up vehicle
detail work - badges, small components etc, as well as the odd plants,
insects etc for mucking around/club stuff. Has anybody with these tubes got
any
How about auto composition with creative zones for the experienced
professional who don't want to use the rule of thirds???
;)
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Julian Loke
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 8:58 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECT
> "Neil K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... That sort of makes me wonder if Canon is slowing down on new film
> body development, having reached the EOS 3 and 1v. Already we've seen
> that cameras like the EOS 30/Elan 7 have no real technical
> innovations in them - it's simply a repackaging o
http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/lseries.html
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
>> 1 Distractive Optical Lens
> Most "distractive" feature of this lens be the price.
Ha ha! Or perhaps the rings around specular highlights?
A refractive catadioptic! Distracting donuts. Or is that
doughnuts?
Cheers
Julian Loke
P.S. Check out Canon USA's revamped EF lens website
http://www.us
At 10:23 PM -0400 10/3/01, Julian Loke wrote:
>And with the EOS 1v/EOS 3/EOS 30/EOS 300/EOS 3000 lineup complete,
>what is the next series going to be called?
>EOS 7 is already taken (Japanese version of Elan 7E, EOS 30)
That sort of makes me wonder if Canon is slowing down on new film
body de
> 1 Distractive Optical Lens
Most "distractive" feature of this lens be the price.
Lars
--
Lars Michael[EMAIL PROTECTED]
87GT http://www.larsmichael.com/
*
***
***
* For list in
> "Bob Sull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know this has been posted many times but I can't find it.
> Will someone please tell me where the archives are?
Hi Bob,
When you find out, let me know :-) WJM is working on majordomo2
which should start producing its own archive.
Listquest in Nova Sco
Tom DelRosario wrote:
> I thought that L series meant a lens was built better and more expensive. In
>looking at a catalog, it appears that all the TS-E models are the same price, yet
>only one of them is L. It also appears that the 100-300/4.5-5.6 is roughly the same
>price as the 100-300/5
On Wed, 03 Oct 2001 17:32:04 -0700 "Tom DelRosario"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I thought that L series meant a lens was built better and more
> expensive. In looking at a catalog, it appears that all the TS-E
> models are the same price, yet only one of them is L. It also
> appears that t
I know this has been posted many times but I can't find it.
Will someone please tell me where the archives are?
TIA,
Bob
--
//
( 0 0 )
-73 de Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Everybody has a photographic memory. Some just don't have any film.
*
***
**
I thought that L series meant a lens was built better and more expensive. In looking
at a catalog, it appears that all the TS-E models are the same price, yet only one of
them is L. It also appears that the 100-300/4.5-5.6 is roughly the same price as the
100-300/5.6, but only one of the is L
"F. Craig Callahan" wrote:
> is it the case that the angle of view of a 90mm lens in 35 mm format will necessarily
> be roughly the same as the angle of view of that lens's 4x5 equivalent (equivalent in
> terms of magnification and depth compression/exaggeration)?
Ah . . . a quick consultation
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Would this increase the effective guide number of the flash,
> since the flash is "condensed" onto a smaller area (better:
> angle of view)?
Yes, the GN number decreases as the coverage increases. Note that the
fash head zoom at discret steps, though.
Robert
Daniel ROCHA wrote:
I have tested my system against Nimda & Sircam virus and found nothing...
--
Daniel,
I am told that one of the holes with this virus is Internet Explorer.
So if you are running 5.0 or 5.5 Service Pack 1 go t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Caveat: Due to design constraints (and to save costs),
> lenses are usually designed for a specific film format
> (size of image circle). I do not know of any lens designed
> for 135 format which will fully cover the 4x5 film format.
That's kind of what I'm getting
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Daniel, thanks to you and Lars for the url, but I can't see that web
> page, I don't know if the guilty is Netscape, but I can only see the
> background of the web. When I try to see it there is a transfer of
> data, it takes a little time, and if a look on "Page sour
> Yes, it does use only a part of the lens' image circle. Therefore, you
> should be able to set the flash at 'focal length of lens' * multiplier
> without cutting the flash off. If you saw the whole 24x36mm you would
> see the cut-off but since the sensor is smaller you want see it. My
> guess.
--- "F. Craig Callahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But is there really a focal length multiplier in effect? Isn't it
> just that the
> digital sensor uses a smaller portion of the image circle presented
> by a lens,
Yes, it does use only a part of the lens' image circle. Therefore, you
should
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Now that Canon has introduced the 1D and 4 MP cameras like the G2 and S40,
>is there any hope/prospect for an "amateur" (@ $1,000) digital EOS SLR? I'd
>sure like something digital to hang my EOS lenses that is more reasonably
>priced than the D30.
wait next year :)
<
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tim,
>
> > Why not try setting your flash to 80mm manually, and see what the result is?
>
> This is an excellent suggestion. Will try as soon as I get
> to it. And a trick to remember. Manually setting the
> (apparent) focal length to save battery power.
>
> I moun
Now that Canon has introduced the 1D and 4 MP cameras like the G2 and S40, is there
any hope/prospect for an "amateur" (@ $1,000) digital EOS SLR? I'd sure like something
digital to hang my EOS lenses that is more reasonably priced than the D30.
*
***
**
From: John M. Lovda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I am beginning to see loads of 70-200/2.8 zooms on ebay; some even stating
> they are getting the IS version. No one's dumping 17-35mm's yet.
It's perhaps to early
After all, the 70-200 IS is out, and not the 16-35 !
<°+°> PhOTo <°+°> GrAPhiSMe <°+°>
Po
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Daniel, thanks to you and Lars for the url, but I can't see that web
> page, I don't know if the guilty is Netscape, but I can only see the
> background of the web. When I try to see it there is a transfer of
> data, it takes a little time, and if a look on "Page source
Tim,
> Why not try setting your flash to 80mm manually, and see what the result is?
This is an excellent suggestion. Will try as soon as I get
to it. And a trick to remember. Manually setting the
(apparent) focal length to save battery power.
I mounted the 28-70 on the D30 last night along w
Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Sull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EOS Re: Gray Market Canon
> I was told by two Canon reps that a "gray" item MAY go back to Japan. The
> determining factor, according to the reps, is how busy the Canon techs
are.
>
> Bob
>
What b
I've been offered a 540EZ for half the price of a new 550EX, and naturally I'm
interested. But I have been told the 540EZ has a tendency to give gross overexposure
when used on the EOS 3. Can anyone confirm this, or is this just a case of operator
error?
Snorre
*
***
I find it interesting that dealers like B&H are not running specials or have
lowered their price on the 17-35mm L lens in anticipation of the 16-35mm. Also,
rebates usually are a traditional sign of a factory phase out yet the "new" Canon
rebate program only puts a measly $50 rebate on a $1200 le
28 matches
Mail list logo
