JA> Since my once brilliant local repair shop has been bought out by the jokers
JA> from Vancouver, I don't trust them any longer. Also, won't such a retrofit
JA> need both the focusing and light meter recalibrating?
JA> James
Yes, it will need both recalibrating. It's worth the effort though,
I
Good lens ... and a very charming girl!
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 2:08 PM
Subject: Sleeper Lens / another 35mm 2450 scan
> Yesterday I recieved in the mail another interesting M42 lens,
> the
he jokers
from Vancouver, I don't trust them any longer. Also, won't such a retrofit
need both the focusing and light meter recalibrating?
James
- Original Message -
From: "Frantisek Vlcek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 20
JA> lenses, which helps a lot. Although the focusing screens on the ME, MES,
JA> Program Plus, Nikon Photomic FTn, KR-10 and XR-X 2000 are way better than
JA> the Spotmatics, I don't know how my eyesight effects focusing with a
JA> split-screens. Does anyone know how the split-screen technique w
>I am delighted with the 2450 35mm results except it
>takes too damn long to scan 35mm @ 2400 ppi ( 10 minutes).
>How long do typical dedicated 35mm film scanners take to scan
>at full resolution I may buy one just for the speed
>if nothing else.
>JCO
My system (P3-700 512MB, SCSI-II,
Hi JC,
Nice shot, my friend has a Nikon Coolpix scanner, and I watched him scan in
negs at HR in around 30 Seconds. I'm sure speed will depend on how good your
PC is! My son has a 1.6GHz Athlon XP with 500MB SD-RAM. He scans photos way
faster than I can, with my Pentium MMX 200 with 64MB Fast Pag
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 08:08:34 -0400, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> http://jcoconnell.com/temp/GIRLPHONEFNL1000.jpg
Need a roommate? :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
file
for printing, I didnt really didnt prepare it for web
properly...
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: wendy beard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 9:40 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sleeper Lens / another 35mm 2450 scan
; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sleeper Lens / another 35mm 2450 scan
>
>
>
> It takes me 1 minute with the HP S20.
>
> How long does it take you to scan MF images? I'm planning on purchasing a
> 2450, but 10 minutes for a 35mm portion sounds awfully long.
>
>
JCO wrote:
>Yesterday I recieved in the mail another interesting M42 lens,
>the Vivitar 200mm F3.5 from the middle 70's. I "risked" a
>whopping $35 for it MINT on ebay. It's got at least 3 layer
>coatings which aint too bad for a tele design.
>This lens is excellent quality. On the large scan you
It takes me 1 minute with the HP S20.
How long does it take you to scan MF images? I'm planning on purchasing a
2450, but 10 minutes for a 35mm portion sounds awfully long.
Jeff.
>
> I am delighted with the 2450 35mm results except it
> takes too damn long to scan 35mm @ 2400 ppi ( 10 minutes)
11 matches
Mail list logo
