Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Unsharp mask was Re: filmscanners: Getting started question



At 01:10 PM 7/15/01 -0400, you wrote:
>
>> That's not being a Luddite, that's being a cheap bastard.
>
>I think they are not mutually exclusive ;-)
>
>> As with your Leafscan, I've compared the output of this
>> "lense" to my newer and more expensive zooms, and found
>> the latter lacking by comparison.  I am content to give
>> up auto-focus for the sake of better images.
>
>I did not know that zoom was an auto-focus!  Speaks even more highly for the
>amazing results you obtained from it.

No, I believe you misunderstood, or I was unclear.
That "Access" zoom is manual focus.  But it is 
a much better lens, I believe, than either of 
my newer, auto-focus Nikkor zooms.  To be honest, 
neither of the Nikkor zooms can be called 
"professional grade."


>I do not, and have never, used autofocus.  Though, I have started to use the
>automatic shutter speed modes on my Hasselblad...it's good for 1/12th of a
>stop...now whether I'll get better results, is another question...but I do
>like having the meter in the body.


Autofocus on the 8008 is a mixed bag, and I generally 
don't bother with it.  Auto-exposure is another matter. 
I don't use it on my Nikon FE, but I do often use it 
on the 8008, which gives the desired results about 90% 
of the time -- at least with C41 films.  Matrix metering 
really works well, but requires the newer Nikkors.


rafe b.





 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.