ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












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

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

RE: filmscanners: NIKON LS 4000 AND D1X



Olympus has made a 21/2 since the '80s.  Just don't ask me what digital 
body will take it.

Agreed on the general problem of digital & short lenses.  Now where's that 
10-20 megapixel 36x24 CCD that has 90+ deg. angle of acceptance, is housed 
in a 35mm spool, can be loaded into most-any 35mm camera, has great storage 
& battery life and costs less than $1,000???  Oops, dreaming again....
BobG

At 10:27 AM 9/17/2001, you wrote:
>As a people and street photographer, I'm somewhat less than 
>enthusiastic.  I live in the 24 to 50mm range.  To get the equivalent of 
>my 28/2.0 lens I'd need a 20/2.0 - anyone know where I can find one?  I'll 
>look at digital cameras when they have full-size sensors, and not a moment 
>before.
>
>Until then, Provia 400F and an LS-4000 rule.
>
>Paul
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Pat Perez [mailto:patdperez@yahoo.com]
>Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 8:06 AM
>To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: NIKON LS 4000 AND D1X
>
>
>Keep in mind that just because a sensor is smaller
>than 24x36mm doesn't make your lenses obsolete. It
>makes them telephoto, and comparatively high speed at
>that. The 200 f2.8 might end up a 300 2.8, which can
>costs thousands of dollars. It is all in how one lloks
>at it. If I were a sports or nature photographer, I
>think I'd be in hog heaven with the magnification
>factor.
>
>
>Pat
>
>--- Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr>
>wrote:
> > John writes:
> >
> > > The REAL point of getting a 24x36 chip is to
> > > make your 35mm lenses be what they're supposed
> > > to be. Not some inbetween angle of view as the
> > > digital cameras of today are.
> >
> > Yes, and until I see that chip, I don't have much
> > motivation to move to digital.
> > Not when it makes all my existing lenses obsolete.
> >
> > Besides, a surface that large would allow for
> > extraordinarily high resolution
> > with very low noise.
> >
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?
>Donate cash, emergency relief information
>http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.