NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/photo/22546

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-25 | 5.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!csri.toronto.edu!acs
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: [e-mail] (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <    <[e-mail]>> <    <[e-mail]>> <    <[e-mail]>> <[e-mail]> <1992Dec23 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: 25 Dec 92 08:26:03 GMT
Lines: 115

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Norman Diamond) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:
>>1. SB-25 FLASH:  1.1) FP sync?
>>In the F-90 brochure, it shows the LCD display as "[M][FP]".  The
>>accompanying paragraph finishes with "You choose from two levels of
>>flash output.".  I cannot help but think that FP sync is only available
>>in MANUAL MODE!
>>SO!  Someone please, please, please tell me that it works with TTL!

>How can it possibly do so?  Sure you could integrate over all the light
>received TTL, as the slit in the shutter exposes part of the film.  Do you
>then want to quench the flash and expose the rest of the film without flash?

With those "Monitor Preflashes" it should be possible to calculate all
of the exposure information at that time and set the flash's power
output accordingly.  (Canon had "Flash Exposure Lock" with the T-90
that did something like this for spotmetering.  No EOS body has it.  So
even Canon isn't beyond idiocy sometimes!)

However, my point still stands that manual FP sync is hardly a generally
useful feature.

>>1.2) Red Eye reduction?  You shouldn't need it for a bounce unit.  I'd like
>>to hear how useful it really is.

>You don't need it in bounce mode.  However, the head does fold down far enough
>to allow non-bounce usage too.  (Oh, yeah! :-)

Silly boy! :-)
I wanted to know how useful it was even for direct flash!  The head,
being far off the lens axis, should rarely produce red eye.  But, I'm
still open to reports on its effectiveness (for people who do find that
they get a lot of red eye in their shots, even with an SB-24, say).

>>2. SHARP ELECTRONIC ORGANIZER:  Looks like a neat gizmo for unattended
>>shooting.  But would *you* leave an N90 lying around?

>That depends.  It wouldn't be wise to leave it lying around my apartment
>(from which a burglar stole 100,000 yen) but it might be safe in a lab
>recording experiments or something.

Does that mean only laboratory experimeters get access to the custom
functions?

Sounds like old IBM folklore.  (Selling 16K RAM cards that were actually
32K RAM cards with a jumper removed.  You still had to pay for the "upgrade"
because removing the jumper yourself voided the warranty!)

>>2.3) An electronic instruction manual?  Is the F-90 *that* complicated?

>Is the "rn" command *that* complicated?  I occasionally refer to an electronic
>instruction manual for it.

Point is that for a camera that complicated, you're bound to mess something
up.  The user interface should be much better.

>>2.5) Flash Bracketing?
>>How hard is to to fiddle with the exposure compensation controls?

>Not hard, if the ambient light is bright enough that you didn't need the
>flash in the first place, or if your subjects will sit still long enough
>for you to fiddle manually.  OK, tell your retailer that you offer C$1 less
>because you don't want auto bracketing and you promise never to use it.

It takes 5 seconds for the flash to recycle.  If your subject doesn't
sit still long enough for you to fiddle manually, flash exposure
bracketing isn't going to save you.

Even if you have a high-voltage pack you've still got to wait 3 s.
(Recycling at 1.5 s using the Quantum Turbo isn't recommended 'cus
you may fry your flash, or overload the Turbo.)

>>If your camera can't AF, what's the *@$^%! use of an electronic rangefinder?

>You mean, as opposed to a split screen and microprisms?  I agree with your
>next comment, but the electronic rangefinder is still nice too if it's hard
>to keep half of a split screen from going black, or if your eyes are tearing
>due to -30 degree weather, etc.

If your electronic rangefinder is working, your *AF* is working!
So if your eyes are having such a bad time at -30, why aren't you
using AF?!?

I guess Nikon has spared its "professional" users much grief by simply
making useful screens unavailable.

>>What you want is a *real* focusing screen with a split prism or microprism

>Yup.  I wonder where the third-party screens are for F-801s too.

Actually, in the deepest, darkest catacombs of Nikon, there is a small
set of screens with manual focusing aids for F-801s.  Alas, those
screens mess up the exposure system.

>>"Practical Photography" finds the SB-25 performance "disappointing"
>>because of "noticable darkening of the image at the edges" [...]

>Are they sure that's because of the flash rather than the lens?
>(Cynical but at least sometimes true comment here.)

The camera pictured (which may not actually be the camera tested) is a
Nikon F-90 with an AF 35-70/2.8 (can't see whether it's "D"-series or
not, but it shouldn't matter since they're optically the same).

I suppose it's possible for a cheap lens like that to have bad
vignetting problems...  :-)

ACS
--
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
[e-mail]______________________|