erikhaugsby
killer of threads
Just to help with your bickering, here's a crop from the original scan of the guy in the upper right (pardon the dust...) and of the girl.
When I did crop like this I noticed that the grain is much, much softer at the edge of the frame relative to even very barely inside of the picture--might this be a common issue amongst Nikon CS V EDs?
When I did crop like this I noticed that the grain is much, much softer at the edge of the frame relative to even very barely inside of the picture--might this be a common issue amongst Nikon CS V EDs?
Attachments
Xmas
Veteran
Erick
Sold my DR in '74, but it would only toggle over to the near focus range and then stop waiting for the specs, it would not go any further. Or is my memory failing?
Noel
Sold my DR in '74, but it would only toggle over to the near focus range and then stop waiting for the specs, it would not go any further. Or is my memory failing?
Noel
Rogrund
Antti Sivén
NB23 said:
OK. I'm sorry.
ferider
Veteran
erikhaugsby said:
Sorry if I came across like this.
Roland.
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
Xmas said:
You are mostly correct in that the lens won't normally go without the specs, but one can simulate the specs being mounted (and thus enter close-focus) by pushing down a small ballbearing on the wingplate on which the specs are mounted.
ferider said:
I don't have any problem with it, in fact i find it kind of amusing the amount of talk going on about one picture, though it did seem as if one other member wasn't pleased with the "debate."
Xmas
Veteran
Erik
'I remember it well' from the musical. But you would not have selected the near range and pushed in the ball learing lock and focused past the lock inadvertently?
Was the previous shoot at 0.7m?
Noel
'I remember it well' from the musical. But you would not have selected the near range and pushed in the ball learing lock and focused past the lock inadvertently?
Was the previous shoot at 0.7m?
Noel
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
Xmas said:
I might have; no, it was of a series of houses at least 20-30 feet away.
Xmas
Veteran
The ball on my DR had a spring that required real effort to depress.
Noel
Noel
Xmas
Veteran
Erik
I take it back if you do fondle the lens in absent mind fashion you could have set it to near range, but how did you get it back again for next frame?
Noel
I take it back if you do fondle the lens in absent mind fashion you could have set it to near range, but how did you get it back again for next frame?
Noel
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
Xmas said:
I reset it by absent mindedly fondling it? I'm not quite sure how long after this shot the next one was, but I re-checked and the two were not in extremely close time proximity to each other (e.g. not of the same subject as far as I can remember).
proenca
Proenca
might i add one thing to the equation ?
well, most likely all of you are going to laugh horribly at me but... same thing happened to me ( couple of photos being grossly misfocused... after a quick investigation, was neither lens coupling, lens misalignment, shutter speed or whatever ) and of course, it was due to the usual culprit - user error.
Im new to RF. helas, Leica is my first RF, comming from years of SLR and trading everything for a RF , so im still in the process of learning it : what sometimes happened ( now it doesnt, i always dbl check, until it becomes automatic ) is the way I hold the camera, i masked with my finger the small window that britghtens ups the focusing square.. so i though that i focused right, because i was seeing everything fine, no dbl image, but in fact i was thinking so because the focusing dbl image was not showing due to my finger positioning.
ok, have a laugh you leica die hard shooters
it puzzled me a lot, until my GF turned to me and said "dear, is your finger suposed to be covering that small white square in the front ? " .. then I realised.
well, most likely all of you are going to laugh horribly at me but... same thing happened to me ( couple of photos being grossly misfocused... after a quick investigation, was neither lens coupling, lens misalignment, shutter speed or whatever ) and of course, it was due to the usual culprit - user error.
Im new to RF. helas, Leica is my first RF, comming from years of SLR and trading everything for a RF , so im still in the process of learning it : what sometimes happened ( now it doesnt, i always dbl check, until it becomes automatic ) is the way I hold the camera, i masked with my finger the small window that britghtens ups the focusing square.. so i though that i focused right, because i was seeing everything fine, no dbl image, but in fact i was thinking so because the focusing dbl image was not showing due to my finger positioning.
ok, have a laugh you leica die hard shooters
it puzzled me a lot, until my GF turned to me and said "dear, is your finger suposed to be covering that small white square in the front ? " .. then I realised.
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
proenca said:
That's the conclusion I've reached--I inadvertently placed the DR into close-range focusing; at that point not even f/16 could save my soul...