Hi Chris,
I guess you're right. Too much worry with little reason. In the end we
don't want our low-light exposures to be equivalent to 18 0rey at all?!
Otherwise nobody would notice they were done under dim conditions ;-)
Oh, and fastidious? Never, but nearly allways experimental!
Cheers, Soenke
Chris Barker wrote:
>
[...]
> I don't know.
>
> However, all of my long exposures with my OM4 (and with the OM2SP that
> preceded it)
> have worked beautifully, just as good old Franz Pangerl said they would when
> he was
> pooh-poohing Olympus' nominal limit of 60 seconds on OTF exposures. In other
> words,
> bracketing for all but the most fastidious (or experimental) is unnecessary.
>
> Soenke Jansen wrote:
> > Thanks Chris. But in a way this is nasty too (not your citation of
> > course, but the SBCs overreacting). Because that means, if I follow the
> > tables and graphs, the film producers give for
> > 'reciprocity-failure-compensation' I'll overcompensate. And bracketing a
> > 4min exposure takes you to something like a quarter hour you spend with
> > that motive in which time the light situation will have changed for
> > sure. Any solution in sight?
> > Dumbfundled,
> > Soenke, Hamburg
> >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|