"The Australians are on a wining streak."
Funnily enough, this typo is funny! The OO little black beauty is in the wilds
of Whian Whian at the moment. This is not pronounced with a tentative 'wee-ann
wee-ann' as it often seems to be, but as 'wine wine' if one is celebrating and
'whine whine' if one is not.
I am sure there was meant to be no reference to Australians' complaining habits
(it would be a whinging streak), or our alcoholic nature (probably still a
beering streak, but wining is catching up) or our propensity to take our
clothes off and run in public. This only happens on important occasions.
Nick
PS Been about 30 C here. La Nina often brings above average rainfall to eastern
Australia, but the subtropical coastal strip is less susceptible to the ENSO
cycles. Still, a wettish summer and it has been good tree growing weather.
Recently had a flood in the creek from the sharp rain from an extra-tropical
cyclone (known as an 'east coast low' - isn't meteorology fun?). Shame the
camera wasn't here...the little Whian Whian falls looks like Victoria Falls for
a few days afterwards.
Nick
Listar wrote:
>------------------------------------
>olympus Digest Wed, 15 Mar 2006 Volume: 03 Issue: 072
>
>In This Issue:
> [OM] Re: Scanning workflow question
> [OM] Re: NOW: crosspoint drivers, was Re: Attention : 16mm
> [OM] Re: [OT] B&H and Adorama
> [OM] Re: [OT] B&H and Adorama
> [OM] Re: Oly XD cards
> [OM] Re: Hong Kong Flower Exhibition 2006 (1)
> [OM] Re: Hong Kong Flower Exhibition 2006 (2)
> [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
> [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
> [OM] Re: The E-330
> [OM] Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
> [OM] Re: Blue XA2
> [OM] Re: NOW: crosspoint drivers, was Re: Attention : 16mm
> [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived
> [OM] Re: Olympus recall
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
> [OM]
>Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!! [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey -
>New Pictures!!!
> [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
> [OM] #036
> [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
> [OM] Re: The E-330
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
> [OM] FS Lens caps (was Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!)
> [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
> [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
> [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
> [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
> [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
> [OM] Hong Kong Flower Exhibition 2006 (3)
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Lowepro AW and AW II - differences and similarities
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Storing lenses, was: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
> [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
> [OM] Re: The E-330
> [OM] Re: The E-330
> [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
> [OM] Re: camera choices
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Olympus recall
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
> [OM] Re: FS Lens caps (was Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!)
> [OM] Musings on large prints from different cameras
> [OM] Re: camera choices
> [OM] [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Epson V700
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Olympus recall
> [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: camera choices
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Anyone had a faulty sensor replaced in the UK on a C-50
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Anyone had a faulty sensor replaced in the UK on a
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Which camera? A little different cut.
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: The E-330
> [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: The E-330
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: Super 4/3?
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] FS at Galbraith: Olympus E300, E500, SP-350
> [OM] Re: #036
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
> [OM] Re: [OT] Canon plastic skin
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:24:07 -0700
>From: Dan Mitchell <danmitchell@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Scanning workflow question
>
>Marc Lawrence wrote:
>
>
>>I use a piece of blank paper - just slip a corner under the photo,
>>and then scoop it/them onto the paper. Is this what you mean?
>>
>>
>
> That's what I meant, yup, and that sounds like the sort of thing I
>should have been doing.. thanks!
>
> -- dan
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:40:48 -0800
>From: Mike <watershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: NOW: crosspoint drivers, was Re: Attention : 16mm
>
>
>The dearth of crosspoint drivers could be due to catalogs incorrectly
>labeling them 'philips'. e.g. this LeeValley set.
><http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=3&cat=1,43411,43417,49733&p=49733>
>While labeled 'Philips' it is clearly a crosspoint set. The clue is that
>the tips are listed as #1, #0, and #00. A true #1 philips tip is way too
>big to be practical in this set. My lousy scan shows a #0 philips point
>(silver) and a #1 xpt (black) for comparison.
><http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/crosspoint.JPG>
>Another clue that they are incorrectly listed is that the xpt shown in
>the scan was from another LeeValley set I purchased a couple of years
>ago also labled 'philips'. (and a nice set it is too by the way,
>recommended, however the slotted tips aren't of much use)
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:40:38 -0700
>From: Garth Wood <garth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: [OT] B&H and Adorama
>
>Thanks for the replies, folks. I'm sending this out "blind" -- for
>some reason, the Oly List is *not* being sent to my e-mail address
>(I've tried re-subscribing several times today), but my messages are
>getting through. I have to use the awkward expedient of reading the
>list on the website's thread aggregator and then sending out replies etc.
>
>Weird. Hey List-Mom, what gives? :-/
>
>
>Garth
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:41:51 -0700
>From: Garth Wood <garth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: [OT] B&H and Adorama
>
>Oh, and yeah, I did know that both businesses were owned by Orthodox
>Jews, but for some reason, I was unable to find info on
>holidays. I'm having the strangest mental blocks recently.
>
>
>Garth
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:41:55 -0800
>From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Oly XD cards
>
>
>Faster.
>
>https://emporium.olympus.com/innards/empProdDetails.asp?sku=202032-410
>
>
>
>Winsor
>Long Beach, California, USA
>
>
>
>
>On Mar 14, 2006, at 5:15 PM, Martin Flink wrote:
>
>
>
>>What is the difference between the M series and the H series in
>>Olympus
>>XD card? Is the H a newer faster card?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:17:50 +0800
>From: "Michael Wong" <mialop.wong@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Hong Kong Flower Exhibition 2006 (1)
>
>
>Thank you very much, John.
>
>
>Michael
>
>
>
>
>2006/3/15, John Hermanson <omtech1@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
>>Beautiful.
>>___________________________________
>>John Hermanson
>>Camtech Photo Services, Inc.
>>21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743
>>631-424-2121 | Olympus OM Service since 1977
>>http://www.zuiko.com | omtech1 AT verizon.net
>>
>>
>>Michael Wong wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Olympus OM-4T Black, Zuiko 90mm F2, Kodak E100vs
>>>
>>>http://palmboy.palmcyber.net/gallery/albums/album131/IMG998.sized.jpg
>>>
>>>==============================================
>>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>==============================================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
>>-- Type: text/x-vcard
>>-- File: omtech1.vcf
>>
>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:19:15 +0800
>From: "Michael Wong" <mialop.wong@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Hong Kong Flower Exhibition 2006 (2)
>
>
>Thanks, Johan.
>
>I like tulips very much too ^^
>
>
>
>Michael
>
>
>
>
>2006/3/15, Johan Malmstrom <jmalmstrom@xxxxxxx>:
>
>
>>I prefer this to the other! Maybe it's because tulips are so much spring
>>and
>>we still have no spring at all. Although winter is good, I miss flowers...
>>
>>The red is very nice.
>>
>>/ Johan
>>
>>Den 06-03-14 14.20, skrev "Michael Wong" <mialop.wong@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Olympus OM-4T Black, Zuiko 90mm F2 Marco, Kodak E100vs
>>>
>>>http://palmboy.palmcyber.net/gallery/albums/album131/IMG992.sized.jpg
>>>
>>>==============================================
>>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>==============================================
>>>
>>>
>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:35:00 +1100
>From: Andrew McPhee <macca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
>
>At 01:46 PM 14/03/2006 -0500, Wayne S. wrote:
>
>
>>...Also I think some people
>>are designing nanotech dust mites that periodically go out and
>>clean the sensors:
>>
>>http://www.aaaai.org/images/photolibrary/bw-dustmite2.jpg
>>
>>They have special fresnel shells to appear invisible if they happen
>>to be wondering the sensor when a picture is being taken. And special
>>feet designed to use the anti-alias grating to traverse the sensor.
>>Just notice the minimal shadow cast by this experimental prototype
>>shows how effective the fresnel shell is.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>Eh, these nanotech dust mites are nuthin' new. Years ago I had a family of
>these living in the pentaprism of an OM-1. Every now and again I'd be
>looking through the VF and one or two would be wandering across the
>screen. Which made it hard to focus if you suffer from arachnophobia like
>I do.
>
>But these little buggers are effective, I never had a dirty sensor.
>
>
>Andrew McPhee
>http://www.dev-stop-fix.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 21:46:45 -0800 (PST)
>From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
>
>Wayne wrote:
>
>
>>Also I think some people
>>
>>
>>>are designing nanotech dust mites that periodically go out
>>>
>>>
>>and clean the sensors:
>>They have special fresnel shells to appear invisible...
>>
>>
>
>Thanks. I needed that bit of humour. Dust mites with Fresnel
>shells. What "order" of Fresnel would that be? 4000?
>
>AG
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 21:54:57 -0800
>From: Mike <watershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: The E-330
>
>
>
>
>>It's Vinca - round here we call it a weed, warm or otherwise.
>>AndrewF
>>
>>
>>
>Yeah, about the only redeeming feature is that it blooms all winter. My
>landscaper neighbor grimaces when he sees it. I'm too embarassed to
>admit to actually planting the stuff before i knew better.
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Paul Martinez" <pdmphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:00:45 -0800
>
>
>I crossed my fingers, took the plunge, and bought the one listed as EX+ from
>KEH. Thank you KEH for making this lens available for a decent price and
>being in at least the stated condition. The only oddities were the lens
>coming with a filthy third party end cap and very dirty rear element
>(probably from being shipped with that filthy end cap). Beyond that the lens
>is very close to new.
>
>I took a few quick shots with my SLR/c while there was a little light left
>and all I can say is WOW! This is one nice lens to use, and the results,
>even on full frame digital look great so far. It's not as heavy or as large
>as I had imagined. Of course it seems smaller on my SLR/c than my OM-1n.
>
>Cheers,
>Paul
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:08:01 +1100
>From: Andrew McPhee <macca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Blue XA2
>
>
>
>
>>Was someone here looking for a blue XA? KEH has an XA2 with flash.
>>I'd provide the direct link to it, but that doesn't work since they
>>'upgraded' their site.
>>
>>FWIW/ScottGee1
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Thanks for the heads up Scott, but I have a blue one, am looking for a red
>and a white one (with matching flash).
>
>And I picked up my blue one for a quarter of the KEH price so I'm grinning! ;-)
>
>
>
>Andrew McPhee
>http://www.dev-stop-fix.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Jeff Keller" <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: NOW: crosspoint drivers, was Re: Attention : 16mm
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:12:00 -0800
>
>
>It is confusing
>
>Several places advertised screwdriver set which had one crosspoint and two
>or more phillips screwdrivers in the same set. The Pollicis SETS sold by
>Micro-Tools come in a 4pc set marked phillips or a different 4pc set marked
>JIS Type S. Their JIS set should be a good bet.
>
>I think Walt posted a link a year or two ago which had pictures many of the
>different styles of screwdriver tips (but not JIS crosspoint). I think it
>was
>http://www.lara.com/reviews/screwtypes.htm
>
>About the only description I found is at (search for JIS, it is halfway
>down)
>http://www.answers.com/topic/screw
>
>It seems the key difference between phillips and JIS is that the phillips
>head was designed to cam out the driver (for electric drivers). Yet many
>phillips screwdrivers are advertised as resisting cam out.
>
>You're surely right about the naming being inconsistant. How about "Ames'
>Professional JIS Phillips Green Handle Screwdrivers"
>http://www.amessupply.com/products1.cfm?aid=1&cid=D&sid=DE&fid=1404070
>
>Of course many phillips drivers are also called Xpt.
>
>-jeff
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: Mike <watershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>The dearth of crosspoint drivers could be due to catalogs incorrectly
>labeling them 'philips'. e.g. this LeeValley set.
><http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=3&cat=1,43411,43417,49733&p=49733>
>While labeled 'Philips' it is clearly a crosspoint set. The clue is that
>the tips are listed as #1, #0, and #00. A true #1 philips tip is way too
>big to be practical in this set. My lousy scan shows a #0 philips point
>(silver) and a #1 xpt (black) for comparison.
><http://www.interisland.net/watershed/mike/crosspoint.JPG>
>Another clue that they are incorrectly listed is that the xpt shown in
>the scan was from another LeeValley set I purchased a couple of years
>ago also labled 'philips'. (and a nice set it is too by the way,
>recommended, however the slotted tips aren't of much use)
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Paul Martinez" <pdmphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:10:17 -0800
>
>
>Forgot to give thanks to ScottGee1 for posting that KEH had this lens
>available. For some reason there inventory never shows up in search engines.
>
>Thank you ScottGee1,
>
>Paul
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx]On
>Behalf Of Paul Martinez
>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 2:01 PM
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
>
>
>
>I crossed my fingers, took the plunge, and bought the one listed as EX+ from
>KEH. Thank you KEH for making this lens available for a decent price and
>being in at least the stated condition. The only oddities were the lens
>coming with a filthy third party end cap and very dirty rear element
>(probably from being shipped with that filthy end cap). Beyond that the lens
>is very close to new.
>
>I took a few quick shots with my SLR/c while there was a little light left
>and all I can say is WOW! This is one nice lens to use, and the results,
>even on full frame digital look great so far. It's not as heavy or as large
>as I had imagined. Of course it seems smaller on my SLR/c than my OM-1n.
>
>Cheers,
>Paul
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:22:23 +1100
>From: Andrew McPhee <macca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus recall
>
>At 11:22 AM 14/03/2006 -0800, Clint @ Photosphere wrote:
>
>
>>(link)
>>http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060314/us_nm/olympus_recall_dc
>>
>>
>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. subsidiary of Japanese camera maker
>>Olympus Corp. and U.S. regulators said on Tuesday that about 1.2
>>million 35-millimeter film cameras are being recalled to fix an
>>overheating problem with the flash circuit.
>>
>>The circuit can cause the camera to overheat and produce smoke when
>>the camera is on, posing a burn hazard, according the U.S.
>>Consumer Product Safety Commission.
>>
>>Olympus has received 21 reports of the malfunction but no injuries,
>>the regulator's statement said.
>>
>>The cameras, sold across the U.S. between 1989 and 1995, include the
>>Infinity Twin, AF-1 Twin, Infinity Zoom 200 series, AZ 200 series, and
>>Quantary Infinity Zoom 222 Olympus-brand 35-mm film cameras.
>>
>>Olympus is advising consumers to stop using the cameras and contact
>>Olympus for a repair kit.
>>
>>
>>
>>Comments:
>>"21 reports of the malfunction"? 21!?!? We saw hundreds of these
>>models with melted flash circuits, most of them "out of warranty".
>>
>>Contact Olympus for a "repair kit"? How is a customer supposed to
>>replace the main ciruict, flash circuit, and melted front cover, and
>>in some cases the shutter circuit/assembly and the AF circuit, too?
>>
>>And how many customers are going to keep a dead, melted Olympus camera
>>lying around that doesn't work, hasn't been repaired by Olympus for
>>years, and that parts are officially "no longer available"?
>>
>>What a load of BS!
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>It's simple - the repair kit comprises a pair of asbestos gloves and
>heat-resistant glasses.
>
>Sorry, I couldn't resist. And yes, their response is BS. And over ten
>years too late...
>
>
>Andrew McPhee
>http://www.dev-stop-fix.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:38:06 +1100
>From: Andrew McPhee <macca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
>
>At 06:27 PM 14/03/2006 -0500, Wayne wrote:
>
>
>>...One of my favorite lenses in the C*non system is the 180mm macro.
>>I basically use a 16-35/2.8, 24-105/4, and the 180mm macro lens as
>>my kit. The 180 macro is a lot of fun if you are into macro stuff...example
>>
>>http://www.zuik.net/5D/macro180_MG_1829.jpg
>>F32, 6 second exposure, iso100. levels and reduced in PS.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>That photo arouses something in me. Does anyone else see what I see..? ;-)
>
>BTW, very nice photo Wayne.
>
>
>Andrew McPhee
>http://www.dev-stop-fix.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:41:24 +1100
>From: Andrew McPhee <macca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
>
>At 09:25 PM 14/03/2006 +0800, Andrew W. wrote:
>
>
>>Here is one example where I did (early morning low light, a small desert
>>
>>
>>>plant at Lake Mungo in far west NSW):
>>>
>>> http://www.cs.adelaide.edu.au/~andrew/photos/mungo_fruit.jpg
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>Hmmm, Mungo. Must go again soon. Shutter finger itchy.
>
>
>Andrew McPhee
>http://www.dev-stop-fix.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Jeff Keller" <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:08:18 -0800
>
>
>The Australians are on a wining streak. Four more great pictures!
>
>My understanding is that the Australian camera has been shipped to Nick.
>Matt & Adam are the only two remaining participants in Australia. Before the
>camera heads to New Zealand are there any more Australian list member who
>wish to participate?
>
>-jeff
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Jeff Keller" <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:14:56 -0800
>
>
>Oops ...
>
>http://www.olympus-photography.com/Olympus-Odyssey/gallery.htm#Andrew_McPhee
>
>-jeff
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: "Jeff Keller" <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>The Australians are on a wining streak. Four more great pictures!
>
>My understanding is that the Australian camera has been shipped to Nick.
>Matt & Adam are the only two remaining participants in Australia. Before the
>camera heads to New Zealand are there any more Australian list member who
>wish to participate?
>
>-jeff
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:27:50 +0800
>From: "Michael Wong" <mialop.wong@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
>
>
>Congratulation!
>
>35-80/2.8 is an excellent lens. I love it so much & it is my unique zoom
>lens in my OM system ^^
>
>
>
>Michael
>
>
>
>
>2006/3/16, Paul Martinez <pdmphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
>>I crossed my fingers, took the plunge, and bought the one listed as EX+
>>from
>>KEH. Thank you KEH for making this lens available for a decent price and
>>being in at least the stated condition. The only oddities were the lens
>>coming with a filthy third party end cap and very dirty rear element
>>(probably from being shipped with that filthy end cap). Beyond that the
>>lens
>>is very close to new.
>>
>>I took a few quick shots with my SLR/c while there was a little light left
>>and all I can say is WOW! This is one nice lens to use, and the results,
>>even on full frame digital look great so far. It's not as heavy or as
>>large
>>as I had imagined. Of course it seems smaller on my SLR/c than my OM-1n.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Paul
>>
>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "GeeBeesPaw" <graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] #036
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:38:45 -0000
>
>
>Olympus OM2 SP : Tamron 300mm f2.8 : Agfa Vista 200
>
>http://www.geebeephoto.com/2006/06036.htm
>
>
>
>--Graham
>http://www.geebeephoto.com
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Wayne Harridge" <wayneharridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:31:45 +1100
>
>
>
>
>>Take a picture of a clear blue sky with a small aperture. Open in
>>Photoshop. Open Levels and really increase the contrast by
>>moving the
>>end sliders toward the middle. Watch the spots appear. That is
>>assuming you change lenses and have had the camera for a while.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Why do you use a small aperture ?
>
>...Wayne
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:38:42 +0000
>From: Stuart Robinson <restmengi@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: The E-330
>
>I'll second that, beautiful colours too.
>
>Stuart
>
>Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
>
>>Beautiful indeed. Don't think it could be improved upon.
>>
>>
>>
>>Winsor
>>Long Beach, California, USA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Mar 14, 2006, at 12:38 PM, Walt Wayman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>This is a tiny little JPEG thereof, and even the original is not
>>>something I'll keep, but it is an example of how handy this camera
>>>is for some situations, like shooting stuff less than 4 inches off
>>>the ground. And it was windy, too, so this might have been even
>>>better if I'd waited until tomorrow. But I'm not the paient sort.
>>>And my ears never got closer than 2 1/2 feet to the ground. :-)
>>>
>>>http://home.att.net/~hiwayman/wsb/media/192375/site1096.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:01:42 +0000 (GMT)
>From: Duncan Paterson <depaterson@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Epson V700
>
>Hi Ian,
>
> Does this mean you won't be requiring any test scans on the Minolta? The
> offer is still open should you still want to take it up. I'd be interested
> to know how your new scanner performs, especially with the Kodachromes.
>
> All the best,
> Duncan.
>
>swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: I have just ordered one of these and
>should get it either today or
>tomorrow, I couldn't wait for the end of the photo-i review but
>reading between the lines vincent is impressed.
>
>I thought of a dedicated film scanner but then reasoned that flat beds
>seem to be where the manufacturers are concentrating now and that as
>most seem people to scan at half maximum resolution a 3200 dpi scan is
>better than a 2700 dpi. My last concern was Dmax but looking at the
>comparison scan's I think this v700 will do just fine - I sure hope so
>because it's pretty much the same price as the nikon coolscan V, but
>then again that won't scan the old prints I have.
>
>I hope I haven't just made another huge scanner mistake ;-)
>
>IanW
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with
>voicemail
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:03:25 +0100
>From: swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Epson V700
>
>The scanner arrived today, here is the first result of a kodachrome
>straight from the scanner using idiot or IanW mode
>
>http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/photos/59986697-L.jpg
>
>no adjustments were made just uploaded as it came from scanner.
>
>I will post more picture as and when, but my first impressions are that
>it pretty much matches the nikon coolscan V scans my pal at work did for me.
>
>I don't know why but switzerland often gets the latest stuff before its
>available anywhere else.
>
>IanW -- at last I can scan my old photo's
>
>
>
>
>Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>
>>Interesting. Neither B&H nor Adorama show this as an item available for
>>sale. However, the Epson US web site says that it's a valid product.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 02:27:14 -0800
>From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
>
>Jeff Keller wrote:
>
>
>
>>Oops ...
>>
>>http://www.olympus-photography.com/Olympus-Odyssey/gallery.htm#Andrew_McPhee
>>
>>-jeff
>>
>>----Original Message Follows----
>>From: "Jeff Keller" <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>The Australians are on a wining streak. Four more great pictures!
>>
>>My understanding is that the Australian camera has been shipped to Nick.
>>Matt & Adam are the only two remaining participants in Australia. Before the
>>camera heads to New Zealand are there any more Australian list member who
>>wish to participate?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>I have been really enjoying the images and realized what the site lacks,
>a facility for comments on individual photographers. I have no idea how
>much work that would be, only that it would be nice.
>
>I really appreciate the effort that's gone into making this all happen,
>so don't feel obligated to do more, it's just an idea.
>
>I was starting to think how those Aussies are really making us USians
>look pretty bad with their promptness in moving their camera along. Then
>I went DOH!, it's summer there.
>
>If we do this again we should consider weather when planning the route.
>The camera now in the US could have started in the South and West, so it
>wouldn't get "snowed in" in the NE or Midwest.
>
>It would have been great here in February, when we had 3 weeks or so of
>Spring. I mean real, lounging in the lawn chairs in the sun for the
>afternoon, alternating reading with checking the old eyelids for pinhole
>leaks. What Winter we had before that was pretty mild. Now we are having
>second Winter, with unseasonably low temps and recurring waves of
>precipitation, including quite a bit of snow on the hills, although not
>here so far. I tricked it today, sneaking out in the sunshime and
>replacing front brake pads before the next band of clouds came and did
>the rain thing.
>
>I wonder what second Spring will be like. :-)
>
>Moose
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 02:32:14 -0800
>From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Epson V700
>
>swisspace wrote:
>
>
>
>>The scanner arrived today, here is the first result of a kodachrome
>>straight from the scanner using idiot or IanW mode
>>
>>http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/photos/59986697-L.jpg
>>
>>no adjustments were made just uploaded as it came from scanner.
>>
>>
>>
>Nice! CAn't tell all that much about resolution, etc. but it looks good
>at the reduced size. Saturation is lowish, but if it matches the slide,
>that's good.
>
>I like micro landscapaces too
><http://galleries.moosemystic.net/D60/pages/02-5888.htm>.
>
>Moose
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:32:34 +0100
>From: swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Epson V700
>
>Hi Duncan,
>
>I am guessing you meant this to be off list, but as its on list now I
>will reply here.
>
>First apologies I meant to get in touch last week, but it's been a bit
>hectic with Cai our little one lately and various visitors - ( In
>Summary though Cai is doing ok and we hope to get him home long term
>next Friday).
>
>It may be still be worth doing a comparison scan with your minolta
>5400 II if you have the time, just for information, but I will scan the
>chromes first with the V700 and then drop them through your letterbox,
>but for me it's not so important now.
>
>I don't have much time now, but here are some sample scans done straight
>from the kodachromes using idiot or IanW mode. excuse some of the
>pictures these are just difficult scans I choose for testing and they
>were on a strip so I scanned the whole strip. These have not been
>tweaked by me in any way just as the scanner produced them with its
>default settings in idiot mode i.e colour correction and ice off etc
>- I can give more info on that later for those interested.
>
> http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/gallery/1277283
>
>
>cheers Ian
>Duncan Paterson wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Ian,
>>
>> Does this mean you won't be requiring any test scans on the Minolta? The
>> offer is still open should you still want to take it up. I'd be interested
>> to know how your new scanner performs, especially with the Kodachromes.
>>
>> All the best,
>> Duncan.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:42:44 +0100
>From: swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Epson V700
>
>Nice Photo Moose, thanks for sharing.
>
>I will try and post some better results when I have had time to play
>with the scanner, the scans are dark compared to the slides (but the
>slides are underexposed) my initial impression's remain though that it
>is very close to matching the coolscan V scans
>
>IanW
>
>Moose wrote:
>
>
>>swisspace wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>The scanner arrived today, here is the first result of a kodachrome
>>>straight from the scanner using idiot or IanW mode
>>>
>>>http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/photos/59986697-L.jpg
>>>
>>>no adjustments were made just uploaded as it came from scanner.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Nice! CAn't tell all that much about resolution, etc. but it looks good
>>at the reduced size. Saturation is lowish, but if it matches the slide,
>>that's good.
>>
>>I like micro landscapaces too
>><http://galleries.moosemystic.net/D60/pages/02-5888.htm>.
>>
>>Moose
>>
>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:48:30 +0100
>From: swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Epson V700
>
>Just one thing to add, it had the epson sharpening option set (this is a
>default setting)
>
>IanW
>
>
>
>
>>I will try and post some better results when I have had time to play
>>with the scanner, the scans are dark compared to the slides (but the
>>slides are underexposed) my initial impression's remain though that it
>>is very close to matching the coolscan V scans
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:52:47 -0000
>
>
>If they truly are "whining" they must be pretending to be Poms.
>
>:-)
>
>--
>Piers
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
>Of Jeff Keller
>Sent: 15 March 2006 07:08
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Olympus OM Odyssey - New Pictures!!!
>
>
>The Australians are on a wining streak.
>
>--snip
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] FS Lens caps (was Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!)
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:01:11 -0000
>
>
>I think you mean the rear end cap rather than the front end, Paul, but your
>post encouraged me to take a look at what oddments I have. All are Olympus,
>new, unused:
>
>62mm front cap for 35-80
>Plastic front cap for 18mm and 16mm
>Deep rear lens cap for 80mm and 135mm macro lenses
>
>USD20 each incl shipping anywhere not subject to UN sanctions. Paypal, incl
>credit cards is OK.
>
>--
>Piers
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
>Of Paul Martinez
>Sent: 15 March 2006 22:01
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
>
>
>I crossed my fingers, took the plunge, and bought the one listed as EX+ from
>KEH. Thank you KEH for making this lens available for a decent price and
>being in at least the stated condition. The only oddities were the lens
>coming with a filthy third party end cap and very dirty rear element
>(probably from being shipped with that filthy end cap). Beyond that the lens
>is very close to new.
>
>I took a few quick shots with my SLR/c while there was a little light left
>and all I can say is WOW! This is one nice lens to use, and the results,
>even on full frame digital look great so far. It's not as heavy or as large
>as I had imagined. Of course it seems smaller on my SLR/c than my OM-1n.
>
>Cheers,
>Paul
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: It's happened. I've relented.
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:53:31 +1100
>
>
>Weren't we training them to eat lens fungus?
>AndrewF
>
>
>On 15/03/2006, at 4:35 PM, Andrew McPhee wrote:
>
>
>
>>Eh, these nanotech dust mites are nuthin' new. Years ago I had a
>>family of
>>these living in the pentaprism of an OM-1. Every now and again I'd be
>>looking through the VF and one or two would be wandering across the
>>screen. Which made it hard to focus if you suffer from
>>arachnophobia like
>>I do.
>>
>>But these little buggers are effective, I never had a dirty sensor.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:56:05 +1100
>
>
>Even dealers often store used lenses with the nose down, bum up and
>dirt/dust accumulates on the rear element. I shudder every time I see
>it. I'd rather see a grubby front element any time.
>AndrewF
>
>
>On 16/03/2006, at 9:00 AM, Paul Martinez wrote:
>
>
>
>>The only oddities were the lens
>>coming with a filthy third party end cap and very dirty rear element
>>(probably from being shipped with that filthy end cap). Beyond that
>>the lens
>>is very close to new.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:01:54 -0300
>Subject: [OM] Lowepro AW and AW II - differences and similarities.
>From: Fernando Gonzalez Gentile <fgnzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>Good morning list,
>
>I'm in the process of buying an AW, but all the info I can gather in the net
>refers to the AW II.
>It may seem obvious that the AW is a discontinued model, but are the
>improvements made to the AW II such an important issue? Which are those
>improvements - I cannot find a side by side comparison.
>
>TIA,
>
>Fernando.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Wayne Harridge" <wayneharridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:04:32 +1100
>
>
>
>
>>Hmmm, Mungo. Must go again soon. Shutter finger itchy.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Perhaps we need a southern Oz Zuikoholics meeting there ?
>
>...Wayne
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:07:43 +1100
>
>
>Fine idea - a mere 8-9 hour drive. Early start, we can be there for
>lunch and back before midnight! :)
>AndrewF
>
>
>On 15/03/2006, at 11:04 PM, Wayne Harridge wrote:
>
>
>>>Hmmm, Mungo. Must go again soon. Shutter finger itchy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Perhaps we need a southern Oz Zuikoholics meeting there ?
>>
>>...Wayne
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Wayne Harridge" <wayneharridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: 90/2 at Mungo
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:14:02 +1100
>
>
>
>
>>Fine idea - a mere 8-9 hour drive. Early start, we can be there for
>>lunch and back before midnight! :)
>>AndrewF
>>
>>
>>
>
>I'm thinking it might have to be more than a day trip to leave a bit of time
>for photography. Also it needs to be around full moon for night shots of
>the lunette.
>
>...Wayne
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:16:46 +0800
>From: "Michael Wong" <mialop.wong@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Hong Kong Flower Exhibition 2006 (3)
>
>Olympus OM-4T Black, Zuiko 90mm F2 Marco, Kodak E100vs
>
>http://palmboy.palmcyber.net/gallery/albums/album131/IMG1020.sized.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>Michael
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:19:16 -0500
>From: ScottGee1 <scottgee1@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
>
>
>One major point in Canon's favor is the range of T/S lenses that are
>fully compatible and easy to use. I have a 90 T/S and really
>appreciate what it can do. The capabilities cannot be replicated in
>image editing software -- at least as far as I know.
>
>ScottGee1
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:20:22 +0000
>From: Mike Lees <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Lowepro AW and AW II - differences and similarities.
>
>
>Fernando,
>
>I'm sure I will be corrected if this is wrong, but I think we'll need
>some more information before we can help!
>
> From what I understand the "AW" in Lowepro product names stands for
>"All Weather" and means the bag will come with a waterproof cover.
>
>So which product are asking about? For example I just bought a Topload
>Zoom AW.
>
>The Lowepro web site gives good information about all there current
>products (http://www.lowepro.com) but I'm not sure it compares them to
>older models.
>
>Mike.
>
>Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
>
>
>>Good morning list,
>>
>>I'm in the process of buying an AW, but all the info I can gather in the net
>>refers to the AW II.
>>It may seem obvious that the AW is a discontinued model, but are the
>>improvements made to the AW II such an important issue? Which are those
>>improvements - I cannot find a side by side comparison.
>>
>>TIA,
>>
>>Fernando.
>>
>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:43:41 -0000
>
>
>You don't mean to say that C*non alone has the T/S lenses? I do believe
>that your 90 T/S is "partnered" by the 85/2.8 PC Micro-N*kkor, and there is
>also a 28mm T/S in the range (though not a 45mm).
>
>And, of course, there are OM-mount T/S lenses available!
>
>--
>Piers
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
>Of ScottGee1
>Sent: 15 March 2006 12:19
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Re: Boy, did I stir up a storm !
>
>
>One major point in Canon's favor is the range of T/S lenses that are fully
>compatible and easy to use. I have a 90 T/S and really appreciate what it
>can do. The capabilities cannot be replicated in image editing software --
>at least as far as I know.
>
>ScottGee1
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 13:52:50 +0100
>From: bartjew@xxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Storing lenses, was: Zuiko 35-80/2.8 has arrived!
>
>
>Speaking of storing lenses, what is the best orientation in storage?
>Nose up, nose down or lying on their belly?
>
>Bart
>
>
>Citeren Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
>
>>Even dealers often store used lenses with the nose down, bum up and
>>dirt/dust accumulates on the rear element. I shudder every time I see
>>it. I'd rather see a grubby front element any time.
>>AndrewF
>>
>>
>>On 16/03/2006, at 9:00 AM, Paul Martinez wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>The only oddities were the lens
>>>coming with a filthy third party end cap and very dirty rear element
>>>(probably from being shipped with that filthy end cap). Beyond that
>>>the lens
>>>is very close to new.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>==============================================
>>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>>==============================================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
