Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Wed May 5 19:18:42 2004
References: <000101c432c4$7e51ded0$6401a8c0@CCA4A5EF37E11E> <40993E7D.8080907@Hemenway.com>
 
At 3:20 PM -0400 5/5/04, Jim Hemenway wrote:
><snip>
>Unless used only on manual by me, most transparencies came out 
>slightly overexposed with my Nikon cameras.  Two Nikon FA units and 
>then the F5.  Too washed out skies!!!  Only the mere EM gave me 
>consistently well exposed slides.

The FA had Nikon's first matrix metering, and it was biased towards 
negative film (overexposure). It never worked for slides. It was not 
one of Nikon's finer efforts.

The F5's exposure system is completely different, although to be 
honest, I don't find the results really any better than the F90's or 
F4's, or, from what I have seen, the R8 or 9's. The overexposure of 
the FA is long gone.

-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)
 In reply to: Message from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)
Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)