[LRflex] Re: Using R lenses on digital bodies..AN EXIF COMMENT.
- From: Steve Barbour <steve.barbour@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 14:58:51 -0800
On Feb 7, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Richard Ward wrote:
> Hello All,
> I have recently made a posting complimenting the 'Group' on it's respect
> and humanity, so I will step gingerly as I attempt to intelligently comment
> regarding a recurring line of thought I've seen in relation to the problem of
> a lack of EXIF info from adapting R equipment to dSLR's in postings all
> across the internet, not just this group. I hope to convey a frustration
> following the logic and not come across as derogatory in my words or tone. :-)
> I am having some difficulty in seeing EXIF issues as something more than a
> Challenge to be adapted to. My line of thinking is that:
> A) EXIF info didn't exist for 99.9999% of cameras and camera users in the
> 'Film Era'.
> B) We are bridging Film Era Mechanical Technology (R Lenses) to Digital Era
> Electronic Technology (dSLR Cameras).
> C) Adapters which DO communicate the exif info regarding Focal Length and Max
> Available Aperture are readily available (For at least Canon, anyway).
> D) If Stieglitz and Adams and Lebowitz and the millions of others who picked
> up a camera over the last Century & A Half were able to operate them quite
> nicely without exif info in their Negs and Trannies, I fail to see where a
> jpeg, a RAW, a Tiff, or a DNG without full and complete exif info is a
> "Problem".
> E) I don't recall there be many (if any!) R lenses with electronic diaphrams,
> so 'properly' accessing ROM info is of profoundly limited benefit to us
> 'Adapters' - isn't it?
> F) I will definitely say that Stop Down focusing and metering is most
> assuredly quite a challenge, but not a fatal one, is it?
> I use a Canon 20D and the troublesome 'Flaw' in the EOS System related to
> metering and exposure with preset lenses never struck me as more than a speed
> bump on getting to where I want to go. There are also good reasons for EOS'es
> handling 'old lenses' differently than Nikons do - Canon wanted more elbow
> room for lens designing than was available with the previous FD mount and
> choose to utterly orphan them off. Nikon took a different design path which
> 'kept' the old mount and there fore their old lenses were still usable. They
> had to account for this in their 'software' engineering for metering and
> exposure. Canon had precious little need to devote engineering to making
> 'old' lenses easily integrate into their designs because the lenses had been
> orphaned off to gain other benefits. Whether their choices on those fronts
> were right or wrong, I'll leave to those battling the NikConian Wars!
> Maybe my 'Life' based around incessantly using the motto
> "Improvise/Adapt/Overcome" as I battle illnesses, disabilities, and economic
> challenges, colors my opinion regarding 'Lack of Exif' being a problem or not
> for the Lens Adapting Community. Internally I equate gripes and hangups about
> lack of exif with complaining about a sunrise, not exactly much we can do to
> change it is there! :-) Well, maybe not to that extent! But it made me smile
> to type it, though.
I see having an exif as a problem, but one that can be done away with...
:-)
so I guess we agree completely,
Steve
>
> Peace Everyone
> &
> Here's Hoping for a Competitive
> Super Bowl Forty Four!
>
> Richard
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> Be Nice To Your Children!
> They Will Be Choosing
> Your Nursing Home :-)
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
