[nikonf4] Kodachrome
- From: Koichi Mac <nikonf3tmd4@xxxxxxx>
- To: nikonf4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 20:16:51 -0800
Wasn't Kodachrome kind of weak in blue?
Koichi Yasutani - a.k.a. Steve + MP
Lakewood, WA U.S.A.
2010 / 11 / 21 20:17 PST
On Nov 21, 2010, at 1629 , Eric Welch wrote:
> I always found Kodachrome Pro 64 to be a tad magenta in low light, but
> otherwise pretty accurate. But for the non-pro film there was some benefit.
>
> On Nov 21, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Dave wrote:
>
>> True, but the results were good on Kodachrome. It had a bluish tendency on
>> cloudless days.
>>
>> From: Eric Welch <ericwelch@xxxxxx>
>> To: nikonf4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Sun, November 21, 2010 11:51:05 AM
>> Subject: [nikonf4] Re: Protection filter questions?
>>
>> That was in the olden days. :-D
>>
>> Now lenses are so good at filtering UV automatically that you only need an
>> 81B for high up in the mountains. With digital, it's not needed any more in
>> any case.
>>
>> On Nov 21, 2010, at 8:02 AM, Dave wrote:
>>
>>> In CA, with all the UV, I put 81A on short lenses and 81B on long lenses
>>> shooting Kodachrome.
>>>
>>> From: Koichi Mac <nikonf3tmd4@xxxxxxx>
>>> To: nikonf4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Sent: Sun, November 21, 2010 2:58:01 AM
>>> Subject: [nikonf4] Re: Protection filter questions?
>>>
>>> Yea, I never cared for Skylight anyway. During my infancy period on
>>> photography, I didn't know any better and Skylight was what was most common
>>> filters sold, so I had it on for many years.
>>> Not knowing any better also meant negative film was all I knew, and I was
>>> using B&W mostly, and there was no point of reference to compare color
>>> rendition. After knowing more, that was the first thing I ditched.
>>>
>>> On Nov 20, 2010, at 1933 , Eric Welch wrote:
>>>
>>> > Skylight filters are useless since lens makers started including UV
>>> > filtration in the glue between elements. Another Leica innovation.
>>> >
>>> > On Nov 20, 2010, at 6:18 PM, Koichi Mac <nikonf3tmd4@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I have filters on most of my lenses. Personally I care neither UV
>>> >> nor Skylight, but many of them are UV. Canon has blank glass and that's
>>> >> in my EF 28-70/2.8.
>>> >>
>>> >> Coatings can be a problem in cleaning up. I have one Nikon 77mm UV
>>> >> that's got coatings messed up. Maybe I should razor blade to peel it
>>> >> off.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Nov 18, 2010, at 1757 , John Osthus wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Do you folks use a UV or skylight filter to protect your lenses?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I actually had a filter take the damage from a short drop once. The
>>> >>> filter broke but the lens was OK.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> How about coatings vs. non coating for a 77mm skylight filter?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I have a Hoya HMC super multi coated uv0 on my 24-70.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I have a new 28-300 Nikon – I found a un coated 77mm tiffen “haze”
>>> >>> filter. OK to use that on the 28-300 or am I better off spending
>>> >>> another $50 or so for a multicoated?
>>> >>>
Other related posts:
- » [nikonf4] Kodachrome - Koichi Mac
