On 26/8/04, Willem-Jan Markerink, discombobulated, unleashed: >Btw, I doubt this was anywhere near as common in analog times then it >is now in digi-times....no 36-shot limit.
I can recall seeing stills cameras placed precariously behind the goal nets at British soccer games well before the digital age.... > >Though it is also odd that Canon never supplied a large-roll filmback >like Minolta did with their first-generation 9000AF.... > >PS: how common is the angled-viewer on these camera's btw? >Only shown once, with another picture of a neck-cramped photographer >trying to do the same without....:)) >And in such conditions/environment, it seems as if quite a lot of >camera's could be damaged easily, the viewfinder-ridge (that holds >the angled-viewer) being ripped off the body....typical damage, or >are angled-viewers not used that much at all? I have no knowledge of their frequency of use. I have the angle finder C and it's a fine bit of kit, I'm sure those have it would use it. Professional gear is heavily insured, and staffers won't care much if a camera is destroyed as long as the shot is worth it :-) Contract employees with their own kit might take a bit more care... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
