Date sent: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:31:41 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #453 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ------------------------------ > > Content-Type: text/plain > > pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 04 : Issue 453 > > Today's Topics: > RE: SV: The film is dead [ "jayers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: What's the GFM photo weekend lik [ "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL > PROTECTED] ] > Re: What's the GFM photo weekend lik [ Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: PAW: Coffeehouse Conversation [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bernd Scheff ] > Reasonable price for an LX? And K2? [ Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: SV: The film is dead [ "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL > PROTECTED] ] > Re: Car Enabled [ "Feroze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: The film is dead [ Jon Glass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Helios 58mm, surprising! [ "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > SV: Reasonable price for an LX? And [ "Joakim Johansson" <johansson.joaki > ] > RE: Comments on SMCP 45-125/4?? [ Andre Langevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Urgent: *stD/DS and vivitar 283 [ Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Helios 58mm, surprising! [ Ryan Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Ink storage [ "Markus Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ] > Re: Urgent: *stD/DS and vivitar 283 [ Mat Maessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: UNEP Intl Photo Comp Finals! YAY [ Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: SV: The film is dead [ Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: SV: The film is dead [ Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > OT:Canon 9950F scanner [ "Markus Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ] > Re: Helios 58mm, surprising! [ CARLOS_ROYO <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Enabled [ "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: More DS samples [ "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: The film is dead [ "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Urgent: *stD/DS and vivitar 283 [ Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: SV: Reasonable price for an LX? [ Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: SV: The film is dead [ "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > SV: Memory [ "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Proof if proof were needed [ Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Pentax 40mm on DPR [ Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:16:46 -0800 > From: "jayers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: SV: The film is dead > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi, I don't think the reasons for keeping the film line open are as > simple as you state. It will be a question of demand. This may stabilize > in the future, and we may be surprised at the outcome. Kodak, as all > other companies have been going through a period of adjustment, which > would have happened to some degree even with out the digital emergence. > Kodak has consolidated film, and paper production into modern > facilities, and has taken older facilities off line. > Ilford has made some poor financial decisions, and now it is caught in > an awkward situation. If they can not recover they will be missed of > course, and the void will quickly be filled by those still solvent. > Film has enough unique differences from digital that I don't think > digital will completely replace film in the foreseeable future. > Jonathan > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 6:06 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead > > On 14 Dec 2004 at 13:49, Joakim Johansson wrote: > > > If we think about it for a second, it may strike us that the digital > > revolution is nothing but an easy summer breeze. In a global > perspective > > that is. > > > > Still most people around the world doesn't even has electricity, and > > therefore certainly no DLSR.s. I don't think the film is dead! > > Do you seriously think that film manufacturers are going to keep > non-profitable > film production lines on ice for those people across the globe who still > don't > have electricity (let alone the ability to afford > cameras/film/processing or > prints)? > > I think you'll find that low end (but capable) digital cameras will very > > quickly become more cost effective than film cameras and all film but > those > destined for a for few niche markets will die out. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:29:27 -0500 > From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: What's the GFM photo weekend like? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Marnie, YOU'RE BACK. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >In a message dated 12/15/2004 8:19:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Frank said: > > > > > >>Hey, Jon, > >> > >>Geez, I haven't been on line since about last Wednesday or Thursday, > >>and I come back to like 201 new threads. Ack! > >> > >>But, this one immediately got my attention. > >> > >>Like everyone's said, lots of fun at GFM. Meet some people that you > >>know from the list. Drink beer. Eat Goldfish (the crunchy ones - it > >>the Listmeister brings 'em, that is). Lovely scenery. Plus, this > >>year you have the bonus of not worrying about running into Cotty, it > >>seems <vbg>. > >> > >> > > > >Ahhhhhhh rats:-) > > > > > >>Don't worry about the competition. I actually entered it. I don't do > >>nature. But, it was all fun. The seminars are interesting, even if > >>nature stuff ain't your bag - but the cameraderie and good fun at PDML > >>Central make the whole thing worthwhile. > >> > >> > > > >So i hear. > > > > > >>OTOH, if you live closeby, maybe you come up for a day. Tom does that. > >> > >>Not to scare you off, but I'll be there - hope you can make it. > >> > >> > > > >I'm starting to put some pennies aside and hope to make it my self. > >Frank, have you registered yet.?? > > > >Dave > > > > > >>cheers, > >>frank > >> > >>PS: beware Bill Owen's homebrew <vbg> > >> > >> > >>-- > >>"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > >> > >> > >==================== > > > >Actually, these people should be avoided in real life at all costs. :-) > > > >Doe aka Marnie aka Eactivist > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. > During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings > and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during > peacetime. > --P.J. O'Rourke > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:29:49 -0500 > From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: What's the GFM photo weekend like? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > "Peter J. Alling" wrote: > > > Marnie, YOU'RE BACK. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Peter, you are sharp today! ;) > > Hey- Marnie nice to see ya! > > annsan > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:49:00 +0100 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bernd Scheffler) > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: PAW: Coffeehouse Conversation > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I like most of your 40mm-photos, but the wider angle of the vivitar makes > your photos still stronger. > Like it, Frank. Real street photography, even in a coffeehouse ;-) > > Best, > Bernd > > ---original message--------- > > frank theriault > Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:31:35 -0800 > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2959523 > > Comments are always welcome. > > thanks, > frank > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:59:56 +0100 > From: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: pdml <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Reasonable price for an LX? And K2? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > What would you guys pay for an LX these days? How about a K2? > > A guy here in Oslo (same person who sold me the M40, actually) has had > both for sale for a while, and I'm a bit tempted... > > - Toralf > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:19:56 -0500 > From: "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > You are quite possibly correct. The technology is changing rapidly, > however, and within two years digital photography will be able to more > things and do them better than today, while film technology will not > advance much, if at all. "In the foreseeable future," therefore, 35mm > film production and sales will become a small niche, like that for > 8inx10in sheet film is today. > > jayers wrote: > > >Film has enough unique differences from digital that I don't think > >digital will completely replace film in the foreseeable future > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:25:53 +0200 > From: "Feroze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Car Enabled > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > format=flowed; > charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=response > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > > > Any other BMW owners out there? > > > > Cory > > Yep > > Feroze > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:29:41 +0100 > From: Jon Glass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: The film is dead > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On Dec 15, 2004, at 7:54 PM, Jens Bladt wrote: > > > Anybody need links to places that (still) sell film??? > > > It's dead in the way that the poor folks in MP's "Search for the Holy > Grail" were dead... > -- > -Jon Glass > Krakow, Poland > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:29:21 -0600 > From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Helios 58mm, surprising! > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/IMGP2572small.jpg > > Uncoated(?) Russian HELIOS-44M-4 58/2 lens. > Cost me a whole $14.67 US, shipped from Australia. > Sun in the upper left corner of the frame. > I figured it would flare like crazy, surprise. > Great portrait length on the D. > I think I'll like this thing! > > Don > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:35:04 +0100 > From: "Joakim Johansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: SV: Reasonable price for an LX? And K2? > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > I'm going to by a Pentax MX tomorrow, and the seller also has a K2 in used > (but quite good) shape. He wants 1400 SEK ($204.15) for the camera. > > /Joakim > > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Toralf Lund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Skickat: den 15 december 2004 21:00 > Till: pdml > Ämne: Reasonable price for an LX? And K2? > > What would you guys pay for an LX these days? How about a K2? > > A guy here in Oslo (same person who sold me the M40, actually) has had > both for sale for a while, and I'm a bit tempted... > > - Toralf > > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15 > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15 > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:46:10 -0500 > From: Andre Langevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Comments on SMCP 45-125/4?? > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" > > Don, tell us how it behaves when you get a chance to use it! > > >It also has a 58mm filter size where the 35-105 has a 67, so perhaps > >flare will be OK. > > A puece of information that we find in the Pentax boklet about their > lens line is that to avoid vignetting at 1.5 meters with lens between > 60mm and 70mm, you need to put 67mm filters over the bottom part of > the lens hood, which is in fact a 58-67 step-up ring. That means that > for all practical purposes, 58mm filters are fine and I shouldn't > have even mentionned that limitation! > > A better hood for this lens is the round rubber "zoom" hoods made by > Hoya and Hama. If you are inclined to use such a hood, I'll test > both brands to tell you which one is the best. > > Andre > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:45:39 -0500 > From: Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Urgent: *stD/DS and vivitar 283 > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I have a late-model vivitar 283 (S/N 0829xx). From what I read on usenet, > the > trigger voltage for this may be high... > > Can I use this on a *istDS or do I risk frying the camera? > > replies urgently requested, as I've got to decide whether or not to pack it > for tonight's shoot.... > > -Luigi > --- > "I need a camera to my eye-- > To my eye, remind me > which echoes belong" > -Wilco, "Kamera" > > www.livejournal.com/users/ouij > Photos, Rants, Raves > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:57:20 -0600 > From: Ryan Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Helios 58mm, surprising! > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Don Sanderson wrote: > > >http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/IMGP2572small.jpg > > > >Uncoated(?) Russian HELIOS-44M-4 58/2 lens. > >Cost me a whole $14.67 US, shipped from Australia. > >Sun in the upper left corner of the frame. > >I figured it would flare like crazy, surprise. > >Great portrait length on the D. > > > > > Looks great! Show us some portraits! > > -Ryan > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:58:08 +0100 > From: "Markus Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Ink storage > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi Kenneth > I'm late but thanks anyway... > greetings > Markus > > > >>Room temp has worked for me the last 7 years. > >>Of course this is Michigan, YMMV! > >>I always run my printers out of ink. No problems. > > Kenneth Waller > > - > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:59:57 -0500 > From: Mat Maessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Urgent: *stD/DS and vivitar 283 > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > If it's a truly late model 283, the trigger voltage should be plenty > low enough for any camera out there. > It's hard to describe the differences between the early and late > versions of the 283, but the case will look a bit more "plasticy" on > the later versions. > There are three distinct generations of 283: > > 1st gen. High sync voltage, no audible power-save on the charging circuitry. > 2nd gen. High sync voltage. Audible power save (the "whine" of the > flash will cut in and out after the flash is charged for about 15-30 > seconds or so. Will also blink the charge indicator) > 3rd gen. Low sync voltage. No audible power save (I think they > redesigned the circuitry for that part of the flash) > > -Mat > > On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:45:39 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have a late-model vivitar 283 (S/N 0829xx). From what I read on usenet, > > the > > trigger voltage for this may be high... > > > > Can I use this on a *istDS or do I risk frying the camera? > > > > replies urgently requested, as I've got to decide whether or not to pack it > > for tonight's shoot.... > > > > -Luigi > > --- > > "I need a camera to my eye-- > > To my eye, remind me > > which echoes belong" > > -Wilco, "Kamera" > > > > www.livejournal.com/users/ouij > > Photos, Rants, Raves > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:28:07 -0500 > From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: UNEP Intl Photo Comp Finals! YAY!!!! ........Oh CRAP!! > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > "Krishna M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Ryan, > >I see getting the negative is the one major physical hurdle you have now. I > >am just wondering if it is possible for you to generate a negative by some > >roundabout process using your digital scanned image which I hope you might > >have located by now in your laptop. May be, some experienced members on the > >list can suggest how to convert a digital image into a film negative. > > Most good service bureaus can do it. I've been pleased with the results > when I've had it done (with scanned B&W negs for art show juries that > insist on slides for evaluation). Costs about $10.00 around these parts. > Not bad as long as you only need one or two done. > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:14:30 +0100 > From: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > > > You are quite possibly correct. The technology is changing rapidly, > > however, and within two years digital photography will be able to more > > things and do them better than today, > > Quite likely, but the digital sensors havent *really* changed a lot > lately, have they? > > The CCD technology is some 30 years old... > > > while film technology will not advance much, if at all. "In the > > foreseeable future," therefore, 35mm film production and sales will > > become a small niche, like that for 8inx10in sheet film is today. > > > > jayers wrote: > > > >> Film has enough unique differences from digital that I don't think > >> digital will completely replace film in the foreseeable future > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:46:25 -0500 > From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > > > >> You are quite possibly correct. The technology is changing rapidly, > >> however, and within two years digital photography will be able to more > >> things and do them better than today, > > > >Quite likely, but the digital sensors havent *really* changed a lot > >lately, have they? > > Technologically no, in terms of quality, vastly. (And in terms of price, > even more!) > > >The CCD technology is some 30 years old... > > Yes, but the quality improvements it's experienced in the past 3-4 years > are greater than all those in the 26-27 years prior. > If you look at how far CMOS sensors have improved over the past few > years the trend is even more dramatic. > > It is anticipated that CMOS sensor fabs will be springing up in China in > the next few years. Watch the prices drop then. We ain't seen nuthin' > yet. > > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:36:06 +0100 > From: "Markus Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: OT:Canon 9950F scanner > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi Otis > I got the older model 9900f form Canon for free. > I like the scan results from negatives a lot despite the fact that scanning > is very slow with Fare (scratch and dust removal)and the scanner has some > ugly red and blue color tint when not (re)calibrated or just turned on. > > Maybe that's fixed with the newer model.... > Otherwise recommended. > > greetings > Markus > > > 8400F is about US$140 at BHPHOTO...... in NYC. Anyone using the > more expensive 9950F? > > Otis Wright > > S > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:45:17 +0100 > From: CARLOS_ROYO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Helios 58mm, surprising! > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Language: es > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Don Sanderson escribió: > > http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/IMGP2572small.jpg > > > > Uncoated(?) Russian HELIOS-44M-4 58/2 lens. > > Cost me a whole $14.67 US, shipped from Australia. > > Sun in the upper left corner of the frame. > > I figured it would flare like crazy, surprise. > > Great portrait length on the D. > > I think I'll like this thing! > > > > The K mount version (Helios MC 44-K), multicoated version of this 58 mm. > lens, is surprisingly good. It is a bit warm, as other Russian lenses > I've had, but it performs really well. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:49:09 +1000 > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Enabled > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > Content-description: Mail message body > > On 15 Dec 2004 at 12:36, John Francis wrote: > > > I carry a special tool (basically a pair of oversized tweezers > > with a small lip at the end of the blades); other folks have > > added little extraction handles to their CF cards using some > > variety of adhesive tape. I'd be very cautious trying that > > with a MicroDrive; they're already thicker than a regular CF II > > card, and you don't want to end up with something that will be > > too thick for the available space. Make sure you use a thin > > tape if you try that, and check the corners regularly every > > time you go to re-insert it. > > Mine sure wedges in there too. I tend to pull mine out by catching the screw > heads in the corners with my nail, it's PITA and a delicate manoeuvre. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:51:03 +1000 > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: More DS samples > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > Content-description: Mail message body > > On 15 Dec 2004 at 12:58, Frantisek wrote: > > > Hi Rob, you understand Japanese then? Or is there an english version > > of it? I also looked it up after seeing the sample images, but sadly, > > only my father learned Japanese and it's been a long time since he did > > use it. > > I wish I knew Japanese, I just installed it and experimented until I worked > out > the functions, it's relatively straight forward. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 08:54:43 +1000 > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: The film is dead > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > Content-description: Mail message body > > On 13 Dec 2004 at 22:36, William Robb wrote: > > > To the point it isn't even on their radar, so to speak. > > To me, it doen't matter all that much if the capture is 16 bit if the > > final output is 8 bit. > > More than 8 bits isn't really of consequence if you never expect to do any > post > capture manipulation before printing, you are basically trusting the cameras > internal processing to get it good enough. But if you intend to do any image > processing working a 16 bit image even with the most basic processing tools > will provide a superior final 8 bit file for print. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:57:56 -0500 > From: Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Urgent: *stD/DS and vivitar 283 > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On Wednesday 15 December 2004 15:59, Mat Maessen wrote: > > If it's a truly late model 283, the trigger voltage should be plenty > > low enough for any camera out there. > > It's hard to describe the differences between the early and late > > versions of the 283, but the case will look a bit more "plasticy" on > > the later versions. > > There are three distinct generations of 283: > > > > 1st gen. High sync voltage, no audible power-save on the charging > > circuitry. 2nd gen. High sync voltage. Audible power save (the "whine" of > > the flash will cut in and out after the flash is charged for about 15-30 > > seconds or so. Will also blink the charge indicator) > > 3rd gen. Low sync voltage. No audible power save (I think they > > redesigned the circuitry for that part of the flash) > > > > -Mat > > Arse. having powered up and tested my flash, It would appear to be of the > second generation, and thus potentially fatal. > > However, I have used it on a ZX-M, and not fried anything. H'mm. > > Looks like available-darkness only tonight, then. > > -Luigi > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:07:50 +0100 > From: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SV: Reasonable price for an LX? And K2? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Joakim Johansson wrote: > > >I'm going to by a Pentax MX tomorrow, and the seller also has a K2 in used > >(but quite good) shape. He wants 1400 SEK ($204.15) for the camera. > > > > > Does this mean that the K2 was a high-end model? Hmmm, since it > apparently has features like DOF preview and mirror-lock-up, I guess it > must have been. > > I mean, the price seems somewhat high compared to the 450 NOK I paid for > my ME Super - including an M50 and an A70-210, but I guess that was a > rather good deal. I've also seen MXes being sold for quite a bit less > than 1400 SEK, though. > > >/Joakim > > > > > >-----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > >Från: Toralf Lund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Skickat: den 15 december 2004 21:00 > >Till: pdml > >Ämne: Reasonable price for an LX? And K2? > > > >What would you guys pay for an LX these days? How about a K2? > > > >A guy here in Oslo (same person who sold me the M40, actually) has had > >both for sale for a while, and I'm a bit tempted... > > > >- Toralf > > > > > >--- > >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > >Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15 > > > > > >--- > >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > >Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15 > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:08:01 +1000 > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > Content-description: Mail message body > > On 15 Dec 2004 at 22:14, Toralf Lund wrote: > > > Quite likely, but the digital sensors havent *really* changed a lot > > lately, have they? > > > > The CCD technology is some 30 years old... > > LOL, that's like saying transistorized products haven't changed a great deal > since the point contact transistors invention in 1947. The concept and > principle of operation is still the same but the technology and > implementation > is vastly different. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:09:01 +0100 > From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: SV: Memory > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: Collin R Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 13. december 2004 23:21 > Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Emne: FS: Memory > > > I decided to buy out WalMart. (Feels pretty of good, really.) > > Anyway, here's the list: > > 1. Lexar 32 meg digital film CF cards > NEW, never opened, qty 8 available. > $10 each SHIPPED (us) > > 2. Lexar 32 meg digital film CF cards > Opened, qty 1 available. > $8 each SHIPPED (us) > > 3. Kodak 64 meg digital film CF cards > NEW, never opened, qty 4 available. > $13 each SHIPPED (us) > > 4. Kodak 64 meg digital film CF cards > Opened, qty 1 available. > $9 each SHIPPED (us) > > 5. Lexar 32 meg Digital Film/SD cards > NEW, never opened, qty 19 available. > $10 each SHIPPED (us) > > 6. Lexar 32 meg Digital Film/SD cards > Opened, qty 1 available. > $8 each SHIPPED (us) > > PayPal. > > Collin > "You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the > relationship the greater the impact." > Howard Hendricks > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:09:09 +0000 > From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Proof if proof were needed > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On the left, the Sigma 14mm EX f2.8 lens. > > On the right, the Pentax SMC K15mm f3.5 lens. > > It's as simple as that. > > <http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/spare3.html> > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty > > > ___/\__ > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com > _____________________________ > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:19:18 +0000 > From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Pentax 40mm on DPR > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > <http://www.dpreview.com/news/0412/04121501pentax_pancakelens.asp> > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty > > > ___/\__ > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com > _____________________________ > > -------------------------------- > End of pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 Issue #453 > ********************************************* Andrew Thornton phone 8222-5436
