> I'd not worry about the aperture coupler, the *ist-Ds2 is unlikely to 
> have new mechanical features, it's mostly the *ist-Ds electronics in a 
> *ist-DL body shell. 

I was thinking about the D2 not the DS2.

Frank

> 
> Frank Wajer wrote:
> 
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I'm not yet ready to dump my analog camera and buy a digital camera (for 
> >example a ist-ds). In fact I want to wait for the istD2 and hope it has an 
> >aperture coupler so I'll be able to use my K/M lenses as I'm used to.
> >However, the prices of prints is getting outrageous, about six times more 
> >expensive than internet printing services. So I'm thinking about buying a 
> >filmscanner to fill the gap till the D2 comes. I need a cheap solution that 
> >gives me good pictures up to 13x18 cm prints. Bigger I'll do the old 
> >fashioned expensive :-(( way. Any advice?
> >
> >Frank
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> When you're worried or in doubt, 
> Run in circles, (scream and shout).
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 09:58:45 -0400
> From: "Christian" 
> To: 
> Subject: Re: Internet Photo Gallery Generator
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> format=flowed;
> charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> Try coppermine Photo Gallery. It uses PHP, MySQL and apache to create 
> thumbnails and intermediate images.
> 
> http://coppermine-gallery.net/index.php
> 
> Christian
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Celio" 
> To: 
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 2:15 AM
> Subject: Help: Internet Photo Gallery Generator
> 
> 
> > Hey y'all, after putting together the Spin Doctors gallery I posted 
> > earlier, I decided I'm never going to post many photos if I don't make it 
> > faster and easier to do. So, I have a question:
> >
> > Are there any programs out there that will help you set up a complete 
> > gallery on your own website? I do not want to use Flickr or Photobucket 
> > or any other site, I want to keep the photos and the pages and whatnot on 
> > my own site.
> >
> > I'd prefer this program feature complete page template customization, so I 
> > can make the resulting pages look like any other page on my site.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > John Celio
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.neovenator.com
> >
> > AIM: Neopifex
> >
> > "Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a 
> > statement."
> > 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 13:58:32 +0000
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: OT: Back in Lake Charles after Rita the Ravager
> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Good news. We were starting to worry about you. The first reports suggested 
> only minimal damage in Lake Charles, but as the days went by a much more 
> disturbing picture emerged. Hope you get everything back together real soon.
> Paul
> 
> 
> > Sid, Good to hear you are safe and more or less sound... Bob S.
> > 
> > On 10/3/05, Sid Barras wrote:
> > > Hi pentax gang,
> > > I'm back in Lake Charles, actually been back 5 days now, but I also
> > > have a phone line that works with my modem now too. Still no
> > > electricity.
> > >
> > > But I'm much more fortunate than about 50% of the population here in
> > > Calcasieu Parish. (and about 100% of the population of Cameron
> > > parish, our southern, coastal neighbor)
> > >
> > > A full report to follow, with pictures; as soon as I get the trees
> > > off my roof, and tarps laid down to keep the rain out of my attic.
> > > Structure of my house is basically undamaged. The vast majority of
> > > the lovely old live oaks in this area survived. The "water
> > > oaks" (what I've always called them-- a taller oak tree, with a
> > > smoother, whiter bark, and an upright growth habit, and these are
> > > deciduous, though their leaves don't "color" as they drop in autumn)
> > > are what have mainly devestated the area around here. These trees
> > > have fallen over, roots and all (and they seem to share a shallow,
> > > weak root system) and crushed many, many homes around here. Most pine
> > > trees that have not survived "snapped" in the middle of the trunk, as
> > > opposed to simply toppling over as the water oaks have. These oaks
> > > and pines are probably 95% of the trees that fell. Of the others, the
> > > most common "fallen" varieties are sycamores, magnolias, and cedars.
> > > Most of the pecans and other hardwoods still stand.
> > >
> > > Well, I'm blathering on. More to follow, and more to the point, pics
> > > for pentax people to peruse..
> > >
> > > Sid
> > >
> > > PS: Mark, I saw your post-- a South Louisiana pdml gathering sounds
> > > great. I'm sure we have a few fellows within the "Houston to New
> > > Orleans" sphere as well... Also, did you hear that Avery Island has
> > > fairly well survived too?
> > >
> > >
> > 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:06:16 -0400
> From: "P. J. Alling" 
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> Technically advanced and feature rich don't always translate to best. 
> Best is what does the job. Sometimes a "lesser" product that has what 
> you need is the best. 
> 
> Toralf Lund wrote:
> 
> > John Forbes wrote:
> >
> >> I suspect Toralf is alluding to the fact that more than half of the 
> >> human beings who have ever lived are still alive today. As they 
> >> haven't yet died, we cannot be certain that they will. (This is 
> >> very worrying.)
> >
> >
> > Exactly ;-)
> >
> >>
> >> I just wish that everyone on this list shared one hundredth part of 
> >> Toralf's optimism.
> >
> >
> > I don't mind the pessimism in general so much myself. What can get me 
> > a bit worked up, is the continuous assertion that Pentax will always 
> > be one step behind because they are a smaller company than some of 
> > their competitors, that Canon will always make the best cameras 
> > because they have more money to spend on R&D etc. I just don't think 
> > this is the case. In fact truly great products often come from more 
> > minor players, and the highest amount of latest- and-greatest features 
> > or the longest list of three-letter abbreviations, is not the same 
> > thing as making the highest-quality products.
> >
> > - Toralf
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> When you're worried or in doubt, 
> Run in circles, (scream and shout).
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:07:49 -0400
> From: "P. J. Alling" 
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> Double Traitor.
> 
> Cotty wrote:
> 
> >On 3/10/05, Toralf Lund, discombobulated, unleashed:
> >
> > 
> >
> >>I don't mind the pessimism in general so much myself. What can get me a 
> >>bit worked up, is the continuous assertion that Pentax will always be 
> >>one step behind because they are a smaller company than some of their 
> >>competitors, that Canon will always make the best cameras because they 
> >>have more money to spend on R&D etc. I just don't think this is the 
> >>case. In fact truly great products often come from more minor players, 
> >>and the highest amount of latest- and-greatest features or the longest 
> >>list of three-letter abbreviations, is not the same thing as making the 
> >>highest-quality products.
> >> 
> >>
> >
> >Just yesterday, I advised a colleague to dump the EOS 350D he had
> >borrowed, and go play with an *istDs. He wasn't happy with the 350 and
> >assumed all DSLRs at this price point were going to be the same. He's on
> >his way to try the Ds :-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> > Cotty
> >
> >
> >___/\__
> >|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
> >||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com
> >_____________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> When you're worried or in doubt, 
> Run in circles, (scream and shout).
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:05:53 -0400
> From: Adam Maas 
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> DALSA has a full-frame sensor, so does Kodak. In fact the older DALSA FF 
> 6MP sensor was in the CONTAX N Digital and the MZ-D, they currently 
> offer a 11MP Sensor.
> 
> -Adam
> 
> Bruce Dayton wrote:
> > The reality is that everyone but Canon has done this, because no one
> > else has a full frame sensor. All the other manufacturers would be
> > foolish to not provide some wide angle lenses to compensate for the
> > crop factor. However, if they made full frame ones, they would be too
> > big and heavy and too expensive. All you have to do is compare the
> > size/weight and price of the 15/3.5 to the DA 14/2.8 to see that.
> > 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:07:00 -0400
> From: Adam Maas 
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> Tom Reese wrote:
> > Shel asked:
> > 
> > 
> >>I've not been reading all the messages in this thread, so maybe I missed
> >>something about this.
> >>
> >>Pentax buys their sensors from Sony, iirc. Sony has just announced, or
> >>released, a new camera, the DSC-R1, which uses a Sony-made, 10mp CMOS
> >>sensor with the dimensions of 14mm x 21mm. The camera has a retail price
> >>of $1,000.00. Seems like Pentax might do well to take advantage of this
> >>sensor if they can, and if Sony's putting out a camera for $1,000.00 it
> >>seems that the sensor price might be reasonable enough for Pentax to come
> >>out with a very competitively priced camera. Any comments on this?
> > 
> > 
> > Pentax is reportedly making their own sensors. That should give them a price
> > advantage with their new digital SLRs.
> > 
> > Tom Reese
> 
> Since when. Pentax is an Optics company not a semi-conductor company, 
> but does not have access to a chip fab as far as I'm aware.
> 
> -Adam
> 
> --------------------------------
> End of pentax-discuss-d Digest V05 Issue #2442
> **********************************************
> 
> 

Reply via email to