On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 12:04:30AM -0600, William Robb wrote:
> We might go to Best Buy on the weekend so that I can grace his salesman with
> my most charming and best behaved self.
I really despair of salesmen.
I'm in the process of beginning to shop for a new car. One option
is a BMW Z4, bu
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 10:52:53PM +1100, Leon Altoff wrote:
>
> Someone I know had a different experience.
>
> He was driving along and though he might like to buy a convertible (he
> does this). He stopped at a Honda dealership and asked to test drive
> their convertible. He was dressed ver
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 05:58:24PM -0600, E.R.N. Reed wrote:
> Mishka wrote:
>
> >that's why those guys blow themselves up in the supermarkets.
> >i have never seen a single keynesian economist who would do the same for
> >his believes.
> >
> >
> I only know of one religion whose followers behave
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 08:53:28PM -0500, Kenneth Waller wrote:
> >I really despair of salesmen.
>
> Normally I do also.
>
> My $.02 on the matter.
>
> Last year I got a post card from Porsche U.S HQ, in Atlanta, inviting me to
> drop by my nearest Porsche dealer to sample their latest offerin
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 09:35:54PM +1100, Derby Chang wrote:
>
> An interesting exercise. Take two stuffed dodo models off to Mauritius,
> photograph them in their natural setting, and stitch multiple shots
> together. Strangely unsettling.
>
> http://www.slate.com/id/2136049/?nav=ais
Mostly t
No they don't.
A quick look at any world population website, and a few
rough calculations, would show that to be wildly inaccurate.
It's a commonly-repeated misconception, but that doesn't make it true.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 10:03:58AM -0500, Mishka wrote:
> according to Britannica, there's ro
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 11:28:21AM -0700, Tom C wrote:
> I actually can't distill down to a single favorite, probably because the
> subjects are so different. Maybe five, but not one.
>
> Tom C.
Even within a single subject area, it's hard to pick just one.
Here are a couple of mine (which mos
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 02:24:46PM -0500, Mishka wrote:
> yes they are, as a consequence of exponential population growth,
> which was the case in 19th and 20th senturies
>
> best,
> mishka
>
> On 2/17/06, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
wrote:
> do you mind sharing your "figures"?
>
> On 2/17/06, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm well aware of the exponential population growth.
> > I suggest that, rather than blindly repeating 'facts'
> > you've
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 03:10:42PM -0700, Tom C wrote:
>
> But also, we didn't see evolution take place. We don't see concrete
> evidence that it has taken place.
Then you're not looking, or you're ignoring the evidence.
Where do all those disease-resistant bacteria come from?
years ago), i am not sure
> what exactly you proved.
>
> best,
> mishka
>
> On 2/17/06, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Go here, for one example, to get a historical estimate of population.
> >
> > http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/world
Then I think you ought to go back and check those figures again.
The dpreview specifications show 0.95x (& 95%) for the D and DS.
A first read of the DS2/DL/DL2 specifications doesn't seem to give
a numeric value at all for viewfinder magnification, but the figures
that Adam quotes match my recol
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:14:14PM -0800, Rick Womer wrote:
> Why would an ist D underexpose only when in manual
> mode?
>
> (I'm toying with bidding for one on eBay that
> reportedly has this problem).
>
> Rick
It probably wouldn't. But it's quite possible that, if
the user is trying to use t
It would be legal for Thibouille to retype just the
numeric ratings from the lens tests. But scanning the
pages, or retyping the opinions & comments (except for
brief excerpts for the purpose of a critique) is not.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:50:44PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote:
> If it's legal to p
I regard that as even worse than just openly publishing them -
it's a tacit admission that you know you're doing something wrong.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:53:10PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote:
> You might put them in a "secret place" that requires a pasword. It's easy to
> make a pdf-file with a pa
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 04:41:45PM -0800, Mark Erickson wrote:
>
> By the way, I think that "fair use" is a concept specific to United States
> copyright law and legal precedent. What are the rules in Europe?
No - the "fair use" provision is spelled out in the international Berne
Copyright agree
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:50:05AM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> I wish Pentax would issue an update for the *ist D firmware at least to
> recognize more recent lenses.
>
> Joe
My *ist-D works just fine with the DA14, 16-45, etc., and I'm sure
Paul Stenquist has used the 12-24 on his *ist-D wit
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 05:15:16PM +0200, Roman wrote:
> There'se a freeware GNU Image Manupulation Program to work on your
> photos. Really great piece of soft with layers and many filters/addons
> available + ability to build own filters with convolution matrix
> feature. For Windows, MacOSX o
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:59:20PM -0700, Tom C wrote:
>
> I don't believe science can or ever will discover the true nature of God.
> On the other hand when it comes to determining cause and effect, if it
> turns out that the cause of the universe as we know it is a person, and not
> just a th
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 11:38:06PM -0800, Francis wrote:
>
> Tamron Adaptall SP 300mm F/2.8 LD (IF?)
I used to have one of these. Highly recommended.
(I only got rid of it because I came across an A* 300/2.8
at a great price).
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 08:47:17AM -0600, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2006, at 8:20, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> >
> >>Are you on a dialup? The pages scroll rapidly for me.
> >
> >I am on broadband. It's the fact that there are pages that
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:24:11AM -0800, Rick Womer wrote:
> Folks,
>
> S... I can probably pick up a used ist D for
> $700-800, looking at the recent prices on eBay and
> KEH.
>
> Worth it?
You can (theoretically) get a new, warrantied DS/DS2 for that.
Which to get depends on what is impo
Thanks to all who offered helpful advice.
Here's a shot of the race leaders rounding the final turn:
http://essence.goldenware.com/~johnf/amgen800.jpg
Obviously I can't have used my *ist-D for this, because -
as we're continually told - the *ist-D is no use for sports.
Maybe I borrowed t
I'd have preferred it without the idiot in the road, myself.
But that was the only opportunity I had. I chose the spot
(on the outside of the curve, contrary to some suggestions)
so that I could get the riders in sunlight - the tall buildings
meant that a lot of the downtown stuff was in shadow.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:53:24PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> I'm going to try to take some time off and head down to the Monterey Bay
> Aquarium for some R n R. Photographing the jellyfish exhibit has been on
> my "to do" list for a while. Has anyone photographed the exhibit - any
> suggesti
r results? In what way?
>
> Shel
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: John Francis <
>
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:53:24PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> > > I'm going to try to take some time off and head down to the Monterey Bay
> > > A
> Thanks to all who offered helpful advice.
>
> Here's a shot of the race leaders rounding the final turn:
>
> http://essence.goldenware.com/~johnf/amgen800.jpg
Now moved to
http://panix.com/~johnf/temp/AmgenTour1.jpg
A much better shot, from today's time trials:
http://panix.com
As has been pointed out many times, the reason the pros use
Canon (and, to some extent, Nikon) is for one reason - pro
support. If you can't get replacement gear at big venues,
loaner gear to try out new stuff, and rental equipment for
expensive occasional-use items, then the pros don't use it.
N
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:44:46PM +0100, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
>
>
> I bet it will have full K-mount compatibility . . .
I'll take that bet.
I'm waiting to find out if it has one or two control wheels.
Oh, and whether it can accept a battery grip. The body looks
more like the DS than the D, so I doubt if the BG-1 will fit :-(
Apart from that (and whether it takes CF cards) I doubt if I'll
be too disappointed - the buffer size and fra
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 12:18:05AM +0100, Dario Bonazza wrote:
> John Francis wrote:
>
> >I'm waiting to find out if it has one or two control wheels.
>
> Two. The one in front is visible. Do you think it could be the only one? I
> don't, since when it's si
That pretty much matches what I was told by a D200 owner - he'd
had no problems with his one (which he'd had for 3 months or so),
but he knew of some other owners who had run into the problem,
which Nikon had fixed free of charge.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 03:07:56PM -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 03:14:31AM +0100, P?l Jensen wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> >I would hope it has both selective modes and hyper modes.
>
>
> I hope it has the hyper function of the MZ-S where you can change instantly
> betwe
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 09:20:47PM -0500, K.Takeshita wrote:
> http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf
>
> DA16-50/2.8!
Now we know why there's a rebate on the 16-45/4
There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 03:47:41AM +0100, P?l Jensen wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >>DFA55/2.8
> >
> >This is for 645D
>
>
> That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label probably
> (almost certainly) indicate that it
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:27:11PM -0500, Mishka wrote:
> i think they are leveraging that with small limited lenses
> quite nicely. if there was a choice, usm or small primes,
> i would pick the second. perhaps that's not what "pros"
> need -- than i'm happy pentax is not "pro" oriented.
>
> best
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote:
>
> >There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well.
> >
> >Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
>
> Not really, it's a DA.
So's the 12
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:14:14AM -0500, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> >My sentiments exactly. I've just finished selling off the rest of my
> >pre-AF Pentax lenses (keeping only the A50/2.8 Macro) since I've replaced
> >all of them with the newer, better performing current series offerings.
> >Addin
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 01:47:33PM -0500, Adam Maas wrote:
> Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> >Who cares?
> >They can call it anything they like as long as it works well.
> >
> >If it doesn't, it'll be called a piece of junk. Or worse. ;-)
> >
> >Godfrey
>
> Well, it would be nice to have a name that's p
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:44:23PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass.
> >
> > -Adam
> >
>
> I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that.
> Paul
I'd say that the announcement of DA f2.8 zooms which replace t
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 10:20:36AM -0700, jtainter wrote:
> You all may recall that yesterday I fell for a pretty sophisticated eBay
> scam, and enterered my password on a fake site. I hadn't slept well the night
> before and was pretty tired.
>
> Immediately I changed passwords at eBay, Paypal,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 08:18:24PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote:
> A 5 FPS camera from Pentax (Autumn 2006) is a little late, isn't it?
>
> I am speaking from experience, you know. I have shot almost 30.000 frames
> with a *ist D. I believe I know very well, what I'm talking about.
>
> I don't really
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 01:18:59PM -0700, jtainter wrote:
> The AF point selector is the pad on the back. You set multi point or singe
> point on the sliding lever on the right.
>
>
> P??l
>
> --
>
> Thanks. Yes, I saw that. I guess it means that in multi-point, you cannot
> select
Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
> ---
>
>
> John Francis wrote:
> >On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 08:18:24PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote:
> >
> >>A 5 FPS camera from Pentax (Autumn 2006) is a little late, isn't it?
> >>
> >>I am speaking from ex
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> Hello Jens,
>
> One thing really surprises me - why would anyone ask for your advice
> concerning sports photography?
You know, that's the question I was asking myself.
Then, when I saw the example photographs he posted, which sup
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 10:25:26AM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote:
> I never blamed anybody or anything.
> I was declineing from recommending the *ist D for action photography.
If that was all you were doing - merely pointing out that there
were other, better solutions available for that task, I don't
th
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 12:37:04AM -0800, David wrote:
> I mostly shoot action (cycling, Cyclocross in particular), here's my
> humble thoughts.
. . . .
> 3) Find me one action photographer that wastes his space with raw
> files. They require lots of extra time to process. Most action
> pho
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 12:37:04AM -0800, David wrote:
> 6) I don't have a single AF lens with a faster f stop than 3.2. Guess I
> can't shoot action anymore :-(
That's the most ridiculous "complaint" in the diatribe
(although, I admit, there's some pretty tough competition).
Once you get out
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 10:47:18AM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Based on the size of the PEFs from the istD and the DS, anyone care to
> venture an educated guess as to the size of the PEF's generated by the
> 10mpx sensor?
16-17MB.
That's 15MB of raw data (10mpix of 12-bit data), plus a low-
q
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 02:58:34PM -0500, Jim King wrote:
> This is a lovely image, Derby. It invites me to contemplate the
> balance of the lines and forms, and the wonderful wash of light over
> it all. I hope that I can go to that art museum in NSW some day to
> stand there myself.
>
>
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 02:16:05PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> "I don't expect compression; it might save a few MB (based
> on estimates with compressed DNGs), but I'm not sure there
> is enough processing power available in-camera for this."
>
> Why not? The DS and DL are able to compress RAW
ce in various press venues, I'd say that magazine
> photographers shoot RAW, newspaper photographers shoot jpeg.
> Paul
> On Feb 25, 2006, at 1:24 PM, John Francis wrote:
>
> >On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 12:37:04AM -0800, David wrote:
> >>I mostly shoot action (
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 04:34:40PM -0500, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> BTW: In regards to PJ's being required to shoot RAW, most of teh high
> end PJ cameras will shoot RAW and full-res JPEG simultaneously.
So does the D (and siblings), actually - there's a full-res JPEG
hidden in that PEF file, and
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 01:38:31PM -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2006, at 1:16 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> >"I don't expect compression; it might save a few MB (based
> >on estimates with compressed DNGs), but I'm not sure there
> >is enough processing power available in-camera for
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 02:46:33PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> "> Why not? The DS and DL are able to compress RAW files."
> >
> "They don't compress. They pack two 12-bit quantities into
> three 8-bit bytes (unlike the D, which pads out to 16 bits),
> but there's no true compression"
>
> O
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 02:55:07PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> I hope also that the battery will continue to be CR-V3
> (accepting rechargeables and AA).
The feature I really want to see retained is a battery grip,
with a slide-out battery tray to hold the batteries.
On my recent cycle-rac
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 04:08:21PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> "All the current Pentax cameras use the same sensor, which
> produces an array of 12-bit values. But the file storage on a
> memory card uses a byte-organised architecture. This means that
> the 12-bit values from the sensor hav
Heck, even the venerable old 'D, with 1.1 firmware, can use 2GB cards.
So, for that matter, can FAT. It's going above 2GB that needs FAT32.
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 08:17:55AM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Good to know ... I don't know if I'd want a 4GB card, but 2GB is a definite
> possibilit
> kind of formatting or card type or software?
>
> Shel
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: John Francis
>
> > Heck, even the venerable old 'D, with 1.1 firmware, can use 2GB cards.
> >
> > So, for that matter, can FAT. It's g
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 01:24:24PM -0600, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "DagT"
> Subject: Re: More pics on PMA
>
>
> >Interesting unmarked switch on the back on the D...
>
> Hopefully they will be selling it with a battery grip that has vertical
> controls.
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 02:31:07PM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> Joe leaps.
> On Feb 26, 2006, at 1:01 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> >It appears that it will not take my CF cards, and that the
> >two-second delay is now relegated to a function menu.
> >
> >Very disappointing. That's two strikes a
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 12:50:12PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> Paul wrote:
>
> Joe leaps.
>
> On Feb 26, 2006, at 1:01 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
>
> It appears that it will not take my CF cards, and that the
> two-second delay is now relegated to a function menu.
>
> Very disappointing. T
There's a straight-on view from behind the camera at dpreview.
That means the relative size of the flash shoe and the CF door
are pretty much as shown. It looks a little too small for CF.
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 04:44:09PM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> We don't know that they didn't. If you eli
eb 26, 2006 at 01:51:27PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> New Egg has two or three 4BG SD cards listed on their site, all for around
> $200.00 or less. I'm sure other places have cards as well.
>
> Shel
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: John Francis
I agree. It's tempted me to have another try with the A* 200/2.8
and the 1.7x adapter. The first time I tried this combination on
the *ist-D (during my first try-out with the camera, I believe) I
was a little disappointed with the purple fringing around branches,
and attributed this solely to
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 05:34:33PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Yesterday I ordered an istDS2 from Adorama. The item was prominently
> posted on their site. It's time consuming to fill out all the forms and
> provide the information, but it had to be done ;-)) I was so happy to have
> found th
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 08:50:03PM -0500, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
>
> On Feb 26, 2006, at 8:17 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> > I've been happy with my
> >Transcend purchase, but I suspect I'd be just as happy with Kingston.
>
> My brother, a hardware and software reseller who deals with large
> c
Sure. You're far better off taking advice from someone who can't
get any acceptable images, and who blames that on the equipment.
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 08:55:13PM -0500, Herb Chong wrote:
> give 'em hell 8-). the people on PDML who think that getting one or two
> acceptable images makes t
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 10:40:29PM -0500, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
>
> On Feb 26, 2006, at 8:55 PM, Herb Chong wrote:
>
> >the people on PDML who think that getting one or two acceptable images
> >makes them a pro sports photographer is laughable.
>
> Oh dear... I hope that's not directed at me.
>
Duh - don't they know you need to use the green button?
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:16:34PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> I just heard on the news that a class action suit has been started in
> California. It seems that the camera isn't sufficiently "green." A vegan
> group is looking into the
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:02:41PM -0700, jtainter wrote:
> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/pma2006/Samsung/IMG_1769.jpg
>
> Is it an early look at the DA 50-135 in its S-K incarnation?
>
> Joe
No. For one thing, that's a 50-200 lens, not a 50-135.
D-XENON is the branding Samsung are putting
Is a 1.35x crop factor really that much better than a 1.5x?
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 03:27:09PM -0800, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> One has to wonder if the DA lenses would have any coverage problems
> with it. Certainly a sensor like this would raise some eyebrows.
>
> --
> Bruce
>
>
> Monday, Febr
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 11:37:07AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2006 at 19:20, John Francis wrote:
>
> > Is a 1.35x crop factor really that much better than a 1.5x?
>
> Yes because it provides for 10.7MPx capture with essentially the same
> physical
> pixel
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 01:04:40PM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2006 at 17:21, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>
> > That was the thought process I was following. Pentax is committed to
> > the DA lens size - we just don't know exactly how much bigger than the
> > APS sized sensor it might support
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 03:56:56PM +, mike wilson wrote:
>
> >
> > From: Sylwester Pietrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: 2006/02/28 Tue PM 03:49:23 GMT
> > To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net"
> > Subject: Re: Some more new camera speculation
> >
> > mike wilson wrote on 28.02.06 16:45:
> >
> >
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 08:54:12AM -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> USB 1.1 reader devices were fine when the average card capacity was
> 16-64Mbytes. With 1G and larger cards becoming the norm, they're no
> longer useful. A good 8-in-1 USB card reader (I use a Belkin) now
> costs on the o
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 01:20:42PM -0500, Adam Maas wrote:
>
> Reportedly the fastest option is the Delkin Cardbus CF reader, it's
> apparently around 4x faster than most USB2.0 readers. But it's CF only.
>
> -Adam
They now offer a 5-in-one version that reads SD as well.
Or I suppose you could
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 08:51:21AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 28 Feb 2006 at 13:11, John Francis wrote:
>
> > Hmm. So if the power contacts come back, presumably we would
> > get at least one more digital signal pin to control the in-lens
> > features (including, but
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:19:59AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 28 Feb 2006 at 15:59, William Robb wrote:
>
> > Considering that their first DSLR body was barely compatable with pre A
> > series lenses, I hardly think that anyone has led anyone on.
>
> The display of a FF DSLR followed by the
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 11:12:36PM -, John Forbes wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 23:00:08 -0000, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >With the announcement of the new body, and a lens roadmap that shows
> >those new f2.8 zooms arriving shortly afterwards, I feel
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 05:27:03PM -0600, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Rob Studdert"
> Subject: Re: Re: Some more new camera speculation
>
>
>
> >>I recall that Pentax was pretty blunt about the FF camera not being
> >>marketable due to sensor issues.
> >
> >So
I very much appreciate Bob and Ken and their well-informed posts.
Much of the information Bob gives was pretty well known at the
time (albeit not officially confirmed directly from Pentax), so
I'm not sure why there are so many alternative "explanations"
for the MZ-D never making it to the store s
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:53:02AM -0700, Tom C wrote:
>
> Some of us have compained that Pentax did not have an upgrade offering to
> the *istD. That was met with claims that the *ist D does everything they
> want, 6.1MP gave images with all the quality they wanted, why would we want
> someth
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:26:10AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 1 Mar 2006 at 10:24, K.Takeshita wrote:
>
> > Adding to this, Kyocra actually approached Pentax for help when they
> > (Kyocera) had been plagued by the noise problem (even at ISO100), as Pentax
> > had solved it at the time. But
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:55:34AM +, mike wilson wrote:
>
> Coming soon, to an energy-guzzling country near you: horse-drawn vehicles.
That happened, some thirty-odd years ago, back in the UK.
A few the small brewers caught on to the fact (as one of the
London brewers knew full well) that th
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 09:15:54AM +, mike wilson wrote:
> >
>
> Unlike the BBC reporter who went down the men's downhill with one pole
> and a video camera. Not sure if he's a hero or an idiot.
If that's the same video we saw in the USA it wasn't a reporter;
it was one of the alternates on
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 06:23:41AM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> A couple of years ago I was watching a fellow shoot a portrait for cover
> for a local magazine. He was using a 'blad, and shot three rolls of what
> was essentially the same pose, changed the setup, and shot another three
> rolls o
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 07:58:07AM -0500, Bob Shell wrote:
>
> The important thing that gets lost in all this techno-babble is that
> it WORKS. I can hand hold a 300mm at 1/15 second, without a monopod.
>
> Bob
Ah. Practical experience. Don't you know that disqualifies you
from posting an op
The first thing I did on my D, even before putting a
memory card in it, was to go through all the option
settings and change them to what *I* wanted.
That's pretty much what I did with the last couple of
film cameras, too - the ones with "Pentax Functions".
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:55:43AM +0
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:02:56AM -0500, Adam Maas wrote:
> Aaron Reynolds wrote:
> >
> >On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> >
> >>300mm f2.8 (600mm equivalent in 35mm)
> >
> >
> >And what, pray tell, does this little beastie cost?
> >
> >-Aaron
>
> Oops, the lens?
>
> $7000USD.
>
>
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:14:14PM -0500, Adam Maas wrote:
> John Francis wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:02:56AM -0500, Adam Maas wrote:
> >
> >>Aaron Reynolds wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> >
Add's a whole new meaning to the term "Compact Flash" :-)
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:06:57PM -0500, herb greenslade wrote:
>
> Hi Tom
>
> Know the feeling. One morning while getting ready for work, my wife called me
> to the patio door to see a hawk sitting on our fence.
> Ran to get my ca
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 07:39:46PM +, Cotty wrote:
> On 2/3/06, Rick Womer, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >That London brewery would be Young's. Ah, for a pint
> >of their "Ordinary" right now...
>
> Dahhh, I wash dishes in that.
>
> Fullers! Aaaah.
One of the nice things about worki
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:44:45AM -0800, Rick Womer wrote:
> That London brewery would be Young's. Ah, for a pint
> of their "Ordinary" right now...
>
> Rick
It would indeed. Many a pint of Young's Special, and quite
a few of their cooking bitter, found it's way down my throat.
One of the good
photo session. But, I guess for some, that's the
> new, modern way ...
>
> Shel
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: John Francis
>
> > > The rangefinder doesn't change the outcome but it does allow the
> > > photographer to be awa
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:26:55PM -0800, Powell Hargrave wrote:
> I was digging through some old negs and tripped over this one.
>
> http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/Image-X.htm
>
> Any old sixties lefties recognize these two?
Keep that up, and in a spirit of balance I'm going to have to see
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 11:00:25PM +, mike wilson wrote:
> Cotty wrote:
>
> He did look rather glum, Ron.
Eth? Is that you?
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 08:10:16PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> "Go away."
>
> Cotty
On the whole, I agree with Cotty.
The attitude we've seen so far seems far more suited to a google
group, where it's more reasonable to assume that most of the
members are idiots, and need to be told how to
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 04:16:24PM +0200, Roman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There's GIMP - Gnu Image Manipulation Program on Linux that works with
> layers, has numerous filters and tools to bild own or use already
> created scripts that for instance can sharpen image without bringinig
> noise. See www.gi
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 09:50:41AM -0500, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Mar 2006, Roman wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >There's GIMP - Gnu Image Manipulation Program on Linux that works with
> >layers, has numerous filters and tools to bild own or use already created
> >scripts that for instance can
601 - 700 of 3027 matches
Mail list logo
