Re: A head for a monopod?
- Original Message - From: "dosk" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 12:22 AM Subject: OT: A head for a monopod? Can one operate effectively with the camera screwed directly onto the top of a monopod, or would this be too rigid and awkward? (As I suspect...) Absolutely, get a small ballhead. And if this is not a good idea, then what would some of you recommend as a head for a monopod? Right now I'm thinking I'd like a ball head rather than a pan because of the compactness of size. This head would probably be strictly for the monopod and would not be switched to a tripod, so I don't want anything too elaborate. Can someone recommend a ball that they're using now with good results? I really like Bogen 3413QR (Manfrotto 308RC). Easy to use and clean. Depending on the monopod, you may need 1/4" to 3/8" adapter to mount the head. Under $50. Also available without quick release. For lightweight duty, it can be used on a tripod as well. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro
The original Cosina as well as Vivitar and Phoenix are also multicoated. But that brings up a question. How much of difference is there between Pentax SMC and multicoating on other modern lenses? The original SMC patent must have expired by now and anyone is free to use it. And anyway many manufacturers like Nikon and Zeiss licensed it back in the 70's. Pentax claims that SMC reduces loss of light transmission to 0.2%-0.3% compared to 5% for non-coated and 2% for single-coated lenses . How does multicoating on non-Pentax lenses perform? Of course this is more critical on complex zoom lenses than would be on this 5 element lens. I can tell you that Nikon's coating isn't as good as Pentax SMC, yet. I had some Nikkor AF just few years back and they had flare problem which my Pentax 20 yrs old SMC lenses do not. Even their high end 80-200/2.8 had quite a lot of flare when pointing to the light source. regards, Alan Chan _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: MZ3 vs. MZ5n
Yes, I have found Henry's listed prices are quite high too. regards, Alan Chan And ALWAYS negotiate price with these guys. In my experience (having been there several times now) they are about 30% high on most stuff, compared with what I'd expect if I shopped around a bit. For instance, they wanted $950 for an LX body that was in good, but not excellent, shape. I know, that's more than 30% high, but this is just one example. They do negotiate price to where it is at least reasonable. Mike Vancouver, Canada _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Given the expiration of original SMC patents, we might expect that most other manufacturers optics must be coated at least up to the level of the first SMC lenses. Even Pentax acknowledged recently that SMC is no longer a technology, but rather a brand name. However, in my experience this doesn't appear to be true. I've been playing with and examined pictures taken with original K lenses, BBAR Tamrons, Sigma, Canon L and common glass, zooms and primes included, and I can tell no one came even close to SMC. In fact, the modern Canons were among the poorest, flaring like an old russian single-coated Helios. Besides, Pentax upgraded SMC multicoatings with each new generation of lenses, and this is obvious with FA lenses performing visibly better in this respect than their 20 years old ancestors. Now latest FAs and Limiteds come in ghostless SMC flavor and owners attest it's truly superior. I cannot explain why other manufacturers - Nikon included - care so little about multicoating, nor do I understand why Pentax reluctantly advertises and sometimes even infirm (!) their unique technological advances, other than by a conspiration theory or a preference of marketing staff for maintaining a mystery aura around Pentax name ...or is it plain stupidity!? Servus,Alin SETH wrote: The original Cosina as well as Vivitar and Phoenix are also multicoated. But that brings up a question. How much of difference is there between Pentax SMC and multicoating on other modern lenses? The original SMC patent must have expired by now and anyone is free to use it. And anyway many manufacturers like Nikon and Zeiss licensed it back in the 70's. Pentax claims that SMC reduces loss of light transmission to 0.2%-0.3% compared to 5% for non-coated and 2% for single-coated lenses . How does multicoating on non-Pentax lenses perform? Of course this is more critical on complex zoom lenses than would be on this 5 element lens. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Who here uses a monopod?
In a message dated 1/24/01 10:43:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: going handheld tends to limit me to 400-speed film which tends to get a bit grainy for my liking. You must shoot the KODAK SUPRAS old boy, you must! *No* grain at ISO 100, limited to barely perceptible grain at 400, barely noticeable grain even at ISO 800! (in 4 x 6). And then, you'll simply *adore* that soft palette, those rich but muted colors; "aaah," film to die for! Mafud Zawadi Imaging Media Company [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Alin Flaider wrote: Given the expiration of original SMC patents, we might expect that most other manufacturers optics must be coated at least up to the level of the first SMC lenses. Maybe, but even if a patent has lapsed doesn't mean anyone else has figured out how to do it. I cannot explain why other manufacturers - Nikon included - care so little about multicoating, nor do I understand why Pentax reluctantly advertises and sometimes even infirm (!) their unique technological advances, other than by a conspiration theory or a preference of marketing staff for maintaining a mystery aura around Pentax name ...or is it plain stupidity!? Maybe lens coating isn't a very sexy thing to advertise? I've mentioned it in a few bars, but women seem to be unimpressed. No one accused them of being marketing geniuses tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT:Tamron 90/2.8 macro as a Portrait lens
Hi. I Have the old manual adaptall 2 verion of this lens, and its probably my most used prime lens by a long way. Its very nice for portraiture, and gives a nice flat image, with fairly shallow depth of field at 2.8. Also, it gives a lovely background effect wide open. I'd highly reccommend it. T. At 10:01 PM 1/24/01 -0800, herbet brasileiro wrote: Does anybody own this lens? I'd like to know how it would perform as a portrait lens since the Pentax 85 is so expensive. Can anybody elaborate on that? Herbet. __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - Terence Mc Goff | [EMAIL PROTECTED] If its worth doing, Its worth Overdoing. John William Corrington, Shreveport, 1956. PLease report all problems and flames to mailto:/dev/null ... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
MY WEBPAGE. AGAIN.
Hi, I have finally worked out the problem. It whould be ok now. http://www.volny.cz/ffranta/index.html Fr. Sorry - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
OT: developing prints in exotic chemicals
BC wrote: On 24 Jan 2001, at 11:01, Alin Flaider wrote: Hmm...20 minutes to develop a print in coffee? Yes, but how long to develop that same print in beer? I add: A bit shorter, but they are never in focus... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
- Original Message - From: "Alin Flaider" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "SETH" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:53 AM Subject: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro) Given the expiration of original SMC patents, we might expect that most other manufacturers optics must be coated at least up to the level of the first SMC lenses. Even Pentax acknowledged recently that SMC is no longer a technology, but rather a brand name. However, in my experience this doesn't appear to be true. I've been playing with and examined pictures taken with original K lenses, BBAR Tamrons, Sigma, Canon L and common glass, zooms and primes included, and I can tell no one came even close to SMC. In fact, the modern Canons were among the poorest, flaring like an old russian single-coated Helios. Ok, but has anyone here actually compared the images taken with Pentax 28-200 vs. the equivalent Tamron? Given its 16 element construction, one would expect any differences in coating to jump out. Or is this rebadged Tamron (and similarly Vivitar 100/3.5) simply an example where SMC is merely a "brand name"? Besides, Pentax upgraded SMC multicoatings with each new generation of lenses, and this is obvious with FA lenses performing visibly better in this respect than their 20 years old ancestors. Now latest FAs and Limiteds come in ghostless SMC flavor and owners attest it's truly superior. In fairness, it shouldn't be unexpected for owners of lenses to attest to their superiority. It'd be more surprising if someone bought an expensive lens and proclaimed that it was inferior to a cheap zoom. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
- Original Message - From: "tom" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 2:07 AM Subject: Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro) Alin Flaider wrote: Given the expiration of original SMC patents, we might expect that most other manufacturers optics must be coated at least up to the level of the first SMC lenses. Maybe, but even if a patent has lapsed doesn't mean anyone else has figured out how to do it. I may be confused, but isn't the whole point of the patent, that you publish that information, and once it expires, ANYONE can implement it? Besides several of the companies paid Pentax for the license to at least part of the original SMC. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Tom wrote: tv Maybe lens coating isn't a very sexy thing to advertise? I've mentioned tv it in a few bars, but women seem to be unimpressed. Remember thumb rules? Here's one completely outdated but almost every pointshooter worships: always keep the sun behind you. It often happens to me on beaches, etc. to be warned by "professionals" to avoid backlights and such. "Nope. I don't have this problem with my Pentax glass." "???". Now imagine how sexy is to show a backlit wet girl over the Pentax logo: "Only with our SMC lenses, the sun becomes your friend"... tv No one accused them of being marketing geniuses Yeah. When did Pentax hire last time an engineer in the marketing staff... Servus, Alin - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT: developing prints in exotic chemicals
mike wrote: mw Yes, but how long to develop that same print in beer? mw I add: mw A bit shorter, but they are never in focus... True, but then there's so much soul in it [the prints]... ;o) Servus, Alin - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Have you ever shot at or above 1/2000th sec and what were the circumstanc...
In a message dated 1/25/01 3:01:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BW: ORWO DK5, Dokument film, rated at anything from 3 ASA to 50 ASA depending on contrast and development. I used it for ultra fine grained landscapes at 3 ASA, one stop slower that my K2DMD would meter. Still have a bulk roll in the freezer. Clearly the winner in BW. ISO 3! Mafud Zawadi Imaging Media Company [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax name - why?
If that's true, then Pentax ps compacts should not be called Pentax at all. 8-) But then Leicas shouldn't be called Leicas, because they're no longer LEItz CAmeras, the Leitz family having sold the business some time ago now. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Las Vegas and Cameras
fredd wrote: About taking pictures of customers in a casino, legally you are maybe correct, but my advise would be to not take that risk. First ask permission. Some have their own guards and they have carte blanche with the local LEO's. Accidents do happen and cameras get dropped. I see your point Fredd, a little discretion should be used. Next time I will ask permission. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax AF330FTZ vs Metz 32 MZ-3
Try to buy the right product once is much better than buying a bunch of cheaper products. In the end, you might end up spending more with less, practically. Try to buy it once and buy it right, is one way to save money in the long term. Excellent advice! And well said. This makes me want to go right out and spend money on camera equipment. The Purchase Enabler could not have put it better himself. s --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Someone pointed out that Pentax is dropping SMC as a selling point. Does anyone think this is related to re-badging other makers lenses? If Pentax re-badges a Cosina lens, is SMC coated glass used? If not, your marketing department might want to de-emphasize SMC, just let the more sophisticated users (read old farts like us) know this. Regards, Bob S. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Re[3]: Have you ever shot at or above 1/2000th sec andwhat were the circumstances?
- Original Message - From: "Dave Evans" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 12:11 AM Subject: Re: Re[3]: Have you ever shot at or above 1/2000th sec andwhat were the circumstances? I've obviously led a very sheltered life- my entire photographic life of 16 years has been spent between B and 1/500. No exceptions, I truly believe. Maybe 10 or so at 1/500- usually 1/250 the minimum. In my photographic PENTAX-life since 1963 I used B, 1/4 - 1/250 and shorter times only to test cameras, never, never in real picture-productions for journals or clients. 1/4 sekonds handheld, head pressed on a wall an and ten takes, two were good in a islamic moshee at Usbekistan, no flash allowed and useless with f = 20 mm. Kristian-H. Schuessler - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax name - why?
Went to another site (Asahi Optical Historical Club), where they said that "one of the theories" (or words to that effect) is that "Pentax" is from PENTAprism refleX, but that that one is the most likely. The Unofficial Asahi Pentax Spotmatic Home Page seems to be of the opinion that PENTAprism asahifleX is more likely. Until I hear otherwise, I guess I'll have to defer to the Pentax corporate page, who proposes the former. Interesting, though. Probably aren't too many people still around who were there at the time the name was thought up. Not that it matters much... regards, frank Mike Johnston wrote: If that's true, then Pentax ps compacts should not be called Pentax at all. 8-) But then Leicas shouldn't be called Leicas, because they're no longer LEItz CAmeras, the Leitz family having sold the business some time ago now. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
OT: Ebay insanity
Wow! People are bidding more than they can get items for new. Bidding big bucks for things that don't even work. Some of the sellers want more for shipping and handling than the item they are selling is worth. I mean what kind of idiot would buy something for 4 or 5 bucks and pay $25 shipping? Tom, Generally, things that are common are great bargains. Things that are truly rare can also be great bargains (I recently bought a wonderful Carl Zeiss S-Orthoplanar enlarging lens, which is extremely rare and cost $3,000+ the last time it was catalogued by Zeiss). However, things which crop up regularly but aren't common can go for a lot of money, since they appear frequently enough to create pent-up demand but not often enough to satisfy that demand. For instance, it's easy to buy very nice Pentax MX's for $150 or less, since these show up often. BUT a very fine *black* MX just sold for $470 the other day--a price for which you could quite easily get three functionally perfect chrome ones. Also, as with everything used, condition matters--good bargains are to be had in slightly beat-up equipment, while "minty" samples attract the collectors like flies to, uh, fecal matter. It certainly helps to be aware of these things if you're selling, too. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: FA24-90 f3.5-4.5AL
So it is not an ED lens afterall. I found the PENTAX JAPAN's press release of FA24-90, dated 19th January, 2001. Alan, There's not much need for a lens that only goes to 90mm to use ED glass, which is used for the aberration correction in long telephotos. Lack of ED glass is no indication of low quality in this case. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
I think we can all be glad they don't. Otherwise the controls on the 5n might look like an IMASI 8080! (Though some of us might enjoy that...) Collin From: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yeah. When did Pentax hire last time an engineer in the marketing staff... *** "The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." --James Madison, Federalist 47 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Takehiko Ueda
Darren, Many thanks. Very useful. --Mike Mike, the following is everything I've seen on it. You may have seen all of this and it's nothing new to the group, but there are pics of the 31mm somewhere in here: http://digilander.iol.it/aohc/photokina2000e.htm Asahi Optical Historical Club report on Photokina http://www.mtu-net.ru/penta/archive/4/exhibition/photokina_eng.htm 2nd most comprehensive report! http://www.dpreview.com/news/0009/00092107photokina4.asp http://www.semiconductors.com/pip/FTF3020-C Info on the actual 6Megapixel CCD http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/pentaxxstarforum Lots of nifty info http://www.mtu-net.ru/penta/news/news.htm A good one to keep track of http://www.photim.net/Pentax/News3.htm This one's French :P Happy hunting! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Brothers and motherlands?!? (Was: Re: Takehiko Ueda)
Subject: Re[2]: Takehiko Ueda Rather unusual feeling to see my own name in the subject lines :-) Take, I for one am glad to have you here. It's nice to have a Pentax "brother" from Japan (mother country of Pentax s) online with us. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: sigma's APO (was: Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO MF lens for Pentax Ka mount)
Hi Frantisek, Here is my translation of Sigma's explanation from their Japanese web site; Sigma calls our lenses with minimum chromatic aberration "APO" series. snip With normal glass, low dispersion concave lenses and high dispersion convex lenses are used to correct chromatic aberration. However, this way, you can only correct chromatic aberration of, at most, two colours. The rest are called "second spectra". In APO series, Sigma adopts ELD (Extraordinary Low Dispersion) and SLD (Special Low Dispersion) glass in order to control the second spectra to the limit. This gives our APO series high contrast and excellent resolution. I'm not so confident in the technical terms... Anyway, from what they insist, Sigma's APO seem to correct three colours indeed. I haven't tested it in such a strict way, though. Hope this helps you. Sincerely, Take Ueda, Osaka, Japan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.tripod.co.jp/hayatama/photo/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Re[2]: Develop Film in Coffee (was Re: Toxicity)
Hmm...20 minutes to develop a print in coffee? Yes, but how long to develop that same print in beer? :-P Ah, but there is a great advantage of beer development over coffee development. With coffee you will always get a very poor negative, but with beer, you drink a few and then you say to hell with dopey useless experiments and go back to trusty old D-76. s --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax name - why?
Hi, in Photo Magazin I once read that at first Pentax was not allowed to sell cameras in Germany under the name Pentax because Pentacon claimed that Pentax name was to close to their's Pentacon. To refrase it, the derivated name "Pentax" had to similiar origin to "Pentacon". It happened in mid sixties, if I remember correctly. It lasted few years long until they obviously setled for some solution. Ciao, Matjaz Frantisek wrote: I can't find how Pentax named their line... Pentax. When was it first used? It seems to me to be an abbrev. of Pentaprism Contax, the famous Carl Zeiss pentaprism camera (which gave name to Pentacon made by Carl Zeiss Jena affiliated company, which invented the M42 mount -PENTAprism CONtax). So did Pentax just "steal" Pentacon's name idea, or is there some other word behind it? Just curious, sorry ;) Frantisek Matjaz Osojnik, B.Sc.M.E. Hajdrihova 4, IBE, d.d., 1000 Ljubljana Slovenia Europe - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Toxicity city
So, okay, lessee, I'm mixing up glacial acetic acid...do I add the water to the acid or the acid to the water...it has something to do with an automobile club, AAA...something to do with alphabetical, can't remember what...there's a little rhyme that tells me...what was that again? ***BOOOM!!!*** large explosion; darkroom blows apart; sound of sirens in distance g --Mike P.S. With acetic acid there's no severe reaction when adding the water to the acid. Again, if you're uncomfortable mixing acid for stop bath, just buy 28% concentration--it's harmess and you can't hurt anything mixing it. Stop bath mixed for use has about the same acidity as orange juice or urine. It's not toxic and it's not a carcinogen. It can't burn anything and it won't hurt your eyes. It won't hurt your fingers even if you always use your hands to move your prints along. I have to add that personally, I just fix a tray of water and then add a dash of glacial, which I buy in gallon jugs that last darn near forever and make a very cheap stop bath. I think once you learn what you need to know about this stuff, it's not particularly useful to overthink it to death. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: CHEM. POISONING (was: Toxicity) (Longish, but full ofmemories)
When Kennedy was shot... Great post, JoMac. Thanks. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Cable Switch F
In a message dated 1/25/01 4:14:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It continues to amaze my the prices some are willing to pay on eBay. Time and time again I've seen stuff sellused for way more than what you can buy the item new for... And they pay hyped-up SH on top of the overpriced stuph! But remember, the Internet allows people living in places far removed from medium or large sized towns, where they might expect to patronize a comprehensive camera store, to buy merchandise otherwise not available to them. We living in the large gig-a-sized cities and serious metro areas, may have three or four rather complete camera stores relatively close by, where they have *nothing at all*. We are so used to walking, legal larceny on our minds, into the local shop ready to pounce on any "bargain" we see. We even crawl their old parts bins in the back of the store, peeking here, poking there, trying to discover a hidden treasure. "Aha!" we say when we find that little whatchamacallit we've been looking for. We carry it to the counter, we ask "how much?" The sales rep, looking at the part as if it were newly minted, says "$12.95." We know he could sell it for $5 but no, it suddenly has value all out of proportion to what it's worth and we pay, grumbling under our breath. So any part, flash, lens the "outlanders," like the Aussies, might need, regardless of how we fortunate might feel about the thing, it is *not* overpriced to them. The old "A bird in the hand, is worth two in the bush" thing applies here more aptly than most anywhere. As in: how many of us will ever actually *see*, not even speak *touching* a real, live barely used f/1.2 SMC 50mm? Hmmm? Not very damn likely if at all. And so, we whip out the plastic, planning to wheedle at least a store guarantee from them because we know the manufacturer's warranty is kaput. What really frosts us is when another shooter, whom we only know from bumping into him at an open shoot, tells us on our next visit to the local shop how *little* he paid for an f/1.2 50mm on eBay. We want to throttle him. So, you grab the bird... Mafud Zawadi Imaging Media Company [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re:Have you ever shot at or above 1/2000th sec and what were the circumstances?
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 19:36:33 +1300, David A. Mann wrote: Mafud surveys: Q: Have you *ever* had an occasion to shoot at or above 1/2000th sec. shutter speed? What were the circumstances? I have on occasion. Usually when doing a macro shot of something bright near wide-open with 400-speed film. I think the fastest I've shot is 1/4000th. Even with the f/32 available on my SMC-P 400/5.6, I sometimes need a faster shutter than 1/2000th when shooting ASA 400 film in bright Atlanta summer daylight. Q: What's the fastest (box rated) film you've ever shot? 1600 What's the slowest? Me? KODAK Gold (RG) ISO 25. 64 TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT:Tamron 90/2.8 macro as a Portrait lens
Hi Herbet, On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:01:39 -0800 (PST), herbet brasileiro wrote: Does anybody own this lens? I'd like to know how it would perform as a portrait lens since the Pentax 85 is so expensive. Can anybody elaborate on that? I have the Tamron SP 90/2.5 version of this lens, but I don't usually take portraits, so I can't really comment on it for that use. I did use it to take some "portraits" of one of my cats, and I was very pleased with both the color rendition and the sharpness. Unfortunately, the circumstances in which I used it didn't lend themselves to seeing and analyzing the lens' bokeh. I did not, though, do any sort of real analysis, I'm just reacting to the one roll of photos I've shot with that lens so far. :-) TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT: A head for a monopod?
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 07:19:05 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I regularly screw the camera directly to the monopod. Although some kind of head sounds good, it never seems to work for me. I spend too much time fooling with the head, getting things in position. Tilting the monopod a bit works best for me. I typically use a medium ball head on the monopod. I move the monopod around to make small corrections, but the ball head is there for major ones. For example, I like to keep the 'pod extended all of the time, so I don't have to keep messing with it. If I go from standing to sitting, I can simply "bend" the ball head a bit to get the 'pod out in front of me, and "straighten" the head again when I stand up. This is much less trouble, to me, than extending and collapsing the 'pod. TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Bob S. wrote: BS Someone pointed out that Pentax is dropping SMC as a selling point. BS Does anyone think this is related to re-badging other makers lenses? BS If Pentax re-badges a Cosina lens, is SMC coated glass used? Bob, all rebadged lenses, be it Tamron or Cosina, are clearly labeled SMC. It would be quite offensive to print SMC on a glass that has nothing in common with SMC, would it!? Moreover, assuming they are indeed SMC, then we can conclude any third party manufacturer is capable of coating glass with SMC layers, and this only adds to the initial confusion: why isn't SMC widely used if it's free and technologically affordable? BS If not, your marketing department might want to de-emphasize SMC, BS just let the more sophisticated users (read old farts like us) know this. Why depreciate your entire product range? It would really make sense to differentiate between SMC and non-SMC lenses, just like they did with Takumars 20 years ago. Servus, Alin - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax AF330FTZ vs Metz 32 MZ-3
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 06:38:29 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote: Try to buy the right product once is much better than buying a bunch of cheaper products. In the end, you might end up spending more with less, practically. Try to buy it once and buy it right, is one way to save money in the long term. Excellent advice! And well said. This makes me want to go right out and spend money on camera equipment. The Purchase Enabler could not have put it better himself. s Good quality tools are bought once, poor ones repeatedly. :-) TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: CHEM. POISONING (was: Toxicity) (Longish, but full of memories)
JoMac wrote: the photographic lab at Naval Air Station Miramar, San Diego, California had to produce a moderate to humongus number of panchromatic and color 8 x 10 prints in short order. The Kennedy job involved over 24 hours of printing from 4 x 5 dupe negatives using six enlargers. We took turns processing these prints, by hand.. Wow! Very close to my memories, though I didn't realize that sailors were taught these mass production procedures. I did work with several Marine Corps photogs that appeared to have no problems with chemical exposure while we were still in the business. One did develop severe problems with warts on his hands. Sickbay said the warts were being aggravated by the chemicals and required him to wear latex gloves. Another developed a very bad case of blood poisoning. If I remember correctly, he had very dry, cracked skin at the time, and was working strictly in the color print lab. He was transferred out of the photo MOS (job assignment.) Today, I have the same very dry cracked skin hand problems that JoMac described. Now to explain why I didn't think sailors were taught these mass production techniques... While assigned to headquarters of the Atlantic Fleet Marine Force in the early '70's, we frequently were tasked to produce massive press releases on the order of those described by JoMac. At the same time I was frequently assigned aboard a ship with a very nice photo lab during NATO exercises. After spending a couple of days with an AMTRAC platoon on another ship without a darkroom, and assaulting a beachhead, I returned on the first evening of the actual exercise to develop not only my film (~30 rolls BW and 15 rolls transparency) but the film of every Marine Corps photojournalist, public affairs officer (PAO), and combat artist above the rank of Gunnery Sergeant (read commissioned officers/gentlemen.) That was about a dozen other people. Some of them shot a lot of film that first day. After printing all the contact sheets, the senior PAO comes down to the photo lab from the officers' mess and selects around 30 BW negatives that he wants several hundred 8x10s of each for immediate release to the civilian and military press. Since I was the lowly corporal, and probably the only one of these photogs who actually knew anything about a darkroom, I figured I was going to spend the remainder of the exercise in the darkroom. One of ship's photo lab Chiefs thought this wasn't fair that I was going to spend the entire exercise in the dark, so he offered to have his sailors make the prints for me during the night, they worked the night shift anyway, so I could get 3 or 4 hours sleep and take photos the next day. I explained the PAO's cropping requirements and the techniques JoMac described. I even printed 2 negs and in effect demonstrated the techniques. When I awoke at 4:00 (3 hours sleep) I found the sailors had made exactly 150 prints of 1 negative. They were printing/developing them one at a time. After that I always figured they didn't teach those techniques to sailors. The chopper left the flight deck for the command base in the Turkish Thrace every morning at 6:00. Between 4:00 and 6:00 I was able to finish 10 more negatives, for about a third of what my PAO had requested. I got my butt chewed for a long time that morning, and was told that I could return to the field every morning to shoot photos. BUT, I was to be on the afternoon chopper back to the ship and print ALL of the requested negatives each and every night. AND I was not to rely on the Navy for anything other than the facilities. AND if I failed at this, well, he reminded that since I was a former MP I did know what a brig was like. For the next 7 days, I think I only slept while riding in a chopper or jeep, probably not even 3 hours/day. The journalist, who was junior to me, had orders to wake me if anything happened. When we got to Istanbul, after the exercise, I slept through the first 2 days of liberty. Then on the last day of liberty, I took a tour of Aya Sofya, a cathedral converted to a mosque, and the Blue Mosque, a Sultan's palace. I shot a lot of available light Ektachrome, not only of the beautiful mosques but also of a very interesting city. When I returned to the ship to develop my transparencies, I learned (the hard way) that another sailor had contaminated the E-6 chemicals. All of my slides had a purple cast. After that I had a real chip on my shoulder towards sailors. ; ) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT:KEH has been very,very good to me.
I ordered 3 Super Programs from KEH and they all had shutter problems. I finally bought one from a private individual that is perfect and near mint (the camera, that is). I think SPs are getting a little too old to have a lot of confidence in, if you don't know their history. Thanks, Ed - Original Message - From: "Steve Larson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 7:56 PM Subject: OT:KEH has been very,very good to me. Hi all, I`ve got to tell about the nightmare Super Program from KEH, it acted like it was`nt syncing with the flash, then it was determined that the shutter magnets were the problem, KEH replaced the shutter long after the 90 day was expired, because it was an intermittent problem. I got it back and had the shutter tested, and the speeds were way off. My repair guy said you could adjust the shutter tension, but would lose 1/2000s. We thought about returning it, but thought there was no way. I called Scott Faust at KEH this morning and he said that he was very disappointed about their camera repair, and to send it back, and he`ll fix it, or replace it. I can`t praise him enough. Was I being to picky? Don`t answer that. The camera was a birthday present for the wife, her confidence level is not too high with a SLR, but when it comes back this time, maybe that`ll change. Thanks for listening to my rants, Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Manual Focusing on the PZ-1P?
Hello. If you are using a manual focusing lens on the PZ-1P and do not switch the camera to manual, will this damage the camera? As always, thanks. Francis - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Brothers and motherlands?!? (Was: Re: Takehiko Ueda)
Make that 2! He's down in Osaka and I'm up here in Tokyo... Cheers, Jeff From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 07:06:36 -0600 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Brothers and motherlands?!? (Was: Re: Takehiko Ueda) Take, I for one am glad to have you here. It's nice to have a Pentax "brother" from Japan (mother country of Pentax s) online with us. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax name - why?
Mike Johnston wrote: If that's true, then Pentax ps compacts should not be called Pentax at all. But then Leicas shouldn't be called Leicas, because they're no longer LEItz CAmeras, the Leitz family having sold the business some time ago now. And let's not overlook Leica's involvement with Minolta, who has made bodies for them, and Leica's reliance on, to me at least, an unknown Japanese lens maker for some of their lenses. Very similar to Pentax's reliance on others to make lenses sold with the Pentax name. In today's complex world, competitors in one arena are business partners in another. Some Nikons are made by Cosina, who also makes the Voigtlander, and who also manufactures lenses that are marketed with a number of different names on them, and where "Made in Japan", which used to be an indicator of poor quality, and which rose to the pinnacle of quality, now has little significance, as Japanese gear is made in the Philippines, Korea, China (Taiwan) and other countries. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't Rollie even owned by a Korean firm? The brand you buy today may have very little to do with who made it and where it was manufactured. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Have you ever shot at or above 1/2000th sec and what were the circumstances?
Aaron Reynolds wrote: What's the slowest? Me? KODAK Gold (RG) ISO 25. Tech Pan at ISO 6, but that doesn't really count, so Agfapan 25 and Agfa Ultra 50 and Fuji Velvia 50. Aaron - have you never shot Panatomic-X? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Who here uses a monopod?
Thanks Dave, that sounds like it might work for me. 400 isn't offensive to me, as my occasionally unsteady hands are likely to degrade the image beyond the effects of granularity with the better 400 films. I think Bogen/Manfrotto sells a head that only offers limited movement specifically for monopods (can't remember the name of it at the moment), maybe an alternative to your ballhead? Take care, Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dan Scott writes: I've been considering this, since is the type of photo I seem to be doing mostly. What is the hassle factor with adjusting the pod for height? I guess I'm thinking primarily about insects and other quick moving things. How does it work out, do you carry it around with camera attached and pod extended or collapsed or what? I usually carry it with one section extended which makes it tall enough for me to crouch on one knee, or two sections which is just below "standing" level. Flowers don't move very quickly so adjusting the height is not a problem. Most of my adjustments only involve one leg-section so its pretty quick to change. I find the most annoying thing is adjusting the ball head, although I can tilt the whole monopod a little when necessary. For anything that moves fast I either chase it with a handheld rig or just do my best not to scare it off. Unfortunately going handheld tends to limit me to 400-speed film which tends to get a bit grainy for my liking. Cheers, - Dave - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Brothers and motherlands?!? (Was: Re: Takehiko Ueda)
And Yoshihiko Takinami makes three. Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Make that 2! He's down in Osaka and I'm up here in Tokyo... Cheers, Jeff Subject: Brothers and motherlands?!? (Was: Re: Takehiko Ueda) Take, I for one am glad to have you here. It's nice to have a Pentax "brother" from Japan (mother country of Pentax s) online with us. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Alin Flaider wrote: Bob, all rebadged lenses, be it Tamron or Cosina, are clearly labeled SMC. It would be quite offensive to print SMC on a glass that has nothing in common with SMC, would it!? Moreover, assuming they are indeed SMC, then we can conclude any third party manufacturer is capable of coating glass with SMC layers, and this only adds to the initial confusion: why isn't SMC widely used if it's free and technologically affordable? That's an unwarranted conclusion. The coatings may be done under direct Pentax supervision. It's even possible that the elements are coated by Pentax, in a facility that they control. It's even possible - although I'm not saying that it's being done - that there's a "coating factory" somewhere that coats the elements for Pentax and Contax badged lenses, and maybe some others as well. And who's to say that SMC is substantially different - or even any different - than some other coatings? Remember, according to some historians, Pentax and Zeiss worked on developing multi-coated lenses together, so it's not too much of a stretch to assume that, at least the CZ T* lenses are coated similarly to the Pentax SMC lenses. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Manual Focusing on the PZ-1P?
There no gears on a TRUE manual focus lens to interact with anything on the PZ-1p. Should be no problem. Thats how you would use TRAP FOCUS! At 09:45 AM 1/25/01 -0500, you wrote: Hello. If you are using a manual focusing lens on the PZ-1P and do not switch the camera to manual, will this damage the camera? As always, thanks. Francis - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT: (Somewhat) Is this true for you?
A scroll of mail from Tom Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:43:45 -0500 Read it? y If you mean a 1:1 viewfinder image, yes it does vary with viewfinder magnification. That is why many of the old SLRs had 55-58mm normal lenses, with the vf magnification they had that gave a 1:1 magnification. They thought that photographers would want to use the camera with both eyes open. Yes, I know what you mean, but my point was that your own 'normal' focal length will vary with the combination of camera and lens that you use. For me, with a MZ-5 and an zoom, the image in the viewfinder is the same as the other eye at about 70mm. However, I find that when I concentrate on something I see approximately the same angle of view that I do with a 100mm lens. If I am not concentrating I have a 20-21mm view with both eyes. This is what I meant. If you're looking at a sunset, or an open vista, your eyes are taking in a huge field of view and almost any lens will feel too narrow. Conversely, if you're intent on a particular detail then your eyes change their perceived focal length to match. What is normal to you will depend on what you're doing. I also find the 100 (FA macro) to be a great normal lens sometimes, but that depends on what else I've been using recently. dave - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
OT: Camping at Grandfather Mountain
During the Nature Photo Weekend, camping spaces are available first come/first served in the picnic area inside the property. It's primitive, meaning there are no showers. There is also the possbility that one of the lower meadows will be opened for camping, though that's not yet been confirmed. Please note that, as Tom R. pointed out, the property closes at 7pm, which means there's a big gate. Camping on the property means your car/truck/large mode of transportation is locked in too, and to get off the property requires a.) an emergency and b.) finding someone with a key. Running out of cigarettes does NOT constitute an emergency. I guess you could park outside the gate and walk up to the picnic area, but there's liability there as well, and walking on the road is strongly discouraged. But what if you stay outside the property and want to get up top to take some sunrise photos? If there's enough interest, we usually arrange to have someone at the gate around 5-5:30am until right before 8am, when the park opens for the day. Staying on the property is much more fun; you can hang with your Pentax posse until late in the night. Heck, we've been known to sit up until 10:30 or so. woo woo, Doug - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT: developing prints in exotic chemicals
mike wilson wrote: BC wrote: On 24 Jan 2001, at 11:01, Alin Flaider wrote: Hmm...20 minutes to develop a print in coffee? Yes, but how long to develop that same print in beer? I add: A bit shorter, but they are never in focus... Well, they're a bit fuzzy, but all the subjects look *real* good tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip And the *ONLY* film that can outscan it is... tada! SUPRA 100*! *World class portraits with SUPRA 100. How do you like it compared to the Portras in terms of color and contrast? Do you have some scans to show us? tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Filter Test
I've taken the plunge and ordered several Pentax SMC filters, and would like to compare them to B+W and Hoya filters (because those are the ones I have). However, I don't really know much about testing procedures, so I'm asking the list for some suggestions. Here's what I'd like to do: First, shoot a few frames of slide film with one of Pentax's finest lenses, sans filter, and using a few different apertures - wide open, a stop or two down, f/8.0 and f/11.0, and at the smallest aperture. Then I'd repeat the test, using the same apertures, with each filter. My first thought is of which lens to use. It's been said that longer lenses suffer most from image degradation when used with a filter, so it would seem that a lens in the 100mm or greater focal length would be a better choice to see any degradation than, for example, a 50mm or wide angle lens. So, here are the lens choices. Which do the "testing mavens" suggest as being the better lens for this experiment: A*85/1.4 K85/1.8 K105/2.8 K135/2.5 M150/3.5 A*200/2.8 A*300/4.0 A100/2.8 macro A*200/4.0 macro I'm thinking that the faster lenses may be the better choice as the difference between wide open and a mid aperture is greater, and any qualitative differences between wide open and smaller apertures may be easier to see. A test for flare and image degradation by a light source just inside and just outside the frame seems like a good option. Since the sun could vary somewhat in its intensity if I couldn't shoot everything at about the same time, would an incandescent light source work as well, or should I try to get everything done at once using the sun as a light source? What might you recommend as a test subject? Using something that doesn't move seems ideal, although a brick wall may not provide the sort of visible detail needed. Any other testing suggestions? Bill, would you be willing to examine the results under your microscope? I know you've got a pretty full plate with the PUG, so let us know. Does anyone else have the ability to examine and photograph slides for this experiment? Is slide film the best choice for this? It seems to allow for fewer variables. Can someone make a case for color negative film? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Primes vs. Zooms: Unusable Sharpness?
The quote below came up on rec.photo.film+labs. It brings up something I've often wondered about, to wit: If most films can resolve less than most lenses, and most scanners can resolve less than most films, why are prime lenses considered superior to good zooms? It would seem at first glance that the extra lens sharpness of a prime would not translate into extra image sharpness. I use several zooms for, of course, their convenience, but also have three primes that I use often. This isn't meant to start a flame war. I've seriously wondered about this for some time. Thanks, Joe "If you use film, the only thing you will be testing is the film itself since film see only about 10 to 20% of the resolution the lens will see. "An example: A typical f4 lens will have about 500 lines per millimeter with noon daylight summer sun. Most picture type ASA 50 to 400 films will record betweent 50 to 100 l/mm from this 500 l/mm image or about 10 to 20%. "Special aerial recon films can do up to about 350 l/mm or 60+% but ASA ratings are down under 10." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Sigma 28-105 F2.8-4
Hello all, what do you think about the Sigma 28-105 F2.8-4 I am thinking to buy this lens to replace my pentax FA 28-70 F4. In the 28-70 range, is the sigma as good as/better/worse than pentax? Thanks for any advice, Alex -- --- Alexandre A. P. Suaide, Ph.D. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Physics Department University of Sao Paulo - BrazilPhone: 1-313-577-5419 Wayne State University - MI -USAICQ number: 78139605 --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Manual Focusing on the PZ-1P?
Well, the only manual focus lens I use now (on a Pentax body) is the Zenitar 16mm. fisheye. The first time I put it on my 1p, the shutter wouldn't fire. I cursed and went through the manual, then thought to set the body to manual focus. Of course then it worked fine. Joe Re: Manual Focusing on the PZ-1P? * From: Tiger Moses * Subject: Re: Manual Focusing on the PZ-1P? * Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 07:45:33 -0800 There no gears on a TRUE manual focus lens to interact with anything on the PZ-1p. Should be no problem. Thats how you would use TRAP FOCUS! At 09:45 AM 1/25/01 -0500, you wrote: Hello. If you are using a manual focusing lens on the PZ-1P and do not switch the camera to manual, will this damage the camera? As always, thanks. Francis - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. l.net/msg04250.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
RE: developing prints in exotic chemicals
At 14:00 25.1.2001 +0300, you wrote: Mike's add: A bit shorter, but they are never in focus... --- What difference will be between dark (Irish) and light (Holland) beer? Speed of developing, tones, colour shifting? Also maybe other kinds of alcohol: gin, whisky, etc... Den I am sorry, I know only BEERS' developer, not BEER developer (but the BEERS' was even promoted by Anselm Adams!) Fr. Wouldn't develop in beer, you might found out it WORKED, and you would never drink beer again afterwards! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
I doubt if the SMC formula is unknown to other manufacturers. They have their own coatings, and most of the time wouldn't risk the legal problems of using Pentax's formula without licensing. It seems to me that if Pentax wants a lens with a low cost, and Cosina or some other company has lower production costs than Pentax, then the most economical approach for Pentax would be to license the SMC formula for a specific production run of lenses that get stamped "Pentax." I think I read once that Pentax licenses some of its technology to other companies. Joe Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro) * From: Rfsindg * Subject: Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro) * Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 04:49:29 -0800 Someone pointed out that Pentax is dropping SMC as a selling point. Does anyone think this is related to re-badging other makers lenses? If Pentax re-badges a Cosina lens, is SMC coated glass used? If not, your marketing department might want to de-emphasize SMC, just let the more sophisticated users (read old farts like us) know this. Regards, Bob S. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. * Follow-Ups: o Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro) + From: Alin Flaider archive.com/pentax-discuss%40-- Chronological -- t/msg04246.h - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Test
Test - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Look through your Family Vacation Pictures
In a message dated 1/25/2001 1:46:23 PM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi! Please look through your family vacation pictures and see what percentage [approximate] of the pictures were taken with [a] Wide angle lenses below 35 mm [b] 50 to 100mm lenses and [c] above 100 mm lenses. If you are using zoom, what zoom range you use most? In my case most pictures were taken with wide angel lenses. With thanks. Looking through more than three decades of vacation photos is a tall order. I can give you a very rough estimate for whatever it is worth. About 25% are wider than 50 with well over half of those at 28 or wider. Maybe 20% were taken in the 50-100 range. The remainder, obviously, fall into the 100+ range. For better or worse, I tend to drift toward the "more is less" theory. Regards, Ed Matthew in Indianapolis - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
RE: SMC again
This is from an article called "Flare control in multi-coated lenses of the Seventies",By Dario Bonazza. It has interesting info about SMC. Full text at: http://digilander.iol.it/aohc/selart07e.htm When Asahi Opt. Co. introduced their Super-Multi-Coated Takumar lenses in 1971, there were many different reactions to this announcement. According to an article authored by Fabio Amodeo and published in September of 1972 by Photo 13 magazine, Nikon stated that they already employed multi-layer coatings (up to three or four) on some lens surfaces and Asahi was fooling photographers, since no more than 5 layers were technically possible. Also Canon and Leitz said they were developing a similar process, but 7 layers was far from being credible. To the contrary, Fuji said they were ahead, since they already had developed their own EBC (electron-beam coating) technology up to 11 layers, employed on some lenses for movie cameras on occasion of 1964 Olympic Games. Further in reaction of the Asahi announcement, Fuji said they were going to use EBC on camera lenses very soon. As I already wrote, Asahi didn't invent the multicoating, since they bought patents from Optical Coatings Laboratories Inc. (OCLI), based in California. The merit of Asahi Opt. Co. was to understand the importance of anti-reflective coating, looking for the proper technology, developing their own industrial process and put it into production at acceptable costs. That marked a turning point in the evolution of photographic optics, allowing the development of modern ultrawide-angle and wide-range zoom lenses. With the growing popularity of zoom lenses and their ever-increasing focal length extension (needing more and more elements), multicoating became almost as necessary as glass in order to obtain quality optics. It is believed that nearly all major lens makers (including Canon, Nikon and Zeiss) paid royalties to Asahi to make use of some part of the industrial process for laying thin anti-reflective compounds on glass elements at acceptable costs. Leica obviously distinguished itself by stating that multicoating was of little help and reducing the number of elements was better for flare control. Of course, when Asahi patents on multicoating expired many years later, they suddenly changed their minds and started using multicoating like all other manufacturers. J. John Cohen, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Immunology, B-184 University of Colorado Medical School Denver, CO 80262, USA phone: +1 303 315-8898 fax: +1 303 315-5967 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?)
In a message dated 1/25/01 8:28:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Subj: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?) Date: 1/25/01 8:28:53 AM Pacific Standard Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tom) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip And the *ONLY* film that can outscan it is... tada! SUPRA 100*! *World class portraits with SUPRA 100. Mafud, in explaining his use of SUPRA, says: I shoot mostly people of color. I used KODAK EKTAPRESS almost exclusively since 1995. SUPRA is the emulsion replacing EKTAPRESS. Both EKTAPRESS and SUPRA, unlike emulsions formulated to reproduce either greens and blues (Fuji) very well or reds/oranges (Kodak) do a lousy job reproducing Black or otherwise "dark" skin. SUPRA and EKTAPRESS take away a lot of the "white skin" penalties in color film when shooting people of color. Both handle the dread "specular" highlights** (shiny spots on black skin) very well. Because both are medium contrast emulsions, both treat fair skin as it is seen. *We've all seen the images; black male subject, looking shiny and greasy (because the sorry photographer, who don't know diddly about shooting black skin, (has the subject smear his face with petroleum jelly then wipe most of it off ), and doesn't know what to do with the specular highlights decides that "shiny all over" is the best way to shoot this client (remember all those Michael Jordan commercials, His "Airness," bald and greasy)? Well, by damn, today "shiny all over" is the almost universal "style" when shooting black males. *Almost without exception, "pro" or amateur, modern print and slide emulsions are also formulated to give white skin a "glow" or "tan." Even Casper, the ghostly white "friendly Ghost" would have a tan with most modern color emulsions. What looks "healthy" or "good" on white skin is intensified in a negative way in Black skin. Worse, using most modern emulsions, any shadows in portraits of people of color are most times a sickly green-black or blue-black. Only full face, "Hollywood lighting" (strobe on top, reflector on bottom, strobe to camera right/left elevated just above the subject's eyes) works to fully illuminate black skin. The worse attribute of most modern emulsions with black skin? The eyes most times are *not* illuminated and when they are, the whites look "distorted" (actually extra white), drawing attention to the eyes in an unglamorous way. *Black women wearing blue, green, white, silver, gold, light yellow make-up over their eyelids or brows or red blush (since black people as a rule cannot "blush") [blush: a reddening of the subcutaneous layer of human skin because of a pooling of blood], many times look like caricatures of themselves in that most (white) portrait photographers, skilled as they are with whites and white skin, don't know diddly about shooting black skin or black faces. And because they see nothing "wrong" in their white approach to shooting black skin, they do a terrible injustice to their dark skinned clients. *Please, no need to say "I know how" or "not me" or worse: "there's no difference in shooting black skin and white skin." Yeah, right! Example: most studio strobes are from 5500 to 6000* (blue) Kelvin. If the photographer is shooting black skin and does not use a CC 20 magenta gel over their strobes top compensate, the black client will be "off color." *I'm fuzzy here, but two makers manufacture strobes at 4800 and 5300 degrees Kelvin, BALCAR being one (I forget the other name). 4800 and 5300 degree Kelvin lights, because they are "redder" than the others, do a fair job of compensating for the horrors of color film emulsions on black skin. *Black skin, shot in BW and correctly lit, looks gorgeous compared to black skin shot in color. The same formulation that produces "tans" in white skin turns black skin "reddish." Add the "blue" light of 6000 Kelvin strobes and you get the blue-black green-black shadows along with a general flattening of the skin texture. Whew! First lessons on how to shoot black people are over. Do you have some scans to show us? No, but the KODAK "pro" site does. I would rather you go there to make your anaysis than lookat my scans, where the viewer can infer that I somehow manipulated the images. And nope. Because if you won't believe KODAK, no way you'd believe me. How do you like it compared to the Portras in terms of color and contrast? As to PORTA. There was a raging argument on the PDML about PORTRA that only died out when I unsubsribed from the list. I insisted then, as now, and being a member of KODAK'S POE (Promise of Excellence) professional program and a charter member of the KODAK Viewfinder Forum, that you can't "rate" the PORTRA emulsions. "Rating" the 160 0r 400 PORTRA emulsions is an excersize in futility. But there are those who would insist, and do, loudly, that "rating" a PORTRA 160 emulsion at ISO 125 or 100 gives better
OT: Mosque photos (was : Have you ever shot at or above 1/2000th sec andwhat were the circumstances?
Hi, Kristian-H. Schssler wrote: [...] 1/4 sekonds handheld, head pressed on a wall an and ten takes, two were good in a islamic moshee at Usbekistan, no flash allowed and useless with f = 20 mm. were people in the mosque aware of you taking photographs? If so, were people included in the photographs and how did they react? This is something I've wanted to do for a long time, but have been rather nervous about, because of Islamic sensitivities about representations of the human figure. -- Cheers, Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Toxicity city
Joseph McAllister wrote: On 01/24/2001 11:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] opined: BTW, on toxicity, I discovered at home a bottle of maximum purity Glacial acetic acid (99.5%) ... should I pour it into water or water into acid ;) ? I just can't get myself to remember it right... Well, if I stop responding to list, I have done it the wrong way... The way to remember is "AAA" "Always Add Acid" Or, "Do as ya aughta, add acid to wata" Illinsis "The Science Teacher" Bill - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Camping at Grandfather Mountain
"Staying on the property is much more fun; you can hang with your Pentax posse until late in the night. Heck, we've been known to sit up until 10:30 or so." I plan on staying on the property. But 10:30, you consider that late. Do you sleep with a flashlight on your head? jeepgirl - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Look through your Family Vacation Pictures
Believe it or not about 75% were taken with either a 50 or a zoom in the 35-60 range. Evan Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anupam Routh wrote: Hi! Please look through your family vacation pictures and see what percentage [approximate] of the pictures were taken with [a] Wide angle lenses below 35 mm [b] 50 to 100mm lenses and [c] above 100 mm lenses. If you are using zoom, what zoom range you use most? In my case most pictures were taken with wide angel lenses. With thanks. Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://home.netscape.com/webmail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Tiger's Chinon CE4 (Was: pre ebay sale - LAST CALL)
I saw that Tiger's selling a Chinon CE4 camera. For anyone who might be interested but doesn't know anything about it, I happened to ge me two used ones of these and I find them very nice. If you're thinking of adding a manual backup body, I can recommend it. It's small, light weight and handles well. (And if you do like me, paint the logo all black, it almost looks professional...) (Thanks for the link to the manual Tiger! Never saw any of those before. Lasse I updated the below referenced pages, removing committed items, and added one more lens. Whatever not committed by tomorrow - hits Ebay on Saturday! If you have any interesting trades to offer, let me know! At 10:50 AM 1/24/01 -0600, you wrote: Cleaning out the closet Selling stuff that newer or Pentax Brand Equipment replaced many great screw mount items http://www.blkbox.com/~tmoses/pentax.htm email me if interested or want to buy or have questions!!! Goes to ebay in 48 hours(ish) giving ya'll first shot - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: OT: (Somewhat) Is this true for you?
In a message dated 1/25/01 8:37:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I figure I could probably use the occasionalreminder to check out alternate perspectives instead of falling into comfortable habits. Just in case the "natural" view isn't_always_ the best. Hey Glenn! The "natural view" as you describe it, I think of as the "first look." Outdoors, I first look for the angle that will let me use a Polarizer to its best effect. Though I own a 17-28 zoom, when shooting 35mm I mostly shoot my old 80-200 f/2.8 FA AF zoom, framing like the PJ I used to be. I'd say then that my "natural view" most often falls between 100 and 140mm. Mafud Zawadi Imaging Media Company Atlanta, Houston, Ontario, CA, Naples, FL [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
MIR 20mm 2.8 lens
Anyone know this lens? 20mm 2.8, M42 mount. A guy is selling it for $99, new, on eBay and here: http://www.moscowgifts4u.com/ (go to the cameras section, look in the price list for a link) Comments? Is it worth getting for use with an adapter on a K-mount Pentax? j -- - Juan J. Buhler | FX Animator @ PDI | http://www.crosswinds.net/~jbuhler - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Magnum Photographers Talk About Their Pictures
Hi, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Last night I was browsing through the local book store, and picked up the February issue of Popular Photography. The magazine contains a small photo essay titled "MAGNUM" that's worth a look. It's only six pictures, but the photographers talk a little about how they got the shot and the equipment they used, as well as offering a couple of suggestions that might help improve how some of us make photographs. thanks for the info, Shel. My mission for tomorrow is to find a copy of that magazine. You might be interested in this book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1560989483/ref=sim_books/102-0330044-2734558 I've been holding back from mentioning it to the PDML because I have it on order, but haven't read it yet. But the contents certainly look interesting for anybody who's interested in photographers talking about their work. It's also available on amazon.co.uk. Of the 4 'customers who bought...' books I have 3! How's that for fitting a marketing profile? I can particularly recommend 'Winterreise' by Luc Delahaye (Magnum), which won this year's Oskar Barnack prize. -- Cheers, Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Basic Composition (was RE: OT: (Somewhat) Is this true for you?)
Hi,
Dan Scott wrote:
[...]
I'm curious as to how many people in this group of photographers have had
formal training in composition or have intentionally sought out info about
it on their own?
[...]
I have no formal training, but like anybody who's read a basic
photography book I'm aware of the general principles such as the
golden section, rule of 3rds etc.
However, I have never thought about them before taking a picture and I
think that for the huge majority of people it would be a waste of time
and would lead to them thinking the picture out of existence.
For me there are 2 rules:
1. f8 and be there
2. if your pictures aren't good enough you're not close enough.
The formal rules may be useful after the event ('why is this picture
so brilliant and that one so crap?') but it's a mistake for photographers
to think when they're taking pictures.
--
Cheers,
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Who here uses a monopod?
At 23:22 25/01/01, you wrote: I think Bogen/Manfrotto sells a head that only offers limited movement specifically for monopods (can't remember the name of it at the moment), maybe an alternative to your ballhead? They sure do. I have one on mine. In the Manfrotto range the number is 234RC. It has a QR plate number 200PL14, the same as on my ball head. The only movement in the head is from side to side. This allows for the camera to be mounted in a portrait orientation. Cheers Jon Relax! Take life as it comes, you can't chase the sun, you can't race the wind - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: FA24-90 f3.5-4.5AL
on 1/25/01 7:36 AM, Mike Johnston at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So it is not an ED lens afterall. I found the PENTAX JAPAN's press release of FA24-90, dated 19th January, 2001. Alan, There's not much need for a lens that only goes to 90mm to use ED glass, which is used for the aberration correction in long telephotos. Lack of ED glass is no indication of low quality in this case. Hi, As far as I can see in the Japanese press release, the use of ED glass is clearly stated, although it did not say "ED" but said it has a low-dispersion glass which I understand is an ED glass. Someone please correct me if I am wrong. Cheers, Ken - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Ebay insanity
Now we're talkin' real dirt. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25 1:08 PM I don't know, if you play your cards right you can get a really really nice 1998 tractor, plow, belly mower, and box for less than a thousand bucks... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And because they see nothing "wrong" in their white approach to shooting black skin, they do a terrible injustice to their dark skinned clients. *Please, no need to say "I know how" or "not me" or worse: "there's no difference in shooting black skin and white skin." Yeah, right! Hey, I've done it myself...didn't know I could do anything about it other than try and soften up the light source. Luckily the natural light shots have looked good. Whew! First lessons on how to shoot black people are over. Thanks, wish I'd had this last year. Funny thing is that I've seen this discussion come up in various places over the last couple of years, but hadn't heard any advice like that. The PORTRA *VC* emissions have all the sins of regualr "pro" or amateur color films in that they "go for the glow" (tan). Emissions, hah! Well, this looks good on many of my clients, though I've been leaning on the NC version lately to help with high contrast situations. Portra really needs the right paper to look good. Mafud, pulling on his Kevlar bulletproof protective armor, slips quietly out the side door. No need, this is a good post. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Pentax F 80-200 f4.7-5.6 lens
It's surprisingly good. Thanks, Ed - Original Message - From: "Anupam Routh" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:28 PM Subject: Pentax F 80-200 f4.7-5.6 lens Hi! How good is the Pentax F 80-200 f4.7-5.6 lens in the 80 to 120 mm range with 200 ASA slide film used for family vacation? With thanks. Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://home.netscape.com/webmail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Pentax 645 - Eye piece focus
The eye piece focus on my Pentax 645 locked on me one day. I have never had that problem before and the manual does not address the problem. Has anyone ever incurred that problem? Any tips? Andre Fiebig [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25/01 16:02:30-- This message originates from the law firm of Gardner, Carton Douglas. It contains information which may be confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity named above.It is prohibited for anyone else to disclose, copy, distribute or use the contents of this message. All personal messages express views solely of the sender, which are not to be attributed to Gardner, Carton Douglas, and may not be copied or distributed without this disclaimer. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or (312) 644-3000. == - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Toxicity city
That's about the only thing from high school chemistry I remember, except for traumatizing my instructor -- I set the lab on fire twice. I could've done more, but he started keeping an eye on me ... - Original Message - From: "William Kane" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 3:14 PM Subject: Re: Toxicity city Joseph McAllister wrote: On 01/24/2001 11:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] opined: BTW, on toxicity, I discovered at home a bottle of maximum purity Glacial acetic acid (99.5%) ... should I pour it into water or water into acid ;) ? I just can't get myself to remember it right... Well, if I stop responding to list, I have done it the wrong way... The way to remember is "AAA" "Always Add Acid" Or, "Do as ya aughta, add acid to wata" Illinsis "The Science Teacher" Bill - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?)
Would the same rules for shooting black skin apply for shooting dark Hispanic skin? I'd like to do some portrait work, and we have a large (and still growing) Hispanic population in our area -- an incredible, virtually untapped market for photography. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 3:12 PM Subject: Re: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?) In a message dated 1/25/01 8:28:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Subj: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?) Date: 1/25/01 8:28:53 AM Pacific Standard Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tom) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip And the *ONLY* film that can outscan it is... tada! SUPRA 100*! *World class portraits with SUPRA 100. Mafud, in explaining his use of SUPRA, says: I shoot mostly people of color. I used KODAK EKTAPRESS almost exclusively since 1995. SUPRA is the emulsion replacing EKTAPRESS. Both EKTAPRESS and SUPRA, unlike emulsions formulated to reproduce either greens and blues (Fuji) very well or reds/oranges (Kodak) do a lousy job reproducing Black or otherwise "dark" skin. SUPRA and EKTAPRESS take away a lot of the "white skin" penalties in color film when shooting people of color. Both handle the dread "specular" highlights** (shiny spots on black skin) very well. Because both are medium contrast emulsions, both treat fair skin as it is seen. *We've all seen the images; black male subject, looking shiny and greasy (because the sorry photographer, who don't know diddly about shooting black skin, (has the subject smear his face with petroleum jelly then wipe most of it off ), and doesn't know what to do with the specular highlights decides that "shiny all over" is the best way to shoot this client (remember all those Michael Jordan commercials, His "Airness," bald and greasy)? Well, by damn, today "shiny all over" is the almost universal "style" when shooting black males. *Almost without exception, "pro" or amateur, modern print and slide emulsions are also formulated to give white skin a "glow" or "tan." Even Casper, the ghostly white "friendly Ghost" would have a tan with most modern color emulsions. What looks "healthy" or "good" on white skin is intensified in a negative way in Black skin. Worse, using most modern emulsions, any shadows in portraits of people of color are most times a sickly green-black or blue-black. Only full face, "Hollywood lighting" (strobe on top, reflector on bottom, strobe to camera right/left elevated just above the subject's eyes) works to fully illuminate black skin. The worse attribute of most modern emulsions with black skin? The eyes most times are *not* illuminated and when they are, the whites look "distorted" (actually extra white), drawing attention to the eyes in an unglamorous way. *Black women wearing blue, green, white, silver, gold, light yellow make-up over their eyelids or brows or red blush (since black people as a rule cannot "blush") [blush: a reddening of the subcutaneous layer of human skin because of a pooling of blood], many times look like caricatures of themselves in that most (white) portrait photographers, skilled as they are with whites and white skin, don't know diddly about shooting black skin or black faces. And because they see nothing "wrong" in their white approach to shooting black skin, they do a terrible injustice to their dark skinned clients. *Please, no need to say "I know how" or "not me" or worse: "there's no difference in shooting black skin and white skin." Yeah, right! Example: most studio strobes are from 5500 to 6000* (blue) Kelvin. If the photographer is shooting black skin and does not use a CC 20 magenta gel over their strobes top compensate, the black client will be "off color." *I'm fuzzy here, but two makers manufacture strobes at 4800 and 5300 degrees Kelvin, BALCAR being one (I forget the other name). 4800 and 5300 degree Kelvin lights, because they are "redder" than the others, do a fair job of compensating for the horrors of color film emulsions on black skin. *Black skin, shot in BW and correctly lit, looks gorgeous compared to black skin shot in color. The same formulation that produces "tans" in white skin turns black skin "reddish." Add the "blue" light of 6000 Kelvin strobes and you get the blue-black green-black shadows along with a general flattening of the skin texture. Whew! First lessons on how to shoot black people are over. Do you have some scans to show us? No, but the KODAK "pro" site does. I would rather you go there to make your anaysis than lookat my scans, where the viewer can infer that I somehow manipulated the images. And nope. Because if you won't believe KODAK, no way you'd believe me. How do you like it compared to the Portras in terms of color and contrast? As to PORTA. There was a raging argument on the PDML about PORTRA
Re: MY WEBPAGE. AGAIN.
Still a snowstorm for me and my IE 5.5. Although it did take a lot longer to load this time. Thanks, Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 4:20 AM Subject: MY WEBPAGE. AGAIN. Hi, I have finally worked out the problem. It whould be ok now. http://www.volny.cz/ffranta/index.html Fr. Sorry - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Balck MZ-3/43mm Limited Package
on 1/24/01 10:25 AM, Shel Belinkoff at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ken, As you know, I'm interested in a similar setup as a walking around, PS type of camera. Please let us know how well the setup works for you. Hi Shel, I replaced my MZ-3/43mm Silver kit with a black kit, so the set up is exactly the same as before and I use it in the same way as before. Black colour makes the MZ-3 look that much more professional, i.e., a real camera (not that MZ-3 is not :-), thus my first impression of "baby LX" with black shutter dial and compensation dial etc. This particular combination is very light (just about 20oz w/lens) and very small. Lens is very compact but its filter and hood do not make the kit quite pocketable. I can see why you say you want to use it in a PS manner as it is ideal for that purpose. If you set everything auto, you can just literally point and shoot, even with one hand. Yet the camera is very capable with its 1/4000 max, 1/125 sync, AE lock, DOF preview and popup flash, which covers most shooting situations. I have a penchant for smallish cameras and the best part of the MZ-3 is its Pentax! This kit makes it easy to just pick it up and go. I do not quite feel like snatching my z-1p so casually when I go to friend's house etc. I used to be a z-1p shooter with the MZ-3 as sorta back up, but since acquiring MZ-3 and a pair of Limited lenses (43/77), I just snatch this up whenever I expect some shooting session, particularly indoor (for this reason, I usually load it with 400 film). In outdoor, you do not feel like lugging around a heavy behemoth, yet this kit takes as good pics as any other higher spec'd cameras do. I love its size. With the legendary 43mm/1.9, the angle is right and the lens is fast enough for most situations. So, it's good for a single lens walk-about. Actually, I love the size and weight of the MZ camera so much so that I purchased an MZ-M and slapped an M40/2.8 on it, which really makes it a great and true "PS" SLR if there is such a term. I do not quite "abuse" the black MZ-3 kit but I treat the MZ-M/40mm kit almost like a disposable camera without worrying scratches and dents etc. I am sure you will be delighted with a black MZ-3. I first tried to buy a black MZ-3 in Canada but it was impossible to find it. I am not even sure that Pentax Canada import black versions. Cheers, Ken - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: MIR 20mm 2.8 lens
its says its a 3.5 - Original Message - From: "Juan J. Buhler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 8:09 AM Subject: MIR 20mm 2.8 lens Anyone know this lens? 20mm 2.8, M42 mount. A guy is selling it for $99, new, on eBay and here: http://www.moscowgifts4u.com/ (go to the cameras section, look in the price list for a link) Comments? Is it worth getting for use with an adapter on a K-mount Pentax? j -- - Juan J. Buhler | FX Animator @ PDI | http://www.crosswinds.net/~jbuhler - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Basic Composition (was RE: OT: (Somewhat) Is this true for you?)
Bob Walkden wrote: For me there are 2 rules: 1. f8 and be there 2. if your pictures aren't good enough you're not close enough. That's one more than my basics: If you don't press the shutter, you won't get a photograph. -- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc. (650)933-82952011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991 (650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Source for Pentax Parts Needed
Anybody know a good source for parts. I need a battery cap (the screw-in type) for a Program A (I believe one for a Program Plus, Super Program or Program A would work as well). Thanks, Ray Reese _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
re: Primes vs. Zooms: Unusable Sharpness?
Because: #1 Effective results The better the sharpness on edges, the better the results, even at every level of loss. Better lenses minimize loss. #2 Barrel pincusion distortion ... are reduced or eliminated. The Tamron 70-300 LD IF lense may be extremely sharp, but look through the finder while zooming it. You can see the corners pull away from the center. Trashy lens, imho. #3 COST A great zoom costs about the same as a good st of primes. Compare a good 80-200/2.8 to 100/2.8 + 135/2.8 + 200/4. #n They're probably more reasons to choose from. Collin From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] If most films can resolve less than most lenses, and most scanners can resolve less than most films, why are prime lenses considered superior to good zooms? It would seem at first glance that the extra lens sharpness of a prime would not translate into extra image sharpness. I use several zooms for, of course, their convenience, but also have three primes that I use often. This isn't meant to start a flame war. I've seriously wondered about this for some time. Thanks, Joe *** "The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." --James Madison, Federalist 47 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Price used LX viewfinders?
Hello all, What is a reasonable price for a used FB-1 + FC-1 viewfinder combo for an LX in good condition? What does this go on eBay? Thanks in advance Roger - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Slide scanner reviews
But in my books, two year's use before the thing starts becoming useless without hundreds of pound's worth of repairs (and no obvious interest in taking it any further) is complete crapola. Don't buy a Polaroid, get the Coolscan! That may be good advice, but the lifespan of scanners seems to be pretty crappy across the board, if you can believe the people on the filmscanners list. Giving you a new one at 1/2 price seems like a pretty fair deal...wonder if you could talk him down. tv I tried, but he was in 'Unmoving Corporate-Line Mode' and didn't seem to have the authority to negotiate. I dare say the dept. manager might have been more lenient, but hey - I'm one amateur punter (customer) with an entry-level piece of kit, not a peferred buyer worth zillions. They can afford to brush me off. True, a half price replacement does seem reasonable - except when one realizes that for twice as much, today's scanners are twice as good! I think I'd rather spend the same money on a used Coolscan. Thanks for your .02 Cotty ___ Cotty's MacAds - free UK Macintosh classified ads at www.macads.co.uk Adverts to [EMAIL PROTECTED] / all other abuse to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Basic Composition (was RE: OT: (Somewhat) Is this true for you?)
In a message dated 1/25/01 9:28:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm curious as to how many people in this group of photographers have had formal training in composition or have intentionally sought out info about it on their own? Both. Mafud Zawadi Imaging Media Company [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: MIR 20mm 2.8 lens
its says its a 3.5 My bad. I wasn't looking at the page when I posted, sorry. Half a stop shouldn't be much of a problem at 20mm, though. j -- - Juan J. Buhler | FX Animator @ PDI | http://www.crosswinds.net/~jbuhler - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:54 PM Subject: RE: SMC again This is from an article called "Flare control in multi-coated lenses of the Seventies",By Dario Bonazza. It has interesting info about SMC. Full text at: http://digilander.iol.it/aohc/selart07e.htm [article text clipped] This article is mostly on target. The fact remains though that Pentax was the first photo lens manufacturer to offer multicoating on all of its lenses after 1971 (Takumar K, Takumar F, and Cosmicar don't count). Nikon did not start using NIC (their version of multicoating) until 1974. Since most manufacturers other than Leica licensed the technolgy from Pentax, it may be reasonable to assume that they were following Pentax lead rather than the other way around. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Protective gear: was Glacial Acetic Acid. etc
As a former chemist, let me offer a few suggestions to those using glacial acetic acid: 1. Do *not* store it outside. The stuff can freeze solid -- that's why it's called "glacial" acetic acid. ISTR that its freezing point is slightly above 0C (32F). 2. Do not store it inside. The stuff has no business being in a residence or workplace lest it spill. 3. When diluting it, do so outside if at all possible. A chemist in a laboratory will do so in a fume hood. You want the best possible ventilation with this stuff. 4. Acetic acid is cheap. White pickling vinegar is about 7% solution. The cost savings of buying glacial acetic acid and diluting it yourself isn't worth the hazards its use involves. 5. If you are still insistent on using glacial acetic acid, see if you can use lab facilities at your local high school or university to do the dilution under proper conditions with a fume hood and an emergency shower, as well as storing it there with proper ventilation. -- Rodger Whitlock Victoria, British Columbia, Canada - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Supra for portraits (was Re: Who here uses a monopod?)
In a message dated 1/25/01 2:17:22 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Would the same rules for shooting black skin apply for shooting dark Hispanic skin? I'd like to do some portrait work, and we have a large (and still growing) Hispanic population in our area -- an incredible, virtually untapped market for photography. Exactly. A lot of Hispanic skin has reddish to reddish brown undertones, so the "normal" emulsions that intensify the "tanning" effect, turns some Hispanic skin an unusual red to red-orange mottled tone. Remember too, to treat Hispanic eyes with a "pop" of light (for the catchlights). A Vivitar 285HV, positioned on a stand over the shooter's shoulder and aimed at the eye, and dialed down 4 stops will give you the catchlights, lighten shadows under the bangs, and the dark shadows usually found over and around the ears. *Here's a trick: Go to the local hamburger or Chinese place. Order out. Take your food home and eat it quickly. You'll want to wash the tray. Take the head of the 285, lay it down on the foam and trace its outline. Cut the pattern out of the foam. Place the foam over your 285s head, a little clear tape and...instant soft box. A 285 (or any powerful hot shoe flash) with variable controls can be your lifesaver. The foam "softbox" cuts up to two stops and softens the flash beautifully. Of course if you want to dial the 285 down, do so until you find the right setting. *No, your "pop" light is an addendum to your regular lighting setup. **You ought to learn how to shoot manual flash. Mafud Zawadi Imaging Media Company Atlanta, Houston, Ontario, CA, Naples, FL [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Primes vs. Zooms: Unusable Sharpness?
Sacrilege!!! You dare question the superiority of primes? HAR - Original Message - From: "Joseph Tainter" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 25, 2001 1:57 PM Subject: Primes vs. Zooms: Unusable Sharpness? The quote below came up on rec.photo.film+labs. It brings up something I've often wondered about, to wit: If most films can resolve less than most lenses, and most scanners can resolve less than most films, why are prime lenses considered superior to good zooms? It would seem at first glance that the extra lens sharpness of a prime would not translate into extra image sharpness. T-Max 100 can quite happily resolve close to 100 lppm in normal shooting situations. Most prime lenses are hard pressed to hit 60 lppm in normal conditions, and the best zooms will likely be not much higher than 50 lppm. A bad zoom may be as low as 30 lppm (those are the ones with the word Minolta on the lens bezel G). So, the problem to me is that the person who wrote the post to rec.photo.film+labs is passing incorrect information. There is also more than mere resolution to think about. Lens flare, contrast and bokeh to name a few are qualities where primes tend to be better. Primes also tend to have better colour correction and suffer fewer optical abberations than zooms, especially long range ones that go from wide angle to telephoto. William Robb I use several zooms for, of course, their convenience, but also have three primes that I use often. This isn't meant to start a flame war. I've seriously wondered about this for some time. Thanks, Joe "If you use film, the only thing you will be testing is the film itself since film see only about 10 to 20% of the resolution the lens will see. "An example: A typical f4 lens will have about 500 lines per millimeter with noon daylight summer sun. Most picture type ASA 50 to 400 films will record betweent 50 to 100 l/mm from this 500 l/mm image o r about 10 to 20%. This is a false statement. There is a huge difference between measurable aerial resolution and what the lens will actually project onto the film. "Special aerial recon films can do up to about 350 l/mm or 60+% but ASA ratings are down under 10." Hmmm, I want to see manufacturers specs on that one. I bet he is taking the 1000:1 TOC measurment rather than the 6:1 TOC measurement. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Filter Test
Interspersed reply: - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Pentax List" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 25, 2001 10:29 AM Subject: Filter Test I've taken the plunge and ordered several Pentax SMC filters, and would like to compare them to B+W and Hoya filters (because those are the ones I have). However, I don't really know much about testing procedures, so I'm asking the list for some suggestions. Sure. I'm good at that. Sometimes I'm even lucid Here's what I'd like to do: First, shoot a few frames of slide film with one of Pentax's finest lenses, sans filter, and using a few different apertures - wide open, a stop or two down, f/8.0 and f/11.0, and at the smallest aperture. Then I'd repeat the test, using the same apertures, with each filter. Sounds like the way I would do it My first thought is of which lens to use. It's been said that longer lenses suffer most from image degradation when used with a filter, so it would seem that a lens in the 100mm or greater focal length would be a better choice to see any degradation than, for example, a 50mm or wide angle lens. So, here are the lens choices. Which do the "testing mavens" suggest as being the better lens for this experiment: A100/2.8 macro A*200/4.0 macro They are the highest resolution lenses of the bunch you listed. I'm thinking that the faster lenses may be the better choice as the difference between wide open and a mid aperture is greater, and any qualitative differences between wide open and smaller apertures may be easier to see. Whatever. A test for flare and image degradation by a light source just inside and just outside the frame seems like a good option. Since the sun could vary somewhat in its intensity if I couldn't shoot everything at about the same time, would an incandescent light source work as well, or should I try to get everything done at once using the sun as a light source? Use an artificial point source to repeat flare tests. A small flash for example. That way is most repeatable. What might you recommend as a test subject? Using something that doesn't move seems ideal, although a brick wall may not provide the sort of visible detail needed. Download the USAF test target from Rob Studderts website Any other testing suggestions? Bill, would you be willing to examine the results under your microscope? I know you've got a pretty full plate with the PUG, so let us know. Does anyone else have the ability to examine and photograph slides for this experiment? I can do that for you. You have my address Is slide film the best choice for this? It seems to allow for fewer variables. Can someone make a case for color negative film? Use T-Max 100. Self process it. That way, there are fewer vairiables still, and ugly as the stuff is inpictorial use, it is just about the sharpest stuff around. William Robb -- Shel Belinkoff "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." I wish I had said that - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
R: Asahiflex, Pentax Club, and Pentax FAQ
At least I got one message about my posting. Thanks Bob. Anybody interested in the Pentax FAQ project? Dario Bonazza http://digilander.iol.it/aohc/ Dario, Thanks for the articles. Peter's was interesting and yours on the LX variations was sensational. I want a Titan LX !!! Any owners or sellers out there? Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You can read some articles about the Asahiflex in AOHC page: http://digilander.iol.it/aohc/selartice.htm I want to highlight you especially the latest one, authored by Peter Jonkman, with very interesting unpublished info about the development of the Asahiflex, the difficult start selling the first Japanese SLR during the rangefinder era, the pentaprism prototypes, the men behind all that. I hope you'll enjoy it. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Pentax FAQ: anybody interested?
Got no replies, not a single one, hence I'll try to re-post this: I got an idea for cooperation between PDML and AOHC. I'm subscribed to PDML since 1997 and I see that many questions and discussions show up again and again. What about putting together some Pentax FAQs by reading and editing discussed topics in PDML? Then, I'll be happy to add them to the proper page in AOHC website (acknowledging authors and PDML of course). AOHC will get a page made and updated by good folks and PDML will get a proper page to re-direct newcomers, thus helping reducing postings and making PDML subscription a bit easier to live with. Just an idea. Dario Bonazza http://digilander.iol.it/aohc/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Tom Rittenhouse wrote: But then I could be wrong. Folks on this list tell me I am wrong about the 35/1.4A. Only if so, what was that I held in my hand once. It was used and they wanted a $1000 for it so I couldn't afford it. But I put it on a camera and looked through it, and lusted for it. Also why did a Pentax rep agree that they existed, but were very hard to find because they only made a few? Hi Tom ... You are wrong g ... but only on a small point. Pentax made a 35mm/1.4, but it was in an M version, not an A series. And there were very few made as it was only made as a "prototype". You can find it here: http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/prototypes/index.html -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: SMC again (was Re: Pentax AF 100 mm f3.5 micro)
Alan Chan wrote: I have had lenses from M series to FA series. I cannot see their SMC coatings are different. Isn't it interesting how people can look at the same things and see them entirely differently. I've got SMC lenses from Takumar to FA, and the coatings sure do look different to me. The earlier coatings seem to be more yellow when examined in a certain type of light, and the later coatings have a more greenish or bluish color. Now, if this means that the coatings are different, or that the light is refracted differently for other reasons, I can't say. I'd only like to add that there are others on this list who have observed the same color differences in their lenses, which also run the gamut from early to late SMC lenses. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is subtleties." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Toxicity city
Used to be that the only rule was to keep the tequilla away from the chicks ;) Collin (not that I'd know anything about that...) Brendemuehl From: "Treena Harp" [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's about the only thing from high school chemistry I remember, except for traumatizing my instructor -- I set the lab on fire twice. I could've done more, but he started keeping an eye on me ... *** "The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." --James Madison, Federalist 47 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Z-1 SE
"Gary L. Murphy" wrote: Wasn't someone looking for a Z-1 SE? This one also has the 77mm f1.8 limited lens and a Metz 34 AF-3P flash. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1210298648 Good grief! What an ugly-looking camera. I'm glad I have a black one. -- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc. (650)933-82952011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991 (650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Price used LX viewfinders?
Thanks Bob, I feel better now. G Bill - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 25, 2001 7:27 PM Subject: Re: Price used LX viewfinders? I think $285 is a price I remember. They go for considerably more than an LX winder, and the piece parts can be $125-$150 each...if you can find them on ebay. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Z-1 SE
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 17:42:37 -0800, John Francis wrote: Good grief! What an ugly-looking camera. I'm glad I have a black one. Yeah, but that lens sure looks nice. :-) Later, Gary - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
