Re[3]: Subject: e-bay words (very OT!)
Hi,
actually the real reason is the Great Vowel Shift (GVS)
(http://www.icg.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/vowels.html) and the failure
of spelling to keep up with the spoken language.
It's obvious that a standardised spelling can never accurately reflect
pronunciation, since pronunciation changes over time and in space. This
seems particularly true of English. The Great Vowel Shift took place over
several hundred years, during which time English was also subject to all
the other 'normal' changes that take place in any language. But also
during that time Britain was expanding the Empire, and establishing
colonies all over the world. So a colony populated by people mainly
from the South-West of England will start as a snapshot of the
pronunciation of that area, during that particular period of the GVS.
Since small isolated populations such as colonies tend to be quite conservative
linguistically the pronunciation will change less than, and usually in a different
direction to, the pronunciation of the mother population. So, many
colonies all over the world each start with a different geographical
accent and from a different point in the GVS, and their modern
descendants' pronunciation reflects this.
A standardised spelling system could not reflect this diversity, which
is why attempts such as 'nu speling' are doomed to fail. So we get apparent
absurdities like 'cough' and 'plough'. The 'gh' in these sorts of word betray
their Germanic origins. It's easy to demonstrate with English/OE/German cognates:
daughter / dohtor / tochter (Greek thygater)
thought / gethoht / gedacht
eight / aehta / acht
fight / fehtan / fechten
usw.
Early in the history of English the 'gh' was pronounced similarly to
the German 'ch', and in some British accents (esp. Scots, which also didn't
undergo the GVC for some reason) there is still a trace of it in some words.
Globalisation (particularly the dominance of US films and TV) means
that accents will probably converge. Already in Britain TV, and other
social changes, have led to a flattening of English accents, in particular
to the rise of so-called 'Estuary English', which is the dialect and
accent spoken around the region of the Thames Estuary and causes much
wailing and gnashing of teeth among people who think it is a 'lazy' or
somehow degraded dialect. Wrt globalisation I remember talking to one of
my nephews when he was little about 'Sesame Street' and he corrected my
English pronunciation of Oliver ('Olivuh') to the American 'Ah-luhver' :o).
As internationalisation continues, I predict a kind of rolling back of
the GVS so that the diphthongised vowels will become, once again, like
their continental equivalents, and that the UN (or some such body) will
standardise and 'simplify' English spelling again. I put simplify in
quotes because once you understand the history, the British English spelling
becomes fairly rational, predictable and understandable, whereas Webster's
standardisation seems distinctly arbitrary in many cases - for instance, why
change 'plough' and leave 'though' and so many others?
A little bit of knowledge of linguistic history makes spelling tests
so much easier! Apparent absurdities are usually interesting indicators
of history, and rarely as absurd as they seem at face value.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Saturday, April 07, 2001, 9:11:06 AM, you wrote:
Hi,
I would have thuft that was obvious. It rhymes with 'cough' and
'through' and 'although'.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Friday, April 06, 2001, 11:51:09 PM, you wrote:
Colour and azma I can live with, but why don't you pronounce "plough" pluff?
Ed
-
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 photography of fairies.
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, William Robb wrote: Wait a minute -- that was the fifties ... Wasn't that about the time they discovered LSD??? Yup. They hadn't discovered video yet. I recall some sort of absurd 19th century work that was purportedly to be fairies in a garden. I think that photographer was in England. William Robb Arthur Conan Doyle (of Sherlock Holmes fame) was famously fooled by some photographs of fairies taken by some British children (Kodak Box perhaps?). I think he wrote a book about them, and became a convinced believer in psychic phenomena. The actual fairies were illustrations snipped from some book and stuck amongst the flowers. They are so obviously faked that one has to be amazed by his gullibility. Where was Dr. Watson when he needed him? Roger. -- Roger Fearick Dept. of Physics University of Cape Town - 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: Subject: Re: Kodak T400CN
I shot myfirst roll of CN last month and was happy with it.The lab i have dealt with forthelast4 years knows how to proccess this and dida good job.I did as Stan suggested and treated the 4x6's as proofs and then decided which to print as colour and which as B W.The lab i use is great.They all know how to use the equipment and are photographers themselves.As long as i tell them ahead of time iof i did something to a frame they are prepared to adjust with out time lost Dave from Torontoarea Begin Original Message From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 23:56:04 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Kodak T400CN The guys at my corner store do just fine with either. They say the Select is a bit easier to work with since it is designed for color or colour paper CN works better with BW paper which , of course, is very rare in machine-print stores. My suggestion: Treat the 4x6 prints as proofs, don't worry too much about the color or colour ting; just have the lab pay more attention when you get your final print(s). Stan From: "Tanya Russell Mayer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 22:38:47 +1000 To: "Pentax Discussion List" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Subject: Re: Kodak T400CN The only bw I have ever shot has been c41 films, and primarily, Kodak T400CN. I really like this film however sometimes the "sepia" toning that it gives can be a leaning a little too much toward the red side of things. (That could just be my crappy lab though). On the other hand, stay away from the Kodak "Select Series" BW (also c41 film). The labs hate to process it and say that they can't get an accurate colour balance. Everytime I have used this film, I get the roll back with some shots looking like true bw, others sepia, and some even with green and blue tinges, it can be extremely annoying, but I guess you could use it to your benefit creatively as well fairy. - 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 . End Original Message Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2
Tanya - someone who knows what they are talking about can answer this better than I can, but the basic principle is that any K, M, A, F or FA lens will fit on any K, Ka, or Kaf mount. No exceptions. (Of course all camera + lens functions won't work the same, depends on how you mix lens and cameras of different generations. But the lens will mount and it will be usable if it is a good lens.) If the lens won't mount, it is either something wrong with the lens or with the mount. If you are easily mounting/dismounting other lenses, then it is a lens problem. Now there may be a trick with the particular lens. Or it may be something silly like a loose screw in the base of the lens mount which is catching on the mount. Or the lens may be damaged. I would suggest opening and closing the aperture a few times (i.e., work the f/stop ring), work the aperture control level a few times, see if anything is obviously loose or of different appearance from your other lenses. I would also suggest saving the packing material the lens came in and consider sending it back. Or send it to Paul Stregevsky. He should have had the good sense to outbid you in the first place and thereby save you from yourself. Good luck. Stan From: "Tanya Russell Mayer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 04:00:06 +1000 To: "Pentax Discussion List" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2 Ok, so this is the "other topic" I wanted to post about...Today (well, actually yesterday, it is after 3 in the morning here now, this list is worse for sleep deprivation than either of my babies ever were!), I received my Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2 (yet another Ebay acquisition). This is the one that Paul Stregevsky was so eager to talk me out of during bidding so that he could add it to his collection. However, I am betting he is glad that I couldn't be dissuaded now, 'cause guess what? The bloody thing won't work!! As you all know, I now have a Pz-20 and an MZ-50. At first, I was thinking that the problem was with the "crippled mount" of the MZ-50, but the same thing applies to the PZ-20. When I line up the red dots and go to turn the lens to "click" it into place, it won't budge. It just sits there and will not "attach" properly. Although advertised as a "PKA" mount, it says on it that it is a "PK" mount and I am wondering if this has anything to do with it. Do any of you guys own this lens? Have any experience with it? Had any problems with it? I am really quite concerned as I also have another Vivitar Series 1 lens (28-90/2.8-3.5 macro) and what if this is the same?!? (Actually, I have a 7 day "inspection" period for that one cause the seller is in Australia, but even so) Helpanybody fairy. (I feel much more comfortable now that I have "come out"...hehe) - 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: ME viewfinder (was Re: Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye)
A scroll of mail from "Peter Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 6 Apr 2001 11:07:13 +0100 Read it? y My hand is raised too but I don't think a camera without a built in flash would sell in the popular market place. Perhaps a better solution would be to move the RTF away from the viewfinder. I recently read that the MZ has a "penta-mirror" not a pentaprism. Is that the cause of the poor viewfinder performance? Stick it over the opposite site from the shutter switch and you could have interchangeable viewfinders as well. For the S-1 (let's fantasize) we get a raisable RTF on the left hand side of the top (looking down) over the control wheel. The viewfinder is interchangeable and has no hot shoe. On the right, the shutter control, other control wheel and hot shoe, just like a PZ-1p. The has the advantage of taking *both* flashes off centre. Or you could just build it into the shoulder of the body like those Fuji instant cameras. It wouldn't need to pop up then, so you could have your af assist beam all the time with having the flash pop up. 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: OT Pentax photography of fairies.
In a message dated 4/7/2001 12:35:00 AM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: James Randi (aka The Amazing Randi) is a magician and big time skeptic. He makes a living these days by going around de-bunking all the amazing paranormal phenomenon, and has been doing this for some time. Perhaps he's the one you are thinking of here. John He's the one. Thanks. Ed - 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 photography of fairies.
Wait a minute -- that was the fifties ... Wasn't that about the time they discovered LSD??? Try the sixties, not the fifties. It may have been discovered in the '50's, but Timothy Leary made it famous in the '60's. The divinity students at Harvard found this drug that let them see God... or so they said. g 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]: Subject: e-bay words (very OT!)
Thanks Bob - quite interesting. On our Public Television (PBS) a few years
ago they had an 8-hour series on the history of the English- American
language with even a small bit on variations occurring in other colonies.
That series started with showing how different spelling conventions and
different pronunciations of the same words arose in Britain as a result of
which invaders took which part of the isle. Within the U.S. you can then
track our regional differences on the east coast (New England vs. Suthren
for example) back to the main source of emigration from England, and you can
track our regional differences in the mid-west to the proportions of migrs
from the east coast plus other non-English sources. By the time you get to
the west coast, everything is homogenized.
Stan
Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED] pronounced:
Hi,
actually the real reason is the Great Vowel Shift (GVS)
(http://www.icg.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/vowels.html) and the failure
of spelling to keep up with the spoken language.
It's obvious that a standardised spelling can never accurately reflect
pronunciation, since pronunciation changes over time and in space. This
seems particularly true of English. The Great Vowel Shift took place over
several hundred years, during which time English was also subject to all
the other 'normal' changes that take place in any language. But also
during that time Britain was expanding the Empire, and establishing
colonies all over the world. So a colony populated by people mainly
from the South-West of England will start as a snapshot of the
pronunciation of that area, during that particular period of the GVS.
Since small isolated populations such as colonies tend to be quite
conservative
linguistically the pronunciation will change less than, and usually in a
different
direction to, the pronunciation of the mother population. So, many
colonies all over the world each start with a different geographical
accent and from a different point in the GVS, and their modern
descendants' pronunciation reflects this.
A standardised spelling system could not reflect this diversity, which
is why attempts such as 'nu speling' are doomed to fail. So we get apparent
absurdities like 'cough' and 'plough'. The 'gh' in these sorts of word betray
their Germanic origins. It's easy to demonstrate with English/OE/German
cognates:
daughter / dohtor / tochter (Greek thygater)
thought / gethoht / gedacht
eight / aehta / acht
fight / fehtan / fechten
usw.
Early in the history of English the 'gh' was pronounced similarly to
the German 'ch', and in some British accents (esp. Scots, which also didn't
undergo the GVC for some reason) there is still a trace of it in some words.
Globalisation (particularly the dominance of US films and TV) means
that accents will probably converge. Already in Britain TV, and other
social changes, have led to a flattening of English accents, in particular
to the rise of so-called 'Estuary English', which is the dialect and
accent spoken around the region of the Thames Estuary and causes much
wailing and gnashing of teeth among people who think it is a 'lazy' or
somehow degraded dialect. Wrt globalisation I remember talking to one of
my nephews when he was little about 'Sesame Street' and he corrected my
English pronunciation of Oliver ('Olivuh') to the American 'Ah-luhver' :o).
As internationalisation continues, I predict a kind of rolling back of
the GVS so that the diphthongised vowels will become, once again, like
their continental equivalents, and that the UN (or some such body) will
standardise and 'simplify' English spelling again. I put simplify in
quotes because once you understand the history, the British English spelling
becomes fairly rational, predictable and understandable, whereas Webster's
standardisation seems distinctly arbitrary in many cases - for instance, why
change 'plough' and leave 'though' and so many others?
A little bit of knowledge of linguistic history makes spelling tests
so much easier! Apparent absurdities are usually interesting indicators
of history, and rarely as absurd as they seem at face value.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Saturday, April 07, 2001, 9:11:06 AM, you wrote:
Hi,
I would have thuft that was obvious. It rhymes with 'cough' and
'through' and 'although'.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Friday, April 06, 2001, 11:51:09 PM, you wrote:
Colour and azma I can live with, but why don't you pronounce "plough" pluff?
Ed
-
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: bad processing
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 at 17:47:54 -0600, "aimcompute" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How long has the clone tool been around? Years. I am still using the old PaintshopPro 4.11 from 1995 or thereabouts and *it* has a clone tool. I'm not saying that the clone tool was original with PSP, just that the concept of such a tool is at least that old. -- 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: Took the Plunge
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 at 20:03:19 -0400, "David J Brooks" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...after months of [worry]...I found and purchased a used SF-1 today c/w a pentax 35-70 zoom/macro lense and a used vivitar 636 AF flash.It was a scary time a lunch today as this life long manual(sp500k1000)guy took the plunge into the noisy world of AF. What will completely alter your life is the automatic film advance. I find that when a friend hands me his older camera (a nice little P3n), I always forget to advance the film and wonder why nothing happens when I push the button. -- 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: K-Mount Lens Envy: Stop Wishing--Settle
Hi Paul ... You've posted some interesting and useful alternatives to some of those hard-to-find Pentax lenses, but as tempting as they may be, I'd much rather have the Pentax glass. All the lenses of a series have the same feel, the focus all turn in the same direction, and, arguably, the build quality of the SMCP lenses is superior to some, if not all, of the alternatives. The hunt for good quality, hard to find lenses is also part of the fun, and when you've finally found that elusive lens, a certain feeling of satisfaction manifests itself. I'm pleased to say that I have every focal length from a 20mm through 300mm (with the exception of the 40mm and the 30mm), and it's quite a pleasure having and using those lenses, as well as thinking back on what lengths it took to get them. I'm happy ... -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. - 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]: Subject: e-bay words (very OT!)
Bob Walkden wrote: It's obvious that a standardised spelling can never accurately reflect pronunciation, since pronunciation changes over time and in space. This seems particularly true of English. and what followed was very educational. Thanks Bob - but this extract from an EU white paper seems to disagree: "English Chosen as new European Standard" The European Union commissioners have announced that agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five-year phased plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (EuroE for short). In the first year, "s" will be used instead of the soft "c". Sertainly sivil servants will reseive this news with joy. Also the hard "c" will be replaced with "k". Not only will this klear up konfusion, but keyboards kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced by "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20% shorter. In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always been a deterent to akurate speling. Also al wil agre that the horible mes of silent "e"s in the languag is disgrasful and they will go. By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" by "z" and "w" by "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou", and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultie and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drem vil av finali kum tru! - 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: Funny subject lines
How come we've lately got these funny subject lines like in below, with repeated "Re":s, a number inserted [2], [3] etc, as well as the word "Subject" spelled out? Do these come from some peculiar mail readers or do people actively insert these letters, numbers and words? Example: Re: Re[3]: Subject: e-bay words (very OT!) Lasse - 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 .
Photo Expo Japan 2001 - MZ-S and FA31Ltd
Hi all, I just uploaded the photos I took at the Japan Photo Expo 2001. They are here; http://members.tripod.co.jp/hayatama/photo/reports/ The Expo is on till tomorrow, and if you have any questions, I can check them tomorrow, so let me know. 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: OT: Theater photo film choice (Brian's ramblings)
Brian wrote: I have been using Fuji NHGII-800, pushed either 1 or 2 stops ... whenever I shoot C41 film that has to be pushed, I usually try to give it at least a third of a stop more light than I rate it for, ie.Shoot at 2500 and process at 3200 etc. OK, please explain something to me. If, as Bill and Aaron, our resident processing gurus say, C41 is not pushable, but, rather, is a develop to completion process, how do you "push" Fuji NGH one or two stops. What is your technique for processing it at 3200, etc.? -- Shel Belinkoff 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: Took the Plunge
David J Brooks wrote: I found and purchased a used SF-1 today snip It came with sf-10 manual but looks like the cameras work just about the same. snip All help appreciated David Maybe we can be mutually helpful. I have an SFXn (SF1n) with manual and a SF7 (SF10) without. If you are willing and able to scan the SF10 manual, I will reciprocate with a scan of the SFXn manual. Interested? If so contact me off list. Peter - 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-A 35/2.8. Mediocre or Maligned?
I posted this to the group on April 5 (so I thought), it's in my "sent items" folder and I seem to remember it coming back to me as a PDML posting. The response totally underwhelmed me, so it came as no surprise to see that the PDML archive doesn't hold my original post (a search for the subject line produced nothing). I'll try again. Pl Jensen recently wrote: Olivier wrote: Pentax-A 24mm f/2.8 Performances : 3 Pentax-A 35mm f/2.8 Performances : 3 Pentax-A* 85mm f/1.4 Performances : 3 Pentax-A* 135mm f/1.8 Performances : 3 Pentax-A* 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF Performances : 3 I belive this sort of drivel shouldn't even be posted here. Some may actually believe in it. Its pure nonsense. Anyone who gives the A* 85, 135, and 300 above a mediocre score of "3" is positively out of their minds. Likewise, compare them to a true medoicre lens as the A 35/2.8. (snip) Pl, I agree with your dissapointment on behalf of the A* lenses for their average ratings on CDI. Apparently WRT lens appraisals the French have no soul. But... I have an A 35/2.8 and I wouldn't call it mediocre by any standard, although it depends what "mediocre" means to you, as I realise that English is not your first language. My Lotus dictionary says mediocre is "moderate to inferior in quality, ordinary", but to describe this lens that way because it is not as good as an A* or FA* is like saying a Ferrari F355 is mediocre because it is not as good as an F50! My A 35/2.8 performs as well as any other Pentax lens in my bag (5x M, 4x A, 1x F). Regrettably I have no "Star" or Limited lenses to compare it with :( Look at these statistics that I gleaned from Boz's K-mount pages, using only Yoshi's results for the sake of consistency. I have had to assume that the M and A lenses of the same specification that Boz has bracketed together are optically the same lens. The optical diagrams are shared between these M and A lenses adding further to my belief that they are the same lenses. If this is true the A lens should in theory be slightly better because of progressive upgrades to the SMC. (I hope that this table makes it un-mutilated into all the different mail clients that PDML members are using, my apologies if it doesn't.) LENS CENTRECORNERBEST APERTURE K 28/2.083 lpm65 lpmf/8-11 K 30/2.885 lpm71 lpmf/8 K 35/2.079 lpm59 lpmf/5.6-11 K 35/3.588 lpm72 lpmf/11 K 50/1.479 lpm65 lpmf/8 M 28/2.090 lpm65 lpmf/8-11 M 28/3.577 lpm62 lpmf/8-11 M 35/2.075 lpm53 lpmf/8-11 -- M 35/2.877 lpm63 lpmf/8 -- M 40/2.875 lpm64 lpmf/11 A 50/1.784 lpm74 lpmf/8 ~ f/11 FA 28/2.8 AL75 lpm60 lpmf/8-11 FA 77/1,8 Ltd70 lpm62 lpmf/11 ~ f/16 -- These particular lenses are included simply because directly comparable results were available. I started my table at 28mm which is one popular focal length wider than 35mm, and continued through to 50mm which is one popular focal length longer. The 77mm Ltd is included as evidence that pure statistics are not the only measure of a lens's quality. The A 35/2.8 (if it is at least equal to the M35/2.8) is neither the best nor the worst lens amongst Pentax lenses. This would make it an AVERAGE performer. An average Pentax lens is pretty good when measured against any other brand IMO :) Notice that the M 35/2.0 has slightly lower resolution on centre and significantly lower resolution out wide than the M 35/2.8, and yet the f2 lens has been praised on this list as a very fine lens. Considering that the M and A versions of these lenses are the same (except for their coatings and outer construction) it is most puzzling that the A 35/2.8 should be considered as mediocre, and inferior to the A 35/2.0 (and M 35/2.0). Perhaps Boz or some other authority can verify or deny that, in optical design terms, M series 35mm lenses = A series 35mm lenses. And who'd've believed that a 40mm pancake would out-resolve a 77mm Limited! Regards, Anthony Farr - 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: Funny subject lines
Hi, Re[n]: is something that Lotus mail clients do. The Bat, which I and some other people here are using also does it. Personally I don't like it, but I don't know how to turn it off. Re: Re[n] presumably arises because some mail clients don't understand Re[n]: as another form of Re: No idea where Subject: comes from. I imagine there's some RFC which defines what they should be. Perhaps if Ralf Stubner is reading he will point us to it. --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Saturday, April 07, 2001, 4:19:44 PM, you wrote: How come we've lately got these funny subject lines like in below, with repeated "Re":s, a number inserted [2], [3] etc, as well as the word "Subject" spelled out? Do these come from some peculiar mail readers or do people actively insert these letters, numbers and words? Example: Re: Re[3]: Subject: e-bay words (very OT!) Lasse - 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: SMC-A 35/2.8. Mediocre or Maligned?
Hi, it seems that these lens tests do nothing except demonstrate their own inadequacy. I have comparable real-world (rather than lens test) slides taken with my M 35/2 and my M40/2.8 in which it is obvious through a good lupe and projected to about 1m on the long edge that the M 35/2 is much better optically than the M 40/2.8. And none which shows the 40mm lens to be better than the 35mm. The only tests that really matter are your own or those of authorities whom you trust through experience. As for the ancestry, Cecchi says the A versions of the 35/2.8 35/2 are the same as the corresponding M lens. --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Saturday, April 07, 2001, 2:44:05 PM, you wrote: I posted this to the group on April 5 (so I thought), it's in my "sent items" folder and I seem to remember it coming back to me as a PDML posting. The response totally underwhelmed me, so it came as no surprise to see that the PDML archive doesn't hold my original post (a search for the subject line produced nothing). I'll try again. Pl Jensen recently wrote: Olivier wrote: Pentax-A 24mm f/2.8 Performances : 3 Pentax-A 35mm f/2.8 Performances : 3 Pentax-A* 85mm f/1.4 Performances : 3 Pentax-A* 135mm f/1.8 Performances : 3 Pentax-A* 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF Performances : 3 I belive this sort of drivel shouldn't even be posted here. Some may actually believe in it. Its pure nonsense. Anyone who gives the A* 85, 135, and 300 above a mediocre score of "3" is positively out of their minds. Likewise, compare them to a true medoicre lens as the A 35/2.8. (snip) Pl, I agree with your dissapointment on behalf of the A* lenses for their average ratings on CDI. Apparently WRT lens appraisals the French have no soul. But... I have an A 35/2.8 and I wouldn't call it mediocre by any standard, although it depends what "mediocre" means to you, as I realise that English is not your first language. My Lotus dictionary says mediocre is "moderate to inferior in quality, ordinary", but to describe this lens that way because it is not as good as an A* or FA* is like saying a Ferrari F355 is mediocre because it is not as good as an F50! My A 35/2.8 performs as well as any other Pentax lens in my bag (5x M, 4x A, 1x F). Regrettably I have no "Star" or Limited lenses to compare it with :( Look at these statistics that I gleaned from Boz's K-mount pages, using only Yoshi's results for the sake of consistency. I have had to assume that the M and A lenses of the same specification that Boz has bracketed together are optically the same lens. The optical diagrams are shared between these M and A lenses adding further to my belief that they are the same lenses. If this is true the A lens should in theory be slightly better because of progressive upgrades to the SMC. (I hope that this table makes it un-mutilated into all the different mail clients that PDML members are using, my apologies if it doesn't.) LENS CENTRECORNERBEST APERTURE K 28/2.083 lpm65 lpmf/8-11 K 30/2.885 lpm71 lpmf/8 K 35/2.079 lpm59 lpmf/5.6-11 K 35/3.588 lpm72 lpmf/11 K 50/1.479 lpm65 lpmf/8 M 28/2.090 lpm65 lpmf/8-11 M 28/3.577 lpm62 lpmf/8-11 M 35/2.075 lpm53 lpmf/8-11 -- M 35/2.877 lpm63 lpmf/8 -- M 40/2.875 lpm64 lpmf/11 A 50/1.784 lpm74 lpmf/8 ~ f/11 FA 28/2.8 AL75 lpm60 lpmf/8-11 FA 77/1,8 Ltd70 lpm62 lpmf/11 ~ f/16 -- These particular lenses are included simply because directly comparable results were available. I started my table at 28mm which is one popular focal length wider than 35mm, and continued through to 50mm which is one popular focal length longer. The 77mm Ltd is included as evidence that pure statistics are not the only measure of a lens's quality. The A 35/2.8 (if it is at least equal to the M35/2.8) is neither the best nor the worst lens amongst Pentax lenses. This would make it an AVERAGE performer. An average Pentax lens is pretty good when measured against any other brand IMO :) Notice that the M 35/2.0 has slightly lower resolution on centre and significantly lower resolution out wide than the M 35/2.8, and yet the f2
[FW:$125 Pentax 50 f4A macro MINT!]
Spotted in rec.photo.marketplace.35mm http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djqas_ugroup=rec.photo.marketplace Todd Subject: FS:$125 Pentax 50 f4A macro MINT! Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 21:39:32 -0400 From: "chris wakeen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.35mm Pentax SMCA 50mm f4 macro lens in mint condition. It looks and operates like new. The glass is perfect and the barrel looks mint. A steal at $125. Pictures are available. Thanks. - 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: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2
Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tanya - someone who knows what they are talking about can answer this better than I can, but the basic principle is that any K, M, A, F or FA lens will fit on any K, Ka, or Kaf mount. No exceptions. Except, I've been told, that the MZ-50 doesn't accept old lenses...? (Of course all camera + lens functions won't work the same, depends on how you mix lens and cameras of different generations. But the lens will mount and it will be usable if it is a good lens.) Basically, you get the common subset of features. Both body and lens need to support a given feature for it to work, but you can still use any combination. Whether you've got an old K lens on a PZ-1P, or a brand new AF lens on a K-1000, you'll have to focus and set the aperture manually -- but both combinations will work just fine. People tend to think N**on is the best brand for compatibility over generations, but the fact is, Pentax is quite a bit better at it. -tih -- The basic difference is this: hackers build things, crackers break them. - 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: Square format on 35mm
A scroll of mail from "Peter Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:00:02 +0100 Read it? y Last weekend I discussed with my eldest son (an poor student) his desire to do some "square" format photography. He has a Pentax MG and a SFX1n. He uses the MG mostly and was considering selling the SFXn to finance the purchase of a Kiev 60. The discussion led to my assertion that I had heard that Kievs were unreliable and he might be better looking for an old Yashica or Rollie TLR. It turns out though that he is not really bothered about the larger format of 120 just the square shape. Which brings me to my question: The square format (esp with a TLR) is a great way to get in to MF. Old Seagulls (the Chinese ones) or Mamiyas are great. Also you get those big focusing screens and waist level viewfinders. The old Seagulls are very cheap, although not the most reliable. Old Mamiyas are great, plus they focus very close. 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: Theater photo film choice
A scroll of mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 6 Apr 2001 20:43:27 +0100 (BST) Read it? y There was an article in the UK's Amateur Photographer a few years ago but they only suggested film speeds and the fact that stage lighting is often coloured for special effects so a photo call session is the best time to get "natural" skin colours. But during a performance, the lights (and the colours thereof) are part of the performance. Capture those colours! 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: Re[3]: Subject: e-bay words (very OT!)
A scroll of mail from "Peter Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:04:39 +0100 Read it? y Oh for Ghod's sake: that thing has been circulated for years now. Give it a rest, people. 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: Flash Exposure Compensation in the MZ5?
A scroll of mail from RK [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 07 Apr 2001 23:04:36 +0530 Read it? y Can I reduce the RTF output on my MZ5, keeping the ambient light exposure constant? I do remember some thread about this topic sometime ago- or was that about flash compensation on the PZ1-p? Nope, that's the flash comp. on the PZ-1p. A good reason to buy that camera, as you can get very nice results using the RTF 2 stops down. 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: SMC-A 35/2.8. Mediocre or Maligned?
Hello I wsih to tell you this story. With some friends, I tryed my 85mm f/:1.4 FA IF Pentax , face to 90mm f/:2 Asph Leica and 85mm f/:1.8 Nikon. You can see the result on www.pictchallenge.com (in french only) In the CdI Website, there was a quarrel about the test (the Pentax seems to be the worst of all) and some people of CDI came and talk with us. And as the matter that we keep on argueing, they are going to test the 85mm f::1.4 again. You need to know that this cost money and time, but as we made contact, it is kindfull to re test a lens. This is a clue which makes me trust the tests of CDI. Why do they need to re test if they do not wish their tests to be reliable ? They want to proove us that this is reliable. Also, you need to know that they use 25 or 50ISO films, so with a 100 or more ISO film, you may not make a difference between 3 stars or 4 stars lens. See you [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.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 .
Order Form for Pentax Operation Manuals,
Hey guys, Ok, as promised here's the order form. Quite a few cameras on there including LX, MEF, MV1, MX, UC-1, K2, and many more . . .also flash units, scopes, mini sports, and binoculars, etc. link is: http://wmkane.scienceteachers.com/Order_Form_Pentax.PDF I'll probably take this link down in a week or two. Don't really have the room for it up there. Illinois 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 .
FS: +1 diopter for M series
Hey guys, Well, I accidently bought the wrong dipoter (which just proves that I really need one, right? ;-) ) At any rate, I have a +1 diopter to fit on M series cameras . . . it fits on my Super Program. If anyone is interested, I'm looking to get about $15 for it shipped in the states. Any takers? Oh, I'm interested in trades for some LX equipment too at this point . . . I could use the finder cover for the LX (the big square thing to go on the body) . . . or maybe some strap lugs (I'd have to toss in a couple of extra bucks, right?) 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 .
OT? everyday votings
On the Penta Magazine: www.penta-club.org you can see new voting every day (today it is about "which body do you have from modern lineup". Next day will be again about MZ-S, etc.). It's not for competition with here's voting about cameras but it can be interesting for many photographers... Den p.s: of course anyone can send me theme for voting and if it will be interesting we'll put it online... - 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 .
PUG comments (Alin Flaider, Matt McCarter, Serge Kozak)
Hello all, My critique assignements this month were for Alin Flaider, Matt McCarter, Serge Kozak. First of all, I would like to apologize to the three of you (and to the other PDML members reading these comments) for the late feed-back but, unfortunately, I couldn't find enough time the last few days to finish this off earlier. So here are my uncensored thoughts on the pictures. Please, feel free to disagree! These are only the various ideas that came to my mind while looking at your photographs. - " Bridge in Motion " by Serge Kozak I find this is an impressive view of the bridge. (I am curious: where is it located?) The suspending cables of the bridge nicely guide you through the whole picture frame, towards the pillar top. In particular, wherever you first start looking at the picture, there is always a strong line leading you towards that centre of interest. I find very pleasing that the eye can wander in any direction in this picture, just by choosing the "proper" cable. I also noticed that the shadow of the cables on the left pillar neatly completes the pattern. Although I never shoot black and white, I am under the impression that this is a really good use of it as, I think, it simplifies a lot the picture elements and allows to further concentrate on the strong, black lines. The white vehicles included in the foreground give a sense of the place and foreground interest. However, I should say that I would really have prefered a simpler foreground. I do not like too much the superposition of the two vehicles which I find disturbing. (I also have been wondering about removing the "colliding" car going in the opposite direction.) My thinking is that this relatively confusing foreground contrasts too much with the clear and simple pattern of the bridge cables and pillar: in my opinion, a simpler foreground would probably have been more adapted to the picture. I'll conclude by adding that I like that you tilted the view. As a result, I feel that the unbalanced position of the bus emphasizes the power emanating from the imposing bridge pillar and cables. - " Classical Goya " by Matt McCarter This is a nice a simple view of the guitar. I like the atmosphere resulting from the overall darkness and the low constrast of this photograph. In particular, I find this is well-adapted to the idea that you like playing with it at night, as you mentioned in your comments. The close-up view also gives a pleasant intimist touch to it. I must admit that I played a bit with the brightness and constrast of your image on my computer as, at first, I thought that both were too low: but I always ended up prefering the original version. On the other hand, the low constrast and the shallow depth of field doesn't help to get a strong feeling of the texture of the spruce top. I think I would like to see more of the guitar in focus, and particularly the white knobs (I don't know what they are called) in the foreground. I am also wondering if you couldn't improve the image by avoiding to crop right part of the last knob. For some reason, I find annoying that I can't see it completely. Maybe you could also include a sound sample on the gallery, for all of us to enjoy :-) ? - " New Generation " by Alin Flaider Fallen leaves are one of my favorite and recurrent photographic theme, so this picture directly grabbed my attention. In particular, it has a very unusual background: are these frog eggs? I am really uncertain of what they are! (At first, I thought they were melting ice droplets, which I had inferred from your mentioning of snow. I didn't realize that I was probably wrong before I tried to understand the title.) To be honest, however, I am not too sure of what to think of the shot: although I definitely like a lot the various constrats conveyed by the picture (both visual and semantic), somehow the composition doesn't work for me. I find that the pattern of the eggs is a very interesting background (I'll have to try that!), with a nice contrast between the lighter and darker portions of the wet eggs. I also like the strong constrast between the monochrome background and the warm colors of the leave. I feel that all this can make it a strong photograph. However, the position of the leaf in the shot does not please me that much. I find the bright color of the leaf so overwhelming that my eyes always go back to that bottom right corner of the frame. I must say however that I haven't imagined a better position for it. I also have been wondering about removing the small twig on the left of the leaf, as it distracts from the main subject of the picture. On the other hand, it gives an other point for the eye on which to focus, which counterbalances the power of the leaf presence. Another comment I'd have is that the image seems very slightly blurred, maybe from scanning. I wonder if it could benefit from using the "unsharp mask" filter. After all this thinking, if
Re: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2
Howdy, Just from my observations about this thread, it sounds as though there is nothing wrong with either lens or camera bodies except for the fact that when that Vivitar lens was designed, the designers could not have anticipated that Pentax would stick their Power-Zoom contacts in the way of the elongated gaurd that protects the lever/pin (on lens) for aperature coupling. on Pentax brand lenses (and most off-brands) this "gaurd" is quite short; only about a cm (1/3-1/3 inch) long. It therefore does not hit the little sqaure protrusion that holds the AF body's Power-Zoom contacts. Some off-brand lenses have a guard that is 2 or 3 cm (1-2 inches) long. The very end of this strikes this little PZ protrusion inside the body's mount. Simply put; not compatable. As to which off-brand lenses have this problem, I don't know all of them. I do know that a brand labelled Magnicon in Canada (former Black's Photography stores' relabelled house brand) had this problem. I had this cute little (although "Coke-bottle" performance) 70-200 PKA mnt lens that would not work with my first AF body, my then-newly acquired PZ-1. Needless to say, that was the end of that lens and I sold it with my Super Program. Again my two bits worth, Darren "can almost feel the MZ-S in hand" Sutherland PS. If there is still confusion about this I can always snap some digital pics of said items at work to illistrate this problem. And no comments on my inaccurate conversion of measurements as I'm being VERY approximate! :OP -Original Message- From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: April 7, 2001 4:01 AM Subject: Re: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2 Now there may be a trick with the particular lens. Or it may be something silly like a loose screw in the base of the lens mount which is catching on the mount. Or the lens may be damaged.Good luck. Stan - 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: Favorite Film Roll Call
I think that would be a good theme for PUG one month: "Leather and Whips" Yeah, baby! -frank "David S." wrote: William Robb wrote: You are a glutton for punishment. My wife would like you, she is into leather and whips. Kodachrome 64 Can you also post some of those photos? David 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 . - 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: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2
If it's a matter of a "guard" on the lens, couldn't the guard simply be filed down so that the lens and body could couple? Bill Darren Tara Sutherland wrote: Howdy, Just from my observations about this thread, it sounds as though there is nothing wrong with either lens or camera bodies except for the fact that when that Vivitar lens was designed, the designers could not have anticipated that Pentax would stick their Power-Zoom contacts in the way of the elongated gaurd that protects the lever/pin (on lens) for aperature coupling. on Pentax brand lenses (and most off-brands) this "gaurd" is quite short; only about a cm (1/3-1/3 inch) long. It therefore does not hit the little sqaure protrusion that holds the AF body's Power-Zoom contacts. Some off-brand lenses have a guard that is 2 or 3 cm (1-2 inches) long. The very end of this strikes this little PZ protrusion inside the body's mount. Simply put; not compatable. As to which off-brand lenses have this problem, I don't know all of them. I do know that a brand labelled Magnicon in Canada (former Black's Photography stores' relabelled house brand) had this problem. I had this cute little (although "Coke-bottle" performance) 70-200 PKA mnt lens that would not work with my first AF body, my then-newly acquired PZ-1. Needless to say, that was the end of that lens and I sold it with my Super Program. Again my two bits worth, Darren "can almost feel the MZ-S in hand" Sutherland PS. If there is still confusion about this I can always snap some digital pics of said items at work to illistrate this problem. And no comments on my inaccurate conversion of measurements as I'm being VERY approximate! :OP -Original Message- From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: April 7, 2001 4:01 AM Subject: Re: Vivitar Series 1 28mm/f2 Now there may be a trick with the particular lens. Or it may be something silly like a loose screw in the base of the lens mount which is catching on the mount. Or the lens may be damaged.Good luck. Stan - 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 .
Pinhole Pic
Hi, Here`s a link to the pic: http://homepages.go.com/~stevenlarson/albums/album/pic79.html It`s a tad over exposed, but we had a deadline to meet, so we did not have time to snap another. It was a comedy of errors to try and get an 8 second exposure with my lovely bride doing the timing with a wristwatch, my daughter opening and closing the shutter, and I barking out commands, but we did get a couple of pics. The pic at the link is with the normal size pinhole, which is smaller in size than any of my wife's sewing needles. The second pic we took was with a larger pinhole using the smallest sewing needle we had, and drilled a hole in a piece of copper sheeting (the stuff used for etching your own circuit board), with the needle, and it came out blurry. It was a fun school science project. 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 .
OT. Web album: pictures don't show.
Hi all, I am trying to create simple web albums. Using Photoimpact, ACDSee and Web Album Creator I think I've done everything right, but when opening the albums locally in my Internet Explorer (v 5.5) the jpgs don't show. I only get the typical picture frame with a red cross for the missing picture. (Backgrounds, other frames as well as text appear all right, but just not the pictures.) I think I may have missed something basic here. Anybody got a clue about what a beginner typically may have missed? Lasse - 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: Flash Exposure Compensation in the MZ5?
- Original Message - From: "RK" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Pentax discuss" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 7, 2001 11:34 AM Subject: Flash Exposure Compensation in the MZ5? Can I reduce the RTF output on my MZ5, keeping the ambient light exposure constant? Use manual exposure control for the aperture and shutter speed, and dial in minus exposure compensation. I would guess that would do it. Try it anyway. 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: Helicoid Ext. Tube
- Original Message - From: "Robert Meier" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 6, 2001 10:46 PM Subject: Re: Helicoid Ext. Tube William, Thanks very much for the table. Is there a book available that will give me that and much more on the 6x7? Bob I have a bunch of brochures and instruction manuals for the 6x7 gear. It seems that almost every piece of equipment for the 6x7 came with some sort of operators manual. You could try Pentax in Colorado, I have heard they are quite good at sending out operators manuals. If that fails, I would be happy to scan and email you whatever information I have on hand. 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: Pinhole Pic
Hi Steve, I can't get the pinhole pic to load. Maybe it's just me, but I do see your wooden duck. Nice shot, even if it's not really wood :-). Paul Steve Larson wrote: Hi, Here`s a link to the pic: http://homepages.go.com/~stevenlarson/albums/album/pic79.html It`s a tad over exposed, but we had a deadline to meet, so we did not have time to snap another. It was a comedy of errors to try and get an 8 second exposure with my lovely bride doing the timing with a wristwatch, my daughter opening and closing the shutter, and I barking out commands, but we did get a couple of pics. The pic at the link is with the normal size pinhole, which is smaller in size than any of my wife's sewing needles. The second pic we took was with a larger pinhole using the smallest sewing needle we had, and drilled a hole in a piece of copper sheeting (the stuff used for etching your own circuit board), with the needle, and it came out blurry. It was a fun school science project. 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 .
Re: OT. Web album: pictures don't show.
Check your extensions, and make sure they match what the href tag says. A common error is to have a tag such as a href="silly_picture.jpg"/a, but then have "silly_picture.JPG" on the server. This stuff is incredibly case sensitive, so if you have a capital letter in the filename that isn't in the tag, or the extensions don't match perfectly, the page will be buggered up. Look for spaces in the tags, as that will screw up the links. Also, if you are using absolute urls for your links, make sure they are correct. Can you get the jpeg by entering it's url? "silly_picture.html" may be the name of the page, but you should be able to access the image file itself by addressing it directly. Just for the sake of converstion, a text editor program such as Notepad or Editpad are much better programs for writing html than many html editors, which tend to make a mess of the script. The PUG is written with a combination of Editpad and the text editor that is attached to Adobe GoLive. William Robb - Original Message - From: "Lasse Karlsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 7, 2001 4:22 PM Subject: OT. Web album: pictures don't show. Hi all, I am trying to create simple web albums. Using Photoimpact, ACDSee and Web Album Creator I think I've done everything right, but when opening the albums locally in my Internet Explorer (v 5.5) the jpgs don't show. I only get the typical picture frame with a red cross for the missing picture. (Backgrounds, other frames as well as text appear all right, but just not the pictures.) I think I may have missed something basic here. Anybody got a clue about what a beginner typically may have missed? Lasse - 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: Pinhole Pic
Hi Paul, I dunno what`s wrong with that, the web server is up and down, maybe try later. Thanks for the comment on the duck! Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "PAUL STENQUIST" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 3:45 PM Subject: Re: Pinhole Pic Hi Steve, I can't get the pinhole pic to load. Maybe it's just me, but I do see your wooden duck. Nice shot, even if it's not really wood :-). Paul Steve Larson wrote: Hi, Here`s a link to the pic: http://homepages.go.com/~stevenlarson/albums/album/pic79.html It`s a tad over exposed, but we had a deadline to meet, so we did not have time to snap another. It was a comedy of errors to try and get an 8 second exposure with my lovely bride doing the timing with a wristwatch, my daughter opening and closing the shutter, and I barking out commands, but we did get a couple of pics. The pic at the link is with the normal size pinhole, which is smaller in size than any of my wife's sewing needles. The second pic we took was with a larger pinhole using the smallest sewing needle we had, and drilled a hole in a piece of copper sheeting (the stuff used for etching your own circuit board), with the needle, and it came out blurry. It was a fun school science project. 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 . - 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: Theater photo film choice (Brian's ramblings)
- Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 7, 2001 9:25 AM Subject: Re: OT: Theater photo film choice (Brian's ramblings) Brian wrote: I have been using Fuji NHGII-800, pushed either 1 or 2 stops ... whenever I shoot C41 film that has to be pushed, I usually try to give it at least a third of a stop more light than I rate it for, ie.Shoot at 2500 and process at 3200 etc. OK, please explain something to me. If, as Bill and Aaron, our resident processing gurus say, C41 is not pushable, but, rather, is a develop to completion process, how do you "push" Fuji NGH one or two stops. What is your technique for processing it at 3200, etc.? We've been down this road a couple of times, now. Here we go again. Colour negative film has several stops of exposure latitude. If you underexpose it, but the important shadow detail is still imbedded on the emulsion, you will have a relatively acceptable print. What you get whenever you underexpose/overdevelop is a decrease in shadow detail, with an increase in contrast. With C-41, as you increase development, you also increase the mask (thats what we call that orange coloured base) density. What does happen with over developed C-41 film is that shadow and midtone values do move up the exposure scale somewhat more than highlight values, thereby increasing the amount of dye that is formed around those exposure values. This does increase relative saturation, and may give an appearance of a speed increase. Unfortunately, the film's speed point is measured at it's threshold exposure value, and this is immutable. No increase in processing time will alter that value. 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: SMC-A 35/2.8. Mediocre or Maligned?
On 7 Apr 2001, at 21:31, Pentax Clover wrote: Hello I wsih to tell you this story. With some friends, I tryed my 85mm f/:1.4 FA IF Pentax , face to 90mm f/:2 Asph Leica and 85mm f/:1.8 Nikon. You can see the result on www.pictchallenge.com (in french only) In the CdI Website, there was a quarrel about the test (the Pentax seems to be the worst of all) and some people of CDI came and talk with us. And as the matter that we keep on argueing, they are going to test the 85mm f::1.4 again. You need to know that this cost money and time, but as we made contact, it is kindfull to re test a lens. This is a clue which makes me trust the tests of CDI. Why do they need to re test if they do not wish their tests to be reliable ? They want to proove us that this is reliable. Also, you need to know that they use 25 or 50ISO films, so with a 100 or more ISO film, you may not make a difference between 3 stars or 4 stars lens. Hi Pentaxclover et.al, For thoses interested the direct link to this page is: http://www.pictchallenge.com/diabolpif/invtest3.html For translation try: http://babel.altavista.com/translate.dyn There is not much information on this page, not a very scientific approach of measurement even though the image samples and analysis is posed as such. I would also like to have seen a Pentax body used with mirror lock up, an indication of how the lenses were focussed, film processing information etc. I can understand why the test caused a quarrel. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 Fax +61-2-9554-9259 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.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 .
