Re: lens of the week: 15/3.5 and A 15/3.5
Hello, Bokeh ??? Let's say at 3.5, if you have something really close and Infinity, you might have a slight fuzzy edge. I had the fun to use the SMC-A 15mm/3.5 last week, I didn't buy it, but it is now on my wish list. It is about the size of a 24-90mm good zoom, the weight makes you think it is made whole out of glass, the feeling I like very much, Heavy, focus is easy and fast 1/2 turn I think. I have to agree the colors rendition is *NICE* Philippe > > SMC 15/3.5 > > SMC-A 15/3.5 > > > > What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it > > for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens > > handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, > > contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? > > I've had the non-A for about two weeks and run maybe 24 frames past it. > Still trying to figure out how best to use it. Impressive build quality, > with the best color, contrast and sharpness of all my (few) lenses except > the 400A*/2.8 ED IF. Really catches the flavor of the early morning > sunlight, my favorite shooting time of day. So far very flare-resistant > for so wide a lens. I keep the winder on my LX all the time, so it balances > nicely in my hands; w/o the winder I think it'd be a somewhat nose-heavy rig. > > Bokeh? I haven't yet opened up enough to notice any... :-) - 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: FNAC catalog of reflex cameras and lenses
On 20 Apr 2001, at 2:22, Peter Spiro wrote: > They generally have good opinions of Pentax cameras and the lower price > Pentax zooms (in terms of quality relative to price). However, the only > Pentax lens that hits the four star level is the 50mm f/1.7. The 43mm and > 85mm f/1.4 both only rate three stars at f/8. Hmm, and it appears that the SMCPFA 20f2.8 gets one star only for performance wide open and at f8 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 .
Tanya's photo adventures
I just wanted to say how much I've been enjoying reading the posts from Tanya about her portrait ventures, and the various responses from other members. This is in part because I'm starting off my own portrait business here in Oregon, though not with quite as much verve (I don't have either the stomach or time right now to book 20+ sittings in advance.) Hope you'll keep us all posted on your progress. Bob Keefer
Countdown to PUG
Well kids, its about a day to cutoff for the May Gallery. We still have lots of spaces to fill in the index page. 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 .
Subject: KMP lens of the week [2]
Boz wrote: "Just a few additions. My intention is to gather comments by single peopleand write a summary..." Does this mean that married people can't submit their comments? ;-) fairy.
Re: Male Aussie Centrefold, enjoy :-)
The whole site is fabulous, Thanks Rob! William Robb - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: Male Aussie Centrefold, enjoy :-) > http://www.wises.com.au/images/people/mlende.htm - 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 Flashes
I have and use the 285HV. Its a great machine, but it is definitely a beast. It even dwarfs my less than small KX, and makes my superprogram look like a toy. I like the auto capablities and the "calculator dial" on the side which keeps you from having to fumble around in your head with f-numbers and ISO and distance and stuff. brent - 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 manual
Try: http://www.robertstech.com/pentax.htm "Frits J. Wüthrich" wrote: > > Does anyone have a website where I can download the manual for the ME? > > Frits Wüthrich > http://www.postkoets.btinternet.co.uk/ > Aren't your pictures worth a Pentax? > > - > 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: Sears 135mm/2.8 lense info needed
Hi, I think i'll give it a miss as it wont fit on my MZ5n. also i had hopes it would go to atleast 1:2. Have to hold out for a Pentax 100/2.8 :) Thanks for everyones replies. Paul >From: Todd Stanley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Sears 135mm/2.8 lense info needed >Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:45:46 -0500 > > >It doesn't get anywhere close to 1:1 - it only gets down to 1:5, meaning >some 135's focus closer that aren't "Macro". Optically it's quite good >from what I have found, I think it performs best in close distances as >opposed to infinity, though I haven't shot any tests with it. > >Compared to the M 135 F3.5, it's considerably larger, takes 52mm filters, >and only stops down to F22. Half stop clicks are present from F2.8-F16. >Build quality is pretty good, the lens feels solid (and it's fairly heavy), >the aperture ring turns quite easily, it's not as "notcty" as the M or A >series. Big huge easy to grip focus ring combined with a fairly large >throw make focusing pretty easy. You go into the Macro mode by focusing to >the minimum focus distance, and then turning a ring in the very front with >marked settings of 1:7, 1:6, and 1:5. Didn't take me long to get used to. > >Todd > >At 10:48 PM 4/19/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Hi, > > > >can any one give me any info on this lense? Its a macro lense, not sure >if > >its down to 1:1 and it takes a 52mm filter. > > > >I'm wondering what its like opticaly, as a macro lense and its build > >quality. > > > >Also does any one know if it they go down to 1:1? if not what size >extension > >tube would i need to get it there? > > > >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 . > _ 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: going back??
The graininess of course is not a function of the camera, but of the film and possibly processing. Try some Fuji and see what you think. :-) You may want to attach a manual lens and take a couple shots with that. And put the AF lens on your manual bodies and take a couple of test shots. That could possibly isolate the perceived problem to the AF lens if it is faulty somehow. Also focus the AF lens manually on the AF body and snap a shot, and then take the same photo allowing the body to focus. Compare them to see if it is focusing correctly. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "David J Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 5:18 PM Subject: going back?? > Well I'v put about 7-8 rolls of various film through my sf-1,test rolls for flash work,indoor > flash horse work and general outdoor stuff and 1 roll indoor jumping,no flash.Film used, konica > 100-200 Kodak max 400,800 and 1 Kodak Gold found deep in the bag.Not to sure i like this > camera.One thing is if i want to look at my f stop it is on top and i have to keep the camera > pointed at the subject and strain over the l.e.d.,the handle is big and feels ocward when i > shoot vertical,which i do alot.Also find if i try to change shutter speed/etc while composing a > shot(eye to view finder) i quite often hit the iso instead of the mode switch,plus alot of my > head/shoulder horse/rider shots with a dull sky seem to be ery grainy even with 100/200 > film.I shot another ef test roll today and will try another indoor roll of 800 this weekend.If i have > not convinced my self to keep it by Sunday i quess back it goes. > Sorry for the rant group but i quess 30 years of manual focus cameras has worn off on me.My > K1000 and SP 500 give me better results,unless i'm doing something really wrong with the > sf-1 > - 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 .
120mm for auction
I'm selling a 120mm F2.8 SMC-M lens at ebay if anyone's interested: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1230224898 JCO - 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 Super/MX Batteries
On 19 Apr 2001, at 15:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Tom & Bucky, > > Interesting. I have never had problems with the double battery in the Super Program >or the ME. On the other hand, I noticed the LX display seemed to pulse when I let go >of the shutter release today. I opened the battery compartment and found a double in >it. I put in 2 unused MS76's from '95 and the pulsing went away. This has happened before. Hi Bob, Doesn't the pulsing indicate a discharged battery? I have been using the 1/3N 3V lithium cells on all my cameras (Pentax/Leica) for many years now and have had no problems whatsoever. 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 .
going back??
Well I'v put about 7-8 rolls of various film through my sf-1,test rolls for flash work,indoor flash horse work and general outdoor stuff and 1 roll indoor jumping,no flash.Film used, konica 100-200 Kodak max 400,800 and 1 Kodak Gold found deep in the bag.Not to sure i like this camera.One thing is if i want to look at my f stop it is on top and i have to keep the camera pointed at the subject and strain over the l.e.d.,the handle is big and feels ocward when i shoot vertical,which i do alot.Also find if i try to change shutter speed/etc while composing a shot(eye to view finder) i quite often hit the iso instead of the mode switch,plus alot of my head/shoulder horse/rider shots with a dull sky seem to be ery grainy even with 100/200 film.I shot another ef test roll today and will try another indoor roll of 800 this weekend.If i have not convinced my self to keep it by Sunday i quess back it goes. Sorry for the rant group but i quess 30 years of manual focus cameras has worn off on me.My K1000 and SP 500 give me better results,unless i'm doing something really wrong with the sf-1 Regards Dave Ps sent an e-mail to the store i bought it.Hope they will exchange for a spare k body 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: going back??
David J Brooks wrote: > > plus alot of my > head/shoulder horse/rider shots with a dull sky seem to be ery grainy even with >100/200 > film.I shot another ef test roll today and will try another indoor roll of 800 this >weekend.If i have > not convinced my self to keep it by Sunday i quess back it goes. The other stuff having to do with handling is a personal thing. It *is* different from what you're used to, but maybe you can get used to it. Maybe not...after all, maybe 30 years of your K1000 and Spotmatics has got you in a groove. I'm not sure why the camera would be at fault for your grainy skies. Do they have an odd color (brownish or puky)? They may be underexposed, which I guess you could blame on the camera's meter, but again, it's probably consistent and maybe you could get used to it. It might be the film. Maybe a ZX-5n might be more to your liking, it's got a more conventional layout. Good luck. 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 me manual
Try www.craigcamera.com he has tons of manuals Dave 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 .
Too many features?
Recent threads about the feature set of various cameras and whether we use them set me to wondering whether others in the group find themselves heading the same way as I am now? For background, I have a Pentax MZ/ZX5, an ME, a Rolleicord, and can use my wife's Pentax Espio if I wish. I find myself nowadays using the MZ5 most of the time, but use the others where appropriate. I have range of prime lenses from 28mm to 400mm, and three zooms, 28-80, 28-105 and 35-135, all consumer-grade. So which features do I use/not use? Auto-exposure? I am tending to use the MZ5 much like a semi-auto camera, by setting either aperture or shutter speed according to circumstance, and then letting the camera work out the other half of the combination. Or I may take total control! For instance, the other day I was shooting an Aboriginal cultural display, and needed to use fill-in flash (AF330FTZ) for some shots to get balanced lighting: so I set the shutter-speed to the X-sync setting. On 100 ASA film, this gave me an auto-aperture of f9.5, which was fine because I needed to keep the DOF I obtained down to blur the background. The settings I chose worked out beautifully: with some of the dancers, there was just a small amount of blur in their legs when they were moving quickly, which enhanced the result, but the flash kept the colours vivid and without dense shadows. No doubt the TTL flash logic actually controlled exposure here. Auto-Focus? With a collection of mainly M-series lenses, the AF is a feature I can't use a lot of the time. With my particular AF zoom lenses, the MZ5 does have a problem with moving subjects in low-light situations. Power or auto-winders? I don't have a problem. At least you can never miss a shot by forgetting to wind on. Exposure Compensation? Don't use it very often, but then I have seldom been in a position to push/pull colour negative film. Might use it again now I've reverted to slides. Selective metering? Yes, I do use it. Panorama format? Same again: as I have said before, if I can crop out unwanted parts of the scene in the camera, I think it's worth doing. Very high shutter speeds? Not often: my sort of photography seldom calls for anything faster than 1/500. I'm very comfortable with the knowledge that I have 1/2000 available though. Very fast lenses? Yes, I'd love to have those really fast lens available - but my budget won't stand it! And I can't help thinking of how many of us who have been in photography for many years were gob-smacked when f2 lenses began to be superseded by f1.7/1.8 as the standard 50mm lens in the 60's and 70's, and how we cheerfully shot in all sorts of light with our f3.5 Tessar designs. I've also gone back to shooting slide film: like another member, having had a whole bunch of negative film printed with a distinct blue cast, I'd rather not have errors introduced by another party. I can always select the keepers for myself and make prints digitally as required, and I can convert them to grayscale if they would work better that way. It's a bit like modern software, I guess: I wouldn't claim to use all of the features all of the time, but sometimes an obscure feature can be a life-saver... So yes, I probably will buy an MZ-S (next month if it's been released in Hong Kong), because I like the specification very much: however, I'll probably go for either a 20/24mm or the 77mm Limited prime lens rather than another zoom. Sorry for the long post, just felt the need for it. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - 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: Vs: Vivitar Flashes
I have one new 283 and three old (made in Japan) 283s. The three old ones sure make good slaves. BTW what is considered a "modern electronic camera". Everything I have is a ME Super, K1000 or Spotmatics. Any danger in using one of the old 283s as a backup? Raimo Korhonen wrote: > > Yep - it is the Made in Japan versions which have too high trigger voltage. Newer >versions are safe. > All the best! > Raimo > Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen > > -Alkuperäinen viesti- > Lähettäjä: Ray Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Päivä: 19. huhtikuuta 2001 23:27 > Aihe: Re: Vivitar Flashes > > >I remember reading something on the internet (maybe on this site) about the > >"discharge voltage" on the V283 flash units being too high for modern > >electronic cameras. SOMETHING ABOUT FRYING THE CAMERA. SOUNDED SERIOUS. > > > >But, I also vaguely remember reading that it is only the oldest models of > >V283 (maybe 285 too). > > > >Finally, I remember reading that Vivitar Tech Support can tell by serial > >number (and/or country of manufacture) whether the unit is to be 'feared' or > >not. > > > >- Ray > >_ > >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 . > > > > - > 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: Sears 135mm/2.8 lense info needed
It doesn't get anywhere close to 1:1 - it only gets down to 1:5, meaning some 135's focus closer that aren't "Macro". Optically it's quite good from what I have found, I think it performs best in close distances as opposed to infinity, though I haven't shot any tests with it. Compared to the M 135 F3.5, it's considerably larger, takes 52mm filters, and only stops down to F22. Half stop clicks are present from F2.8-F16. Build quality is pretty good, the lens feels solid (and it's fairly heavy), the aperture ring turns quite easily, it's not as "notcty" as the M or A series. Big huge easy to grip focus ring combined with a fairly large throw make focusing pretty easy. You go into the Macro mode by focusing to the minimum focus distance, and then turning a ring in the very front with marked settings of 1:7, 1:6, and 1:5. Didn't take me long to get used to. Todd At 10:48 PM 4/19/01 -0700, you wrote: >Hi, > >can any one give me any info on this lense? Its a macro lense, not sure if >its down to 1:1 and it takes a 52mm filter. > >I'm wondering what its like opticaly, as a macro lense and its build >quality. > >Also does any one know if it they go down to 1:1? if not what size extension >tube would i need to get it there? > >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 .
ME manual
Does anyone have a website where I can download the manual for the ME? Frits Wüthrich http://www.postkoets.btinternet.co.uk/ Aren't your pictures worth a Pentax? - 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: autofocus motor
I would think so. I would also think that motors in the camera may fail sooner if large heavy lenses are used a lot, as then the likely underpowered motor will have to work harder, trying to do the job of a larger motor. Todd At 05:08 PM 4/18/01 -0300, you wrote: > >What about AF motors dependability and longevity? >Only when Todd put together all his considerations that I noticed that, when >the AF motor is in the body, it's used all the time with every AF lens you >may have. When the AF motor is in the lens, you're not using the SAME motor >all the time. When it's used all the time, it will, I guess, be susceptible >to failure sooner, isn't it? >Does Pentax and/or other manufactures provide a figure about how long will a >AF motor last? Will it need --- or accept --- any kind of maintenance, like >other kind of electric motors? >I'm not saying that having the AF motor in the lens system is better. I'm >just curious about this aspect of the Pentax AF system. >Do any of you have any information or idea about it? >Best, > Eduardo. > >- - 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: Rare 'Soft K 85 2.2' Lens
Thanks Paul Don - Original Message - From: "Provencher, Paul M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:35 AM Subject: RE: Rare 'Soft K 85 2.2' Lens > See these photos (forget the subject matter - taken to test the lens) taken > with that lens here: > > (ppro) > (closet K-Mount user) > > -Original Message- > From: Donald Ross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 5:33 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Rare 'Soft K 85 2.2' Lens > > > I just received this lens from an Ebay auction and was surprised to find > that it is really 2.2. When I read the description, I thought it was a > typo. However, I've since found it on Boz's page. I have not, however, > been able to find an evaluation, good or bad, of this lens. Are any of you > learned Pentaxians familiar with this lens, and if so, what can I expect in > the way of performance? It really is a strange looking beast mounted. The > aperature scale (limited from 2.2 - 5.6) is at the bottome of lens with a > sliding gray scale on the top. The focusing ring is narrow and up close to > the body. It will take some getting use to. All comments are welcome. > Have a great day. > > Don > > - > 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 .
Pentax FA 18/2.8 Limited
Nothing is certain or official yet but I've been told that the forthcoming 18mm is a Limited lens. Take it with the mandatory grain of salt though. Pål - 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: lens of the week: 2000/13.5 and M 2000/13.5
Pål said: If you can focus it! I had troubles with the 1000/11. Try to stop down any lens to F:11 and try focusing it. A 2000mm will be 10 times worse; remeber the focusing accuracy involved. Its pretty much hopeless in my experience. Focusing bracketing is mandatory. I say: Yes, but Pål, in the domestic spy business, all you need to do is be able to recognize the guy/gal cavorting with the other guy/gal. Wall hanging quality isn't such an issue for most of the clients. - 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 .
Vs: Vivitar Flashes
Yep - it is the Made in Japan versions which have too high trigger voltage. Newer versions are safe. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Ray Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 19. huhtikuuta 2001 23:27 Aihe: Re: Vivitar Flashes >I remember reading something on the internet (maybe on this site) about the >"discharge voltage" on the V283 flash units being too high for modern >electronic cameras. SOMETHING ABOUT FRYING THE CAMERA. SOUNDED SERIOUS. > >But, I also vaguely remember reading that it is only the oldest models of >V283 (maybe 285 too). > >Finally, I remember reading that Vivitar Tech Support can tell by serial >number (and/or country of manufacture) whether the unit is to be 'feared' or >not. > >- Ray >_ >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 . > - 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: Sears 135mm/2.8 lense info needed
I have one I bought for $48. It is quite good for the price. My focus ring wobbles a little but it is otherwise solid. As a macro it is so - so, you need to stop down. It is quite sharp and very nice for portraits in the non - macro range even wide open. One thing, you cannot use it on a ZX5n, or probably any of the new autofocus bodies: There is a screw that gets stuck in the AF drive hole. It works great on my Program Plus though. Regards, Tom Wannenburg - 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]: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
Nikon already published the list price, no guess work needed. Check their web site for the announcements. If I remember right, it was ($899?) much cheaper than MZ-S's list price. Regards, ___ Tonghang Zhou (Zhou is pronounced like Joe) On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Another factor is the price. > FM3A seems excellent, but it will cost A LOT. Just look the price of a FM2n, add > all the features the new body has, and the price will be close to the F3. > The five letters in front of pentaprism housing adds another 100 or 200 bucks : > - ). > Just my two cents. - 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: MZ-S is really good ?
Pentax clover wrote: > The problem is not only that there is some features find missed, but for > the price it would be sold, it is not easy to accept this fact. If I was > richer, I will buy it. But it is not my case, and not the case of most of > Pentaxists, that's why I hope this change. > If you think its price is the good price, so I am wrong whatever I said. But > compare to other SLR (Nikon F-90x, Minolta Maxxum7, or Dynax7, for example) > I find it too expensive. This is where I have problems with your argument. I fully accept that you find it too expensive for you and that it lacks some features you may want. However, thats totally different from claiming that the MZ-S is too expensive and basically isn't worth its price. The MZ-S is a unique product compared to the competition: no other camera at this price offer that heavy duty construction; no pro or semi pro comparable camera is equally small and lightweight: no other slr offer RTF flash that synchs up to 1/6000s; no other slr offers a more quick and flexible interface for shooters who mainly use aperture priority and manual mode (this means the majority of wildlife and nature shooters). In addition, the MZ-S really has many features. For many these are features worth paying for. Pål - 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: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
Alin Flaider wrote: > > I wrote: > > AF> ...Only wished Pentax > AF> viewfinders showed a full 6 EVs scale instead of the current 4. > > This was stupid of me, of course current MZ, PZ bodies display a > full 6 (six) EV scale. Mea culpa. Anyway, it seems it's not enough for > me, as I could see this night at the theatre. I think I could do better > with a -5 +2 scale. If you play around with the ISO rating, you can get a -4 +2 scale ... (It's still labelled as -3 +3, of course, but you can allow for that) -- 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[2]: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens
Hi,
just a thought, but maybe the ones who _did_ use filters are the ones
lucky enough not to be featured in "Requiem" !
---
Bob ("it's only the filters that are keeping me alive" Walkden)
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thursday, April 19, 2001, 3:04:15 PM, you wrote:
> I was looking through "Requiem" last night and noticed that none of
> the pictures I saw of photographers with their cameras had filters
> on their lenses. And this was in a war zone. What was also
> interesting was how these unprotected lenses produced so many
> remarkable photos.
-
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: Thoughts on the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 please?
I just got on yesterday! This is a nice, but BIG lens. Has a wonder tripod bracket, which may get in your way for mostly manual focus use. I haven't shot anything yet, but it looks nice. It feels very solid, and comes with nice hood and fancy carry case. If you don't have autofocus body yet, wait until you do, prices may drop or maybe Pentax will have ANtiVibration stuff by then! $799 at B&H if I remember right? At 07:49 PM 4/19/2001 +0100, you wrote: >Hello, > >I am considering replacing my Tokina 80-200 f2.8 manual focus lens with a >later autofocus equivalent. There's a Tokina to be found now and then, >but also I hear good things about the Sigma 70-200 2.8 lens. Not having >had any Sigma gear before, I wonder if anyone would like to comment >generally on their performance, or maybe on the lens in question if >possible. > >It would be used for a while on MXs, but (hopefully) within a year or so, >on a new Pentax digital camera. I use manual focus rather a lot (!), and >will most likely continue to do so as old habits die hard (although I'm >certainly not averse to newfangled methods). Accordingly, what can you >tell me about the manual focus facility, if anything? > >Finally, I have searched for lens reviews for the Sigma, but haven't been >very successful - if anyone can suggest a website with a review of this >lens I'd be grateful. > >Many thanks, > >Cotty > >___ >Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Check out the UK Macintosh ads >www.macads.co.uk > > >- >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 Moses - 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: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
I wrote: AF> ...Only wished Pentax AF> viewfinders showed a full 6 EVs scale instead of the current 4. This was stupid of me, of course current MZ, PZ bodies display a full 6 (six) EV scale. Mea culpa. Anyway, it seems it's not enough for me, as I could see this night at the theatre. I think I could do better with a -5 +2 scale. User definable? Forget it Pentax, I'm rambling. 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: MZ-S is really good ?
Dear Paal, > Why do you expect Pentax to give away the MZ-S? Do you expect Nikon to reduce the F100 by 50%? > What other camera offer the MZ-S features and a fully heavy duty metal body for less cash? If Nikon makes the F-100 50% less, I also will be agree, you know ! For a less price, in France, you can get a Nikon F-90x (N-90X in US, if I remember rightly) > What camera is this? The MZ-S don't lack features. It has among the most sophisticated flash system on the planet with RTF flash synch up to 1/6000s something no other camera do. It also has a unique dataimpriniting feature far better than anything else since the data follow the picture. I thought it was up to 1/180 ! For Data printing, it is a good thing, but it is not really what I use the most. And when you use inversive mounted, you cannot read the information (whatever the system is ion the top or between the pictures) > Admittedly, if you nedd many fps the MZ-S isn't the best thing but then no Pentax are. If you really need machnegunning images the only game in town is the EOS-1v or the F5. I wonder then what you do with an MZ-3 in the first place then... Guess what I am doing with my MZ-3...? I never use AF almost of the time. Because I know it cannot allow me to do picture this way. But if I can go up to 4 or 5 fps, I may use it in a new way but also the way I am doing for the moment. I used to own a Canon ELAN II (EOS 50e), it shows that sometimes, I need such a high rate. If I buy a better SLR, is it forbidden for me to wait for such a possibility. As I say, I would buy a MZ-S if its price is lower than 933US$. At last, in France, it might be sold about 20% more than in the US. So you might understand why I find it too expensive. The problem is not only that there is some features find missed, but for the price it would be sold, it is not easy to accept this fact. If I was richer, I will buy it. But it is not my case, and not the case of most of Pentaxists, that's why I hope this change. Will you buy the MZ-S if it was sold less than the price of 999USS$ ? Yes, but you won't buy it if it was sold at 1299US$. I think Pentax could make the MZ-S a blockbuster if the price is lower or the features are enhance as I said. If you think its price is the good price, so I am wrong whatever I said. But compare to other SLR (Nikon F-90x, Minolta Maxxum7, or Dynax7, for example) I find it too expensive. Selling a SLR is not easy, that is why I hope the MZ-S will show a lower prie, in order to make new users attracked. If you prefer to stay few user of Pentax (what I could really understand, because this is a way to be different), well, I understand the MZ-S is really the perfect Pentax SLR. For the moment, I consider the MZ-S as the best SLR Pentax has ever design. BUT I also consider Pentax is able to make a much better flagship. If you also think so, I will be happy to know. See you all ! PPS: you know, ^because of writing about the MZ-S, I am thinking of buying it, even it will not match with my expectations...This is the Pentax power...8-) _ 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 .
Re: ME Super/MX Batteries
Bob, if the MS76's were from 1995, maybe THAT's why the pulsing stopped. ;-) Tom C. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 1:04 PM Subject: Re: ME Super/MX Batteries > Tom & Bucky, > > Interesting. I have never had problems with the double battery in the Super Program or the ME. On the other hand, I noticed the LX display seemed to pulse when I let go of the shutter release today. I opened the battery compartment and found a double in it. I put in 2 unused MS76's from '95 and the pulsing went away. This has happened before. > > Regards, Bob S. > > > Tom C. wrote: > > >>That's interesting. I recall now that have used > the double-battery once before and noticed no > problems (I can't remember if it was in the MX or > ME super). In any case that's what I've purchased > this time. > > It seems to me that a single battery possibly could > have an advantage in that there is no possibility > of corrosion or resistance between the two > individual cells. Of course I am probably over > analyzing things with this statement. > > Tom C. > > - Original Message - > From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Pentax Vancouver has informed me that these > > "double size" batteries are not > > recommended, at least for use in the LX. > > I took mine in for CLA, and they specifically > > suggested that I remove that battery and put > > in two regular ones. Don't ask me what the > > problem would be; I had not had any trouble > > with it at that point, but I took their word > > for 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 .
Re: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens
Thanks, to everyone who responded about the Lenspen and the carbon black. Shel Belinkoff wrote: "I was looking through "Requiem" last night and noticed that none of the pictures I saw of photographers with their cameras had filters on their lenses. And this was in a war zone. What was also interesting was how these unprotected lenses produced so many remarkable photos." You're right. Normally my group didn't use filters for lens protection. But I had learned that if I was going to be susceptible to heavy salt spray and wanted a clean lens later in the day to have some sort of filter on the lens. Another point, was that if the photog was having his/her picture taken, they knew about it. They knew to appear macho they had better take the sissy filter off of the lens. ; - ) K - 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: Thoughts on the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 please?
I bought this lens in lieu of the similiar pentax (cost concerns) and I really like it. The f/2.8 capability is really great for snapping your subject out of the background, and the price was low enough that I could pick up a Pentax 300mm f/4.5 ED IF lens in addition. Seems sharp to me & AF speed is reasonable. I believe photodo.com did rate the pentax and the sigma the same. Also, I've had no problems with lens<->camera communication, like some of the earlier Sigmas. -Ryan Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=113369 Cotty wrote: > Hello, > > I am considering replacing my Tokina 80-200 f2.8 manual focus lens with a > later autofocus equivalent. There's a Tokina to be found now and then, > but also I hear good things about the Sigma 70-200 2.8 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: Vivitar Flashes
I remember reading something on the internet (maybe on this site) about the "discharge voltage" on the V283 flash units being too high for modern electronic cameras. SOMETHING ABOUT FRYING THE CAMERA. SOUNDED SERIOUS. But, I also vaguely remember reading that it is only the oldest models of V283 (maybe 285 too). Finally, I remember reading that Vivitar Tech Support can tell by serial number (and/or country of manufacture) whether the unit is to be 'feared' or not. - Ray _ 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: Brand wars [WAS: Re: MZ-S is really good ?]
I use both Nikon and Pentax equipment (all old) having on the Nikon side the Nikkormat FTn, FE, F3, N2020 and on the Pentax side Spotmatic, SP-F, ES-II, K1000, MX and program-A. One great thing about them both is that (as far as I can see anyhow- maybe I'm missing something) both marques have retained backward compatibility for decades which allows you to use your existing old lenses even on new equipments and also (not as well known) that the lenses work in the same way, that is the focussing rings turn in the same direction, the f-stop rings ditto and so on. But my own preference is that the Pentax lenses have a certain luminosity which some of the Nikkors lack. Conrad F. Samuels Kirstenhof SA - Original Message - From: "Paradiso" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:50 PM Subject: Brand wars [WAS: Re: MZ-S is really good ?] > As the lively chats between Doug Brewer and "Pentax Clover" continues, I'd > like to say this: > > I began photography 21 years ago in 1980 with a Spotmatic II, then over the > years went through a K1000, Super Program, 2 MX's and finally an LX in 1996. > But in 1998 I finally jumped into the AF foray, not with the Z-1p but a > Nikon F90X. For my money the F90X was a much better buy than the Z-1p. I > later added an FE2 as MF backup. > > As much as I enjoy my expanding Nikon system (no flames please), my pride > and joy will *ALWAYS* be my LX with its FB1/FC1 finders, LX winder and grips > A and B. I now use my LX system with SMCA 24/f2.8, 35-105/f3.5 and 50/f1.8 > and AF280T flash (after selling all my other Pentax gear). To lose my LX is > akin to losing a limb. > > Whenever anyone asks me what brand of camera equipment I use, I proudly tell > them I own and use both Pentax and Nikon, noting that it's not the brand(s) > that matters most, but rather the pursuit of the art of photography and how > you wish to capture images that reflect how you see the world. > > My $0.25. > > Kenneth Kuo > > - > 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: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
Well, the main reason I sold both my FM and FM2n and my first MX was the diode readout. I found that in bright daylight I simply could not see the diodes. (I wear spectacles). On the other hand, the meter needles in my FTn and Spotmatics are just fine, excepting in the dark of course- when I use the second MX or the F3 :-) Conrad F. Samuels Kirstenhof SA - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:06 PM Subject: Re: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt! > For the very same reason as Alin, I moved from the Olympus OM-1 to Pentax > MX. Couldn't see the needle working with spotlights. The LED's were a > godsend. I'm very happy I made the move to Pentax those many years ago. I > would never want to go back to a needle again. > > Bruce Dayton > Sacramento, CA - 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: Carbon Black (Was RE: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens)
Carbon black was and still is the best lens cleaning substance ever used. Carbon black
(ultra fine powder) acts like activated charcoal and a mild abrasive that is way too
soft
to hurt the coatings but will loosen and absorb almost any gook. It will lift oils and
other stains that you can't get out with other cleaning methods. Often you may see a
lens
with "cleaning scratches", and just as often these stubborn marks are not scratches at
all, but a hard, almost irremovable residue (hard water? dried spit?). Carbon black
has no
binders or adhesives and is not itself sticky, so it can't really fill scratches except
very temporarily (the carbon will blow off). Any commercial compound that claims to
fill
scratches must have a binder and is therefore not pure carbon black. Folks stopped
using
carbon black not because it wasn't the best, but because of the consequences of the
smallest of accidents when using it - not to your lens, to you, your clothing and
anything
surrounding you. Use this stuff outdoors, or be prepared to suffer the wrath of your
wife
if you spill even the smallest bit of it.
The most reliable source of pure, useful carbon black is calligraphy shops where it is
sold (usually as lamp black or bone black) to folks who make their own inks. This is
what
I use to clean my lenses.
The active ingredient in lens pens is carbon.
Regards,
Bob...
---
"In the carboniferous epoch
we were promised perpetual peace.
They swore if we gave up our weapons
that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed they sold us,
and delivered us, bound, to our foe.
And the gods of the copybook headings said,
'Stick to the devil you know.' "
--Rudyard Kipling
From: "Provencher, Paul M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It is carbon black, used to fill scratches and thereby eliminate unwanted
> refraction from them, improving results with a scratched lens - a very old
> trick, apparently resurrected in new form ("Productized")
>
> I have seen the advertisement - it makes claims way beyond what filling
> scratches with carbon black will accomplish, but in the case of a stray nick
> or scratch, like the one on the lens here:
> http://whitemetal.com/pentax/st_135_25/st_135_25_13.htm
> it can work very well.
>
> From: Lewis, Gerald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Recently on the tele there has been an advert about a penlike device for
> repairing scratched spectacle lenses. During the demo it shows rubbing on a
> blackish grey substance and then polishing it away to hide the scratches. I
> have no idea if this really works, but might it be the same substance as the
> LENSPEN?
>
> From: Jan van Wijk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:39:40 -0400, W Keith Mosier wrote:
>
> >Also, about the lens pen that Tom and many others have mentioned. I've yet
> >to find one in the local stores. What exactly is it? What manufacturer?
>
> Make or manufacturer is "CARSON", name is simply "LENSPEN"
>
> It is shaped like a thick balpoint, with a retractable soft brush on one
> end,
> and under a protective hood on the other end a special shaped foam
> brush, with wat seems to be some very fine black powder ...
>
> >What's it contain?
> >
>
> Maybe something based on carbon-black ???
>
> >I think on the old list several people talked about using carbon black (?)
> >to clean lenses. Is that right?
>
> I think it is, maybe it's in the pen 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: ME Super/MX Batteries
Tom & Bucky, Interesting. I have never had problems with the double battery in the Super Program or the ME. On the other hand, I noticed the LX display seemed to pulse when I let go of the shutter release today. I opened the battery compartment and found a double in it. I put in 2 unused MS76's from '95 and the pulsing went away. This has happened before. Regards, Bob S. Tom C. wrote: >>That's interesting. I recall now that have used the double-battery once before and noticed no problems (I can't remember if it was in the MX or ME super). In any case that's what I've purchased this time. It seems to me that a single battery possibly could have an advantage in that there is no possibility of corrosion or resistance between the two individual cells. Of course I am probably over analyzing things with this statement. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Pentax Vancouver has informed me that these > "double size" batteries are not > recommended, at least for use in the LX. > I took mine in for CLA, and they specifically > suggested that I remove that battery and put > in two regular ones. Don't ask me what the > problem would be; I had not had any trouble > with it at that point, but I took their word > for 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 .
RE: Re[2]: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens
I guess I am just the most fortunate person because in 30 years of shooting, often in hostile environments, and under adverse conditions, I have yet to damage a front lens element, and I don't use filters of the UV or Skylight variety for lens protectors. I am partial to opaque, metal lens caps for that purpose. Now I will probably get run over crossing the parking lot to get to my car this evening but... :-) Paul M. Provencher (ppro) Bought all his own equipment -Original Message- From: Bob Walkden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 1:58 PM To: Shel Belinkoff Subject: Re[2]: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens Hi, ah yes, but how many of them had to pay for their own equipment? :o) --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thursday, April 19, 2001, 3:04:15 PM, you wrote: > I was looking through "Requiem" last night and noticed that none of > the pictures I saw of photographers with their cameras had filters > on their lenses. And this was in a war zone. What was also > interesting was how these unprotected lenses produced so many > remarkable photos. - 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 .
KX Aperture window
Just wondering, what's with the little aperture readout window on the KX, that displays the selected aperture in the viewfinder? Is it prone to breaking or something, as I have handled 2 KX's so far (including one that was claimed to be completely overhauled), and on both it wasn't working - the window is completely black. TIA! Todd - 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 .
Thoughts on the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 please?
Hello, I am considering replacing my Tokina 80-200 f2.8 manual focus lens with a later autofocus equivalent. There's a Tokina to be found now and then, but also I hear good things about the Sigma 70-200 2.8 lens. Not having had any Sigma gear before, I wonder if anyone would like to comment generally on their performance, or maybe on the lens in question if possible. It would be used for a while on MXs, but (hopefully) within a year or so, on a new Pentax digital camera. I use manual focus rather a lot (!), and will most likely continue to do so as old habits die hard (although I'm certainly not averse to newfangled methods). Accordingly, what can you tell me about the manual focus facility, if anything? Finally, I have searched for lens reviews for the Sigma, but haven't been very successful - if anyone can suggest a website with a review of this lens I'd be grateful. Many thanks, Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads www.macads.co.uk - 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: In Praise of my amazing new Pentax: The ME super!!!
I once had 2 ME-supers and observed a big difference between them in terms of vibration, although both were in great condition. Regards, ___ Tonghang Zhou (Zhou is pronounced like Joe) On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Much as I like my Super Program, the ME Supers that I've tried in camera > stores were quieter, with discernibly less vibration. And seeing the lit - 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[2]: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens
Hi, ah yes, but how many of them had to pay for their own equipment? :o) --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thursday, April 19, 2001, 3:04:15 PM, you wrote: > I was looking through "Requiem" last night and noticed that none of > the pictures I saw of photographers with their cameras had filters > on their lenses. And this was in a war zone. What was also > interesting was how these unprotected lenses produced so many > remarkable photos. - 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 Super/MX Batteries
That's interesting. I recall now that have used the double-battery once before and noticed no problems (I can't remember if it was in the MX or ME super). In any case that's what I've purchased this time. It seems to me that a single battery possibly could have an advantage in that there is no possibility of corrosion or resistance between the two individual cells. Of course I am probably over analyzing things with this statement. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 5:43 PM Subject: RE: ME Super/MX Batteries > Pentax Vancouver has informed me that these "double size" batteries are not > recommended, at least for use in the LX. I took mine in for CLA, and they > specifically suggested that I remove that battery and put in two regular > ones. Don't ask e what the problem would be; I had not had any trouble with > it at that point, but I took their word for it. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Todd Stanley > Sent: April 18, 2001 3:33 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: ME Super/MX Batteries > > > > Kodak has a K58L that works too. It's the size of 2 SR44's, and is 3V. > It's a bit easier to get into the camera than 2 of those button batteries. > > Todd > > At 05:35 PM 4/18/01 -0300, you wrote: > > > >A76 or 76A, LR44, etc. > >Regards > > > >Albano - 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 Flashes
The Vivitar 285HV is a workhorse of a flash. The 283, if one of the older models, could fry some modern cameras. I'd pass on the 283 and if the 285HV is in good condition, with a decent price, it will serve you well. Just go to KEH and some other used equipment sites (Cameta Camera comes to mind) to get a good feel for the retail selling price so you don't end up paying more than you should. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: B. K. Lane Sr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:36 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Vivitar Flashes > > > Hi, > > I have been looking at flashes on ebay for a couple > of days now. There seems to be alot of VIVITAR 285HV > and the VIVITAR 283 model. > > Are these models pretty good? > > Thanks, > Rebecca > > NetZero Platinum > No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access > Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month! > http://www.netzero.net > - > 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: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
For the very same reason as Alin, I moved from the Olympus OM-1 to Pentax MX. Couldn't see the needle working with spotlights. The LED's were a godsend. I'm very happy I made the move to Pentax those many years ago. I would never want to go back to a needle again. Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA - Original Message - From: "Alin Flaider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:44 AM Subject: Re: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt! > >Let me know about it next time when you try the needle trick in a > dim theatre. >... >I'm pleased I got rid of it and find the bargraph the most > intuitive representation of under/over-exposure. Only wished Pentax > viewfinders showed a full 6 EVs scale instead of the current 4. >I posted this just to avoid the impression we're a pack of ruthless > retro wolves. ;o) > >Servus, Alin > > Lon wrote: > > LW> I'm pleased to see Nikon do this. > LW> Jeeze, a NEEDLE in the viewfinder. > LW> So much better than those darned digital > LW> displays. > > > - > 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 .
Vs: MZ-S is really good ?
According to the correction printed in PopPhoto/May 2001 the RTF can sync up to 1/8000 s - but if the shutter goes only to 1/6000 this feature is not very useful ;-) - but the flash covers the field of view of 24 mm lens, not bad. And I have never said that the MZ-S is a bad camera - just that the MZ-5N is so good that I see no reason so upgrade (at least that´s what I keep telling myself). All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 19. huhtikuuta 2001 14:16 Aihe: Re: MZ-S is really good ? > What camera is this? The MZ-S don't lack features. It has among the most sophisticated flash system on the planet with RTF flash synch up to 1/6000s something no other camera do. It also has a unique dataimpriniting feature far better than anything else since the data follow the picture. > >Pål > - 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 .
Brand wars [WAS: Re: MZ-S is really good ?]
As the lively chats between Doug Brewer and "Pentax Clover" continues, I'd like to say this: I began photography 21 years ago in 1980 with a Spotmatic II, then over the years went through a K1000, Super Program, 2 MX's and finally an LX in 1996. But in 1998 I finally jumped into the AF foray, not with the Z-1p but a Nikon F90X. For my money the F90X was a much better buy than the Z-1p. I later added an FE2 as MF backup. As much as I enjoy my expanding Nikon system (no flames please), my pride and joy will *ALWAYS* be my LX with its FB1/FC1 finders, LX winder and grips A and B. I now use my LX system with SMCA 24/f2.8, 35-105/f3.5 and 50/f1.8 and AF280T flash (after selling all my other Pentax gear). To lose my LX is akin to losing a limb. Whenever anyone asks me what brand of camera equipment I use, I proudly tell them I own and use both Pentax and Nikon, noting that it's not the brand(s) that matters most, but rather the pursuit of the art of photography and how you wish to capture images that reflect how you see the world. My $0.25. Kenneth Kuo - 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 Super/MX Batteries
That's interesting. I recall now that have used the double-battery once before and noticed no problems (I can't remember if it was in the MX or ME super). In any case that's what I've purchased this time. It seems to me that a single battery possibly could have an advantage in that there is no possibility of corrosion or resistance between the two individual cells. Of course I am probably over analyzing things with this statement. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 5:43 PM Subject: RE: ME Super/MX Batteries > Pentax Vancouver has informed me that these "double size" batteries are not > recommended, at least for use in the LX. I took mine in for CLA, and they > specifically suggested that I remove that battery and put in two regular > ones. Don't ask e what the problem would be; I had not had any trouble with > it at that point, but I took their word for it. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Todd Stanley > Sent: April 18, 2001 3:33 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: ME Super/MX Batteries > > > > Kodak has a K58L that works too. It's the size of 2 SR44's, and is 3V. > It's a bit easier to get into the camera than 2 of those button batteries. > > Todd > > At 05:35 PM 4/18/01 -0300, you wrote: > > > >A76 or 76A, LR44, etc. > >Regards > > > >Albano > > > > > >- > >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 . > - 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: lens of the week: 2000/13.5 and M 2000/13.5
on 4/19/01 11:16 AM, O'Neill, William at William.O'[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is there anybody that actually owns one of these? I often though of getting > one and starting up my on little domestic spy business. You could do some > neat things with it and some 3200 ASA B&W film! > > - > 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: lens of the week: 2000/13.5 and M 2000/13.5
William wrote: > Is there anybody that actually owns one of these? I often though of getting one and >starting up my on little domestic spy >business. You could do some neat things with >it and some 3200 ASA B&W film! If you can focus it! I had troubles with the 1000/11. Try to stop down any lens to F:11 and try focusing it. A 2000mm will be 10 times worse; remeber the focusing accuracy involved. Its pretty much hopeless in my experience. Focusing bracketing is mandatory. Pål - 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: In Praise of my amazing new Pentax: The ME super!!!
Much as I like my Super Program, the ME Supers that I've tried in camera stores were quieter, with discernibly less vibration. And seeing the lit LED move up and down as you change aperture makes for very intuitive readings; you can "know" your shutter speed while keeping your eye off your subject. I'll always own one Super Program, for its TTL flash and ability to get the most from PKA lenses. And it's SO nice to see the shutter speed on the top plate. But if you're not using flash or a PKA lens, the ME Super seems just super.There's a reason it's so pupular among list members. Chris Brogden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ha, wait until you've tried the Super Program. Think of an ME Super with shutter-priority and full program, DOF preview, TTL flash, etc. etc. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
I'm pleased to see Nikon do this. Jeeze, a NEEDLE in the viewfinder. So much better than those darned digital displays. Now if we can just get Pentax to re-release the KX. -Lon - 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: KMP lens of the week [2]
Boz wrote: My intention is to gather comments by single people Can married people respond also? 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: Re[2]: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
Another factor is the price. FM3A seems excellent, but it will cost A LOT. Just look the price of a FM2n, add all the features the new body has, and the price will be close to the F3. The five letters in front of pentaprism housing adds another 100 or 200 bucks : - ). Just my two cents. And the new Nikon pancake is obviously "inspired" in the Pentax limited lenses (I know the nikon's is manual focus, but the concept is too similar) Albano - 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: EV
Chris Brogden wrote: > As a rule, if the camera sees a lot of bright things, it will try to make > them darker (to roughly 18% reflectance), so a bright background can > darken a foreground subject, and you might want to overexpose a > bit. Conversely, a dark background can cause your camera to > overexpose. This is a function of meters that measure reflected > light. If you measure incident / ambient light, your exposure will be the > same regardless of what your subject is. EV is a feature on my LX I haven't used yet because I'm not sure I fully understand it. Am I correct in conceptualizing it thus? In terms of the match needle in my K1000, a bright scene (snow, sand, etc.) makes the needle ride high, which is the camera's way of telling you to stop down. You're free to ignore that advice, and in this case you should. With autoexposure the camera makes the choice, so you dial in a positive EV as a way of "forcing the needle back up," as it were. The opposite is true for under-lit scenes, so you use negative EV. Is that close to the mark, or am I full of it? Regards, Stephen Moore __ "You got a Zarg in here? Are you *nuts*??? - 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: MZ-S is really good ?
I don't think he expects it to be reduced 50%, he was only wishing it was cheaper. Interpretation again. Norm Pål Jensen wrote: > Pentax clover wrote: > > > I hope I keep my MZ-3, and of course I hope I could buy a MZ-S for half of > > his price ! > > Why do you expect Pentax to give away the MZ-S? Do you expect Nikon to reduce the >F100 by 50%? > What other camera offer the MZ-S features and a fully heavy duty metal body for less >cash? > - 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 .
Vivitar Flashes
Hi, I have been looking at flashes on ebay for a couple of days now. There seems to be alot of VIVITAR 285HV and the VIVITAR 283 model. Are these models pretty good? Thanks, Rebecca NetZero Platinum No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month! http://www.netzero.net - 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: My shopping list...
Ditto -- did that a couple of months ago. When it showed up, it didn't look like bargain condition (which is a standard I've come to expect from KEH). What a gem of a lens. Recently it disappeared into my husband's cavernous camera bag, and I haven't seen it since. Maybe I should acquire another According to Kevin > If you can wait on this one watch KEH. > > I have a list of lenses I check KEH at least once a day for. I recently picked up a Macro 100/2.8 this way for $189 US in bargain condition. I works great and I'm loving 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 .
RE: MZ-S is really good ?
I was under the impression that you can use as many, or as few, of the features as you need. When you need to just point and shoot, because the image is fleeting, it's nice to have as much automation as possible. It's also nice to turn off lots of it when you have the time to do your own thinking and you can afford to be very deliberate and painstaking. I still want to get my hands on an MZ-S and use it a bit before I make a final decision on purchase but that's mostly because I'm pretty happy with my PZ-1p. The name on camera has only been a consideration, because I have a fair amount of money invested in Pentax lenses. I also have a fair amount invested in Nikkor MF lenses. I use both systems to good advantage. I find the Pentax to be a more consistent performer for my needs, and easier to use when I need to work very fast. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: petit miam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 3:24 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: MZ-S is really good ? > > > I am a dedicated Pentax fan, but don't think I would > buy an MZ-S either. I think if you start getting too > many features, you start forgetting about photography. > > > Also I don't want a fully automated camera. I love the > feel of my manual wind-on, and rewind. And I love > setting my shutter-speed and aperture to get the photo > I want, not the photo the camera thinks I should have. > Having bought my first auto-focus camera 6 months ago, > I have also decided that I think I prefer manual > focus. My eyes are more reliable. > > Having said that, I definitely don't want my camera to > say Nikon or Canon. I would be ashamed. Only Pentax > for me. They are great cameras. I think maybe an LX > next, only I am struggling to get one in this remote > part of NZ. > > Jody. - 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: MZ-S is really good ?
petit miam writes: > I am a dedicated Pentax fan, but don't think I would > buy an MZ-S either. I think if you start getting too > many features, you start forgetting about photography. That can certainly happen but it really becomes a matter of thinking of "features" as "tools". Most people seem to buy a camera based on feature count, then never use any of the features! I bought my Z-1p so I could do portraits and wildlife shooting without having to manually focus at wide apertures on moving objects, all while trying to figure out fill-flash. It's a great body but I do believe that the feel of a K2 with a SMCP 50mm f/1.2 can hardly be matched. > Also I don't want a fully automated camera. I love the > feel of my manual wind-on, and rewind. I like the lack of noise my manual wind makes. I would love a new camera that has a removable winder (just think how compact the MZ-S would be without a winder or RTF). The Z-1p winder is just about indispensable when I don't want to take my eye off the viewfinder but any other time it's just a battery-draining noisemaker. > And I love > setting my shutter-speed and aperture to get the photo > I want, not the photo the camera thinks I should have. I still get that with my Z-1p. Hyper-program mode rocks. This is also part of the reason I switched to slide film: I want to see what I took, not what the lab's machine considers an "18% average". I just wish it had an electronic DOF preview :( > Having bought my first auto-focus camera 6 months ago, > I have also decided that I think I prefer manual > focus. My eyes are more reliable. I find manual focus quite difficult in darker conditions, but I think a split- image screen would be better for that. My K2 bodies both have microprism screens but I can accurately focus my RB67 in any amount of dark. I generally prefer the microprism screen because the split-image requires a vertical line to focus on. > Having said that, I definitely don't want my camera to > say Nikon or Canon. I would be ashamed. Only Pentax > for me. They are great cameras. I think maybe an LX > next, only I am struggling to get one in this remote > part of NZ. How remote is remote? :) I know a guy who inherited two LXes and I've seen one other for sale in a pawn shop. I've yet to actually touch one though. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. email [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - 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: MZ-S is really good ?
Hello Dear Doug, If you can read easily french, come on www.photim.com, and ask about clover (myself) and if he is ashame about having a Pentax.I sold my Canon (Elan II) is it not a clue to guess how important the famous of the brand is for my opinion ? I hope I keep my MZ-3, and of course I hope I could buy a MZ-S for half of his price ! I am just disappointed about its price, because for the same price, you can find a SLR which is much more better and still believe that the MZ-S only needs a feww change to be perfect for me.(few and not expensive) Even, if I change, I might buy a Minolta Maxxum/Dynax 7, because it has all the things I find missing in the MZ-S. It is not reallly much bigger neither! You know, I put Gaffer on my MZ-3 such as you cannot guess even it is a Pentax nor a new SLR. So even I own a Nikon, I will not be proud to show it because I will make it up as well Please , do not to so vexed that you cannot see what I really ask, the few change I ask can be release on a MZ-Sn. Then I will agree to pay this price. I just did not express why I stay in Pentax, so that is why some of you think I could switch for Nikon. But regard to my needs, this is easier to buy a MZ-S (much more cheaper) I understand, you just encourage me to self my MZ-3, my 35mm FA f/:2, my 43mm f/:1.9 and my 85mm FA IF f/:1.4 for others pdml members ??? 8-) See you [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Doug Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: jeudi 19 avril 2001 06:26 Subject: Re: MZ-S is really good ? > Clover, > > Let me give you some advice, my little friend. Get rid of your MZ-3 and buy an F100. If you don't, you'll never be able to look your little Nikon buddies in the eye, because you're more worried about what they think about your camera than you are about your photographs. > > The F100 is perfect for you. It's heavy, has a lot of cool features, says Nikon on it, all the things that are important when a camera is a fashion statement. Plus, it also works pretty well as a camera, should you ever decide to take some pictures. > > I am a firm believer in comfort. That's one of the reasons I use Pentax, because the bodies I use are comfortable. It's plain you are uncomfortable using Pentax when your friends have switched to Nikon. I say, as I've said before, if the Pentax is causing you grief and shame, then trade it for something you can wear with pride. > > Let us know if you're going to sell or trade. Some folks on the list might be interested in a barely used MZ-3 and some lenses. > > Doug > > > At 1:46 AM +02004/19/01, Pentax Clover caused thus to appear: > >Hello > >I was thinking about the MZ-S and I realize something : > >The MZ-S is perfectly good for the user who knows what he is going to get... > >>From my experience, we usually do not use all function of a SLR. > >I know that I feel needed sometimes with my MZ-3., so the MZ-S is a good SLR > >if I wish to replace my MZ-3. > >As often, there is much asked things which are not very usefull. The MZ-S is > >a Pentax version of a SLR which you can easily use. (as easy as a MZ-3) > >Of course, I am still wishing a better SLR, but I forget to mention that it > >is a good SLR if we know all our needs so we cannot buy it wrongly. > >Hoping for a new body for myself, but hoping a MZ-S for Pentax users who > >need it ! > >See you > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > Douglas Forrest Brewer > Ashwood Lake Photography > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.alphoto.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 . _ 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 .
RE: My shopping list...
If you can wait on this one watch KEH. I have a list of lenses I check KEH at least once a day for. I recently picked up a Macro 100/2.8 this way for $189 US in bargain condition. I works great and I'm loving it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 11:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: My shopping list... I believe it's not so much the focal length she's after, but the macro capability. The A100/2.8 macro (1:1) goes for about $450 to $550 U.S. when you can find one. Collin Brendemuehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Also, how about the manual focus A100/2.8 for 1/2 the price! Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Nikon's New Manual-focus SLR kicks butt!
Herbet Brasileiro wrote: > Yeah, right. What's the difference from an LX with > limited lens on? You can buy it NEW. 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 .
KMP lens of the week [2]
Hi, Just a few additions. My intention is to gather comments by single people and write a summary, something similar to the pages that Arnold Stark and I have done for the M40/2.8 and the FA 43/1.9 Limited. I am aware that Stan Halpin has already collected and made available most of the past PDML lens discussions. I am also aware that Alex Nemerovsky (BOA) has done work similar to what I propose. The difference with the KMP will be that all the info will be all together (lens description, specs, image, optical evaluation, discussion of accessories, etc.) and that I will be the "editor" (for good or for bad). Cheers, Boz - 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 .
lens of the week: FA 50/2.8 Macro
Hi, SMC-FA 50/2.8 Macro What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than the one that I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about the lens that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = <__> <__> - 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 .
lens of the week: 2000/13.5 and M 2000/13.5
Hi, SMC 2000/13.5 SMC-M 2000/13.5 What is your opinion of these lenses? Are they any good? What do you use them for? What do you like about them? How well built are they? How is the handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than the ones that I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about these lenses that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = <__> <__> - 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: Grip A vs Grip B (LX)
On 18 Apr 2001 10:28:08 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Here's what I see as an intersting question: What's with the price difference >between the Grip A and the Grip B for the LX? > > I constantly see the B go for $40 or more on eBay, while the grip A is only $20 >NEW at B&H . . . > > Anyone have any ideas on the price of a new grip B or a more reasonable price for >it? Camera-direct in the UK has both for the same price: 20 pounds, this would be over US$ 25 I guess. http://www.camera-direct.com/other.asp Regards, JvW (who ordered a Grip-B a few weeks ago :-) - Jan van Wijk; www.fsys.demon.nl - 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: MZ-S is really good ?
Unnecessarily vitriolic and deliberately hurtful. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Brewer Sent: April 18, 2001 9:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S is really good ? Let me give you some advice, my little friend... - 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: KMP lens of the week
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 03:05:35 -0500 (EST), Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: > >How do you all like the idea? Sounds good Boz, I don't think we could do more than 2 or 3 a week anyway ... Regards, JvW - Jan van Wijk; www.fsys.demon.nl - 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: MZ-S is really good ?
I am a dedicated Pentax fan, but don't think I would buy an MZ-S either. I think if you start getting too many features, you start forgetting about photography. Also I don't want a fully automated camera. I love the feel of my manual wind-on, and rewind. And I love setting my shutter-speed and aperture to get the photo I want, not the photo the camera thinks I should have. Having bought my first auto-focus camera 6 months ago, I have also decided that I think I prefer manual focus. My eyes are more reliable. Having said that, I definitely don't want my camera to say Nikon or Canon. I would be ashamed. Only Pentax for me. They are great cameras. I think maybe an LX next, only I am struggling to get one in this remote part of NZ. Jody. __ 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 .
lens of the week: 15/3.5 and A 15/3.5
Hi, This is the first attempt to start a lens of the week discussion. Let's see how well it goes. SMC 15/3.5 SMC-A 15/3.5 What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about the lens that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = <__> <__> - 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 .
KMP lens of the week
Hi all, "The time has come for all good men..." Ooops, sorry. The time has come to start filling up the lens descriptions and optical properties for the lenses listed in the KMP (www.phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/). For now only the primes, but also coming up are the zooms. So, the idea is like this. I've prepared a page dedicated to each lens, with space left for a short description and for optical performance evaluation. I call upon your knowledge and experience in helping me write these descriptions and evaluations. I propose that each week I/we feature 2-3 "lenses of the week." During that week we will discuss the lenses proposed (by me probably) from the previous Friday. At the end of that week I will sum up the opinions and will write up the lens description and optical evaluation. I will also clean up the lens image and optical diagram as much as I can, and we will have 2-3 additional "complete" lens pages per week. Of course, at that tempo it will take us 2 years to do all lenses, but that's the best that I can do. How do you all like the idea? Cheers, Boz - 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: ZX-7 autofocus probs.
Or, if you have enough time, auto-focus, then quickly flick the switch to manual focus and press the shutter. It should still be in focus. I use this sometimes with my MZ-30 to lock the focus. This camera also seems to be a bugger for moving subjects, and I keep forgetting that I can hold my finger on the shutter. Jody. > This is one of those situations where true Servo > focusing is the ticket. > Bruce Dayton > > Monday I went to watch the Boston Marathon and > took my ZX-7. I wanted to > > take action shots of the runners as they went by, > but I actually ended up > > missing several great shots. Here's what happened: > > > > As the runners approached, I was zoomed out to > 200mm on the F 80-200mm > zoom. > > The camera focused and I fired off a shot. As the > runners neared me > though, > > the camera was unable to focus on them, and the > shutter simply wouldn't > fire. > > > > Sometimes I would release the shutter button > completely, then press it > down > > again to try to get the camera to focus and fire. > Again, the camera failed > > to get a focus lock and the shutter would not > fire. > > > > As the runners passed by, eventually they would > get far enough away that > the > > camera could get a focus lock and then it would > fire the shutter. Lots of > > shots of the backs of people's heads. > > > > Other times, I would pull the zoom back out to the > 80mm end, as the > runners > > got closest to me, and the camera did manage to > get a new focus lock, but > as > > soon as I zoomed back out to 200 for the next > runner, it would again fail > to > > focus and I could not fire the shutter. > > Mike Nosal > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ 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 .
RE: Multicoated filter on a single-coated lens
Just watch the seven years bad luck :) > When the adrenaline stopped cursing through my veins > and I stopped cursing, > I went back to see which pieces of glass belonged to > which item. Lots of > mirror glass. But lo and behold, the lens was > intact, the barrel not even > dented, the camera likewise, unscathed. And the > lens coating? Remember > this is a protruding front element. Nothing. Just > a little mirror dust > where the two collided. A quick shot with a can of > Dust-Off and it was as > good as new. I was stunned. > > I have never been as paranoid of my lenses since. > > Paul M. Provencher > (ppro) __ 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 .
RE: outrageous
You know I don't like all black cameras ;) > Hey, it's an "all black, professional grade camera". > Who could > resist buying it? Especially with that dedicated > Vivitar flash. > :-) > > Len __ 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 .
Re: EV
I think of it this way. With a black subject, it is going to be clear in the negative, so that lots of light can get through and hit the photographic paper and turn it black. The more light getting to the paper through the negative, the blacker the paper will go. You may have to have done darkroom processing to understand this concept. Not trying to insult your intelligence, but it may make it a little harder. Now if you look at a negative film (or part of one) which hasn't been exposed, but has been developed, it will be black. The more light that hits it through the camera lens, the clearer it will become. Black absorbs light, so not much light is reflected back into your camera from a dark subject. Hence the subject will have little detail. So, to increase the light getting onto the film, and hence the detail, you need to overexpose it a little, allowing more time for light to enter the camera. Then read what Chris said (below) about meters compensating for light or dark backgrounds. Hope this helps. It seemed to make more sense in my head than typed out :) Jody. > > One problem i have when photograph horse jumping, > is on a bright > > day-dark horse-and a darkish background like trees > with lots of > > greenery,if i expose normaly the horse will be > dark,harder to see,and > > the trees nicely exposed.I usually overexpose a > small amount but in > > the manual for the sf-1 for ev examples it says to > minus (-) the ev > > for subjects infront of dark background and plus > (+) if subjext is > > infront of blue sky or snow. I'm sure the book is > correct but my brain > > seems to say this is back wards. > > As a rule, if the camera sees a lot of bright > things, it will try to make > them darker (to roughly 18% reflectance), so a > bright background can > darken a foreground subject, and you might want to > overexpose a > bit. Conversely, a dark background can cause your > camera to > overexpose. This is a function of meters that > measure reflected > light. If you measure incident / ambient light, > your exposure will be the > same regardless of what your subject is. > > chris __ 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 .
