Re: Autofocus on MZ5 (ZX5)
Could it be the lens? Sigma lenses have known to have some self-destructive devices built-in. regards, Alan Chan >I've noticed that the autofocus on my MZ5 seems less accurate now than when >I first got it. Has anyone else had problems with this? The AF seems to >often settle on a focus that I can easily see is wrong in the viewfinder. > But when I first bought the camera, this didn't happen. The lens is a >Sigma 28-80 f3.5-5.6. I suspect the contacts between the lens and camera >may need cleaning, but I'm not sure how to do that. I also have to check >whether it is certain filters making the problem worse. Circular >polarisers >don't seem to help. > >It makes AF a bit pointless because I end up manually focussing. > >Rob _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp - 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 .
Lessons Learned
There are at least 2 ways to learn; (1) from your own mistakes, and (2) from the mistakes of others. Here's a mistake made by an amateur photographer (blush) that I know quite well. The gear was an MZ-S and Tamron 28-200 XR: a) Snapped some pictures in very bright daylight. b) Snapped more pictures, playing with aperture and shutter priority. It's a new camera, so you've got to try everything. Right? c) Let the sun go over the horizon until it was completely dark, then snapped a few pictures using the built-in flash d) Cringed big-time when the dark (very underexposed) prints came back from the photo shop e) Cursed the camera, then discovered the aperture was set to F-22 f) Photographer cursed himself, then bandaged the wound that was created when said photographer shot himself in the foot. Ouch!@!#@! It seems that the built-in flash can't generate enough light for small aperture settings, but then again, F-22 is an itsy-bitsy hole. John - 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: Macintosh Owners
Rob Studdert writes: > pity that none of the HTML Browsers currently available adhere to the > certified HTML spec :-( I second your comment but I will point out that in some areas, notably frames, the spec itself isn't even up to standard. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) 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: When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic?
Bob Rapp writes: > Dig out your old Spotmatic and a few lenses and have a Spotmatic weekend. > You will know what I mean. Don't have one. Will you accept the following kit: K2 body, SMCP 35/3.5, SMCP 50/1.2 and SMCP 135/2.5? That's as close as I can get to a screwmount kit with what I have. I must go for a wander with just that stuff one day. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) 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 .
Instructions on a Vivitar RL5200 flash when used on a Pentax Super Program
Hi All, Can anyone tell me how to set up the strobe to shoot TTL? Do you need to adjust f-stops, etc. on the strobe or just set the camera f-stop? Also, what is mem on the RL5200? Can you tell me its function? Thank you for any help you can give me. Dave Denham - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: SMC Takumar 135 mm f3,5 (M42)
The SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 (M42) is a fine lens. The A/M switch allows you to stop down the lens to taking aperture - you will use the lens in "M"anual mode when you shoot using the K mount adapter. During focusing and composition the switch is placed in the "A"uto position. The lens will work for a portrait lens although it will cause you to be a little far from your subject (at least 5 feet, and probably more like 8 to 10 feet for head and shoulder portraits. It flattens things out, which can be good, but again, often a bit longer than optimum for some subjects. But as an all-around short telephoto, mine has served well since 1974 without fail. For a very long time it was my only tele. The technical specs are very good, holding their own with any "modern" lens of like focal length. You might be better off with the K-mount version if you have a K-mount camera, and the lens optical design is the same so no great difference in the image quality, other than the ease with which you will capture it. ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Artur Ledóchowski > Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 4:30 PM > To: PDML > Subject: SMC Takumar 135 mm f3,5 (M42) > > > > Hi, > I saw this lens (the used one, of course:)) today morning. What do you think > of it? I consider buying some 135 mm as a portrait lens and so far I focused > on SMC M 135mm f3,5 until today I saw the Takumar. The latter is about 30% > cheaper that the former and I have the K-to-M42 adapter. So how do both > lenses compare to each other? > And also one thing. The Takumar has a switch "Auto/Manual". What is it for? > TIA > Artur > - > 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: Tokina 300 2.8 (was RE: Tamron SP 300mm f2.8)
John Mustarde wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:25:51 EST, you wrote: > > >> While the subject of fast 300's is alive, has anyone any experience with > >> the Tokina 300 2.8 - the old manual one, not the latest AF one - and, > >> more to the point, has anyone actually seen one or know of one, > >> especially old and beat up, and, ahem, for sale??? > >- > > I have that lens, and it's great. It's nomenclature is Tokina AT-X SD > 300/2.8. It is reasonably sharp wide open, which is great because > there's no use carrying the extra weight of a 300/2.8 if the dang lens > is soft wide open. > > I've owned mine for less than a year, and it has exceeded my > expectations in every respect. I got it for a Buy It Now price of > about $825 on Ebay. The condition was pretty good, not mint, but not > beat up either. But it didn't have a hood, which is an absolute > requirement for me for long lenses. Luckily, I picked one of those up > for just a few bucks on Ebay within a couple of weeks. Tokina still > sells the hood, but they want about $150. Just so you guys know, we have a Sigma 500mm f4.5 APO sitting in our shop for $900. It's an "A" lens, but not autofocus. I don't know how good or bad this lens is, but the former owner claims that it is quite a performer. It looks nice and has its case with it... Isaac - 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 .
Autofocus on MZ5 (ZX5)
I've noticed that the autofocus on my MZ5 seems less accurate now than when I first got it. Has anyone else had problems with this? The AF seems to often settle on a focus that I can easily see is wrong in the viewfinder. But when I first bought the camera, this didn't happen. The lens is a Sigma 28-80 f3.5-5.6. I suspect the contacts between the lens and camera may need cleaning, but I'm not sure how to do that. I also have to check whether it is certain filters making the problem worse. Circular polarisers don't seem to help. It makes AF a bit pointless because I end up manually focussing. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.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 .
R: SMC K mount lenses: year of introduction
Cotty, are you a soothsayer? Ciao Fabio - Original Message - From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Pentax List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 5:21 PM Subject: Re: SMC K mount lenses: year of introduction > Hi Fabio, > > Can't help you with your quest regarding when lenses introduced, but just > wanted ti say what a brilliant story! Excellent. I got my first MX in > 1978, along with a 28mm 2.8. Both still here, the 28 tucked away in a > drawer. Not worth selling it. The MX only recently retired, although > still works great - never CLA'd!!! Shutter times must be adrift, but no > problems with it and everything works. Only had about 2 thousand rolls > through it since new, but what a great performer. > > I suppose you would have had that little lens back even if it had been > ten timed the cost you paid ;-) > > Nice one, > > Ciao, > > 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 . - 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 .
Problem with MX light metering (shutter/ISO dial?)
Hello all! I've recently obtained a new toy - Pentax MX camera and have only played with it for a while (didn't run a film through it yet). But I've noticed a problem with metering - I measure the ligh from a same scene while changing the aperture and shutter. For: f/2.8 1/30, f/4 1/15, f/5.6 1/8 and f/8 1/4s combinations I get correct exposition reading (green LED lights up) but when I change the shutter speed to 1/2 or 1s the bottom red LED allways lights up. This is when ISO 400 is set. When I change ISO speed to 200 I get correct reading for 1/2s and wrong one for 1s and for ISO100 the situasion is correct for 1s, too. When going in other direction the situation changes other way: problem shows up on 1/4 for ISO800 and 1/8 for ISO1600. I've tried changing batteries with no effect. Also changing the lens form A 50/1.7 to A 135/2,8 or FA 35-80/4-5.6 didn't help. What may cause such a problem? Is it possible to fix it by myself? I don't use those shutter speeds anyway because I don't have a good tripod but it still bothers me a lot. Is sending a camera to e service shop an only option? TIA for your help. Maciej Marchlewski - 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 .
Z-50p advice
What does a Z-50p sell for these days? The reason I ask is because I recently bought a broken one for $40, and I'm trying to justify spending ~$115 to have it repaired by PentaxUSA (the circuit board in the grip is fried, and the flash doesn't shut properly). KEH has a PZ-10 in Excellent condition for $115. Is one better than the other, or would I be better off saving up my quarters and nickels for a MZ-S or PZ-1? Thanks. Steve - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
SMC Takumar 135 mm f3,5 (M42)
Hi, I saw this lens (the used one, of course:)) today morning. What do you think of it? I consider buying some 135 mm as a portrait lens and so far I focused on SMC M 135mm f3,5 until today I saw the Takumar. The latter is about 30% cheaper that the former and I have the K-to-M42 adapter. So how do both lenses compare to each other? And also one thing. The Takumar has a switch "Auto/Manual". What is it for? TIA Artur - 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 .
Wedding Candids - PZ1p, AF500FTZ, Stroboframe
We just returned from 'Woodstock, Canada, where our daughter Lori got married. I took some candid photos of the rehearsal, some after the wedding, and a few more at the reception. Four rolls of 24, all told. http://web2.airmail.net/linnm3/lori/loriadam.htm I used the PZ1p with AF500FTZ on a Stroboframe. Lenses included the power zoom 28-105, A* 200/4 Macro, and Phoenix/Samyang 18-28/4-4.5 zoom. I used center weight metering in Hyper Program mode, flash at minus 1.7, and shot everything at 1/60, letting the camera choose the aperture. Film was Fuji Superia 800, rated at 640. There's a lot of duplicate shots, and some bad exposures I included because that particular photo may be of interest to certain family members. This is not my attempt to branch off into wedding photography. I was adamant that I wasn't going to be the "wedding photographer", because I wanted to enjoy the ceremony, and I don't have any experience shooting weddings. Besides, everyone knows the PZ1p goes blooie with daddy's salty tears dripping down its innards. But when the "real" photog showed up at the rehearsal bearing a Rebel and 35-70 zoom, and popped up its silly little flash, I thought there was trouble in paradise. And I knew I intentionally didn't pack any "wedding" film. So I decided to at least take some candids using whatever film I had handy. Fortunately, the wedding photographer felt guilty seeing my PZ1p and Stroboframe, and went out and borrowed a decent flash, and picked up the Elan 7 he had ordered earlier. I don't know how his pics came out yet, but at least he knew something about posing, so maybe they will be fine. My hat is off to anyone who successfully shoots weddings. I about went crazy trying to find an uncluttered background, or get enough DOF, or get rid of some strange light or shadow, or worrying about the flash settings, etc etc. At least my camera/flash performed admirably. Out of 96 photos, about three came out seriously underexposed (shot with the Samyang zoom and no flash), and three more seriously overexposed (due to flash). -- John Mustarde - 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: Tamron & Pentax was Pentax USA
was super light-ray absorbent for those heavy overcast days ... - Original Message - From: "Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 5:32 PM Subject: RE: Tamron & Pentax was Pentax USA > I once had a Tampon lens. It(fill in the blank contest) > > Thanks, > Ed > http://lightandsilver.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: When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic?
I use most of my SMC Taks with my LX and PZ1-p. I can use them as intended with the ES and ESII bodies I own. I agree, the Spotmatic design is a classic. I sometimes wish that Pentax would issue a special limited edition of the Spotmatic. I see where some company has come out with a sub miniature Spotmatic that uses Minox film. Jim A. > From: "Bob Rapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:56:47 +1100 > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic? > > Hi all, > I was interested in how JCO's Takumar auction went and was very > disappointed in the prices he received. For you newcomers, the Takumar > lenses were, and some still are, the highest quality lenses produced at that > time. From the 15 f3.5, 24 f3.5, 35 f3.5, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8, 105 f2.8 120 > f2.8 to the 135 f2.5, these lenses are screwmount versions of the much > sought after "K" series lenses. > Until I could afford the K mount lenses, I freely used my old Takumars on > my LX! But how about the body. Simply put the original Spotmatic body is a > marvel of design and function. One reviewer (Mike Johnson in Nov 2000 Photo > Techniques) said "...may be the closest we've ever come to a Leica > rangefinder in an SLR". > Dig out your old Spotmatic and a few lenses and have a Spotmatic weekend. > You will know what I mean. > > Bob Rapp > - > 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: Tokina 300 2.8 (was RE: Tamron SP 300mm f2.8)
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:25:51 EST, you wrote: >> While the subject of fast 300's is alive, has anyone any experience with >> the Tokina 300 2.8 - the old manual one, not the latest AF one - and, >> more to the point, has anyone actually seen one or know of one, >> especially old and beat up, and, ahem, for sale??? >- I have that lens, and it's great. It's nomenclature is Tokina AT-X SD 300/2.8. It is reasonably sharp wide open, which is great because there's no use carrying the extra weight of a 300/2.8 if the dang lens is soft wide open. I've owned mine for less than a year, and it has exceeded my expectations in every respect. I got it for a Buy It Now price of about $825 on Ebay. The condition was pretty good, not mint, but not beat up either. But it didn't have a hood, which is an absolute requirement for me for long lenses. Luckily, I picked one of those up for just a few bucks on Ebay within a couple of weeks. Tokina still sells the hood, but they want about $150. I second the comment about using the AF 1.7x Adaptor with it - it is an excellent combo. -- John Mustarde - 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: November PUG first impressions
> " River Of Gold "by Maciej Marchlewski - well done on your first submission > (mine also this month) small tip, one thing I do always is look at the scan > desaturated and see if it looks better in b/w, I tried this with yours and > for me it works better - great shot Thanks Tim. I didn't suspect to get any comment on my photo so I really appreciate yours. From this moment I can see at leat couple ways to use the situasion - maybe one would work better - but I'm pleased with the result. I've tried mono version as you've suggested and it's a totally different photo - something else catches the eye. The reason I've submitted it in color is that I made it this way. I've started to think if shooting b&w has a sense today as I can allways get a b&w print from color film and I'm forced to use C41 b&w film anyway (no darkroom) but I like to challenge myself to get into b&w thinking allready during composition not after comparing the results. Now I'm doing only b&w (frankly speaking only done couple of rolls) and maybe I will have something to post on PUG soon. I've looked at your photo (I didn't have time to take a solid look at all of the pictures :-( ). I also like it. I like this kind of portraits. Too bad you can't see where it was taken - at first I thought it was on the bus or something similiar - due to the nature of portrait photography everything out of the window is blurred so you can't see the height. But you can see a fascination in his face. Btw - also looks very nice as a black&white one :-) Greetings Maciej - 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: November PUG favourites
> River of Gold > Maciej Marchlewski > Fine effort by Maciej. The road makes the shot. I like the building too. > Keep up the good work! Thank you very much, Cotty. I appreciate kind words about my photo. I'm constantly trying to shot something nice with varying effect but I hope that amount of photos to keep will grow as it's not very high right now. Looking back at the scene I shot I find at least couple other ways I could have use it. Hope I'll have something worth of PUG soon. Maciej Marchlewski - 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: 2001 All-Ford Nationals at Carlisle
Boy, just when you think you've got everything the way you want it! Everything should be working now. Sorry about that! -Rich On 4 Nov 2001, at 10:07, Gary L. Murphy wrote: > On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:53:13 -0500, Richard Klein wrote: > > >I just posted some new pictures on my website: > >http://rich.richardklein.org/images/index.html > > The pictures are not showing up - 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 .
New Toys
Just in: MEII Winder (with the cap!) Remote Cord A LX Winder Remote AF400T Clamp AF400T Bracket Hot Shoe Grip LX Drive Battery Grip M A 35-105mm F3.5 Kind regards from sunny Brighton 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 .
Re: "The 37th Frame" Second Issue Out
Shel wrote: > Congratulations! It's wonderful to know that the newsletter is doing so > well. I'm happy for you, and glad to know that it's increasing in size > and scope. Knowing that, I'll send you a check for a subscription right > away. > > I hope you didn't remove ~all~ the profanity ;-)) Shel, Naturally not. It's interesting how the future development of the newsletter lays out--for each one of a number of increasing increments of numbers of subscribers, it will become possible to do more with the product. For instance, I'm just about to switch over to bulk mailing (next issue or the one after) which will reduce my mailing costs by 50% and increase my maximum weight from 2 oz. To 3.3 oz. On the other hand, I believe that in one of the next two issues I'm going to provide an original print, and that won't be feasible once the numbers get too high. I suppose it's just a question of being creative within the resources I have available to me at each stage of the way, which, fortunately, is something I'm good at, and enjoy. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Macintosh Owners
On the iBook (a G3 300) running IE 5.1 on OS X 10.1, looks like Arial. Page looks fine. I've also just loaded it up using OmniWeb 4.05 on the same computer. Looks the same (though the text is smaller, but this is probably because I haven't changed any of OmniWeb's defaults and I certainly have in IE 5.1). No problems. -Aaron - 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: 2001 All-Ford Nationals at Carlisle
The thumbnails show up, but clicking on them at any of the optional resolutions does not work. Maris - Original Message - From: "Richard Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 9:53 AM Subject: 2001 All-Ford Nationals at Carlisle | I just posted some new pictures on my website: | http://rich.richardklein.org/images/index.html | | Sadly, they were taken with a free promotional camera (which, | thanks to this list, I now know was a rangefinder) that I received | from some cigarette company. Two days after shooting these | pictures the winder stopped working and I decided it was time to | buy a "real" camera. That's when I got my SF-10. | | Most of the pictures are discolored along the left side. Is that what | light leakage looks like? | | The images are un-retouched; not cropped or anything. They look | much better when I simply use the auto-level feature in PhotoShop, | but I figure you can tweak the pictures however you like. | | -Rich | - | 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-M 28mm f/2.8
Spotted on eBay with a Buy It Now price of, $50.00 (Not mine) http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1293145115 Description follows: Pentax 28mm F 2.8 lens. Item is in good condition with no problems to the glass or operation. There is some wear on the barrel (paint worn). This is a good prime lens. Item pictured is the actual item you will receive. Includes caps. Terms: Ships in US only, fixed shipping cost at $6.50 via USPS in CONUS. Other shipping services available at actual cost. Buyer has right to return for full refund minus return shipping if not satisfied on receipt. Payment must be made within 10 days of auction close or I will restart the auction (unless other arrangements have been agreed to). Payment by money order or personal check. Personal check will hold for 2 weeks before shipping, money order ships on receipt Later, Gary - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: SMC K mount lenses: year of introduction
Hi Fabio, Can't help you with your quest regarding when lenses introduced, but just wanted ti say what a brilliant story! Excellent. I got my first MX in 1978, along with a 28mm 2.8. Both still here, the 28 tucked away in a drawer. Not worth selling it. The MX only recently retired, although still works great - never CLA'd!!! Shutter times must be adrift, but no problems with it and everything works. Only had about 2 thousand rolls through it since new, but what a great performer. I suppose you would have had that little lens back even if it had been ten timed the cost you paid ;-) Nice one, Ciao, 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: 2001 All-Ford Nationals at Carlisle
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:53:13 -0500, Richard Klein wrote: >I just posted some new pictures on my website: >http://rich.richardklein.org/images/index.html The pictures are not showing up Later, Gary - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
2001 All-Ford Nationals at Carlisle
I just posted some new pictures on my website: http://rich.richardklein.org/images/index.html Sadly, they were taken with a free promotional camera (which, thanks to this list, I now know was a rangefinder) that I received from some cigarette company. Two days after shooting these pictures the winder stopped working and I decided it was time to buy a "real" camera. That's when I got my SF-10. Most of the pictures are discolored along the left side. Is that what light leakage looks like? The images are un-retouched; not cropped or anything. They look much better when I simply use the auto-level feature in PhotoShop, but I figure you can tweak the pictures however you like. -Rich - 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: SMC-FA 4/28-70 vs. SMF-FA 4-5,6/28-105IF
I have no experience of the 4-5.6/28-105 but it is indeed made by Tamron - which in itself is not so bad. I have had the 4.0/28-70 which is, however, as very good lens so I doubt that the 28-105 will not be as good. If you need longer and wider reach, I would recommend the 3.5-4.5/24-90 - a lens I really like and IMO even slightly sharper than the 28-70. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Heiko Hamann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 04. marraskuuta 2001 12:59 Aihe: SMC-FA 4/28-70 vs. SMF-FA 4-5,6/28-105IF >Hi, > >the primary lens for my MZ-5n is my SMC-FA 4/28-70 as it is very compact >an sufficient to my everyday needs. Now I'm offered a SMC-FA 4-5,6/28- >105 to a fair price. The main advantage that I see is the inner focus >(IF) which makes it easier to use filters. > >Has anyone already compared these lenses and can give my an advice? Is >the 28-105 sharper? I also heard, that the 28-105 is produced by Tamron. >Is this true? And if it is true - is this good or bad news?? > >Regards, Heiko - 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 .
Donke bags in problems?
http://www.micro-tools.com/Merchant2/domke_menu.htm Frits Wüthrich - 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: teleconverter
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:48:20 -, Frits J. Wthrich wrote: >How are Tamron teleconverters compared to Pentax? I see there are Tamron >1.4x AF teleconverters for much less then the Pentax 1.4x-L. Is there a big >difference in quality? I am thinking of using it between my SMC-A 400mm >f/5.6 and my PZ-1. Hi Frits, I am not sure about this Tamron, but I have a similar 1.4 AF converter made by Sigma. I also have the 1.4x L converter and the big difference is that the Sigma does cause some vignetting when used with big glass like the 300mm f/2.8. The Pentax L does not. (I have the 1.4x and 2x AF EX Sigma converters, but hardly use them) This is caused mainly by the 'snout' the L converters have, that goes inside the lens, and because the aperture of the converter-lens is a bit bigger. It should be OK on the 5.6 400mm I guess ... Regards, Jan van Wijk - 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: FW: What your favourite photo?
I just bought the bookMEOW. Norm Mike Johnston wrote: > Lon wrote: > > > Grin. Someone wrote that we should > > all refer to ONE reference book to > > "back up" our natterings here. It > > won't happen. Such is not the nature > > of this list. > > Git along, little kitty! MEEOW! - 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: Macintosh Owners
On Sun, 04 Nov 2001 06:34:40 -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Although I sent you a private message, I thought I'd address this aspect > here. With Netscape 4.7 even if I specify a specific font in the HTML > code, I can still set my preferences to another font face, and adjust > the size. From what you've written I gather that that's not always a > possibility with other browsers and systems. Is that correct? Some browser's make it very hard to adjust to a page. Besides, do you really want people to have to ditz with their browser just to view your pages? I've politely complained to several webmasters because they did silly things like set the fonts to 10 pixels tall. Well, on a 120 dpi monitor, that's unreadable. Their response sometimes was "change your browser settings". Well, thank you very much, but I'm not going to do that for every site I visit. I spend eight to sixteen hours a day staring at monitors. I've spent a lot of time and effort tuning the "visual environment" of my computers. A site has to have some pretty compelling content to make me want to dump all of that work and risk the additional eyestrain. > I really want to put stuff up that's accessible to everyone, and that > was in my mind when setting up the page. But, if there's a better way > to do it than I've done it, I'd like to know about it. That's a great goal, but it either reduces how "fancy" you can get or it makes a lot more work for you. If you really want a visually rich site, then accessibility angle can force you to have a second set of pages with reduced content, for example, "text only", for those that can't make use of the "full" site. I generally create only one set, that has some graphics and colors, but doesn't go wild with them, and tries to avoid bad combinations, like red next to blue or green. There are guides out there on the Web for accessable site development. I can't remember the URLs, but a search on Google should dig a few up. If you want to help blind "viewers" out as much as possible, for example, you have to make liberal use of the ALT and TITLE attributes on tags so that their screen readers can do something useful for them with your site. You also have to be very careful about using absolute sizes for anything, whether fonts or tables or frames or columns or whatever. Layouts based on absolute sizes generally fare poorly when used on a display that's not exactly the same size and fonts as the one the developer was using. TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re:
At 07:16 PM 11/3/01 -0500, Nicolas Colarusso wrote: >I have the opportunity to purchase a Pentax AF280T flash for 56$ US. I have a >few questions. That's a very good price if it's in good condition. >1. Is it compatible with my Z1p and MZ5n? I've used one with the Pz-1p and it works fine. I assume it would work OK with the Zx-5nsince it also works with the Mz-S. >2. Can I use it with the flash extension cord with the FS adapter attached to >the flash? I plan to use it at the same time with my AF500FTZ using the FS >adapter at both ends of the cable, an FG adaptor on the FG on the camera with >a cord going to my 500FTZ. The synch cord F-5p and adapters work fine with the AF-280T. >3. Has anyone here used this flash and what are your feelings concerning the >flash. I have two of them - one in my LX / manual focus kit and one in my Mz-S / Pz-1p kit. This flash has TTL auto, non-TTL auto (via a sensor on the flash itself) at two power levels, and manual at two power levels. It also has the in-finder TTL indicator that shows that the TTL function cut off the flash. The only negatives I can come up with are that at GN 28 in meters its a little less poserful that I'd like (but not bad) and the design is somewhat boxy (no detriment to operation though.) The really nice thing about it is that with the on-flash auto settings you can use this as a backup flash for ANY camera with a hotshoe. So you can stick it on your Spotmatic or ME Super or whatever and it works. So if you use an MX as a backup for the Pz-1p thatis flash will work with both. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.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: Macintosh Owners
Hi Doug ... Although I sent you a private message, I thought I'd address this aspect here. With Netscape 4.7 even if I specify a specific font in the HTML code, I can still set my preferences to another font face, and adjust the size. From what you've written I gather that that's not always a possibility with other browsers and systems. Is that correct? I really want to put stuff up that's accessible to everyone, and that was in my mind when setting up the page. But, if there's a better way to do it than I've done it, I'd like to know about it. Thanks! Doug Franklin wrote: > > Hi Shel, > > On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 22:58:33 -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/lx/questions.html > > and let me know what font face you see or if you have any problems > > reading it. Also, please let me know which O/S you're using. Thanks! > > If I might interject, here, I think it's better not to specify actual > fonts since you have no idea what fonts the viewer has available. It's > better to just use the HTML standard font names like "serif", > "sans-serif", and "monospace". That way you use the ones the end-user > has chosen. By the same token, it's best only to specify the relative > font sizes, like "5" and "normal" instead of absolute font sizes, like > "12pt" or "12px", since you won't foul up the end-user's choices. > Visually impaired people view the web, too, and often they have very > specific needs for fonts and sizes. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Macintosh Owners
Hi Shel, On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 22:58:33 -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/lx/questions.html > and let me know what font face you see or if you have any problems > reading it. Also, please let me know which O/S you're using. Thanks! If I might interject, here, I think it's better not to specify actual fonts since you have no idea what fonts the viewer has available. It's better to just use the HTML standard font names like "serif", "sans-serif", and "monospace". That way you use the ones the end-user has chosen. By the same token, it's best only to specify the relative font sizes, like "5" and "normal" instead of absolute font sizes, like "12pt" or "12px", since you won't foul up the end-user's choices. Visually impaired people view the web, too, and often they have very specific needs for fonts and sizes. TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Getting better lenses for my MZ5?
Rob Geraghty wrote, in part: > So far, the Pentax f3.5 100mm lens and the Pentax f1.7 50mm lenses look like > good value. Maybe for wide angle, the Pentax f2.8 28mm or f2 24mm? I have the Phoenix-labled 100mm f3.5, and consider it quite good for the money. You might want to know, should you purchase the Pentax version (which probably does have better coating) that Phoenix includes a two- element diopter with theirs that gets the lens to 1:1. Perhaps you could purchase this from them if you get the Pentax. -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: AF280T Flash (reposted forgot subject sorry)
"Leon Altoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I haven't got it but I've seen lots of people say how good it is and it >has a useful feature if you do the occasional macro shot - the head >will tilt down by 5 degrees (I think - it could be slightly more) so >you can leave the flash mounted on the hotshoe and still have it >illuminate the subject. Tilts down by 15 degrees. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.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: SMC-FA 4/28-70 vs. SMF-FA 4-5,6/28-105IF
Hi Alan, >IMO, if you have already had the FA28-70/4, you might just save the money to >buy something more useful instead of another standard zoom. Good point, but I would sell the 28-70 so that my "investment" would be approximately 50$ in the end. The IF would be worth this investment, but I wonder, how the 28-105 compares to the 28-70 besides IF... Regards, Heiko - 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: Macintosh Owners
Hi Shel, On my Mac G3/300 with System 9.1, the page looks fine. Black type on a gray background. The font is some kind of san seraph, helvetica perhaps. The body copy appears to be around 14 to 16 point. The headline is a bit bolder, and looks to be around 24 point. Paul Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > Hi ... would you please check this page > > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/lx/questions.html > > and let me know what font face you see or if you have any problems > reading it. Also, please let me know which O/S you're using. Thanks! > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: SMC-FA 4/28-70 vs. SMF-FA 4-5,6/28-105IF
>the primary lens for my MZ-5n is my SMC-FA 4/28-70 as it is very compact >an sufficient to my everyday needs. Now I'm offered a SMC-FA 4-5,6/28- >105 to a fair price. The main advantage that I see is the inner focus >(IF) which makes it easier to use filters. > >Has anyone already compared these lenses and can give my an advice? Is >the 28-105 sharper? I also heard, that the 28-105 is produced by Tamron. >Is this true? And if it is true - is this good or bad news?? IMO, if you have already had the FA28-70/4, you might just save the money to buy something more useful instead of another standard zoom. regards, Alan Chan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp - 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: When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic?
I know what you mean.My SP500 is always in ,y Lowepro and loaded with a roll of B&W of some sort. I had a sticky shutter a few years ago and i put it aside,used P&S and throw a ways,bought a K1000 but said hey for $125.oo Can a CLA will get her back on the road.So i did and it does. BTW saw 2 spotties in Henry downrtown for $ 150.oo and an F for about $ 350.00 with lenses.Comments on price?? Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada 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: November PUG favourites
Thanks for the comments Cotty. I would have liked to have added more side detail,but the property is in a bit of a valley and by walking a few feet east or west made quite a bit of difference in the composition and i wanted the sun and house to be the focal point. The lab scan seemed to have a bit of a washed out effect on the upper right part of the sky,but seems to PUG ok. As i don't have a lot of non horsey work i find the PUG gives me a little jump start to do other types of pictures Dave http://brooks1952.tripod.com/davespentaxpages (only 1 on it now more to come) Begin Original Message From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: November PUG favourites Pickering Fog David J Brooks Pleasing landscape, I coulda done with it even wider to get more trees on the left and the building on the right, but then the sun would have shrunk. You can't have everything! Nice example, nice serene feeling. Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada 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 .
SMC-FA 4/28-70 vs. SMF-FA 4-5,6/28-105IF
Hi, the primary lens for my MZ-5n is my SMC-FA 4/28-70 as it is very compact an sufficient to my everyday needs. Now I'm offered a SMC-FA 4-5,6/28- 105 to a fair price. The main advantage that I see is the inner focus (IF) which makes it easier to use filters. Has anyone already compared these lenses and can give my an advice? Is the 28-105 sharper? I also heard, that the 28-105 is produced by Tamron. Is this true? And if it is true - is this good or bad news?? Regards, Heiko - 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: "The 37th Frame" Second Issue Out
Dear Mike ... Congratulations! It's wonderful to know that the newsletter is doing so well. I'm happy for you, and glad to know that it's increasing in size and scope. Knowing that, I'll send you a check for a subscription right away. I hope you didn't remove ~all~ the profanity ;-)) Mike Johnston wrote: > > I've just published and mailed Issue number 2 of my newsletter "The 37th > Frame." > > This issue has two new features: > > --"Abberzee & Coates" is a conversation between Bob Abarzejian and Bob > Coates that will be a regular feature. In this issue they argue about the > advantages and disadvantages of digital photography. > > --"Comments & Queries" is just what it sounds like, a combination letters > section and Q&A...in this section I get raked over the coals by Steve > Simmons, the Publisher of _View Camera_. This will also be a regular feature > from now on. (Not Steve calling me names, but the C&Q section .) > > "The Rant" in this issue concerns what I think is a real outrage--the fact > that certain celebrity photographers were chosen for a major landscape > photography project despite the fact that they are in no way, shape, form > landscape photographers. I was prevailed upon at the last minute to remove > most of the profanity. > > The other features are the Squib From the Squid, about Sept. 11th; > > An essay by me called "Photographs Can Be Meaningless," explaining why I > think the current trend in academic photography criticism doesn't always > relate very well to photographs we love; > > How To Test A Lens; > > And an article about camera company standards for keeping replacement parts > in stock for discontinued cameras. > > And of course the news section. > > For those who might be interested in how the newsletter is doing, it's doing > extremely well. I'm having to spend a lot of time on administrative / > secretarial duties (it took a whole world series game just to seal all the > envelopes, for instance ). I now have subscribers in Canada, Germany, > Spain, Singapore, India, Northern Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, England, > and of course the U.S. I honestly don't quite know how the news is getting > around, but the subscriptions continue to come in almost daily. > > The newsletter will continue to expand in size and number of features. > > Oh, and by the way, I'm really having a blast putting this little thing > together! It really is a lot of fun. > > The website is at www.37thframe.com. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] LX Questions: http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/lx/questions.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic?
I'm on my way out to do some time in the National Forest with my kids. As is often the case I am bringing: Super Takumar 17mm f/4 SMCT 24mm f/3.5 SMCT 28mm f/3.5 SMCT 50mm f/1.5 SMCT 85~210mm f/4.5 Spotmatic Spotmatic F ESII When I return I shall shoot for my regular columns with: Spotmatic II SMCT 100mm f/4.0 You might say I do a lot of Spotmatic hugging! ppro > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bob Rapp > Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 3:57 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic? > > > > Hi all, > I was interested in how JCO's Takumar auction went and was very > disappointed in the prices he received. For you newcomers, the Takumar > lenses were, and some still are, the highest quality lenses produced at that > time. From the 15 f3.5, 24 f3.5, 35 f3.5, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8, 105 f2.8 120 > f2.8 to the 135 f2.5, these lenses are screwmount versions of the much > sought after "K" series lenses. > Until I could afford the K mount lenses, I freely used my old Takumars on > my LX! But how about the body. Simply put the original Spotmatic body is a > marvel of design and function. One reviewer (Mike Johnson in Nov 2000 Photo > Techniques) said "...may be the closest we've ever come to a Leica > rangefinder in an SLR". > Dig out your old Spotmatic and a few lenses and have a Spotmatic weekend. > You will know what I mean. > > Bob Rapp > - > 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 .
teleconverter
How are Tamron teleconverters compared to Pentax? I see there are Tamron 1.4x AF teleconverters for much less then the Pentax 1.4x-L. Is there a big difference in quality? I am thinking of using it between my SMC-A 400mm f/5.6 and my PZ-1. Frits Wüthrich - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
SMC K mount lenses: year of introduction
Last thursday I was looking for a UV filter, but I had no time to go to my
usual seller, so I went into a little shop, the first one I found. While
asking for the filter, on a shelf I spotted an old Pentax lens box (the one
white in the upper part, red in the middle and black below). I cannot trust my
poor sight, but it looked like that in the little rectangular white label down
on the left, it was written "35 mm F3.5". My old 35!, after 21 years!
(Flashback: when I bought my first camera, a MX, I chose a 35 mm as standard
lens, and the K f/3,5 was far cheaper than the then (1978) new M series' f/2
or f 2.8. I was very happy with this lens, and then added a used K 200 f/4. A
odd pair of lens, but I loved both, and, I had no money to buy any other one
(I was 18). Two years later they robbed me of all the gear. When I managed to
buy another MX, one more year later, the tiny budget allowed me to get a M 50
f/1.7. Since then, I have been regretting the lost of both 35 and 200. Yes, I
got a A 35 f/2.8 and a M 200 f/4, but I always missed the old pair).
I asked for the price, and it was 260 euros (about $ 230). "Not a bargain for
used stuff" I said. "Used? It's brand new!". It *WAS BRAND NEW*! Possibly it
had been sleeping 25 years on that shelf!! The box needed a sprinkling, but
the lens, and its case & strap, were mint. There were both the sheet with
serial number and feet/meters conversion tablewere and the booklet "SMC PENTAX
LENSES K ", too.
Back at home, the lens mounted on the MX, I enjoyed the reading of the
booklet. Whew, it is the 200 f/4 which is displayed in the cover, mounted on a
silver K2
Now the questions:
At pages 32-33 ("Specifications") are listed the K series lenses, with their
features. Some K lenses are missing in this list:
18 / 3,5
24 / 2.8
28 / 2
28 / 3.5 Shift
30 / 2.8
55 / 2
100 / 4 Bellows
200 / 2.5
1000 / 11 Reflex
2000 / 13,5 Reflex
Zoom 28 - 50 / 3.5 - 4.5
Zoom 85 - 210 / 3.5
Zoom 400 - 600 / 8 - 12 Reflex
The question is: When were theese lenses released? According to B.Dimitrov's
site the most of the K lenses was introduced in 1975, but he includes in this
first issue the 18 mm, the 24mm/2,8, the 30 mm and the 100 mm Bellows. Were
they introduced in the same year, but in a second time (after the bookled was
issued)?
OTOH, Bozhidar states that the 28 / 3.5 and the 150 / 4 were introduced,
respectively, in 1976 and 1977. But they actually are present in the booklet's
list!
Can anyone of you give me the right answer?
Another related question: when did the indication on the lens' front ring
change? In the oldest K lenses, the focal lenght does not include "mm"
(millimeters), and the lettering is different (thiner types, more space
between two letters).
Thank you
Fabio (very happy with his 35/3.5, and still hoping to come across a K
200/4).
-
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 .
When was the last time you "hugged" a Spotamtic?
Hi all, I was interested in how JCO's Takumar auction went and was very disappointed in the prices he received. For you newcomers, the Takumar lenses were, and some still are, the highest quality lenses produced at that time. From the 15 f3.5, 24 f3.5, 35 f3.5, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8, 105 f2.8 120 f2.8 to the 135 f2.5, these lenses are screwmount versions of the much sought after "K" series lenses. Until I could afford the K mount lenses, I freely used my old Takumars on my LX! But how about the body. Simply put the original Spotmatic body is a marvel of design and function. One reviewer (Mike Johnson in Nov 2000 Photo Techniques) said "...may be the closest we've ever come to a Leica rangefinder in an SLR". Dig out your old Spotmatic and a few lenses and have a Spotmatic weekend. You will know what I mean. Bob Rapp - 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]: Meer cats - was: November PUG bis
thanks Bob.. wonderful site :- Daphne (on first coffee) - 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: Macintosh Owners
Hi Shel, On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 at 01:57:34 -0500 (EST), Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Hi ... would you please check this page > [snip] > and let me know what font face you see or if you have any problems > reading it. Also, please let me know which O/S you're using. Thanks! I checked with both Mozilla 0.95 and IE 5.1.3 running on MacOS X 10.1. In both cases, I see Arial font face in the windows of my graphical user agents. Hope this helps. -- Yoshihiko Takinami Osaka, Japan [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Vs: Pentax dirt and more - a day at the Photo Plus Expo
It´s made by Pentax - and I think that there is/was a Pentax version, too - but my memory can be wrong on this. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Amita Guha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 04. marraskuuta 2001 3:32 Aihe: Pentax dirt and more - a day at the Photo Plus Expo >In an interesting sidenote, Hewlett Packard makes a digital SLR with Pentax >glass: the HP Photosmart C912 http://www.goldenimagecenter.com/hpc912.htm > >--Amita - 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 .
