Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay
Well, let me fine-tune your understanding just a little, too - g. While I do agree with your statements ~in general~, Bruce, I do disagree somewhat with your emphasis on it being ~so~ bad as a landscape lens. I do think it's a better portrait lens, yes, but I haven't found it to be so downright awfully soft at larger apertures at infinity to be as useless as is sometimes stated. At least mine was hopelessly soft at wide open near infinity. Brokeh was horrible at near infinity too. regards, Alan Chan _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.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 .
77/18 Ltd.vs. FA* 85/1.4(Was Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay)
At portrait distances (say 4 to 6 feet) or at mid-range say 10 feet), just how different is the angle of view of the subject lenses? I've seen test reports that suggest that the 77 is actually a bit longer than that, and the 85 is not quite that (at least close in, due to the IF), so they seem like they might be virtually identical in focal length at such focus distances. Since I use my 85/1.4 essentially only at 10 feet and closer, but I sometimes _carry_ the lens long distances, the lighter-weight Limited lens seems quite attractive. Because the 85/1.4 is--really--the bulk of my family kit, I carry it sometimes when I'm hiking with medium format gear (my I will Create Art kit), even though, on those occasions, I also often carry one member of the family. My four year-old daughter is unlikely to grow lighter; I wonder if my family kit should. I enjoyed the linked photos, but I still can't decide to sell an excellent lens and buy another excellent (lighter, but shorter?) lens, especially if the focal length is significantly shorter than the length (and what length is that?) that works for me. I'm sorta-kinda leaning towards self-enablement. Should somebody stop me? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Tempted by the dark side--help!
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Apparently, the shutter button is connected to the control circuitry by a flexible printed circuit board that goes over the prism. The board has a tendency to crack at the bends. The cure is to run ribbon cable in place of the board. I believe that strip of flex board across the top is pretty common. I've repaired a dead ME by doing what you describe. (I only had to solder in a single lead, though, and stopped the crack from expanding with a drop of glue.) -tih -- Puritanism -- the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Re: Australians
On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Bob Blakely wrote: I've tried to stay out of this OT thread Me too, but Each year, approximately 150,000 folks are killed by physician and pharmaceutical error. Most of these folks were not involved in any life or limb threatening situation. This dwarfs folks killed in automobiles ~50,000 and those killed by firearms ~20,000. Presented for perspective... The BBC reckons 30,000 killed, 90,000 injured in the USA each year. Last year the figure for England and Wales was 42 killed. Corrected for population we'd probably be looking at about 6000 more dead peaple a year if we had your gun laws. But think; 30,000 people dead! It strikes me that America has gone to war and shaken up its entire society for 1/10th of that number of people killed in New York. You can't dismiss 30,000 or even 20,000 people as 'perspective'! But lighten up please, don't take this gun thing too seriously guys. The thing is it's YOUR country and if you want guns then you can vote to have them. However the UK and Australia are also democratic countries and by and large we feel safer the way we are. Honest, we're happy, we don't feel oppressed :-) Chris -- Dr Chris Stoddart: Unix SysAdmin, Department of Computer Science, Sheffield University, U.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: Spotmeters, a new question.
Five degrees isn't much of a spot. IMO, it's inadequate for critical metering in many instances. David A. Mann wrote: I have a Sekonic L328 meter with the 5-degree spot attachment. It'll do anything and everything, even spot flash metering. Its not that great at doing low-light with the spot attachment though. -- 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: Another PDML outing!
Cesar's a great guy. Great company. A good time was had by all and I'd love to do it again. Maybe someplace safer and prettier next time. :) Thanks, Ed http://lightandsilver.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matamoros, Cesar A. Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 10:45 PM To: Pentax Subject: Another PDML outing! Tuesday afternoon I got together with fellow PDMLer Ed Mathews in Baltimore, Maryland. What a wonderful time. The weather was wonderful, except for the slight haze. We ended up going to an older section of Baltimore and taking some shots around the docks. This is an area he has always wanted to check out. I am glad I was able to enjoy it too. I was not even aware that this section existed. I won't even bring up what we were shooting :-) It was interesting to see how he was viewing these scenes as opposed to me. From there we ended up having a wonderful dinner with more talking of things photographic and even the PDML. I do have to admit we also went off topic:-) And no, the wine did not help us in that vein. We ended the evening in the Fell's Point section, the older port section of Baltimore. This used to be a place I was very familiar with. It was great walking about and checking it out. A great send off to my vacation in NYC. Thanks Ed, César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida in New York City for a bit - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 Data imprinting (WAS: RE: MZ-S Film-rewind Problem )
Bill wrote: What are those 11 brass colored discs in my MZ-S if not data emitters? Electrical contacts to the data back. 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: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay
Alan wrote: At least mine was hopelessly soft at wide open near infinity. Brokeh was horrible at near infinity too. Like Alan I replaced my FA* 85/1.4 with the 77 Limited and don't regret it. One thing was the lack of sharpness of the 85 wide open, worse was the fact that you need to stop the lens down to F:4 to get acceptable, but nothing to write home about, results. It wasn't really razor sharp until F:8 at infinity distances. In my opinion the 85/1.4 is not a great choice for low-light landscape. The 77 Limited is basically sharp at all apertures although it's hard to focus near infinity mark due to the fact that it focuses past infinity and the small error margins at such narrow DOF. The 77 also has a bokeh to die 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: 77/18 Ltd.vs. FA* 85/1.4(Was Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay)
I own the 77, and I would suggest you would not be disappointed with it in any respect. I only have one 85mm lens to compare it to - an 85mm F1.8 AF Nikkor, and it takes in approximately the same field of view. The Nikkor is a rear focusing design, so I don't know if that affects the focal length at short distances like internal focusing does - I don't think it should. So my guess is that the 77 is indeed a little longer than advertised - maybe in the low 80s. Thanks, Ed http://lightandsilver.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Brian Walsh Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 3:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 77/18 Ltd.vs. FA* 85/1.4(Was Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay) At portrait distances (say 4 to 6 feet) or at mid-range say 10 feet), just how different is the angle of view of the subject lenses? I've seen test reports that suggest that the 77 is actually a bit longer than that, and the 85 is not quite that (at least close in, due to the IF), so they seem like they might be virtually identical in focal length at such focus distances. Since I use my 85/1.4 essentially only at 10 feet and closer, but I sometimes _carry_ the lens long distances, the lighter-weight Limited lens seems quite attractive. Because the 85/1.4 is--really--the bulk of my family kit, I carry it sometimes when I'm hiking with medium format gear (my I will Create Art kit), even though, on those occasions, I also often carry one member of the family. My four year-old daughter is unlikely to grow lighter; I wonder if my family kit should. I enjoyed the linked photos, but I still can't decide to sell an excellent lens and buy another excellent (lighter, but shorter?) lens, especially if the focal length is significantly shorter than the length (and what length is that?) that works for me. I'm sorta-kinda leaning towards self-enablement. Should somebody stop me? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: Australians and Guns!
Wednesday, December 12, 2001, 12:40:03 AM, Paul wrote: PJ From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 12 00:55:44 2001 PJ Received: from noc002.aitg.com ([216.32.91.72]:29669 EHLO noc002.aitg.com) PJ by data.centrum.cz with ESMTP id S30418517AbRLKXys; PJ Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:54:48 +0100 PJ Received: (from majordomo@localhost) PJ by noc002.aitg.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) id SAA00833 PJ for pentax-discuss-pdml-list; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:40:41 -0500 (EST) PJ Received: from hotmail.com (oe64.law11.hotmail.com [64.4.16.199]) by PJ noc002.aitg.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA00828 for PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:40:39 -0500 (EST) PJ Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft PJ SMTPSVC; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:40:08 -0800 PJ X-Originating-IP: [131.170.6.141] PJ From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ References: 000601c18251$30c56810$[EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ Subject: OT: Australians and Guns! PJ Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:40:03 +1100 PJ MIME-Version: 1.0 PJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 PJ Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PJ X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600. PJ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Dec 2001 23:40:08.0941 (UTC) PJ FILETIME=[2B3451D0:01C1829D] PJ Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ Precedence: list PJ Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ X-Orcpt: rfc822;[EMAIL PROTECTED] PJ Hi Kevin, Not quite true. Hunting is not considered a good reason to own a gun. PJ I would be interested to know what the situation is in England and Europe, PJ as alot of these countries I would envisage are under a similar style of PJ rule as Australia. I wonder how easy is it to aquire a gun in these PJ countries. PJ Paul Jones Paul, do you know that you could start a potentially another hot thread ;) ? Gun rights is a pretty hot topic. Being a pacifist, I really don't want to discuss it here. But maybe all are exhausted after the last flame frenzy... Good light, Frantisek Vlcek P.S. if you are interested in my European view, I will mail you privately, even with some political / social theory (e.g. Nozick, Rawls) ;) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Implications for optics WAS: New Pentax digital SLR
Wednesday, December 12, 2001, 4:19:13 AM, Mark wrote: MC Thanks Frantisek. I'll definitely look into those - they have to be MC shorter than 24mm to work , but now that you mention it, I think John Shaw MC talks about those in one of his books. MC - MCC There is plenty such lenses on fixed-lens 8mm movie cameras. I don't think the zooms would work, though. If you can find a cheap old 8mm with fixed lens (I am sure some are collector items now g), you could simply tear it apart to get the lens. If you are lucky tell us if it works Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Flash question...
t Basically the calculation is the same, the difference is that the t distance is from flash to bounce point to subject. The X factor is how t high the ceiling is, so I don't think there's any rule we can give you. Is that true? The normal calculations works for spread of radiation, according to the square root rule (right in English?). Spread from point source. But bounce flash is so nice because it isn't a point source. Once it hits the ceiling, it radiates like from a plane source, for which the formula doesn't work (it doesn't diminish with the square root of distance). That's why bounced flash looks so natural, too. I remember seeing some formula, but there would be much more error than in the simple direct-flash formula. For bounce, flashmeter or auto/ttl metering is imho best. Good light, Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Re: Australians
I think Dave just pretty much put the nail in the whole argument there...case closed. Norm dave o'brien wrote: On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Tom Rittenhouse wrote: I probably should refrain from commenting in this thread, but when have I ever shown good sense? Here in the US the statistics show when states have enacted shall issue concealed carry laws the violent crime rate goes down dramatically. A fact the anti-gun people try to cover up. Does that mean that the violent crime statistics actually begin to approach those of countries without mass gun ownership? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Shipping a camera abroad (was LX hunting)
John wrote: An lost/damaged shipment rate of 1 in 20 is extremely common amongst all the major carriers operating from the USA. Our shipping companies may be the last bastion of the old we don't give a s**t method of quality control. My reply: This is just not acceptable today. Why should we expect a poor service at a high cost? Malcolm - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Cleanin non-removable screens
LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Mark Please elaborate on this a little. What made you come to this conclusion? Experience :( I've did that myself to a focusing screen once. Which part of the cleaning process did I kill the screen with. I was in fact fairly confident that if I could get the darn thing out of there I could clean it, but I wasn't sure so I prepaired for the worst. :)) Perhaps you can clean it if you get it out, but every focusing screen I've seen that looked as you describe was beyond my ability to clean up. If you find something that works I'd like to hear about it, though. Could be useful in the future. Also, if this is the case, does anyone know how I can get an ME Super SE screen? (the one with the diagonal split prism) I buy organ donor cameras on eBay. -- 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: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
I've never had any problems running film through the X-rays here (carry on), I wouldn't worry about it... Norm LeviL wrote: The place I will have to get through an X-ray is in Germany. I assume thay have film certified equipment too, but it is worth a try. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Packing film in clear bags for hand searching at airports
Are these easily available?? Norm Paul Stenquist wrote: Why not get some lead bags? snip - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Packing film in clear bags for hand searching at airports
Most camera stores have them. Norman Baugher wrote: Are these easily available?? Norm Paul Stenquist wrote: Why not get some lead bags? snip - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 .
FA 135/2.8 replacement coming?
Anyone have any info on a replacement for the FA 135/2.8 (end of production 2000)? Is this just a poor selling focal length, or is there something even better coming? (a Limited or FA* replacement perhaps?) Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay
If there's one thing I've learned it's that there are degrees of hopelessly and horrible, and as many definitions of them as there are sets of eyes in the world. In fact, I've seen pictures from hopelessly soft lenses with horrible bokeh hanging on gallery walls. It's enough to make me wonder if I am seeing what other people see when they look at the same pictures. I don't see the results from my FA*85mm f/1.4 as hopelessly soft with horrible bokeh. Maybe somebody dropped yours on the floor before you bought it and, though there were no signs of external damage, perhaps something was knocked out of alignment internally. You should have tried to exchange it as soon as you noticed these problems. It's not an inexpensive lens and you may have been thrilled and delighted by the replacement. Len --- -Original Message- From: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 2:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay At least mine was hopelessly soft at wide open near infinity. Brokeh was horrible at near infinity too. regards, Alan Chan - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 suggestion--85/1.4
Brian W. wrote: I enjoyed the linked photos, but I still can't decide to sell an excellent lens and buy another excellent (lighter, but shorter?) lens, especially if the focal length is significantly shorter than the length (and what length is that?) that works for me. I'm sorta-kinda leaning towards self-enablement. Should somebody stop me? Brian, Why not get the smaller, lighter, cheaper ($200) 100/3.5 macro for hiking and simply leave the 85/1.4 at home? The 85mm is really too good to sell--a wonderful lens, one of Pentax's best. And a slightly longer macro would serve for both landscape details and closeup work. With lenses, it's always cheaper to keep her. --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: OT: Re: Australians
Well said. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Bob Blakely wrote: I've tried to stay out of this OT thread Me too, but Each year, approximately 150,000 folks are killed by physician and pharmaceutical error. Most of these folks were not involved in any life or limb threatening situation. This dwarfs folks killed in automobiles ~50,000 and those killed by firearms ~20,000. Presented for perspective... The BBC reckons 30,000 killed, 90,000 injured in the USA each year. Last year the figure for England and Wales was 42 killed. Corrected for population we'd probably be looking at about 6000 more dead peaple a year if we had your gun laws. But think; 30,000 people dead! It strikes me that America has gone to war and shaken up its entire society for 1/10th of that number of people killed in New York. You can't dismiss 30,000 or even 20,000 people as 'perspective'! But lighten up please, don't take this gun thing too seriously guys. The thing is it's YOUR country and if you want guns then you can vote to have them. However the UK and Australia are also democratic countries and by and large we feel safer the way we are. Honest, we're happy, we don't feel oppressed :-) Chris -- Dr Chris Stoddart: Unix SysAdmin, Department of Computer Science, Sheffield University, U.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: My View
In a message dated 13/12/01 03:42:58 GMT Standard Time, Mike writes: To no one in particular: I find discussion of gun issues extremely offensive. If this gun control / gun rights discussion continues, I'll have to be leaving the PDML. It has NOTHING TO DO with Pentax or with photography. Nothing at all. Sorry to have upset you. It was going the way of the list a year or so ago. And you are right, of course. 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 .
Pentax vs Other teleconverters
Anyone have experience comparing image degradation of Pentax's A 1.4x-s and A 2x-s against their Kenko, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, etc. counterparts? Dan Scott [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: December PUG assignments - Buhler and Larson
Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote: Volleyball at the Pier - Steve Larson, USA I am wondering if the softness of the image is due to the lens. I am not familiar with your lens. I'd like to give it a try :-) That is the only thing I dislike about the image. Some people would want more outside the two players to be seen. Some may even want the water. This would, in my opinion, detract from the two players, the team at work. This may be because of my familiarity with playing beach volleyball. This brings back the whole aspect of the game - unfortunately the three people I used to play with have left this area. Something I miss terribly. So, I guess I am saying that this shot talks to me. I can see the individual form of the digger/setter. That has always intrigued me how the arms and hands of all the diggers/setters I have seen seem to be different. I can read the other player anticipating what he is going to do and make it all work out for the team. I can go on, but you get where I am going with this. Other than the softness, and not knowing the conditions and actual colors of the scene, this is a good shot. Well done. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida in New York, New York Hi César, Thanks for the comments. I`m glad you liked it as an action shot. The 1000mm I`m still trying to figure out, in the pic I think the focus was a little too much in the foreground, I should have added another stop maybe, because I was just about at close focus (100 ft.) with the pic. I don`t know where the weird color of the whole pic came from, probably the scanner. The softness I have to work out with different shutter release method and/or tripod. It sounds like you really enjoy beach volleyball César, my wife played a lot too. Thanks again for taking time to comment. 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: Packing film in clear bags for hand searching at airports
I fly frequently, and I always take my cameras and a load of film. I've been using lead bags for 25 years and have never had a problem. I frequently include a few rolls of T-Max 3200. The bag is always run through the carry on x-ray. I've never seen a touch of fogging. And when I've had an opportunity to see the screen image, the lead bag is always totally opaque. Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Why not get some lead bags? snip I am not sure it is sucha good idea. First of all NEVER use it in a checked bag. They will just boost the x-ray. Second I am not sure it works 100% but I might be wrong on this. Thirdly they might be able to boost the xray on the carry on thingies. But I guess that is an approach. As far as availability I thin I saw them at bhphoto or adorama. Also as far as ziplock bags and experiences. I will be flying a lot in the next two days. I will let you know how it went around christmas. L Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Mick Maguire wrote: Is this lens any good? what's it best suited for (portraiture etc)? Is it a reasonable buy at $165? any thoughts / opinions anybody? Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? Regards, /\/\ick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: pentax-discuss-digest V1 #1737
In a message dated 13/12/01 13:39:12 GMT Standard Time, Malcolm writes: John wrote: An lost/damaged shipment rate of 1 in 20 is extremely common amongst all the major carriers operating from the USA. Our shipping companies may be the last bastion of the old we don't give a s**t method of quality control. My reply: This is just not acceptable today. Why should we expect a poor service at a high cost? I was rather surprised at this figure, but I suppose that John was speaking of couriers operating from USA. I think when we used Parcelfarce (UK Post Office courier arm) the delays were interminable, packages were claimed as lost then turned up when PF couldn't trace. By all accounts, they have improved, somewhat. I think in 3 years of importing, we might have had one parcel slightly damaged. This is as much to do with the skills of the packers as the bloody-mindedness of the shipping agent. OTOH, I do agree very much that the level of service received often does not warrant the expense involved. And I understand both UPS and Fedex just raised their prices by 3.5%. 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: Night Photo of Earth
Aren't you the same guy that mounted his big tele lens to get a shot of the full moon and then tried to back up a few steps to make it fit in the frame? Bill, KG4LOV [EMAIL PROTECTED] I tried to take one like that once, but couldn't get my tripod to go high enough girn. Ciao, graywolf - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Apology
No worries, Mike. It baffles me why a light hearted thread about the Croc Hunter and his endorsement of the Pentax brand came to be used as a soapbox by gun enthusiasts, who believe that our (Australia's) government oppresses us by prohibiting the unjustified ownership of killing implements. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey everybody, I apologize for my intemperate post yesterday objecting to the gun thread and threatening to leave. I should have thought that one over before hitting Send. Sorry! --Mike - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
On Thursday, December 13, 2001, at 08:46 AM, Mick Maguire wrote: Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? I'm not ignoring you, I just don't have one and have never used one. ;) Why don't you buy a nice SMC-A* 200mm f2.8? Now THAT is a nice lens. -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: Packing film in clear bags for hand searching at airports
On Thursday, December 13, 2001, at 07:28 AM, Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Why not get some lead bags? snip I am not sure it is sucha good idea. First of all NEVER use it in a checked bag. They will just boost the x-ray. Second I am not sure it works 100% but I might be wrong on this. Thirdly they might be able to boost the xray on the carry on thingies. Levi is right -- DO NOT PUT A LEAD BAG IN YOUR CHECKED LUGGAGE. DO NOT PUT ANY FILM AT ALL IN YOUR CHECKED LUGGAGE, PACKED IN ANY WAY. The new automated scanners have an automated recognition system where they fire X-rays at your checked bags and determine what objects are inside. If an object seems suspicious to the scanner, it keeps firing X-rays at it until it determines the content. Unfortunately, metal film cassettes are suspicious, lead bags are more suspicious, and by the time the scanner determines oh, those are just rolls of film, your film is all fogged. Once more for the cheap seats: NEVER PUT FILM IN YOUR CHECKED LUGGAGE. EVER. NO MATTER WHAT. We do sell lead bags over here, because people are stupid and want them anyways. Seriously. Everyone who buys one has heard this speech from me, and every single person who has bought one has dismissed me as paranoid. These scanners, by the way, are not at every airport, but the FAA is not letting us in on which airports have them, for obvious security reasons. If I'm remembering right, the problem came to light when a BBC film crew returned from some far-flung photographic expedition and found all of their footage had been fogged by Heathrow. -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: (OT) Australians
How the hell would Kent know whether or not the good citizens of sunny Brighton, UK, were apt at gunplay? Or not? There is surely no reason to disparage a whole community just because of their relative innocence of killing machines. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Kent Gittings [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's because anybody in your neighborhood with a gun WOULD be a menace to others simply because they wouldn't be very good at handling it. But then again considering the alcohol consumption rate in the countries we've mentioned it's probably a good idea that they don't have guns around. Kent Gittings - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Re: Australians
I'm trying to figure out what you mean by version of for civilians. If you mean a non military version you are sort of correct. While the several versions of the full auto M16 don't have a civilian version there are plenty of semi-auto versions under other names produced by Armalite, Clot and others. Bushmaster even sells a bullpup version that takes all the same critical parts. And don't forget the semi-auto H-Bar precision target model. It still takes 20-40 round M16 magazines. On the subject of full-auto Class 3 weapons any law-biding, non-felony convicted American can get just about any full auto military firearm as long as you want to go through the background checks and pay all the money involve. Also the local police chief/sheriff where you reside has to approve and sign off that he will allow it to be stored in his jurisdiction. Some will and some won't. Getting in good with the local police is a good start before hand. I have friends who have M-60s, WWI/II British Vickers, Browning .30 Cal air and water-cooled, and German MG-34 light and medium machineguns. ATF and the local police know exactly where any legally owned full auto weapon is. The felony for an illegal one or even the parts to convert a semi-auto to full auto is a term from 10-20 years and only in rare cases do they impose less than 15 years. The husband of one of my former fellow employees owns a full military M-16. It was fine up here but when he moved to a new brokerage house and they sent him to North Carolina the local sheriff didn't want no Yankee owned machinegun in his county even though several of his local friends legally had some. So my friend had to store in it a secure location outside that county. By the time he evolved into a local good ol' boy he got sent back up to the Washington DC area and it didn't matter. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bob Blakely Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Re: Australians I've tried to stay out of this OT thread, but the level of ignorance and of and paucity of rational thought is seriously getting to me. As to one previous poster who stated that the NRA produced ads with erroneous data concerning gun control in Australia, there was one such show 1/2 hour in length which contained an interview with Keith Tidswell of Australia's Sporting Shooters Association. the Australian government lodged an official complaint with the NRA demanding that they pull this misleading video. The NRA said, basically, Screw you! We've researched the figures presented by Mr. Tidswell using your governments information and found them to be true. The interview is still available on the NRA site. As to your amazement that: After the various massacres that have occurred (Dunblane, Port Arthur, Columbine) it amazes me to think that anyone anywhere still believes it's Ok for ordinary citizens to ordinarily possess weapons not necessary to their trade (e.g. farmers with anti-vermin weapons, not M16's, AK47's or even M60's!). 1.No ordinary citizen of the United States has ever owned an M16's, AK47's or even M60's. Non fully automatic versions of M16's, AK47's are available in most states. M60's are not available. There is no version for civilians. I prefer the old M1 from WWII and the M1A (Civilian version of the M14) for national matches (Civilian Marksmanship Program, created by the U.S. Congress, http://www.odcmp.com/about_us.htm) - and for hunting. The felt recoil of a semi-automatic rifle is about half that of a bolt action version. Recoil on the M1A is also significantly reduced further by the flash suppressor. 2.Considering the fact that such aberrations as Dunblane, Port Arthur, Columbine are exceedingly rare, and that all such deaths over recorded history don't even begin to compare with the (comparable ages) death toll from automobiles, or swimming pools, cleaning chemicals under the sink or bicycles, etc. firearms are a comparatively safe household item. I say house hold item because there is something like 250 million firearms owned by 80 million civilians in approximately 40 million families in the US. Each year, approximately 150,000 folks are killed by physician and pharmaceutical error. Most of these folks were not involved in any life or limb threatening situation. This dwarfs folks killed in automobiles ~50,000 and those killed by firearms ~20,000. Presented for perspective... From: John Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've stayed out of this one so far, but as a naturalised Australian born in England I now gotta jump in! Kent, the presumption of innocence also applies in both England and Australia - the rule is that, in a jury trial, the jury must be satisfied 'beyond reasonable doubt' of the guilt of the accused. It is only recently that some offences can be tried with a majority verdict rule applying, also. Incidentally, since the Americas were settled
RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
At 21:46 13/12/01, you wrote: Hi Mick I missed your earlier post in all the noise. :-) My 135/2.8 F series lens isn't used anywhere near enough. I use it as a short telephoto, mainly shooting horse racing, and mainly at night. I have no complaints with the lens at all. I haven't really used it for much portraiture, mainly because I really don't do any portraiture, so I won't comment on that aspect. As a short tele it works fine. I paid $225 AUD for mine, which at the time was about equivalent with what you can get it for. I was happy with the price and have been happy with the lens. Now that you've made me think about the lens I'll probably take it to the trots tomorrow night and use it fr the night. :-) One more thing. A year or so (maybe a couple of years ago) there was a discussion about 135mm lenses on the mailing list. IIRC someone posted, buggered if I can remember whom, that the 135mm lenses are probably the easiest for lens makers to get right. There seems to be less bad ones of any manufacturer than any other focal length. Or something like that. :-) Cheers Mick Maguire wrote: Is this lens any good? what's it best suited for (portraiture etc)? Is it a reasonable buy at $165? any thoughts / opinions anybody? Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? Regards, /\/\ick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . Jon Relax! Take life as it comes, you can't chase the sun, you can't race the wind - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Apology
Mike Johnston wrote: [An apology for an allegedly intemperate post, snipped] Hey, don't sweat it, Mike. After all, when intemperate posts are outlawed, only outlaws will be making intemperate posts. And THEN what will we all do? VBG Bill Peifer (proud owner of a copy of The Federalist Papers and a few small-caliber arms, and NOT feeling safer about living under New York's restrictive gun registration laws -- now donning his asbestos suit and promising no more posts on this off-topic) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: opinions
Courtesy of the Writer's Almanac: It's the birthday of the German poet (Christian Johann) Heinrich Heine, born in Düsseldorf, Prussia (1797). He is most famous for his poems, such as The Lorelei, which were set to music by Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Brahms, and other German Romantic composers. He wrote: People in those old times had convictions; we moderns have only opinions. And it needs more than a mere opinion to erect a Gothic cathedral. We need fewer opinions and more good photography. Dan -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://danmatyola.com Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT!Re: Packing film in clear bags for hand searching at airports
Paul Stenquist wrote: I fly frequently, and I always take my cameras and a load of film. I've been using lead bags for 25 years and have never had a problem. I frequently include a few rolls of T-Max 3200. The bag is always run through the carry on x-ray. I've never seen a touch of fogging. And when I've had an opportunity to see the screen image, the lead bag is always totally opaque. So, where is the security in this? m - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Thanks John :) I was getting paranoid at the silence... I too am an amateur and am working on a tight budget so cant afford the likes of the limited lenses, so I really tend to look at the bargain end of the spectrum. Perhaps I should break out my old screw mount equipment LOL Regards, /\/\ick... -Original Message- From: Karasch,John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 9:27 AM To: 'Mick Maguire ' Subject: RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8 I've had a 135 2.8 for more than 10 years, used mostly for portraits. It may not be the perfect lense for that purpose, but it hasn't disappointed this amateur photographer. However, I don't have an 85mm or 77 Limited to compare it against. A new 135 is at least $320, so $165 might be okay for a lense in good condition. John -Original Message- From: Mick Maguire To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/13/01 9:46 PM Subject: RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8 Mick Maguire wrote: Is this lens any good? what's it best suited for (portraiture etc)? Is it a reasonable buy at $165? any thoughts / opinions anybody? Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? Regards, /\/\ick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Packing film in clear bags for hand searching at airports
I know you are right about lead bags in checked luggage, but how about in carry-ons? When I have done this, rarely and mostly years ago, the security person sees the bag pn the screen and usually then hand inspects it, whereas when I've asked for hand inpection I've had a bigger hassle. Aaron Reynolds wrote: I am not sure it is sucha good idea. First of all NEVER use it in a checked bag. They will just boost the x-ray. Second I am not sure it works 100% but I might be wrong on this. Thirdly they might be able to boost the xray on the carry on thingies. Levi is right -- DO NOT PUT A LEAD BAG IN YOUR CHECKED LUGGAGE. DO NOT PUT ANY FILM AT ALL IN YOUR CHECKED LUGGAGE, PACKED IN ANY WAY. The new automated scanners have an automated recognition system where they fire X-rays at your checked bags and determine what objects are inside. If an object seems suspicious to the scanner, it keeps firing X-rays at it until it determines the content. Unfortunately, metal film cassettes are suspicious, lead bags are more suspicious, and by the time the scanner determines oh, those are just rolls of film, your film is all fogged. Once more for the cheap seats: NEVER PUT FILM IN YOUR CHECKED LUGGAGE. EVER. NO MATTER WHAT. We do sell lead bags over here, because people are stupid and want them anyways. Seriously. Everyone who buys one has heard this speech from me, and every single person who has bought one has dismissed me as paranoid. These scanners, by the way, are not at every airport, but the FAA is not letting us in on which airports have them, for obvious security reasons. If I'm remembering right, the problem came to light when a BBC film crew returned from some far-flung photographic expedition and found all of their footage had been fogged by Heathrow. -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://danmatyola.com Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399 - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Thanks John, I'm sorely tempted by this lens, but it's probably just itchy fingers for some new gear. :) Regards, /\/\ick... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jon Hope Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 9:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8 At 21:46 13/12/01, you wrote: Hi Mick I missed your earlier post in all the noise. :-) My 135/2.8 F series lens isn't used anywhere near enough. I use it as a short telephoto, mainly shooting horse racing, and mainly at night. I have no complaints with the lens at all. I haven't really used it for much portraiture, mainly because I really don't do any portraiture, so I won't comment on that aspect. As a short tele it works fine. I paid $225 AUD for mine, which at the time was about equivalent with what you can get it for. I was happy with the price and have been happy with the lens. Now that you've made me think about the lens I'll probably take it to the trots tomorrow night and use it fr the night. :-) One more thing. A year or so (maybe a couple of years ago) there was a discussion about 135mm lenses on the mailing list. IIRC someone posted, buggered if I can remember whom, that the 135mm lenses are probably the easiest for lens makers to get right. There seems to be less bad ones of any manufacturer than any other focal length. Or something like that. :-) Cheers Mick Maguire wrote: Is this lens any good? what's it best suited for (portraiture etc)? Is it a reasonable buy at $165? any thoughts / opinions anybody? Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? Regards, /\/\ick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . Jon Relax! Take life as it comes, you can't chase the sun, you can't race the wind - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Sorry for mis-spelling your name Jon. :-/ Regards, /\/\ick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Re: Australians
The previous poster was me, and I take exception to your reference to the level of ignorance and of and paucity of rational thought (sic). FYI have a look at: http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/03/24/p7s2.htm and http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issuebriefs/australia.asp as well as http://www.salon.com/politics2000/feature/2000/04/03/nra/ where the NRA lies are disproved. Or do as I did and type Australia+NRA into your favourite search engine. There are many things that Australia can learn from the United States. How to manage firearm ownership is not one of them, Australia's attorney general, Daryl Williams said in 2000. BTW, Keith Tidswell is a stooge of the NRA, thus there is no journalistic legitimacy in their interview of him. HAR! Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've tried to stay out of this OT thread, but the level of ignorance and of and paucity of rational thought is seriously getting to me. As to one previous poster who stated that the NRA produced ads with erroneous data concerning gun control in Australia, there was one such show 1/2 hour in length which contained an interview with Keith Tidswell of Australia's Sporting Shooters Association. the Australian government lodged an official complaint with the NRA demanding that they pull this misleading video. The NRA said, basically, Screw you! We've researched the figures presented by Mr. Tidswell using your governments information and found them to be true. The interview is still available on the NRA site. (snip) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: Re: OT posts
Kent Gittings wrote: Clot Bullseye! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Apology
ROTFL Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Peifer, William [OCDUS] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) Hey, don't sweat it, Mike. After all, when intemperate posts are outlawed, only outlaws will be making intemperate posts. (snip) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Lightmeter for Yashica-Mat
On 13 Dec 2001 at 7:33, David Brooks wrote: All this talk about spot meters has me now wondering what to get for use with Dad's Yashica-Mat camera.This model does not have a built in light meter and the ancient Sekonic he had i'm not sure is still acurate. Can any one recommend something newer(his is about 30 years old,no model number on it) I'd assume i should be looking for an incedent type or would it be advisable to get an all round one incase i do any indoor available light work. Price is iffy as i'm trying to save up for an MZ-5n and pay off the D1 loan so a meter in thr range of say:: $125 to 175 USd would help. Hi Dave, The little Gossen Luna-Pro Digital/Sixtomat and Sekonic 308B come in at around this price range on eBay. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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 .
RE: OT: Re: Australians
Not really. To be honest it just means the criminals are more careful and commit less crimes as a result. The guns in illegal hands are still there. Not to mention any competent person in the world with a decent milling machine and lathe could turn out serviceable guns as long as they could get the stock to machine it from. It's not possible to uninvent anything whether it is a weapon or a camera. So lets get back to photography. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of dave o'brien Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Re: Australians On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Tom Rittenhouse wrote: I probably should refrain from commenting in this thread, but when have I ever shown good sense? Here in the US the statistics show when states have enacted shall issue concealed carry laws the violent crime rate goes down dramatically. A fact the anti-gun people try to cover up. Does that mean that the violent crime statistics actually begin to approach those of countries without mass gun ownership? dave - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.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: Flash question...
On 13 Dec 2001 at 0:22, Frantisek Vlcek wrote: I remember seeing some formula, but there would be much more error than in the simple direct-flash formula. For bounce, flashmeter or auto/ttl metering is imho best. And the use of TTL or Flash meters also compensates for the unpredictable reflectivity of the bounce surface. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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 .
Re: FA 135/2.8 replacement coming?
Dan wrote: Anyone have any info on a replacement for the FA 135/2.8 (end of production 2000)? It exist. It may not reach the market. Is this just a poor selling focal length, or is there something even better coming? (a Limited or FA* replacement perhaps?) It is a poor selling focal length so the new version may not be released. My understanding of this issue was that the new FA 135/2.8 was unlikely to get the green light. 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: Apology
That's OK Mike. We are all probably just as sorry for bringing it up in the first place. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Johnston Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Apology Hey everybody, I apologize for my intemperate post yesterday objecting to the gun thread and threatening to leave. I should have thought that one over before hitting Send. Sorry! --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.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: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay
When did you get back? Nice to see you here. tv Fred wrote: - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Cleanin non-removable screens
There is actually a screw that holds the frame in place under the foam mirror bumper. Lots-o-luck finding that SE screen, if you find a source for them let me know, I would like a couple myself Ciao, graywolf - Original Message - From: LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:25 AM Subject: Re: Cleanin non-removable screens Hello Mark Please elaborate on this a little. What made you come to this conclusion? Which part of the cleaning process did I kill the screen with. I was in fact fairly confident that if I could get the darn thing out of there I could clean it, but I wasn't sure so I prepaired for the worst. :)) thx Also, if this is the case, does anyone know how I can get an ME Super SE screen? (the one with the diagonal split prism) L You're going to have to replace the screen, I'm afraid. - -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - - Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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: Re: OT posts
The unfortunate part about mistyping a word is when it is still a valid word your spell checker will pass it right by. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of mike wilson Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Re: OT posts Kent Gittings wrote: Clot Bullseye! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.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: Lightmeter for Yashica-Mat
Why don't you give dad's old meter a try first? If it works at all it is probable pretty accurate. If it isn't then you can think about replacing it. If you do, I suggest spending a little bit more than you are thinking of and getting something a little more versatile. The Sekonic L-308 b (or b II) that Aaron and I like often can be had for about $200 used and gives you flash metering capability as well as being pocket sized and using one AA battery for power. About the best meter for hot lights and incident metering is the Sekonic Studio Deluxe meter in its various guises. The current one is the L-398 I believe, previously it was called the L-28, and long ago it was the Norwood Director. It has probably been in production longer than any other meter, there must be a reason. Usually sells used for about what you are wanting to pay, an L-28 can sometimes be found for $50 or so. They don't use batteries at all. I've owned two of them over the years. Others will recommend other brands. I have no experience with them, my Sekonics have served me well over the years. Before the Sekonics I used a Weston Master but those are more collector's items than users today. Ciao, graywolf - Original Message - From: David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:33 AM Subject: Lightmeter for Yashica-Mat All this talk about spot meters has me now wondering what to get for use with Dad's Yashica-Mat camera.This model does not have a built in light meter and the ancient Sekonic he had i'm not sure is still acurate. Can any one recommend something newer(his is about 30 years old,no model number on it) I'd assume i should be looking for an incedent type or would it be advisable to get an all round one incase i do any indoor available light work. Price is iffy as i'm trying to save up for an MZ-5n and pay off the D1 loan so a meter in thr range of say:: $125 to 175 USd would help. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Night Photo of Earth
Yah, and the lens was too long to get a good shot or the cliff dwelling as I went by. Sometimes you can't win for losing. Ciao, graywolf - Original Message - From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Night Photo of Earth Aren't you the same guy that mounted his big tele lens to get a shot of the full moon and then tried to back up a few steps to make it fit in the frame? I tried to take one like that once, but couldn't get my tripod to go high enough girn. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: FA 135/2.8 replacement coming?
In a message dated 13/12/01 15:14:11 GMT Standard Time, Paal writes: Re: FA 135/2.8 replacement coming? Dan wrote: Anyone have any info on a replacement for the FA 135/2.8 (end of production 2000)? It exist. It may not reach the market. Is this just a poor selling focal length, or is there something even better coming? (a Limited or FA* replacement perhaps?) It is a poor selling focal length so the new version may not be released. My understanding of this issue was that the new FA 135/2.8 was unlikely to get the green light. Howzabout an FA 135mm F1.8? That would glean Pentax some much needed limelight. Make it a DC lens, like the Nikkor. Kind regards from sunny Brighton, soon Kagoshima 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 .
MZ-S Data imprinting (WAS: RE: MZ-S Film-rewind Problem) - SOLVED
To anyone that's still interested! Thank you to all the people who responded to this question - very useful. Experiment: I thought I'd give a quick update based on the test I finally got round to performing: 1. Set the MZ-S NOT to fully pull a completed film back into the canister 2. Take a manufacturer-rolled Delta400 (DX-coded) film and shoot 10 shots 3. Rewind the film 4. Using a dark bag, pull these shots out into a tank and expose - leave some leader on the unexposed part of the film 5. Shoot the rest of the film - but DON'T rewind it 6. Using a dark bag pull these shots straight out of the back of the camera into a tank and expose 7. Check the difference Rationale: The reason for running the test in this way is that it eliminates everything that I've had suggested as a possible cause of the imprinting problem i.e. DX/non-DX coding, film-type, film-batch etc. If the first part imprints and and the other doesn't you KNOW that it's being printed on the rewind - there are no more variables (except the shape of the leader - I can't think that this has anything to do with anything - particularly as others a bulk loading without error). Results: Sure enough, all those people who stated that the data imprinting is done on the rewind were bang on the money. It was the failed rewind that was the problem NOT the failed imprint. Conclusion: Dodgy canisters? Not sure - was using plastic Jessops cannisters and someone did say they'd seen problems with them sticking. Have now run a dozen or so steel canisters from bulk without a problem. I will run some more tests on this as it may just be that I am being much more careful now with rolling and loading ;-) Footnote: I am a bit disappointed that Pentax misguided me (I deliberately prodded around the topic with their UK 'expert' and he ASSURED me that they imprinting was done on shot - not rewind.) However, I would like to stop sounding moaning for 2 seconds to say how much I LOVE the MZ-S - it is an absolute joy to use (although I am still learning to get the best out of it) - a friend of mine has recently got a Dynax7 (too many menus!!!) so I'll be intrigued to do some comparison. I know it's one loads of awards but I like the ergonomics of the MZ-S - SOMEONE HAS CLEARLY THOUGHT ABOUT SOMEONE QUITE IMPORTANT - THE USER! This may sound obvious but it is all too rare. Cheers P. Paul Wilkinson ELA Digital Content Service Centre of Excellence 1 Kingsway, London DDI: +44 (0) 207 844 7935 Mob: +44 (0) 7973 489 353 This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Mick Maguire wrote: Mick Maguire wrote: Is this lens any good? what's it best suited for (portraiture etc)? Is it a reasonable buy at $165? any thoughts / opinions anybody? Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? Well, sorry. I have the FA version. It's optically fantastic, I'd say it's a limited lens in a cheaper barrel. The focusing ring kind of sucks, but otheriwise it's awesome. I think it's optically identical to the F, and I think $165 would be a very good price. 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: 77/18 Ltd.vs. FA* 85/1.4(Was Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF onE-bay)
Brian Walsh wrote: At portrait distances (say 4 to 6 feet) or at mid-range say 10 feet), just how different is the angle of view of the subject lenses? I've seen test reports that suggest that the 77 is actually a bit longer than that, and the 85 is not quite that (at least close in, due to the IF), so they seem like they might be virtually identical in focal length at such focus distances. Could be, but they seem a little different to me. Not a huge difference, surely. I enjoyed the linked photos, but I still can't decide to sell an excellent lens and buy another excellent (lighter, but shorter?) lens, especially if the focal length is significantly shorter than the length (and what length is that?) that works for me. I'm sorta-kinda leaning towards self-enablement. Should somebody stop me? If you're willing to schlep it around, I'd stick with the 85mm. Size is it's main drawback. 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: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
From: Joseph Tainter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] The new thing is that ever since September I have always been denied hand inspection of film. The only ones they will inspect are when I am carrying ASA 3200. Not like before when I could claim that it is within the guidelines to have it inspected by hand. Cesar Matamoros II Panama City, Florida in Baltimore, Maryland In the U.S., FAA regulation still gives you the right to request hand inspection. The problem is in the rapid turnover of low-wage workers in screening jobs. They often don't know this. Overseas - forget it. No hand inspections anywhere I've been (about 20 countries). Joe Joe, I have looked but have not found this in print or printable form. It does not effect me one my latest trips where the film will only pass through a machine twice. But I do have trips where there are multiple scannings and this is where my concern lies. Can you point me in the direction where I can print this out? Thanks, César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida in New York City - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Flash question...
Frantisek Vlcek wrote: t Basically the calculation is the same, the difference is that the t distance is from flash to bounce point to subject. The X factor is how t high the ceiling is, so I don't think there's any rule we can give you. Is that true? The normal calculations works for spread of radiation, according to the square root rule (right in English?). Spread from point source. But bounce flash is so nice because it isn't a point source. Once it hits the ceiling, it radiates like from a plane source, for which the formula doesn't work (it doesn't diminish with the square root of distance). That's why bounced flash looks so natural, too. I was under the impression the rays just bounced off the plane at the angle they came in at (angle of incidence?). The bounce doesn't spread them out any more, though I guess a stucco style ceiling might do a little of that. The light *is* more spread out because it's traveling farther. I don't think the results look nicer because of the diffusion, they look nicer because of the angle. They still look like point source lighting shots, it's just that the point is effectively shifted somewhere over their heads. In any event, the calculation works in practice. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax SMC-FA* 85mm/1.4 IF on E-bay
Right. Bill Owens wrote: Lees-McRae College. Bill, KG4LOV [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: Rangefinder shooting
Isaac Crawford wrote: Welcome to the wonderful world of rangefinder photography! At some point you'll have to ignore the focusing patch and start to zone focus (Use the Force Luke!). Ack! I do that now with slr's in dark rooms... After some tests, I've found that my acceptable DOF with a 50mm lens is around 6 feet deep at f8, focused around 6 feet (If I remember correctly, its been a while since I've shot like this...). That would kind of screw me with a 75/1.4 at 1.4... Thanks for your insights. 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: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
- Original Message - From: LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:25 AM Subject: RE: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film In the U.S., FAA regulation still gives you the right to request hand inspection. The problem is in the rapid turnover of low-wage workers in screening jobs. They often don't know this. Just to be nit-picking, I don't believe that it is a right. The FAA has guidelines that do allow handchecking, but they are free at any time to suspend those guidelines. I also believe that it is left to the discretion of the checker as to if they will allow it or not. My advise is to call ahead of time and arrange a hand check. Make it as easy as possible for them and maybe they'll cooperate more... 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 .
Re: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
- Original Message - From: Ken Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 1:03 AM Subject: Re: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film Print this out and use this next time. It's their own regulations. THIS DATA CURRENT AS OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER DATED SEPTEMBER 28, 2001 14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 108 SNIP From what I've heard from customers, the checkers put everything through the xray. This might only happen in the DC area where I am... Still, I don't really mind our security standards rising to the rest of the world's... 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 .
Re: OT: Re: Australians
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html shows gun death statistics for many countries. It is interesting to note that Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada have very high suicide rates despite restrictive laws about gun ownership. BTW it looks like 95+% of the hits for gun deaths are antigun related. Ciao, graywolf - Original Message - From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:02 AM Subject: Re: OT: Re: Australians On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Bob Blakely wrote: I've tried to stay out of this OT thread Me too, but Each year, approximately 150,000 folks are killed by physician and pharmaceutical error. Most of these folks were not involved in any life or limb threatening situation. This dwarfs folks killed in automobiles ~50,000 and those killed by firearms ~20,000. Presented for perspective... The BBC reckons 30,000 killed, 90,000 injured in the USA each year. Last year the figure for England and Wales was 42 killed. Corrected for population we'd probably be looking at about 6000 more dead peaple a year if we had your gun laws. But think; 30,000 people dead! It strikes me that America has gone to war and shaken up its entire society for 1/10th of that number of people killed in New York. You can't dismiss 30,000 or even 20,000 people as 'perspective'! But lighten up please, don't take this gun thing too seriously guys. The thing is it's YOUR country and if you want guns then you can vote to have them. However the UK and Australia are also democratic countries and by and large we feel safer the way we are. Honest, we're happy, we don't feel oppressed :-) Chris -- Dr Chris Stoddart: Unix SysAdmin, Department of Computer Science, Sheffield University, U.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 . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Ignoring Mick
Thanks Mike, I did look at Stan's site, but unfortunately there wasn't anything much on that particular lens there. Tom has since convinced me to buy it though :) Regards, /\/\ick... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Johnston Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 11:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Ignoring Mick Is it true that *nobody* on this list has an opinion on this lens?? Or are you all just ignoring me? I'm ignoring you because I don't have anything to say about the lens you're asking about. Not meaning to be rude. Have you checked Stan Halpin's lens comment site? That's where most of our collective wisdom about various lenses is archived. http://www.concentric.net/~smhalpin/ --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MZ-S Data imprinting (WAS: RE: MZ-S Film-rewind Problem) - SOLVED
paul, Thanks for the extensive test. From your results, I'm guessing that Mid-roll change will work with data imprinting because the body would know how many frames it skipped. If you used the old method -fire until the right frame (kept dark of course), would probably double imprint the first portion of the roll. I, too, love the MZ-S. It is a joy to use! Bruce Dayton Thursday, December 13, 2001, 7:17:04 AM, you wrote: pxwac To anyone that's still interested! pxwac Thank you to all the people who responded to this question - very useful. pxwac Experiment: pxwac I thought I'd give a quick update based on the test I finally got round to pxwac performing: pxwac 1. Set the MZ-S NOT to fully pull a completed film back into the canister pxwac 2. Take a manufacturer-rolled Delta400 (DX-coded) film and shoot 10 shots pxwac 3. Rewind the film pxwac 4. Using a dark bag, pull these shots out into a tank and expose - leave pxwac some leader on the unexposed part of the film pxwac 5. Shoot the rest of the film - but DON'T rewind it pxwac 6. Using a dark bag pull these shots straight out of the back of the pxwac camera into a tank and expose pxwac 7. Check the difference pxwac Rationale: pxwac The reason for running the test in this way is that it eliminates pxwac everything that I've had suggested as a possible cause of the imprinting pxwac problem i.e. DX/non-DX coding, film-type, film-batch etc. If the first pxwac part imprints and and the other doesn't you KNOW that it's being printed on pxwac the rewind - there are no more variables (except the shape of the leader - pxwac I can't think that this has anything to do with anything - particularly as pxwac others a bulk loading without error). pxwac Results: pxwac Sure enough, all those people who stated that the data imprinting is done pxwac on the rewind were bang on the money. It was the failed rewind that was pxwac the problem NOT the failed imprint. pxwac Conclusion: pxwac Dodgy canisters? Not sure - was using plastic Jessops cannisters and pxwac someone did say they'd seen problems with them sticking. Have now run a pxwac dozen or so steel canisters from bulk without a problem. I will run some pxwac more tests on this as it may just be that I am being much more careful now pxwac with rolling and loading ;-) pxwac Footnote: pxwac I am a bit disappointed that Pentax misguided me (I deliberately prodded pxwac around the topic with their UK 'expert' and he ASSURED me that they pxwac imprinting was done on shot - not rewind.) However, I would like to stop pxwac sounding moaning for 2 seconds to say how much I LOVE the MZ-S - it is an pxwac absolute joy to use (although I am still learning to get the best out of pxwac it) - a friend of mine has recently got a Dynax7 (too many menus!!!) so pxwac I'll be intrigued to do some comparison. I know it's one loads of awards pxwac but I like the ergonomics of the MZ-S - SOMEONE HAS CLEARLY THOUGHT ABOUT pxwac SOMEONE QUITE IMPORTANT - THE USER! This may sound obvious but it is pxwac all too rare. pxwac Cheers pxwac P. pxwac Paul Wilkinson pxwac ELA Digital Content Service Centre of Excellence pxwac 1 Kingsway, London pxwac DDI: +44 (0) 207 844 7935 pxwac Mob: +44 (0) 7973 489 353 pxwac This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain pxwac privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have pxwac received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the pxwac original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited. pxwac - pxwac This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, pxwac go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to pxwac 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: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Well, it looks like I have my Christmas present to myself now... I just hope it arrives before I head off back home to England next week. Regards, /\/\ick... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of tom Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 2:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8 Mick Maguire wrote: Thanks Tom... I can feel my fingers getting itchier by the minute You really should just do it. Think of it: you'd be the only person on pdml with the F version. You'd be a celebrity. Plus you'd have an excellent lens. BTW my ignoring comment was uttered in a tongue-in-cheek vein rather than anything else. I guess the trouble with speaking tongue-in-cheek is it can make you hard to understand! ;o) When speaking tongue-in-cheek, sometimes you get misunderstood, which can lead to reticence about doing it again. Please continue. And bite me. 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 . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Mike Johnston's Digital Photos ...
... arrived today, and I'll be giving them a good examination. My first reactions are mixed, with the print made from the Canon D30 getting a big thumbs down for a photo quality image. The prints made from the Pentax Optio 330 at first glance appear superior, although they are substantially smaller than the print made from the Canon. I'd say, without hesitation, that the Pentax certainly ~seems~ to be capable of producing a 5x7 print that's an acceptable alternative to that done by the average lab. Certainly the prints would be more than acceptable to the typical amateur photographer who is looking for family snaps, memories of important events, and the like. I like them for that purpose. Perhaps a good test of this assumption is to show the prints to a few friends who use inexpensive PS, lower-end SLRs, and digital cameras, and hear what they have to say. Nonetheless, I like those Optio happy snaps. More upon further examination. -- 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: screwmount 85mm
LeviL wrote: Thanks but I think I'll pass on that. E-bay usually has them for less anyway. I personally HATE converters. I used to use a Takumar 35mm. I almost killed my camera with removing and remounting the converter. Ah -- but the secret is to leave the adapter in the body and just accumulate scads of screwmount lenses instead of K's :^) Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [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: Apology
Mike wrote: Hey everybody, I apologize for my intemperate post yesterday objecting to the gun thread and threatening to leave. I should have thought that one over before hitting Send. Sorry! Ah - Good :^) IMHO, it is best to just let those occassional hot threads die off naturally. By exercising restraint in responses they generally fade away in a few days on their own unless there is a pile-on reaction. ... these things too shall pass away Pearls Before Swine c.'68 Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Mick wrote: Thanks John :) I was getting paranoid at the silence... I too am an amateur and am working on a tight budget so cant afford the likes of the limited lenses, so I really tend to look at the bargain end of the spectrum. Perhaps I should break out my old screw mount equipment LOL To really save the budget, just pick up a Pentax K-m42 adapter and dig out all those fine Takumars that you say you have! Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [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: Gun stocks
Collin wrote: Out of curiosity, how many of you long-lens-lovers use a gun stock for mounting and shooting those big beasts? Me! I do! But my long tele's are rather modest ones. My SMCK 400mm f5.6 has a bit too stiff of a focus for the riflestock approach, but my old Petri 400mm f6.3 stovepipe design is very light and slender and works very well that way. The old c.'63 Takumar 300mm f4 also does, despite its 3.5pound weight! Using TMZ makes for the ability to use very fast shutter speeds and greatly enhances the %age of successful shots. Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [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: FA 135/2.8 replacement coming?
Sounds good to me! Make it so. Dan Scott (cold, wet San Antonio) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter wrote: Howzabout an FA 135mm F1.8? That would glean Pentax some much needed limelight. Make it a DC lens, like the Nikkor. Kind regards from sunny Brighton, soon Kagoshima 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 .
Moisture
I was looking @ shooting today @ lunch, but it's misty -- with a little drizzle. How does one keep a lens free from this excess moisture? A hood is not always enough. Umbrella? Collin - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Motor Drive-A
I was looking @ one at a good price today @ lunch. ($50) BUT, I put batteries in it, put it on a super program (no lens attached, no film) but it won't fire. Won't do anything off-camera either. Switch on side alternated between red and green positions. What else should I check? CRB - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 Data imprinting (WAS: RE: MZ-S Film-rewind Problem) - SOLVED
This is why the MZ-S has the dial-in the first frame number feature. If it didn't and you used the conventional lens-cap-on, 1/6000th at f/22 technique, the original imprinting would be overwritten with the above data. Regards Jim Christien Bunting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for sharing. Worrysome that it imprints on rewind. What happens if you change the film using MRC ? Does it imprint there up to the last frame shot on that role ?? Does it continue when the role is reused ? Things to think about. Chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: FA 135/2.8 replacement coming?
That's a bummer. The FA 135/2.8 has very good comments wrt performance. Any idea how the replacement would have differed? Thanks, Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pål wrote: It is a poor selling focal length so the new version may not be released. My understanding of this issue was that the new FA 135/2.8 was unlikely to get the green light. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax SMC-F 135 f2.8
Jon Hope wrote: At 03:40 14/12/01, you wrote: Does that mean I am a celebrity? I already own the F series 135/2.8. H, nup, I gather not. LOL Can I have your autograph? 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: Moisture
Hi, Collin ... Don't worry about a little drizzle. Just go out and make some photographs. A lens hood is usually adequate, and if you're feeling particularly in need of some more protection, add a skylight filter. If the rain gets too bad, or if you want to keep the camera/lens out of the drizzle as much as possible, just put the camera under your coat or jacket, or duck into a doorway until it lets up. Drizzle and moisture won't hurt anything Collin Brendemuehl wrote: I was looking @ shooting today @ lunch, but it's misty -- with a little drizzle. How does one keep a lens free from this excess moisture? A hood is not always enough. Umbrella? -- 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: Gun stocks
Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Out of curiosity, how many of you long-lens-lovers use a gun stock for mounting and shooting those big beasts? Do you mean some kind of shoulder rest? A Pentax photo sniper? -- http://members.chello.nl/~j.schoone\\|// Registered Linux user #78364 - The Linux Counter - http://counter.li.org Assume nothing, expect anything. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Screw mount!
I'm just a amateur with a LX wishing I had more lens like you all. I see lots of Screwmount lens on Ebay going cheap. The question is, Buying these screwmount is it going Backwards? Or should I just save up and stay with the times , Like the Limited lens. Thanks . Bob. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Happy Holidays
Thanks. Same to you! Dan Scott (chokes me up, it does) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill, KG4LOV wrote: Best wishes for an environmentally conscious, non-addictive, socially responsible, low stress, gender neutral winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most joyous traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, yet with respect for the religious persuasions of others or their choice not to practice religion at all; And A fiscally successful, personally fulfilling medically uncomplicated recognition of the generally accepted calendar year 2002 but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to our society have helped make America great, without regard to the race, creed, color, religious or sexual preference of the wishees. (This greeting subject to clarification or withdrawal; it implies no promise by the wisher to actually attempt to implement any of the wishes for recipient or others.) Cheers to all! Bill, KG4LOV [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: MZ-S Data imprinting (WAS: RE: MZ-S Film-rewind Problem) - SOLVED
Great!!. Another good reason to get the MZ-S :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is why the MZ-S has the dial-in the first frame number feature. If it didn't and you used the conventional lens-cap-on, 1/6000th at f/22 technique, the original imprinting would be overwritten with the above data. Regards Jim Christien Bunting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for sharing. Worrysome that it imprints on rewind. What happens if you change the film using MRC ? Does it imprint there up to the last frame shot on that role ?? Does it continue when the role is reused ? Things to think about. Chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 .
Fun in the Snow
The following link shows some sledding pictures I sent to Idaho Magazine. I would have done things differently now as opposed to yesterday, specifically only including one of the center three on the top row. These are basically just all snapshots taken with a PZ-1p or ZX-10. Most are rough crops and first attempt adjustments for contrast. Nevertheless, I think several of them would make nice cover shots, if the intent is to show fun in the snow. http://www.peaceoflight.com/WinterSports/WntrSprt.htm Tom C. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: airport scanner film damage
There must be some reason X-Ray techs wear lead aprons in hospitals. Perhaps because they protect vital parts from X-Rays? If the X-Rays from airport scanners are strong enough to pass easily through these lead bags, there's a good chance that they are also hazardous to unprotected people. Len --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
I have always understood this to be true-- that is, they can scan the film if there is any concern on their part. A couple of times I was told this as they took my film and ran it through the machine. Once I was told the film was not going with me unless scanned, it was my choice. Since the 11th, I've not tempted fate --- the environment is just to touchy. I take a digital camera with me. Where for some reason, I need film, I arrange for equipment to supplied locally. The end result is that I now carry less gear on trips, which isn't all bad. Otis Isaac Crawford wrote: - Original Message - From: LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:25 AM Subject: RE: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film In the U.S., FAA regulation still gives you the right to request hand inspection. The problem is in the rapid turnover of low-wage workers in screening jobs. They often don't know this. Just to be nit-picking, I don't believe that it is a right. The FAA has guidelines that do allow handchecking, but they are free at any time to suspend those guidelines. I also believe that it is left to the discretion of the checker as to if they will allow it or not. My advise is to call ahead of time and arrange a hand check. Make it as easy as possible for them and maybe they'll cooperate more... 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 . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
I have no idea what the regs say and really doubt most at the scanners know either. However, I always understood this to be true-- that is, they can scan the film if they feel there is a need to do so.. A couple of times I was told this as they took my film and ran it through the machine. Once I was told the film was not going with me unless scanned, it was my choice. Since the 11th, I've not tempted fate --- the environment is just to touchy and I suspect the machines have been turned up a notch. I take a digital camera with me. Where for some reason, I need film, I arrange for equipment to supplied locally. The end result is that I now carry less gear on trips, which isn't all bad. Otis Isaac Crawford wrote: - Original Message - From: LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:25 AM Subject: RE: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film In the U.S., FAA regulation still gives you the right to request hand inspection. The problem is in the rapid turnover of low-wage workers in screening jobs. They often don't know this. Just to be nit-picking, I don't believe that it is a right. The FAA has guidelines that do allow handchecking, but they are free at any time to suspend those guidelines. I also believe that it is left to the discretion of the checker as to if they will allow it or not. My advise is to call ahead of time and arrange a hand check. Make it as easy as possible for them and maybe they'll cooperate more... 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 . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: airport scanner film damage
Have you read the mortality rate for airport security scanner technicians? :-) Sorry, probably in poor taste. Tom C. - Original Message - From: Paris, Leonard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 11:10 AM Subject: RE: airport scanner film damage There must be some reason X-Ray techs wear lead aprons in hospitals. Perhaps because they protect vital parts from X-Rays? If the X-Rays from airport scanners are strong enough to pass easily through these lead bags, there's a good chance that they are also hazardous to unprotected people. Len --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Airport Postal Scanners Fogging Film
Just to be nit-picking, I don't believe that it is a right. The FAA has guidelines that do allow handchecking, but they are free at any time to suspend those guidelines. I also believe that it is left to the discretion of the checker as to if they will allow it or not. My advise is to call ahead of time and arrange a hand check. Make it as easy as possible for them and maybe they'll cooperate more... And do not expecta ny cooperation. Back in August when I came to Lincoln I told then that I will have a guitar with me that might not fit through the X-ray. A guitar is NOT something you'd want to check. It has a soft bag (with a hard bag it is hopeless to carry on) and if they put even a small suitcase on top (and note I said put, not throw as they usually put stuff) it would be damaged. So they told me to get a soft case and come out to the airport a few weeks before the trip and check if it fits through the machine. Well I did. They refused to even bring the darn thing close. I did not want to cross the gate, I did not want to go up to the X-ray, I did not even want to send the darn thing across just check if the bulky body will or will not fit through the frame. F@ckers refused all cooperation. So that is the attitude what you can expect nowdays... But it is worth a try. L Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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: Screw mount!
I'm just a amateur with a LX wishing I had more lens like you all. I see lots of Screwmount lens on Ebay going cheap. The question is, Buying these screwmount is it going Backwards? Or should I just save up and stay with the times , Like the Limited lens. Thanks . Bob. Hey, try it. It's worth a try. And then you will see how much you can put up with the adapters. I have a friend that only uses screw mount lenses. And the screw mounts are usually good lenses too though the method can be considered backwards. The forward way of doing this is getting the best autofocus K lenses so when you go to an MZ-S, you will be set :)) L PS: You are just an amateur and you are learning on an LX? Did you learn to drive on a Ferrari? :)) I was playing with the idea of starting with the best camera my self, but I went with the MX, leaves more room (cash) for lenses. And rememebr more lenses usually do not increase creativity. Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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: airport scanner film damage
There must be some reason X-Ray techs wear lead aprons in hospitals. Perhaps because they protect vital parts from X-Rays? If the X-Rays from airport scanners are strong enough to pass easily through these lead bags, there's a good chance that they are also hazardous to unprotected people. OK, but note that no people go through the inside of the machines now do they? I would assume that those x-ray machines ahd some seruous led shell that does not let much X-rays out. I am sure if you look hard enough you might find a little sticker on the machine that says no animals or babys... That in the US at least. L Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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: airport scanner film damage
Have you read the mortality rate for airport security scanner technicians? :-) Sorry, probably in poor taste. Of course it is high. Didn't you hear how many of them make a sport out of scanning poor photographer's films? I mean that old K1000 with that heavy metal lens is sure good enough to beat someone half to death with :)) Sorry... L Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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 .
Prefocusing a rangefinder
I guess one of the reasons I keep considering one is that there are people who are very fast with them. Maybe it just takes some practice. Actually it takes a LOT of practice. I personally believe daily practice is necessary, even if it's only five or ten minutes' worth. Also, most people who are fast with rangefinders don't necessarily focus them. On the Leica M6 with the 35mm Summicron and selected other lenses you can do what's called prefocusing. What you do is practice looking at objects and setting the approximate focus by feel. You reference infinity by pushing the focusing tab all the way over, then learn how far back to draw the tab based on your estimation of the distance from camera position you wish to focus. It's actually possible to become quite good at this. At my best I was very good at it. I once astonished Nick Zavalishin at the photo show in NYC by taking his M6, pointing out an individual standing some distance away, and setting the focus by feel (without putting the camera anywhere near my eye) and then asking him to check me. I got it bang on. For sure, people who raise the camera to the eye briefly, frame and shoot and return the camera to a resting position all in one fluid motion (like Cartier-Bresson used to shoot) are prefocusing by feel. But it does take work --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: Screw mount!
Bob, One limited will cost you more than a set of screwmount lenses...it will also be much easier to use! If I was looking to fill out a small, fast kit with an LX, I would probably go M28/2, M50/1.4, and K135/2.5 for $400 if you bargain shop. You might substitute a K or A24/2.8 on the wide end or if speed was not a concern, a K28/3.5 for $150 less than the M28/2. These are fine lenses that are easy to use and will give you a lot of enjoyment...unless you've got $2K to burn on a new set of limited lenses. Regards, Bob S. I'm just a amateur with a LX wishing I had more lens like you all. I see lots of Screwmount lens on Ebay going cheap. The question is, Buying these screwmount is it going Backwards? Or should I just save up and stay with the times , Like the Limited lens. Thanks . Bob. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 patents I wish they'd productize!
All, I haven't looked at Pentax patents for awhile, so I did a search at the U.S. Patent Office website. I found these extremely cool Pentax Patents: 6311022 Film-Back Exchangeable Camera Maybe a new version of their 645, but with exchangeable backs? Cool 6318912 Adapter Having a Tilt and Shift Mechanism I really want this one! Looks like a teleconverter built into a tilt-shift mechanism. Must require stop-down metering, though. Very, very cool 6301441 Lens Driving Device Looks like a mechanism to allow simultaneous auto and manual focus--the same functionality now offered by USM lenses. Maybe this will be built into a new range of Pentax lenses? You can view the patents for free at the U.S. Patent Trademark Office website. Here is a link to their patent number search engine. http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnum.htm --Mark - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Screw mount!
I don't know how expensive or hard to find it is, but the K28/2.0 might be a nice addition to a set of early K-mount lenses. I'd love to have one even though I've an A28/2.0 ... I just love those early K-mounts. Anybody have one of these puppies? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One limited will cost you more than a set of screwmount lenses...it will also be much easier to use! If I was looking to fill out a small, fast kit with an LX, I would probably go M28/2, M50/1.4, and K135/2.5 for $400 if you bargain shop. You might substitute a K or A24/2.8 on the wide end or if speed was not a concern, a K28/3.5 for $150 less than the M28/2. These are fine lenses that are easy to use and will give you a lot of enjoyment...unless you've got $2K to burn on a new set of limited lenses. -- 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: Cleanin non-removable screens
13 Dec 01, Peifer, William [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: [Answers to Levil's cleaning questions, snipped] Hi Mark LeviL, (Snip)... I've had great luck getting all sorts of schmutz off of all sorts of surfaces using various brands of waterless hand soap (Snip)... Another thing I've used to remove adhesives and resins from glass is WD-40. Ever given this a shot? Of course, you'd want to take the dirty part out of the camera for this kind of a cleaning, and you'd still need to wash the part afterwards with soap and water, and/or Windex. Seems like either of these might be good for cleaning off rotting foam or adhesive... (Snip)... Bill, Waterless hand cleaners (Goop, Go-jo, Fast Orange, Citrus Orange, etc...) are very good at removing grease and goop. However, they are very messy in their own way. Because of their messy nature, they would seem rather inappropriate for use inside a camera (ie, Subject: Re: Cleanin non-removable screens). If you do use a waterless cleaner on a screen outside the camera, be certain the cleaner does not contain pumice. Those cleaners are commonly available with and without pumice. WD-40 works well for cleaning off adhesive residue. However, it does require more rubbing than most true solvents and therefore may not be best for cleaning delicate parts like focusing screens (just guessing, I haven't tried it). WD-40 also leaves an oily residue that must be cleaned off, so it's not a one-step cleaner. I would think it would require 3-steps: 1) clean with WD-40,2) clean with naphtha,3) clean with Lens Cleaner (first choice... Windex/ Sparkle as second choice). Is Sparkle still around? I always found that Sparkle gave better streak-free results than Windex. Magic GooGone (grocery, drug and hardware stores in the USA) is made for removing adhesive residue (stickers, labels, tape, gum, tar, crayon, etc) and does a great job with little rubbing while leaving minimal residue. It works well for cleaning the sticky mess left by deteriorating light seals. It doesn't hurt painted surfaces. It does have a light oily feel when poured on your finger (contains petroleum distillates...), but seems to leave a squeeky clean surface when it's dried. A follow-up cleaning with Naphtha will remove any lingering trace. Goo Gone does leave a citrus (?) smell. Naphtha is a good, general purpose, no residue solvent for use inside camera equipment. It's sold commercially as lighter fluid (the old liquid-fueled lighters like Zippo... not butane lighters), and handwarmer fuel. Common trade names around here are Ronco or Zippo lighter fluid and Jon-e (like Johnnie) handwarmer fuel. Lighter fluid can be purchased where tobacco products are sold. Handwarmer fuel can be purchased in hardware and sporting goods/ hunting supply stores. Naphtha is also the solvent used to dry-clean clothing. Naphtha is the only solvent I use inside a camera body, since it evaporates quickly and leaves no residue of it's own. Just be careful that you don't wash whatever goop you were trying to remove into other areas of the camera. Regardless of what liquid you use, always apply it to a cloth or cotton swap first, then transfer it to the part to be cleaned. Avoid pouring a liquid directly on any surface inside a camera. Regards, Tim Engel - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: Screw mount!
If I was looking to fill out a small, fast kit with an LX, I would probably go M28/2, M50/1.4, and K135/2.5 for $400 if you bargain shop. You might substitute a K or A24/2.8 on the wide end or if speed was not a concern, a K28/3.5 for $150 less than the M28/2. That is pretty much what I have. 24mm 2.8, M50mm 1.4, 135mm 2.5 (though this is a Takumar, oh well... :)) I found that the wide angle is great for spec applications. The 50 is the most used one for sure. (low light, general app) But the 135 is just too long. I can only use it to do portrait outdoor. If I'd have a huge studio I could see it being useful, but not for general portrait work. This is why I am looking for an 85mm. I will probbaly keep the 135 unless one of my Hungarian friends will really want to take it off my hand. It's not really worth money if you know what I mean. I also have a 50-250 Tokina ATX zood. If I even need zood, it's there, so the 135 is really NOT doing me much good. L Levente -Levi- Littvay University of Nebraska-Lincoln -- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.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 .
