Re: Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
On 12 Jan 2002 at 0:57, William Robb wrote: > Something to think about: The Pentax 6x7 is a full averaging > meter. No center weighting, no multi patterning. Nothing fancy. I could never get my head around that meter, I had to resort to external metering, I can cope with full frame average outside the VF but inside I see the scene centre weighted, each to their own I guess. 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: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
I think that if many people made contact sheets instead of prints, they'd be surprised at the sometimes widely varying quality of their exposures. Recently I was trying out a new MX and checking the meter. I pointed the camera at a lamp in my bedroom, with the light source centered. The camera showed one reading. I then moved the camera slightly, so the lamp was still in the finder, but just a little off center. The camera's meter indicated a different exposure was required, yet ABSOLUTELY NOTHING had changed in the way of lighting, or in the subject matter of the scene. By viewing the metering pattern of the camera (http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/mx/mx-meter-pattern.gif) it becomes clear that the meter will give that point source of light a different weight as the light moves from the center of the metering zone, thereby changing the recommended exposure, even though nothing has changed in the scene. Unless one knows and understands how the meter is reading the light and determining the exposure, the actual exposure could be either under or over the ideal exposure for that scene. Now, the nice thing about the MX is that the camera operator has to manually change the exposure, forcing the photographer to think a moment before pressing the shutter release. But, if one were using an automatic exposure system, every time the camera moved slightly, the exposure would change to some degree. The result is exactly what you, as a lab tech, see - widely varying exposures. Now - getting back to alternative methods of exposure - if one were using a spot meter here, the bright light source would be metered, and the resulting exposure would be made by opening up two or three stops from that reading, depending on the result the photographer was trying to obtain, and that setting would be used for all subsequent exposures of the scene, even if the camera position was moved. William Robb wrote: > I compare this to what I see coming from the few fancy SLR > cameras that come through my lab, and I cringe. I am also glad I > don't have to make contact sheets from them. > William Robb -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go 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[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
On 12 Jan 2002 at 2:22, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > No one is listening to me. INCIDENCE meters do not get "fooled" > by the reflectivity of the subject, they meter the light level > FALLING on the objects, not the light reflected off them. Like everyone else seems to be saying, we appreciate the benefits of incident meters. I too love my little Gossen Luna Pro digital F, but I don't blindly trust it. You still need to make executive decisions, simply transcribing the meter reading to the camera dials won't guarantee an aesthetically pleasing photograph (nor necessarily a technically perfect exposure).. and that's what it's all about isn't it? 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 .
Tak 85mm f1.9 hood
I purchased a 85mm f1.9 Takumar thru reckless bidding on ebay. I just got the hood in another purchase and am amazed. It reverses and stores on the lens perfectly, mating like the cap does. It feels like it is cushioned, but it is not...just a good fit. That is impressive! Regards, Bob S. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Metering
> One option, and perhaps the simplest, > is to measure the brightest part of the scene and open up three stops. > Bada-Bing! a great exposure, simply and without fuss. Thats not always going to work. What happens if the sun is in the pic, or if the subject is back lit? Your going to end up with underexposures. > Or, for most > scenes, just point the meter at a middle grey tone (rock, grass, your > jeans - whatever), and there you have it, another great exposure. This is the real problem with spot meters , its not easy to decide by eye what is "middle gray, especially in a color ful scene. > And the thing that's nice, is that the spot > meter can help you learn about light and latitude as well. The > experience and skill just continues to build, each contributing to the > growth and enhancement of the other, and will ultimately reach a point > where, in many situations, using a meter will no longer be necessary. > Yeah it's called Sunny F16, I trust that more than ANY meter reading. Sunny F16 doesnt get tricked by light or dark subjects either. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Metering (WAS: RE: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...))
> Number 3.Some claim that using an incident light meter always > gives the > best exposure. Bull. Example: You are taking a photo of a bride and groom. > The groom in wearing black with some pattern in his tux you want to > reproduce as best as possible. The bride is wearing white with delicate > white patterns you want to reproduce as best as possible. The goal here is > more about getting the extremes within the latitude of the film and (if > necessary) adjusting other areas in the darkroom. It's about > getting as much > information on the film as possible to give you choices later. > This will not > necessarily work by simply using an incident light meter. It > depends on the > characteristics of the film and how it works at the gray scale edges. The incidence metering technique gives the best POSSIBLE exposure with a given film. But the only way to capture what your talking about is to change to lower contrast film, using a spot meter or an in camera meter with the same film/developer is not going to help one bit JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
Rob, You know, it is an interesting thing, that perhaps there is really something to the precision of the meter. I find it curious that none of the advertising from any of the main makers (Pentax, Nikon, Canon, Minolta) ever make any claims over the precision and consistency of their meters. They all talk about the capabilities (color sensitivity, 5000 sensors, low light, etc.) but they don't talk about the quality of the meter. Is it because it can't be measured very well or demonstrated or ??? Bruce Dayton Friday, January 11, 2002, 10:48:36 PM, you wrote: RS> On 11 Jan 2002 at 16:38, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> Paul, >> >> I keep trying to stop asking questions, but you guys keep making >> statements that need clarifying. Other than Mike Johnston making a >> statement that many meters are inaccurate, I really haven't heard much >> about most center weighted meters be inaccurate. Do you have any >> other information that you can share with us to that end? I would >> love to hear it. Are most other Pentax bodies center weighted meters >> inaccurate? Or is it mostly other brands or what? RS> Hi Bruce, RS> I can't quantify it scientifically either but the LX meter is very predictable, RS> it is easy to learn how it behaves and to make consistently good exposures. As RS> Mike said earlier, the M6 meter is a good meter too. The LX and M6 are my main RS> cameras I get very consistent exposures from each, my Mamiya 7II apparently has RS> an accurate spot meter but I can't drive it, I have to use external metering or RS> my results stink (the LX and M6 make handy external meters :-) RS> Like others have mentioned too, I think that internal spot-meters are way over RS> rated, they are inconsistent in AOV and they most often don't offer the RS> exposure calculation features offered on external meters. I have an MZ-S and RS> whilst it makes a cool noise and offers AF capabilities it isn't a great RS> advantage to me in my general subject matter and shooting style. It must be the RS> same for many other LX users I am sure. RS> Cheer, RS> Rob Studdert RS> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA RS> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 RS> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours RS> [EMAIL PROTECTED] RS> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html RS> - RS> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, RS> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to RS> 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: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
Did I say GENERALLY AVAILABLE? FWIW, the is/wa a company called Film For Classics that respooled film in all kinds of obsolete formats for a price. They might even have a webpage. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:17 PM Subject: Re: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively? > I poked around a little more, and B&H has a couple of pages listing > 1110, 127, 620, and 828 film. > > Tom Rittenhouse wrote: > > > > Why not just say 120? Yes there used to be all kinds of roll film out there > > but I think the only one in general use any more is 120. You can still find > > 220 and 70mm but they have essentially the same formats as 120. Now, I > > always liked 116, anyone tried to buy a roll of that lately? > > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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: Metering
Doh? I would like to make a little wager. I would wager that 90% of the members on this list would get consistently better exposures with an incident meter after five minutes instruction than they would get with a spot meter after taking a weekend course. A spot meter is a valuable tool, if you are doing precision photometrics, for general photography it is a pain in the ass. The TTL meter in most SLR are great for telephoto and macro work, but once again I say that for general photography 90% of the people on this list would get far more consistent exposures with an incident meter after that five minutes of instruction. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 12:30 AM Subject: Re: Metering > Thank you, David, for putting that so succinctly and clearly. I've > been arguing that point here for quite a while. You've said it better > than I ever did. > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > > Only an INCIDENCE hand held meter which > > > measures light FALLING on the subject will > > > give a correct reading. Incident metering > > > techniques are far more accurate than > > > reflectance techniques which all in camera > > > meters use. > > And David Mann correctly countered: > > > The incident meter will give you the correct "overall" > > midtone reading but you will still need to alter your > > exposure to keep detail where you want it. Film has > > a limited tonal range so if you shoot your inicident > > meter reading you might find that the white car is > > totally washed out, and the black car is just a big dark > > blob. Your film contrast will determine the outcome, > > and even if you know the film characteristics there is > > no way of knowing how it will be rendered as you > > don't know how much light each subject is reflecting, > > relative to your 18%-grey reading. > > [a little snip here] > > > By using my spot meter I get a full tonal scale of what's in > > my picture, then adjust my "midtone" (ie exposure settings) to > > achieve the results I'm looking for based on the capabilities of > > the film. > > [another snip] > > > No matter what kind of meter you're using you still need > > to apply a little brain-power to get good results every time. > > You need to know how your meter works, and what its limitations > > are. Knowing your film tends to help as well, and so does a good > > "feel" for what you like (or what your client likes). Some > > people like to keep shadow detail at the expense of highlights, > > others like their shadows black... and so on. > > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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: Face reflectivity of different ethnics
- Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: Face reflectivity of different ethnics > I think its much easier to just use an incidence meter > right in front of the subject's face and use THAT reading. > then the face will fall on the correct zone automatically. > JCO This gets into one of those situational challenges where the technically correct exposure may well not be the esthetically correct exposure. A very dark skin tone may well fall as low as Zone II. At this level of exposure, the film is not giving a usable amount of detail. While always a judgement call, I would hesitate to place a skin tone as low as Zone II or III, whether it is the technically correct place for it or not. Print films all have sufficient latitude to allow for some over exposure. If you set the very dark skin tone to Zone IV or even as high as Zone V, you will be securing sufficient detail to get a richly detailed dark skin tone by printing the negative down to the correct flesh tone. This is much more appealing than having undetailed soot with a smile where a face should be. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
On 11 Jan 2002 at 16:38, Bruce Dayton wrote: > Paul, > > I keep trying to stop asking questions, but you guys keep making > statements that need clarifying. Other than Mike Johnston making a > statement that many meters are inaccurate, I really haven't heard much > about most center weighted meters be inaccurate. Do you have any > other information that you can share with us to that end? I would > love to hear it. Are most other Pentax bodies center weighted meters > inaccurate? Or is it mostly other brands or what? Hi Bruce, I can't quantify it scientifically either but the LX meter is very predictable, it is easy to learn how it behaves and to make consistently good exposures. As Mike said earlier, the M6 meter is a good meter too. The LX and M6 are my main cameras I get very consistent exposures from each, my Mamiya 7II apparently has an accurate spot meter but I can't drive it, I have to use external metering or my results stink (the LX and M6 make handy external meters :-) Like others have mentioned too, I think that internal spot-meters are way over rated, they are inconsistent in AOV and they most often don't offer the exposure calculation features offered on external meters. I have an MZ-S and whilst it makes a cool noise and offers AF capabilities it isn't a great advantage to me in my general subject matter and shooting style. It must be the same for many other LX users I am sure. Cheer, 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: Re[2]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
- Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: Re[2]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...) > > I like it for its low light sensitivity and because it will alter > > exposure time part way through a long exposure if the lighting > > conditions change. > > > > -Aaron > If the lighting conditions change during the exposure isnt > the photograph going to be screw up anyway??? http://www.pdml.net/LX_Gallery/sasklx.html The lighting guy was changing the lights fast enough that I couldn't get an accurate manual exposure (I am no slouch with a camera, BTW). This was shot with the LX set to automatic. I recall being quite amazed while shooting this concert because the camera kept giving very diffeent readings from what it was indicating. The LX metering system in auto is quite an amazing piece of work. If the light levels drop during the exposure, the camera will continue to expose the film until the correct exposure is reached. If the light levels increase, the camera will cut off the exposure prior to what was indicated when the shutter was actuated when the correct exposure is achieved. In a normal auto exposure, or manual exposure situation, if the light level changes during exposure, the rxposure will be off. The beauty of the LX metering sustem is that it continues to meter the exposure while the exposure is happening, and therefore can react to changing light coditions during the exposure. It is unique in this particular feature. AFAIK, all other cameras stop metering the scene when the shutter is actuated. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Metering
Thank you, David, for putting that so succinctly and clearly. I've been arguing that point here for quite a while. You've said it better than I ever did. J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > Only an INCIDENCE hand held meter which > > measures light FALLING on the subject will > > give a correct reading. Incident metering > > techniques are far more accurate than > > reflectance techniques which all in camera > > meters use. And David Mann correctly countered: > The incident meter will give you the correct "overall" > midtone reading but you will still need to alter your > exposure to keep detail where you want it. Film has > a limited tonal range so if you shoot your inicident > meter reading you might find that the white car is > totally washed out, and the black car is just a big dark > blob. Your film contrast will determine the outcome, > and even if you know the film characteristics there is > no way of knowing how it will be rendered as you > don't know how much light each subject is reflecting, > relative to your 18%-grey reading. [a little snip here] > By using my spot meter I get a full tonal scale of what's in > my picture, then adjust my "midtone" (ie exposure settings) to > achieve the results I'm looking for based on the capabilities of > the film. [another snip] > No matter what kind of meter you're using you still need > to apply a little brain-power to get good results every time. > You need to know how your meter works, and what its limitations > are. Knowing your film tends to help as well, and so does a good > "feel" for what you like (or what your client likes). Some > people like to keep shadow detail at the expense of highlights, > others like their shadows black... and so on. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: LX Shutter Sound WAV! +500mm and 30mm shots
OK - for your listening and viewing pleasure, go to: homepage.mac.com/smh645 You'll get a single page with a file list, a choice on some to preview, others are only for download. What is there: -Gianfranco's WAV file -A copy of the folder of sound files to which Rob posted a link earlier -A series of 4-5 jpeg's and 4 original scans: The jpeg's and Photoshop files which have "500mm" in the title were, strangely enough, taken with my 500mm /5.6. I have captioned the pictures themselves so you needn't work too hard deciphering the file titles. Circumstances: Christmas time, central Michigan at my in-laws house, we heard a hammering outside, saw a pilliated woodpecker a couple-hundred yards down river. This is a seriously large heavy duty woodpecker, for those who have not had the pleasure. They are to a normal woodpecker as a compressor-driven jack hammer is to a tack hammer. So I put my 500mm on the LX, grabbed my father-in-law's slightly shaky tripod (with sloppy ballhead), and went out to photograph. The 500mmWP is the best of those shots. Scanned at 200%. Then I took a few snapshots of birds at the feeder, a squirrel on a nearby tree, etc. Finished the roll. Went back in. Remembered that I had a 2X-AS with me. Grabbed another roll of film (different film type), did some more woodpecker and squirrel shots at 2X. These were scanned at 100%. I've put both .psd and .jpeg versions of these. Also put there a 30mm shot I did the next day. It has become the wallpaper on my home and work computers. . . Stan > From: Stan Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 21:51:48 -0600 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: LX Shutter Sound WAV! > > Gianfranco sent me the WAV with the idea that I could put it on a web site > and let all download it. So far I have it moved onto my free space on the > mac.com site; now just have to figure out how you should address it . . . I > misplaced the directions I had printed out, figured that was a sign of some > sorts, and decided to read accumulated PDML stuff instead. > > I'll let you know. > > Stan > >> From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 17:11:58 -0800 >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: LX Shutter Sound WAV! >> >> Hi Gianfranco, Could you please send me the file too? >> >> Thank You, >> Steve Larson >> Redondo Beach, California >> Hi gang, For the pleasure of you all, I've recorded the shutter sound of two different LXs, an early model and a new one, both on the same WAV file. There may be slight variations in volume of the two takes, due to the "casual" recording equipment, but the differences between the two models are very interesting. Both the cameras without lens, at 1/75, microphone near the mount. Of course, the difference is bigger when heard in real life. The file is 107KB, if anybody is interested I can send it off list. Gianfranco >> - >> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, >> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to >> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax 28mm shift lens
> Has anyone had experience with this lens? Herb: I've got some specimen K 28/3.5 Shift images up at: http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/k28shift/ Fred - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 15mm?
> What I like about the Pentax is that being an SLR lens you can > actually see and avoid flare before you shoot. Thats a big > advantage in my book. Yes, true. However, to do a really thorough "flare check" you should stop down to the intended shooting aperture with the DOF preview lever, since flare can sometimes occur at only certain apertures (and not always when wide open - I've learned this before the hard way - . Unfortunately, stopping down may make things dimmer and harder to see, but usually gross flare would catch your eye if you are checking even reasonably carefully. Fred - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Is there something I don't know?
There seems to be an unusual number of things for sale on the list. Is this just part of the great cosmic probability distribution? Or post-holiday guilt? Or is Pentax coming out with the 6mp digital after all, but they are only making 10 of them and you guys selling things are the only ones who know? I leave Sunday for two weeks in Mali, then about a week in France. Taking two MZ-S bodies (my office owns them). It'll be my first outing with them. Also taking Provia 100F, Provia 400F, E100VS, and Agfa Optima 400. Joe - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: LX Shutter Sound WAV!
Gianfranco sent me the WAV with the idea that I could put it on a web site and let all download it. So far I have it moved onto my free space on the mac.com site; now just have to figure out how you should address it . . . I misplaced the directions I had printed out, figured that was a sign of some sorts, and decided to read accumulated PDML stuff instead. I'll let you know. Stan > From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 17:11:58 -0800 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: LX Shutter Sound WAV! > > Hi Gianfranco, Could you please send me the file too? > > Thank You, > Steve Larson > Redondo Beach, California > >>> Hi gang, >>> >>> For the pleasure of you all, I've recorded the shutter sound of >>> two different LXs, an early model and a new one, both on the >>> same WAV file. There may be slight variations in volume of the >>> two takes, due to the "casual" recording equipment, but the >>> differences between the two models are very interesting. >>> Both the cameras without lens, at 1/75, microphone near the >>> mount. Of course, the difference is bigger when heard in real >>> life. >>> The file is 107KB, if anybody is interested I can send it off >>> list. >>> >>> Gianfranco > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
> > It is, however, sensitive to the reflectivity of the film itself > > which seems to vary somewhat from film to film. > > > > Len > Plus the reflectivity of the subject can "fool" it too. > JCO Yep. That's why when I'm in doubt I whip out my trusty Gossen for an incident reading. I will grant that multi-segment meters in cameras are a lot better than single area meters because they try to integrate the light differences and give an exposure that attempts to cover the range in the scene, but they can still be fooled by a large imbalance and skew the overall exposure. I have to believe that the Nikon F5, with its 1024 (IIRC) segments has a pretty good track record for not being fooled. But, if you want the middle gray parts of a scene to actually register as middle gray on film, I don't think anything is more accurate than an incident meter. I usually use the meter in the PZ-1p, tempered with a bit of judgement from experience, but the Gossen is always within reach when I need to be sure. 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: Left Coast Photo Ops
> I will be on the left coast taking a workshop and would > appreciate suggestions > from left coast PDML'ers for places to shoot scenics/seascapes and nature > shots. Will be arriving LAX and departing SFO. Thanks in advance. Ken, We just had a good go at this on photo.net. You might want to check this thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001rnS Gannet St. Petersburg, Florida USA [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: Metering
J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Wrong! All built in camera meters are only accurate when aimed at > a subject with 18 % reflectance. Try taking a picture of a white > car or a black car using a built in camera meter. You will get > two different readings BOTH of which are wrong. Only an INCIDENCE > hand held meter which measures light FALLING on the subject will give a > correct > reading. Incident metering techniques are far more accurate than > reflectance techniques which all in camera meters use. The incident meter will give you the correct "overall" midtone reading but you will still need to alter your exposure to keep detail where you want it. Film has a limited tonal range so if you shoot your inicident meter reading you might find that the white car is totally washed out, and the black car is just a big dark blob. Your film contrast will determine the outcome, and even if you know the film characteristics there is no way of knowing how it will be rendered as you don't know how much light each subject is reflecting, relative to your 18%-grey reading. If you *must* preserve the same background lighting for both subjects then you're stuck and must be careful in your film selection (same as if both cars are in the same frame). It really depends on your intentions but a spot meter will work just as well, as long as you think about your readings... but that can take longer in this situation, depending on your technique. For my medium format work I always use a spot meter. For 35mm I just use the in-camera meter and adjust appropriately (I don't always rely on the reading). Once I've taken a reading it is my decision as to whether I continue shooting with the same settings or change them each time. By using my spot meter I get a full tonal scale of what's in my picture, then adjust my "midtone" (ie exposure settings) to achieve the results I'm looking for based on the capabilities of the film. Since my knowledge of film is imperfect I will tend to bracket when I'm unsure. I cannot do this with an ambient meter which is why I use the spot. The spot meter also helps a lot when I'm standing in different light to my subject (very common when doing landscapes). This takes time but IMO its time well spent when you're shooting slides in the middle of nowhere. If I can't afford to be that slow for something important, I'll shoot negs which can be adjusted in printing if necessary. That lowers my risk of being affected by mistakes. No matter what kind of meter you're using you still need to apply a little brain- power to get good results every time. You need to know how your meter works, and what its limitations are. Knowing your film tends to help as well, and so does a good "feel" for what you like (or what your client likes). Some people like to keep shadow detail at the expense of highlights, others like their shadows black... and so on. I know that exposure errors can be corrected in post-processing (whether chemical printing or digital manipulation) but getting the exposure right in the first place could save a lot of effort later, particularly with colour slides where their narrow tonal range can limit retouching. > Wrong again , nearly all of the digital incident meters on the market > are accurate to within 1/10 of a stop and the readouts are in 1/10 stops. > My Minolta Autometer III which is 10 years old reads out fstop in 1/10 > stop increments. So does my Sekonic L-328 which does incident and 5-degree spot (with an attachment). Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: P67
Brian Campbell wrote: > Biggest I've printed from 67 negs are 16 x 20 - and they're razor > sharp. I think even up to 24 x 30 would be good if from the right > film / exposure combination... I have a framed 40x30" on the wall behind me, shot on 6x7 Reala using non- Pentax gear. The film grain is barely visible with your nose just about on the glass. Sharpness isn't too bad but where any degradation came from is anyone's guess. Your idea of "razor sharp" might differ from mine ;) The picture is of a replica of the Endeavour sailing out of Lyttelton Harbour, taken from another boat. People's faces are about 2.5 to 3mm in size on the print (they're standing near the middle of the boat). You can see facial features (nose, ear, eye, beard etc) but thats about it. You can't count the strands of hair on their heads :) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/photography/gallery/endeavour.html (please overlook the fact that I oversharpened the digital image, and the colours aren't quite right... I can't get into the account to change anything at the moment) I find that you're just as dependent on the enlarger as much as the gear you shot with, and with a print that size the magnification factor is high enough that you might be better off with a good scan and digital print. I remember we had to do a bit of retouching on my print due to dust on the neg, which is something else I'd rather do digitally! Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Attention Americans
Hi, I just won an eBay auction, from a buyer who only ships to the US. I didn't have a chance to ask him if he'll ship to Canada before bidding, 'cause I only noticed this thing with a few minutes left. If he won't ship to Canada, would anyone be able to help me buy accepting shipment, then mailing it to me? I'd obviously pay your postal costs. It's a Pentax!! Contact me off-list if you can help. thanks a bunch, frank -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: gettingLX-worth it? (repairs,...))
Assuming that can be done ... but Frantisek specifically asked about spot metering. "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > I think its much easier to just use an incidence meter > right in front of the subject's face and use THAT reading. > then the face will fall on the correct zone automatically. > JCO -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting LX-worth it? (repairs,...))
I think its much easier to just use an incidence meter right in front of the subject's face and use THAT reading. then the face will fall on the correct zone automatically. JCO > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting > LX-worth it? (repairs,...)) > > > You've quoted me out of context. Shame on you! There is no absolutely > correct exposure for "dark skinned" people, which is what I said in my > original post. Metering the face and using that exposure will not > always give you overexposure, and it doesn't always give you Zone V, > either. I said that it gives less than Zone V, based on Kodak's grey > card instruction sheet. > > In addition, stopping down two stops to Zone III may cause a loss of > detail and contrast in highlights, in and around the eyes, and in other > shadow areas. There are many factors involved in getting a correct > exposure for skin tones, and I made that clear to some extent in my > original post. > > I suggested "Zone V minus" as a starting point, and that further tests > would be advised. > > "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > > Putting a dark skinned face at zone 5 will cause everexposure, > It probably > > should be closer to zone 3 which would mean giving 2 stops LESS exposure > > than the spot meter reading. > > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting LX-worth it? (repairs,...))
You've quoted me out of context. Shame on you! There is no absolutely correct exposure for "dark skinned" people, which is what I said in my original post. Metering the face and using that exposure will not always give you overexposure, and it doesn't always give you Zone V, either. I said that it gives less than Zone V, based on Kodak's grey card instruction sheet. In addition, stopping down two stops to Zone III may cause a loss of detail and contrast in highlights, in and around the eyes, and in other shadow areas. There are many factors involved in getting a correct exposure for skin tones, and I made that clear to some extent in my original post. I suggested "Zone V minus" as a starting point, and that further tests would be advised. "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > Putting a dark skinned face at zone 5 will cause everexposure, It probably > should be closer to zone 3 which would mean giving 2 stops LESS exposure > than the spot meter reading. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Left Coast Photo Ops
I will be on the left coast taking a workshop and would appreciate suggestions from left coast PDML'ers for places to shoot scenics/seascapes and nature shots. Will be arriving LAX and departing SFO. Thanks in advance. Ken Waller - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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 6X7 150mm F2.8 for auction
Since I just bought the 135 macro, I'm selling the 150 F2.8. Starting bid $149.99 and no reserve: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1321128563 JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Good PR for Pentax 17-28mm zoom
The February issue of Popular Photography, page 72 has some flattering ("very
groovy") comments regarding Pentax 17-28mm f/3.5-4.5 Zoom.
Ken Waller
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Canadian PDML'rs
It says on one of the front pages 'This book was originally produced to mark the 100th anniversary of the Confederation of Canada's', and on the last page was reprinted 1969. James The Photographers are listed as (non-alphabetically): (If anyone is interested) Freeman Patterson Jean MacKenzie Gar Lunney John de Visser Valerie MayJohn Mailer Egon Bork Don McPhee Jean Marcotte Bruce Weston Mia and Kluas William Mill George HunterDon Newlands Jean-Paul Morrisset Chris BruunRonald Solomon R. Norwood MalakPeter Varley Dick Nye Robert Bourdeau Bob BrooksKen Patterson Doug Wilkinson John Bryan Peter Phillips Dunkin BancroftRuth A. Buck Janet Porchawka Hans Blohm A. J. Carter Joan Powell Audrey Burnand Ed Cesar John Powell Audrey Crich C. B. Chick Nina Raginsky Mary FergusonKen Elliott Asta Riives Richard FyfeCharles Everest E. A. Rogers Rudi HaasOlive Everest Harry Rowed Tom W. HallPierre Gaudard D. W. Schmidt Ted Maginn Russell Gee Michael Semak W. Gillies RossW. E. Gray Robert N. Smith Jeremy Taylor Richard Harrington Karl Sommerer Jean White Gordon KnightLionel Stevenson Raloff Beny Paul Lambert Kryn Taconis Marcel Cognac Joan LatchfordTed Tadda Vittorio Fiorucci Julien LebourdaisPeter Tasker Rosmary GilliatMichael LiuBetty Williamson Helen Hancock Chris Lund. James - Original Message - From: "herb greenslade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax User's group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:13 PM Subject: RE: Canadian PDML'rs > Hi > > I just caught this message just as I was joining up. Just some info on the CANADA: Year of the Land > > This book was produced to commerate Canada's Centennial. > > The executive producer was Lorraine Monk, a lady who did more for Canadian photographers to establish them as artists, > was the founder of what is now the Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography originally part of the National Film > Board but now part of the National Gallery of Canada > > The art director was Allan Fleming, the first Canadian art director to receive the prestigious New York Art Director's award. He > designed the famous CN logo. > > The photographers were some of Canada's finest landscape and nature photographers, including Freeman Patterson, Mary > Ferguson, John de Visser. > > Originally the book was to be printed in an edition of 100, 000, but it became so popular that in subsequent years, many more > editions were printed. > > The main criticism of the book, was that it didn't portray Canadians. Subsequently two other books were published in 1968, > one in French and one in English, the French one was called (my copy) "Ces visages qui sont un pays" . If I recall correctly, > there were minor difference in each. > > Lorrain Monk produced a third book in 1976, called "Between Friends" the official gift from Canada to the US for their 200th > celebration. Again 25 of our best photographers were commissioned to document the vast border between our two countries. > > Just in case you wanted to know!. > > herb > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
Doug FWIW, as I edit my slides, I accumulate "keepers", and when I get 20 or more, I then take them in for scanning to a Photo CD. There is absolutely no need to have an entire roll of film scanned to a Photo CD at one time. I have had conversations with the local service that scans for me, and apparently a number of customers at this service get entire rolls scanned at once regardless of the number of keepers, a costly/dumb way to go IMHO. Ken Waller - Original Message - From: Doug Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:14 PM Subject: Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD > A big reason I don't do PhotoCDs is that I don't want to pay to have > images scanned that aren't "up to snuff". My average "keeper" rate is > one or two frames per roll, at most. I don't want to pay to have the > other ten, twenty, or thirty frames scanned. > TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
Have been using a local service for the last 4 years to scan selected slides to Photo CD. Cost is dependent on the quantity scanned at a single time. I usually pay around $1.50 each when a batch of 30 to 40 are scanned at one time. You get 5 levels of resolution, but I generally use the highest resolution available. There is an additional charge of about $12 for each CD and I have been getting as many as 125 scans per disc. I am very satisfied with the quality of the scans from my local supplier. Make sure they are clean when you submit them or you will be cleaning the scans when you go to print. The CDs become your masterWith a digital manipulation program you can size and correct any brightness or color issues and then print. I have a 4 year old Epson Stylus Photo, (similar printers are available now for around $150) that produces killer prints. I can do a 4"X6" glossy for about $.25 each (paper cost). I choose to go this route as I don't want to take the time to scan myself. Hope this helps. Ken Waller - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:36 PM Subject: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD > Happy Friday! > > I'm looking into getting an inexpensive scanner (right now, the leader is the Epson 1250 with photo attachment). I'm debating on going this route versus getting a PhotoCD with my processing (both slides and color negs). I haven't had any shots made into a PhotoCD, so I'm brand new at this medium. > > I recently saw a thread on Photo.net that was along these lines as well, but I wanted to get the PDMLers thought on these two ways to go digital. > > My main reason for going digital is to post to the PUG, setup my own web portfolio and possibly print. Printing would probably be limited to 4x6, 5x7 and 8x10. > > Any thoughts on the PhotoCD or this scanner (or anything in the same price range, $100-$150US) would be appreciated. > > Thanks... > Ed 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: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting LX -worth it? (repairs,...))
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting LX > -worth it? (repairs,...)) > > > Frantisek ... > > It's not rocket science. It's not even brain surgery. If you're using > a spot meter, meter the face and shoot at the indicated exposure. That > will actually give you a little less than Zone V according to > extrapolation of information from Kodak. Putting a dark skinned face at zone 5 will cause everexposure, It probably should be closer to zone 3 which would mean giving 2 stops LESS exposure than the spot meter reading. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
For Aaron
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1318305173 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: Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Len Paris > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 5:23 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...) > > > It is, however, sensitive to the reflectivity of the film itself > which seems to vary somewhat from film to film. > > Len Plus the reflectivity of the subject can "fool" it too. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Wide Angle 28mm Question
A few weeks ago I picked up a Rikenon P 2.8 28mm lens via eBay. I am pleased with it. It didn't cost me much. I use it on my LX, K2DMD, and a PZ1-P. Jim A. > From: "Frank Knapik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:49:48 -0500 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Wide Angle 28mm Question > > Hello. I realize that there is a wealth of information regarding Pentax 28mm > lenses available. I have done some research. I will need to purchase a wide > angle lens soon to photograph buildings and interiors, so I am looking for > advise from Pentax users as to which 28mm has the least distortion. I have a > PZ-1P and an LX. I am looking for the best 28mm lens, whether it is auto focus > or manual is not important. Since cost is a factor, I am looking for a 28mm > instead of a 24mm, but if there are reasonable priced 24mm's, please let me > know. Thank you. > > Francis > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go 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 28mm shift lens
I got one these lenses several years ago for a "bargain" price because the owner had dented one of the parts of the hood. It didn not affect the optics of the lens. It's great for architectural shots. Jim A. > From: "herb greenslade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 17:14:45 -0500 > To: "Pentax User's group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Pentax 28mm shift lens > > Hi > > Has anyone had experience with this lens? > > herb > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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[2]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
> I like it for its low light sensitivity and because it will alter > exposure time part way through a long exposure if the lighting > conditions change. > > -Aaron If the lighting conditions change during the exposure isnt the photograph going to be screw up anyway??? JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
I'll let you guys know later more definitive impressions, but.. I've done a couple of print scans and one 35mm neg scan with the 1200 and I'm impressed with what I've seen so far. I got the 1200/TU to use with the soon (hopefully) to arrive Yashica 635 TLR. I think (and hope) that 1200dpi scans of a 6x6 negative should be of similar quality to the 2400dpi 35mm scans from my HP S20 in the final print. Bill KG4LOV [EMAIL PROTECTED] > A friend works at at Daymen in Markham.We disscussed > the 1250 and 1650.I'm going to do the same as you > but for the extra $100.00 or so i'll go with the 1650.Now > they have to get their back orders in > > > Dave > > Begin Original Message > > From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:58:47 -0500 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD > > > > I'm looking into getting an inexpensive scanner (right now, the > leader is > the Epson 1250 with photo attachment). I'm debating on going this > route > versus getting a PhotoCD with my processing (both slides and color > negs). I > haven't had any shots made into a PhotoCD, so I'm brand new at this > medium. > > > Check out the Epson Store at www.epsonstore.com > > They have the refurbished 1200 scanner with transparency adapter for > $99.00 > US. Just got mine up and running this morning, and although I've only > scanned a couple of prints and one 35mm negative, so far I'm pretty > impressed with it. > > 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 . > > > > End Original Message > > > > > Pentax User > Stouffville Ontario Canada > > Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, 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: FS Rolling Photo Backpack - Once carried Pentax 600mm FA lens
For Sale, Once used Tamrac 678 "Rolling Photo Backpack" in almost as new condition (wheels are scuffed). Bought to transport 600mm FA lens and some photo gear. Pack measures approximately 24" high by 14 " wide by 12" deep. Will hold multiple 35mm & medium format cameras, large telephoto lenses, a tripod & a multitude of related equipment. Rolls well in airports and on paved surfaces and also is a comfortable backpack. Is foam padded and water proof with foam padded adjustable dividers to creat protective compartments to securely hold a variety of cameras, lenses & accessories. Fits in most overhead compartments on commercial jets. Decided to sell after one trip to the Alaska outback, where it quickly became apparent that this was not the way to transport this lens in the bush - took too much time to set up and break down camera body/lens for transport in backpack. Have since bought a Kinesis L630 long lens case/padded shoulder harness which allows me to carry lens with body attached for quicker setup in the field. Currently selling for $ 337.50 @ B&H where I purchased mine. Can view at http://www.tamrac.com./welcome.htm. Contact me off list @ [EMAIL PROTECTED] if interested. Ken Waller - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: B&W negative scanning
"Christian Skofteland" writes: >around with the B&W negatives. My scanner only allows 1500 ppi resolution on >B&W negatives but it goes up to 2400 for color negatives. Is there anything >wrong with scanning the B&W as color and converting the scan to grey-scale? >The results look good and the higher resolution scans are more to my liking. The short answer is that if the scans look better to you, then do them that way. However, the long answer has to do with the way the scanner works. If it of a typical design where it uses a color mask over the CCD, then you are not getting the resolution you think you are with a color scan. That's because when the scanner performs a color scan, the hardware returns an (say) 8-bit grayscale image, but different pixels are masked by different color masks, and therefore reprenet only a single R, G or B color. To create a color image, where each pixel represents a R, G and B value, it has to take the colors that are absent at that pixel location and borrow values for them from adjacent pixels. This means that, for example (Bayer), the red plane of the image is actually represented by 1/4 of the pixels of the scan. The red values for the other 3/4 pixels of the scan are derived by blending adjacent red pixels. Ditto for blue layer. Green layer is an odd beast using the Bayer mask pattern in that 1/2 the scanned pixel values have a green mask, so it actually has more detail than the rest of the layers. Now, when you then flatten the image back to grayscale, you've blurred adjacent pixels by using a color scan. Given that it is a B&W negative, so have no color info to get in the way, the scaner could do something like perform a color scan and then just forget that the pixels had R, G or B masks over them. Perform some intensity adjustment to counter the light response of the CCD under the mask and you've got an actual B&W image. Perhaps this is what it is doing when it gives you a 1500ppi B&W scan? later, patbob ([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: Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
I can get a 5 stop increase in meter reading from bright > sunlight reflected off my glasses into my spotmatic meter. > > Mark Rofini Just another good reason to use a hand held meter and set the camera manually. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Is TMZ a thick base film?
- Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" Subject: Is TMZ a thick base film? > I believe it was Bill who advised against the use of TMY films in a 6x7, > because of the film's thick base and possible winding problems Does this > apply to TMZ as well? I've been looking forward to trying some TMZ in > 6x7. Are all T-grain films thick base? Is Delta 3200 as thick as the > Kodak films? Twas me Paul. I don't know about TMZ, though I expect all the T-Max films are on the same substrate. Kodak tid shave the thickness down a bit from the first run, but it is still awfully thick and stiff. The Ilford films have a very nice. easy to work with base. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Metering (WAS: RE: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...))
- Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: Metering (WAS: RE: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)) > > The advantage of meters like in the LX is that you can set exposure more > > accurate than 1/3 of a stop something that's impossible to do > > consistently > > with any hand-held meter. > > > > Pål > Wrong again , nearly all of the digital incident meters on the market > are accurate to within 1/10 of a stop and the readouts are in 1/10 stops. > My Minolta Autometer III which is 10 years old reads out fstop in 1/10 > stop increments. Well, both right and wrong really. The handheld meter may well measure within 1/10 stop. Whether it is actually accurate to within 1/10 stop is another question. Presuming it is, you still need to be able to accurately transfer that reading to the camera, something that is well nigh impossible on any camera. My view camera lenses can be set fairly accurately to 1/6 stop with the aperture, but only full stops with the shutter. My miniature format and MF lenses can be set with repeatable accuracy to within 1/2 stop, and my tired old mechanical cameras can only be set to full stop shutter speeds as well. Come to think of it, my more modern MZ-5 has full stop shutter speeds as well. I don't know if the MZ-S or PZ series fairs better in this regard or not. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: P67
- Original Message - From: "Brian Campbell (pm)" Subject: Re: P67 > Biggest I've printed from 67 negs are 16 x 20 - and they're razor > sharp. I think even up to 24 x 30 would be good if from the right > film / exposure combination... We did some 40x60 display prints from some 6x7 negatives that I had shot. They were still quite good. I really miss Ektar 25. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: MZ7, MZ5, MZ3 bodies........
> > I was using the focus confirm "beep" w/ a PZ1-p and my ancient > > 85mm f1.9 SuperTak in a dark theater setting (dress rehersal) > > and found it a wonderful feature. To get it I slipped a thin > > piece of aluminum foil between the lens and the PZ1-p's contacts > > to "fool it" into thinking it had a newer lens. > > Wow:)! Can you give some details on it? It's very important to me > since I'm > going to get a Z-1p soon and read that it doesn't support the focus > confirmation feature for m42 lenses and I'd like to mount my MIR > 20mm on the > camera... Do you really need focus confirmation on such a short lens? I doubt the focus confirmation would work properly on a lens with such wide DOF. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[6]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
Actually, I would think it is because as a US magazine Pop Photo reports what Pentax USA sells. Pentax USA has not sold the LX for a long time though it continued to be available in other markets. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:12 PM Subject: Re: Re[6]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...) > - Original Message - > From: "Bruce Dayton" Subject: Re[6]: getting LX - worth it? > > > On a side note - I found it odd that each year, Pop > Photograhpy does a > > camera roundup where they list the main models of each maker. > The LX > > has not been shown for a very long time, even though it could > still be > > purchased new, when the Olympus OM-3,4 and Contax RTSII have > always > > been featured. One wonders if there is a reason for that. > > > That would be because for the most part, Pop Phot has their > heads up their asses. > Herp Keppler being the notable exception. > William Robb > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Metering (WAS: RE: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...))
And even that's open to arguments these days. Kodak, in the instructions included with the grey card, says to meter the card and then open up ½-stop for a correct middle grey reading for average scenes. There have been numerous discussions in many venues as to whether some meters are calibrated for 18% grey or 13% grey. IAC, Pål is wrong and has been wrong about this for years. For some reason he wants to believe that a "properly calibrated meter" in one of these wunderkameras is always going to give precise and proper exposure. Please correct me, Pål, if I've misunderstood you - but that's what you seem to have been saying. "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > Wrong! All built in camera meters are only > accurate when aimed at a subject with 18 % reflectance. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: 15mm?
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dan Scott > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 11:24 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: 15mm? > > > Anyone on the list ever compare the image quality of Pentax's SMCP-A 15mm > f/3.5 to the Voigtlander Heliar 15mm f/4.5? > > Spec wise the Heliar seems to have the advantage: 1/3 the price, 1/5 the > weight, smaller size, 10 vs 5 aperture blades... How does it do wide open? > Contrast, color, flare, etc.? > > Subjective evaluations of either lens are fine. > > Dan Scott > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arent they two differnt type lenses? One is for reflex cameras and one is for rangefinders. I would bet the one for rangefinders has better performance because its not required to be a severe retrofocus. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax 28mm shift lens
On 11 Jan 2002 at 17:14, herb greenslade wrote: > Hi > > Has anyone had experience with this lens? Hi Herb, Yes, a few of us here have, what do you specifically need to know? 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: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
I poked around a little more, and B&H has a couple of pages listing 1110, 127, 620, and 828 film. Tom Rittenhouse wrote: > > Why not just say 120? Yes there used to be all kinds of roll film out there > but I think the only one in general use any more is 120. You can still find > 220 and 70mm but they have essentially the same formats as 120. Now, I > always liked 116, anyone tried to buy a roll of that lately? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: LX Shutter Sound WAV!
Hi Gianfranco, Could you please send me the file too? Thank You, Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California > > Hi gang, > > > > For the pleasure of you all, I've recorded the shutter sound of > > two different LXs, an early model and a new one, both on the > > same WAV file. There may be slight variations in volume of the > > two takes, due to the "casual" recording equipment, but the > > differences between the two models are very interesting. > > Both the cameras without lens, at 1/75, microphone near the > > mount. Of course, the difference is bigger when heard in real > > life. > > The file is 107KB, if anybody is interested I can send it off > > list. > > > > Gianfranco - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
I saw what I believe to be Verichrome Pan 620 listed on the B&H web site. Wasn't someone asking about that the other day? Ann, perhaps? http://www03.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___220893___KOVP620___REG___CatID=2721___SID=EB8FD97A9E0 Tom Rittenhouse wrote: > > Why not just say 120? Yes there used to be all kinds of roll film out there > but I think the only one in general use any more is 120. You can still find > 220 and 70mm but they have essentially the same formats as 120. Now, I > always liked 116, anyone tried to buy a roll of that lately? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Mint MX on Ebay, low BIN
You have to understand ebay ratings. Mint means it just came out of the box, the junk box in the basement that is. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: wendy beard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 12:25 AM Subject: Re: Mint MX on Ebay, low BIN > >On 1/9/02 1:14 PM, "Rob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Mint MX on Ebay, low BIN > > > > > > > > > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1320123125 > > > - > > Good grief, I wonder what I could get for my even-mintier-than-that one. > Especially as mint seems to mean "missing the winder cover and that little > black thing on the shutter lock". > Although having said that, $179 is cheaper than the going rate for an MX in > the used camera stores, if you can find one. > > Wendy > > --- > Wendy Beard > Ottawa, Canada > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > home page http://www.beard-redfern.com > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:36:28 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Any thoughts on the PhotoCD or this scanner (or anything in the > same price range, $100-$150US) would be appreciated. A big reason I don't do PhotoCDs is that I don't want to pay to have images scanned that aren't "up to snuff". My average "keeper" rate is one or two frames per roll, at most. I don't want to pay to have the other ten, twenty, or thirty frames scanned. My preference is to preview scan them myself (flatbed from prints now, direct from negatives soon). Then I do full resolution scans of the interesting or "keeper" shots and ignore the rest. When I get enough full resolution scans to fill a CD, I move them from hard drive to CD to conserve hard drive space. Then, I'll use the full resolution scans saved to CD as the starting point for creating images for any use. Sometimes, I'll create a set of post-processed images all of a topic and make a CD of them. For example, I have a CD with a self-running slide show of all my Petit le Mans photos from all four years at PUG resolution (600 pixels on the longest edge). I'm getting ready to create a CD with the ready-for-printing versions of a bunch of my images, too. TTYL, DougF NB. IrfanView is cool for creating self-running slide shows you can freely distribute. Search for it on www.download.com or any of the other freeware/shareware sites. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Prices & shops (Was: 80/1.8 CZJ going cheap in Poland)
Artur, try out www.paladix.cz I have remembered, I have bought tripod from them (it was a bargain because they were selling out the old models of Manfrotto tripods. A list member from Slovakia I think had to point me to it, even though it's a Prague based shop I never knew about it before!) 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: LX Shutter Sound WAV!
Gianfranco, I wouldn't mind hearing that . . . THanks, Illinois Bill Gianfranco Irlanda wrote: > > Hi gang, > > For the pleasure of you all, I've recorded the shutter sound of > two different LXs, an early model and a new one, both on the > same WAV file. There may be slight variations in volume of the > two takes, due to the "casual" recording equipment, but the > differences between the two models are very interesting. > Both the cameras without lens, at 1/75, microphone near the > mount. Of course, the difference is bigger when heard in real > life. > The file is 107KB, if anybody is interested I can send it off > list. > > Gianfranco > > = > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > 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: Prices & shops (Was: 80/1.8 CZJ going cheap in Poland)
[MZ-S's price in Czechia and Poland] AL> 37 900 Kc is still about 8 000 Kc cheaper than here... Really?!? That's a lot of difference! It's roughly (almost?) the price of the new flash!!! If you could explain to the customs (or go trough "green borderline") that you have already brought this new MZ-S complete in box with receipts from Poland just to show a friend in Prague... ;-)) AL> And how about this?:) [link deleted] WOW! What can I say? AL> Hmmm, anybody knows links to other Internet shops in Czech and maybe AL> Slovakia? Unfrotunately, not. Even if I live here :) I usually buy used, and new equipment (tripods, camerabags,...) I buy in small shops where I have friendly relation with the staff. I have found that most small shops when at least little friends can lower the price to about just a little bit over the price of internet shops, so I don't use internet shops. Frantisek P.S.: the link was interesting. Investigating it further. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting LX -worth it? (repairs,...))
Frantisek ... It's not rocket science. It's not even brain surgery. If you're using a spot meter, meter the face and shoot at the indicated exposure. That will actually give you a little less than Zone V according to extrapolation of information from Kodak. Remember, all skin tones aren't equal, so you may have to run some tests to find which tones should fall into what "zone". It's not always "zone VI" for Caucasians, either. If they have a tan, or a ruddy complexion, or are especially pale, you may have to adjust a bit. IOW, there is no simple, direct answer for all people under all situations. Go out and shoot some film, process it, print it, and see what the results are like. Frantisek Vlcek wrote: > But I am already figuring this into my exposure! I wrote in my post > "spotmetering faces and placing them at Zone 6" - that means because > usual caucassian faces are about 1 stop brighter than medium gray (18% > gray) for which meters are calibrated. So I need to open up one stop > from the spotmeter reading. I use a simplified zone scale with the > spotmeter, otherwise, it's almost useless. The problem is, I haven't > figured yet how much the reflectivity of faces of dark skinned people > (especially of certain ethnics, from middle Africa) differs from 18% > gray. I know that for the caucassians, it's Zone 6. But what zone for > them? Zone 4? 4.5? If it was normal portraits, I would be using > incident metering. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Peleng 8mm circular fisheye now in K mount?
I have just purchased a Sigma unit, similar to this one from the same vendor: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1320452055 I will post a report when I get it. I had the oportunity to look at the 'AF' version, in Canon mount, and hope the MF version is of even better build quality (being older). And for $129 + shipping ... Michel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 11 January, 2002 14:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Peleng 8mm circular fisheye now in K mount? A listing on German Ebay claims to have a Peleng 8/3.5 circular fisheye lens in K mount: http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1320219348 Is this possible? That would be quite a development. No mention whether it's autoaperture. I've written to an English-speaking Russian who sells the M42 version everyday for $199 shipped (http://www.geocities.com/belshop/index.html), asking him what he knows about this. I'll report his reply. There remains my unanswered question about how someone else can be selling Sigma 8/3.5 PKAs on EBay for under $200. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: San Fran?
Hi, When are you going to be here? CBWaters wrote: > > It looks like I'm going to a conference in Oakland next month. I might have > a few hours to spare and am wondering about some good places to find PDML > members relaxing with their cameras...and maybe a beverage? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go 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 MZ-S questions and some observations
Hi Pal, please see below. PAJ> I beg to differ. I find the good, modern Pentax AF bodies far easier to PAJ> focus than any manual focus Pentax I've used. I did side-by-side comparison PAJ> with the LX and the Z-1p and whereas the LX (old type focusing screen) was I agree, but what's the point? You are IMHO comparing apples to oranges - an old grainy and dark focusing screen with modern super bright aspherical type screen... If both cameras had same screen, the much higher magnification viewfinder of LX would be much easier to focus. Solution - new screens in the LX, MX, ... [...] PAJ> Split images screens are in my opinion totally useless; like most PAJ> photographers, the first thing I did was removing these screens from any Totally? Sorry but surely not totally. Perhaps for your application, yes. But not in all cases. For long fast lenses, I agree - split-image is the worst for them. But for many other kinds of photography, split-image focusing aid is absolutely needed... especially with low magnification finder like MZ-S has. E.g. - long lenses near infinity. Ever tried focusing your 600/4 wide open at moon? I tried with 500/5.6, and I must admit, split-image was the best. - wide angle lenses, focused from about 3 meters farther away. With superwides, image detail is so small you can't very well focus them using plain matte screen, ESPECIALLY with low mag finder. A split image helps tremendously. ... and there are other uses. PAJ> new camera body. The split image screens are not common anymore because PAJ> they aren't needed any longer. Older cameras needed these focus assist They are not common because mf cameras are not common! All mf cameras sold today have split-image/microprism focusing aid screen. Look at Pentax, Nikon, Minolta, Cosina... Or the MZ-M is no longer sold with splitimage C74 screen? [...] PAJ> brain to decide when an image is in focus and when its not. Again I take PAJ> exception of the LX with the new screens (which are similar to the MZ-S PAJ> screens anyway). That's it! With ~same~ screens, any older high magnification camera will be easier to focus than any newer low mag camera! LX has 0.95x (IIRC), MZ-S has 0.75x (0.77?). So from simple math, LX is much more precise (it shows image detail higher magnified, therefore easier to determine for eye if in focus or not). PAJ> I also prefer the lower finder magnification because it does not detract PAJ> from critical focusing and it makes it easier to compose because the whole PAJ> image can be seen without wandering of the eye. Of course, that's a dilemma. Easy focusing OR easy composing? High eyepoint for eyeglass viewers OR high magnification for best focusing? I wear glasses, but am considering using contact lenses just for photography, it would make seeing whole finder much easier. Anyway, I though it would be nice to know if the MZ-S can use the C74 splitimage screen, I can see the usability of such precise focusing screen _at least_ for critical focus work in lenstesting et cetera. OTOH, is there a clear (without AF zone markings) screen for the MZ-S? I might get one to put in my older bodies for long teles :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Face reflectivity of different ethnics (was: Re: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...))
HK> Don't worry, I don't believe you will have offended anybody (unless HK> they're very sensitive)! :) HK> My hypothesis as to why (spot) metering of darker faces doesn't work is HK> as follows. The lightmeter assumes 18% gray reflectance. However, in HK> this case, the reflectance will be much lower. In an attempt to turn HK> the image into an 18% gray image, the lightmeter will overexpose. HK> Therefore you need to underexpose by maybe a stop or two, but I'm HK> guessing. The opposite is true if you try photographing something HK> really white eg snow or possibly sand at midday. (I hope I've got this HK> the right way round...) But I am already figuring this into my exposure! I wrote in my post "spotmetering faces and placing them at Zone 6" - that means because usual caucassian faces are about 1 stop brighter than medium gray (18% gray) for which meters are calibrated. So I need to open up one stop from the spotmeter reading. I use a simplified zone scale with the spotmeter, otherwise, it's almost useless. The problem is, I haven't figured yet how much the reflectivity of faces of dark skinned people (especially of certain ethnics, from middle Africa) differs from 18% gray. I know that for the caucassians, it's Zone 6. But what zone for them? Zone 4? 4.5? If it was normal portraits, I would be using incident metering. Best regards, 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: Odp: MZ7, MZ5, MZ3 bodies........
Artur Ledóchowski wrote: > Wow:)! Can you give some details on it? It's very important to me since I'm > going to get a Z-1p soon and read that it doesn't support the focus > confirmation feature for m42 lenses and I'd like to mount my MIR 20mm on the > camera... All you need to do is make sure the body's electrical contacts are all shorted together. I couldn't get trap-focus to work with my 400/5.6 on an extension tube until I scraped the paint off the mount (which is a lot easier than fiddling with bits of metal foil). With a K adaptor you'll have to be sure that the lens is firmly mounted against the contacts, then I guess its the same deal... get rid of any paint on the lens mount where it makes contact with the body's electronic contacts. If its plastic you'll need to glue some foil to it. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 300/4 A* Questions
Geoff Moes asked: > If I use the extention tubes, what are the other effects. Do I loose the > ablility to focus to infinity, does it increase magnification of the lens? Yes, because you can get closer. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: Wide Angle 28mm Question
Bruce Dayton wrote: > Since I have never used the K, I can't > make a fair comparison between them. I have been quite happy with mine > and it is one of the lenses that goes in the bag even when traveling > light. I've used both (traded the 24/2.8K for the 24/2 FA*). The K is MUCH smaller and MUCH lighter. I can't really comment much on the relative optical qualities because I didn't own the K lens for long. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 15mm?
Dan Scott wrote: > Anyone on the list ever compare the image quality of Pentax's SMCP-A 15mm > f/3.5 to the Voigtlander Heliar 15mm f/4.5? I could have done; I had a friend who used to have one, until he sold all his film gear to go digital. > Subjective evaluations of either lens are fine. What I like about the Pentax is that being an SLR lens you can actually see and avoid flare before you shoot. Thats a big advantage in my book. You might also find the extra speed useful. On the other hand, the rangefinder is small and light. It may be better optically because it won't be a retrofocus design. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
San Fran?
It looks like I'm going to a conference in Oakland next month. I might have a few hours to spare and am wondering about some good places to find PDML members relaxing with their cameras...and maybe a beverage? Cory Waters - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 67 film advance question
On Friday, January 11, 2002, at 03:52 PM, William Robb wrote: > I am, at this moment, admiring my 6x7 and 90mm LS lens mounted > to a bellows. > Very impressive. I would hate you, but the SMCP-67 75mm f2.8 AL seems to emit some kind of calming rays or something. -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: 77 limited vs. 75mm f2.8 for 67? was Re: FM3A dilemma
:-) --- Oliver Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > STOP beating me to the punch ! :) > > - Original Message - > From: "Brendan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:04 PM > Subject: Re: 77 limited vs. 75mm f2.8 for 67? was > Re: FM3A dilemma > > > > I vote for a fair comparison, send me the limited, > > I'll get the 75mm 67 from Aaron and I'll let you > both > > know which is better. > > > > --- Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thursday, January 10, 2002, at 10:03 PM, > William > > > Robb wrote: > > > > > > > I would be happy to run a comparison. Just > send me > > > the 75mm > > > > f/2.8 and a 6x7 to 35mm adaptor > > > > > > Damn, you figured out the trick...I was waiting > for > > > you to say "yeah, > > > I'd be interested in seeing that" so I could say > > > "okay, send me your > > > limited". > > > > > > -Aaron > > > feeling less sneaky than usual > > > - > > > > > __ Web-hosting solutions for home and business! http://website.yahoo.ca - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: B&W negative scanning
Try it both ways and see how it works for you. Len --- - Original Message - > I've got a back-log of negatives and slides to scan so I started messing > around with the B&W negatives. My scanner only allows 1500 ppi resolution on > B&W negatives but it goes up to 2400 for color negatives. Is there anything > wrong with scanning the B&W as color and converting the scan to grey-scale? > The results look good and the higher resolution scans are more to my liking. > > Thanks in advance for any advice. > > By the way, I've got a lot to learn about Black and White Tri-X seems > very nice though! > > Christian Skofteland > [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: Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
It is, however, sensitive to the reflectivity of the film itself which seems to vary somewhat from film to film. Len --- - Original Message - From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:54 AM Subject: Re: Re[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...) > Because the LX meters off the film plane and not through the focus screen, it is not > sensitive to the "brightness" (translucence) of the focus screen as is the MX or any other > camera that has to meter through the screen. This allows the use of many different types > of screens without having to compensate separately for each screen (or no screen at all in > special circumstances). It also makes possible the use of a myriad of finders (or no > finder at all!) while maintaining the ability to meter in a consistent manner. > > Regards, > Bob... > > "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, > and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us > from the former, for the sake of the latter. > The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls > for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, > and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we > suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, > we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' > It is a very serious consideration that millions yet > unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." > - Samuel Adams, 1771 > > From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Bob, > > > > Ok, I read through it. I still say, compared to modern cameras, that > > outside of low light readings, there doesn't appear to be anything > > overly special about using the meter in the LX. I understand it reads > > from the film plane, but outside of long exposures, I don't think that > > is much, if any, advantage over meters in the viewfinder. I'm trying > > to think where else it would have an advantage - fireworks, lightning. > > > > I think the lack of spot metering is a big take-away that has to be > > balanced against the low-light capability. > > > > Bruce Dayton > > > > Friday, January 11, 2002, 6:22:02 AM, you wrote: > > > > BB> http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx / > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pentax 28mm shift lens
Hi Has anyone had experience with this lens? herb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Canadian PDML'rs
Hi I just caught this message just as I was joining up. Just some info on the CANADA: Year of the Land This book was produced to commerate Canada's Centennial. The executive producer was Lorraine Monk, a lady who did more for Canadian photographers to establish them as artists, was the founder of what is now the Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography originally part of the National Film Board but now part of the National Gallery of Canada The art director was Allan Fleming, the first Canadian art director to receive the prestigious New York Art Director's award. He designed the famous CN logo. The photographers were some of Canada's finest landscape and nature photographers, including Freeman Patterson, Mary Ferguson, John de Visser. Originally the book was to be printed in an edition of 100, 000, but it became so popular that in subsequent years, many more editions were printed. The main criticism of the book, was that it didn't portray Canadians. Subsequently two other books were published in 1968, one in French and one in English, the French one was called (my copy) "Ces visages qui sont un pays" . If I recall correctly, there were minor difference in each. Lorrain Monk produced a third book in 1976, called "Between Friends" the official gift from Canada to the US for their 200th celebration. Again 25 of our best photographers were commissioned to document the vast border between our two countries. Just in case you wanted to know!. herb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go 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 First impressions - P67
I'm one who holds the 67 just like my 35s -- left hand under the mirrorbox, with left fingers and thumb focusing and changing the aperture, and right hand (obviously) winding and firing. I do not find that this fatigues my wrists at all. If anything, my shoulders and neck are tight at the end of a long day of shooting. -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: Odp: Re: Odp: 80/1.8 CZJ going cheap in Poland
Artur wrote: Aanybody knows links to other Internet shops in Czech and maybe Slovakia? http://www.foto-video.cz The Pentax used stuff is at http://www.foto-video.cz/cenik.asp?kod=PE07* and other shops listed by country at http://acecam.com/abroad.html#Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.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: Focusing screens for MZ-S? LX / MX maybe?
Yup it is, you'll loose the spot meter for some reason ( it works just meters weird thru the split image finder ), just order from Pentax a MZ-M screen and swap them :) --- gfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Rob Brigham wrote: > > > The only other genuine pentax screen for the MZ-S > is one with a grid on > > it. There are no offivial split screens. > However, some have put the > > MZ-M screen into MZ-5 and I think it worked OK. > Not sure if this is > > right size for MZ-S though... > > ooh.. wait.. > > Are you saying its possible to put a split screen in > my ZX-5n in place of > teh stupid ground glass one which is impossible to > use? > > Details, please? > > -g. > > (oh, hi, look, I'm done lurking) > > -- > http://www.infotainment.org > "The destructive character is cheerful." - > Walter Benjamin > - __ Web-hosting solutions for home and business! http://website.yahoo.ca - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Peleng 8mm circular fisheye now in K mount?
A listing on German Ebay claims to have a Peleng 8/3.5 circular fisheye lens in K mount: http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1320219348 Is this possible? That would be quite a development. No mention whether it's autoaperture. I've written to an English-speaking Russian who sells the M42 version everyday for $199 shipped (http://www.geocities.com/belshop/index.html), asking him what he knows about this. I'll report his reply. There remains my unanswered question about how someone else can be selling Sigma 8/3.5 PKAs on EBay for under $200. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.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: Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
A friend works at at Daymen in Markham.We disscussed the 1250 and 1650.I'm going to do the same as you but for the extra $100.00 or so i'll go with the 1650.Now they have to get their back orders in Dave Begin Original Message From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:58:47 -0500 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD > I'm looking into getting an inexpensive scanner (right now, the leader is the Epson 1250 with photo attachment). I'm debating on going this route versus getting a PhotoCD with my processing (both slides and color negs). I haven't had any shots made into a PhotoCD, so I'm brand new at this medium. > Check out the Epson Store at www.epsonstore.com They have the refurbished 1200 scanner with transparency adapter for $99.00 US. Just got mine up and running this morning, and although I've only scanned a couple of prints and one 35mm negative, so far I'm pretty impressed with it. 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 . End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: (4): Halogen lighting
Thanks Bill.I know what you mean now.We have similar stuff here in our photogramatry dept.a white kind of shiny sheet with a thin waffer inbetween. Dave Begin Original Message From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:38:58 -0600 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Halogen lighting - Original Message - From: "David Brooks" Subject: Re: Re: Re: Halogen lighting > Bill,by foam core,do you mean like the blue type > used in insulation jobs or something else. Something else. Graphic arts suppliers will have what i am talking about. Essentially, it is a light weight mount board for photographs or other flat art. I think it comes in up to 4x8 foot sheets. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
Forget about the Epson 1250 flatbed for film or slide scanning - get it if you want to scan prints, etc. but skip the photo attachment, and go with the PhotoCD for now. For websites the flatbed may be fine, but for prints - especially 8x10 - it won't do the job. Save up for a filmscanner instead. I bought the Epson 1200 a year ago with the same thought in mind - a month later I bought a Nikon LS-30 filmscanner refurb for about $500. Maris - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:36 PM Subject: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD | Happy Friday! | | I'm looking into getting an inexpensive scanner (right now, the leader is the Epson |1250 with photo attachment). I'm debating on going this route versus getting a |PhotoCD with my processing (both slides and color negs). I haven't had any shots |made into a PhotoCD, so I'm brand new at this medium. | | I recently saw a thread on Photo.net that was along these lines as well, but I |wanted to get the PDMLers thought on these two ways to go digital. | | My main reason for going digital is to post to the PUG, setup my own web portfolio |and possibly print. Printing would probably be limited to 4x6, 5x7 and 8x10. | | Any thoughts on the PhotoCD or this scanner (or anything in the same price range, |$100-$150US) would be appreciated. | | Thanks... | Ed 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[4]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
Aaron, Guess I phrased that badly. Other than low light *usage* (sensitivity and reaction-shutter), isn't it just a normal center weighted meter? Bruce Dayton Friday, January 11, 2002, 12:37:23 PM, you wrote: AR> On Friday, January 11, 2002, at 01:31 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> I'm trying to figure out why everyone thinks the LX meter is so >> fantastic. Other than low light sensitivity, isn't it just a normal >> center weighted meter? AR> I like it for its low light sensitivity and because it will alter AR> exposure time part way through a long exposure if the lighting AR> conditions change. AR> -Aaron AR> - AR> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, AR> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to AR> 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: Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
> I'm looking into getting an inexpensive scanner (right now, the leader is the Epson 1250 with photo attachment). I'm debating on going this route versus getting a PhotoCD with my processing (both slides and color negs). I haven't had any shots made into a PhotoCD, so I'm brand new at this medium. > Check out the Epson Store at www.epsonstore.com They have the refurbished 1200 scanner with transparency adapter for $99.00 US. Just got mine up and running this morning, and although I've only scanned a couple of prints and one 35mm negative, so far I'm pretty impressed with it. 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 .
Attn Tom Rittenhouse
Drop me an email when you get a chance. Had to reformat my hard drive and lost all the addresses. Bill - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 67 film advance question
- Original Message - From: "Michel Adam" < Subject: 67 film advance question > Help needed: > > > I just loaded a roll of 220 in the 67. I did make sure the > pressure plate was set to 220, and then advanced it so that > the counter shows '0'. > > But only then did I remember to turn the right switch to 220. > > Will I be able to shoot more than 10 frames? In other words, > does the 120/220 switch on the side have to be set BEFORE you > close the back and start winding? > > Do I have to go in the darkroom and open the back and try > to salvage the situation? As long as you switch the counter to 220 before you hit frame 10, it will advance properly through the entire film. I am, at this moment, admiring my 6x7 and 90mm LS lens mounted to a bellows. Very impressive. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: Several Pentax cameras and other items
These are some Pentax cameras I have for sale, because nowadays they see very little use, and I want to sell them to fund other Pentax equipment purchases. This is the first lot: Pentax SFX AF SLR body (like new) + Pentax soft case for the SFX + SMC Pentax-F 35-70 mm. 3.5-4.5 (one of the best standard zooms Pentax has made) + 2 SFX battery grips, one for 2CR5 lithium battery and other for 4 AA batteries (everything is mint, except that one of the plastic tabs of the soft case is missing, but it is perfectly functional) Instruction manual (in Spanish) Everything for 190 euro. Second lot: Pentax MZ-5 AF SLR body + SMC Pentax-F 35-80 mm. 4-5.6 (a fine standard zoom lens) + Fg battery pack (the body and battery pack are like new, the lens is EX+ cosmetically; optically and mechanically it's perfect) Instruction manual for the camera in Spanish, and in English for the battery pack. Everything for 280 euro. Shipping expenses will be paid by the buyer. -- Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Zaragoza (Aragon) - Spain -- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go 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: Re: Halogen lighting
- Original Message - From: "David Brooks" Subject: Re: Re: Re: Halogen lighting > Bill,by foam core,do you mean like the blue type > used in insulation jobs or something else. Something else. Graphic arts suppliers will have what i am talking about. Essentially, it is a light weight mount board for photographs or other flat art. I think it comes in up to 4x8 foot sheets. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Inexpensive Photo Scanner v. PhotoCD
Happy Friday! I'm looking into getting an inexpensive scanner (right now, the leader is the Epson 1250 with photo attachment). I'm debating on going this route versus getting a PhotoCD with my processing (both slides and color negs). I haven't had any shots made into a PhotoCD, so I'm brand new at this medium. I recently saw a thread on Photo.net that was along these lines as well, but I wanted to get the PDMLers thought on these two ways to go digital. My main reason for going digital is to post to the PUG, setup my own web portfolio and possibly print. Printing would probably be limited to 4x6, 5x7 and 8x10. Any thoughts on the PhotoCD or this scanner (or anything in the same price range, $100-$150US) would be appreciated. Thanks... Ed 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: Re[2]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
On Friday, January 11, 2002, at 01:31 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: > I'm trying to figure out why everyone thinks the LX meter is so > fantastic. Other than low light sensitivity, isn't it just a normal > center weighted meter? I like it for its low light sensitivity and because it will alter exposure time part way through a long exposure if the lighting conditions change. -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 .
67 film advance question
Help needed: I just loaded a roll of 220 in the 67. I did make sure the pressure plate was set to 220, and then advanced it so that the counter shows '0'. But only then did I remember to turn the right switch to 220. Will I be able to shoot more than 10 frames? In other words, does the 120/220 switch on the side have to be set BEFORE you close the back and start winding? Do I have to go in the darkroom and open the back and try to salvage the situation? Thanks Michel - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[2]: Wide Angle 28mm Question
Shel, I can tell you a little. This is a * lens so it's build quality is higher than the typical FA lens - it is mostly metal-can't say if any plastic is used. It also has the focus clutch, which IMO, provides for a much better manual focus feel than the typical FA lens. The extra stop is handy, but not critical. For most uses of a wide angle you are going to stop down a fair bit. Since I have never used the K, I can't make a fair comparison between them. I have been quite happy with mine and it is one of the lenses that goes in the bag even when traveling light. Bruce Dayton Friday, January 11, 2002, 11:53:29 AM, you wrote: SB> The 24/2.0 is getting rave reviews here, which, of course, is always of SB> interest. But the question is, how much better is it than the K24/2.8? SB> After all, moving to the FA*24/2.0 one is giving up manual focusing, SB> adding a lot of weight - the lens weighs twice that of the K24/2.8 - and SB> bulk, and, while I don't judge a lens solely by it's performance SB> figures, the figures on Boz's site show the two lenses to be quite SB> close. SB> So, what characteristics does the 24/2.0 have that make it so desirable SB> besides being a stop faster? How does it feel to focus manually? Is SB> the lens body plastic? Has anyone experienced any problems with it? SB> Bob S. wrote: >> ... you won't find a better wide angle >> lens than the FA 24mm f2.0." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Wide Angle 28mm Question
Shel, I've only held this lens once but if memory serves, it had a focusing clutch that made it one of the best feeling AF lenses I've ever held. Evan From: "Shel Belinkoff" > The 24/2.0 is getting rave reviews here, which, of course, is always of > interest. But the question is, how much better is it than the K24/2.8? > After all, moving to the FA*24/2.0 one is giving up manual focusing, > adding a lot of weight - the lens weighs twice that of the K24/2.8 - and > bulk, and, while I don't judge a lens solely by it's performance > figures, the figures on Boz's site show the two lenses to be quite > close. > > So, what characteristics does the 24/2.0 have that make it so desirable > besides being a stop faster? How does it feel to focus manually? Is > the lens body plastic? Has anyone experienced any problems with it? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[6]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
- Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" Subject: Re[6]: getting LX - worth it? > On a side note - I found it odd that each year, Pop Photograhpy does a > camera roundup where they list the main models of each maker. The LX > has not been shown for a very long time, even though it could still be > purchased new, when the Olympus OM-3,4 and Contax RTSII have always > been featured. One wonders if there is a reason for that. > That would be because for the most part, Pop Phot has their heads up their asses. Herp Keppler being the notable exception. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
>> Isn't it >> mostly about understanding the equipment and how it works to be able >> to use it wisely? >> > > I think that's always the case. I think it also helps if the device is accurate and consistent, which some in-camera meters really aren't. I used to have an SPF, for instance, that would meter fairly accurately down to a certain lowish light level and then STOP metering accurately while continuing to give what LOOKED like active readouts! Very frustrating. You needed a meter to know when the light levels had gotten to the point that the meter wouldn't work! Also, many meters are non-linear. The might be accurate at EV10 but high at EV 15 and low at EV5 (or whatever). Lots of meters aren't very well color-corrected, either. That is, the same luminance of red or green will result in different readings when the readings ought to be identical. Don't forget that system flare affects meter accuracy, too. And finally, a lot of in-camera metering systems just contain a lot of slop and don't work repeatably. Some old meters needed to be "charged" by being exposed to brighter light before they would work with lower light. Some in-camera meters don't give the same reading for the same control subject time after time. Saying that the LX has "a great meter" really means that it avoids a whole rat's-nest of problems that variably afflict other in-camera meters--often enough, without the operator being very aware of them. The Leica M6 has "a great meter" too. Lots of cameras really don't. What's happened with meters over the decades has been interesting. Forty years ago photographers resisted any sort of in-camera meter. Then they wanted spot meters so they would know exactly what they were measuring. Then they wanted full-field meters (now called "center-weighted") so they wouldn't have to spot meter. Now, since most photographers don't understand metering any more, we're to the point that we prefer the cameras to actually adjust for the scene FOR us, since we're apparently too thick to do it for ourselves. I've always thought it odd that most "Matrix"-type meters actually change a camera's exposure settings ON THEIR OWN--without telling the camera operator what adjustment has been made! One nice feature of the Contax Aria is that it has a scale in the viewfinder that shows the degree of adjustment between multi-segment metering and CW metering. An obvious feature. I should have thought that it would be a feature all photographers would have demanded as a matter of course after the advent of the Nikon FA (the first camera with multi-segment evaluative metering), but evidently, no. --Mike J. "The 37th Frame," an independent newsletter for photographers www.37thframe.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 .
Messed it up (about my Jan PUG photo)
I've noticed that somehow I messed up my Jan PUG photo (scanning?). The print is much better than what you can see on the screen. Sorry. Luis Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Wide Angle 28mm Question
Francis, If you can find an older K 28mm f3.5 (52mm front filter size), that has the best reputation and could cost $35-$65 because it looks old and obsolete (manual focus). The optics are great. I would not buy the M28/2.8 or settle for a M28/3.5 (49mm filter & manual focus). If you are able to spend $300+, you won't find a better wide angle lens than the FA 24mm f2.0. Regards, Bob S. > I will need to purchase a wide angle lens > soon to photograph buildings and interiors, > so I am looking for advise from Pentax > users as to which 28mm has the least > distortion. I have a PZ-1P and an LX. I am > looking for the best 28mm lens, whether it > is auto focus or manual is not important. > Since cost is a factor, I am looking for a > 28mm instead of a 24mm, but if there are > reasonable priced 24mm's, please let me know. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[2]: Metering (WAS: RE: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...))
Shel, Very well put. The meter is just a tool. When understood and used properly, it can help you produce good results. When misunderstood or used poorly, it will be fooled quite often. Bruce Friday, January 11, 2002, 9:29:10 AM, you wrote: SB> Pal, you are quite mistaken. Leaving the camera on automatic can cause SB> exposure problems. Here's one example taken from a commentary by Kirk SB> Tuck, in which he describes metering a scene in which the light doesn't SB> change: SB> When I meter my hand it meters the light falling on it and SB> that light doesn't change during the shoot. When I shoot SB> with the Leica I leave the exposure alone and since there SB> is no option for auto-exposure I don't have the temptation SB> to use it. When I used the F5 I was always lured by the siren SB> call of advertising onto the rocks of "multi-matrix super SB> integrated" automation. When I pointed the camera at the SB> doctor's white coat the camera tried to compensate, kinda. SB> When the camera pointed at the dark sweater of a patient SB> the camera tried to compensate, kinda. According to my lab, SB> this "kinda" automatic compensation means that most rolls of SB> pro film are all over the map compared with film received SB> ten years ago. SB> Further, getting LX specific, the LX meter is bottom center weighted SB> (http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/lx/lx_pat.html) which SB> means that, if you turn the camera from horizontal to vertical to shoot SB> the same scene in the same lighting, the camera may change the exposure SB> due to the different relationship of dark to light elements in the SB> scene. SB> If one relies solely on automation for metering, rather than SB> interpreting the scene and using one's brain to set the final exposure, SB> there is a very good chance that the exposure will be off by some SB> degree. JCO is right. Without involvement by the photographer a meter SB> can be a pretty stupid thing, and staunch reliance on meter readings - SB> regardless of what meter or what type of meter - is sometimes a very SB> foolish approach. SB> Tell me something - if the LX meter is so perfect, why do people SB> continue to bracket their exposures? SB> Pål Audun Jensen wrote: >> >> JCO wrote: >> >> >In camera meters are very stupid to the point that a simple "guess" >> >can easily be more accurate than even an LX with certain subjects. >> >> Certainly not. The LX meter and any other correctly calibrated meter is >> right 100% of the time. >> >> >Very true to the point that in order to compensate for the >> >in cameras meter's "dumbness" you end up guessing anyway. >> >Thats why I use sunny f16 or an incident meter and manual >> >exposure. It yeilds more consistant results than an in camera >> >meter does. >> >> Whatever meter you use, consistent results are dependent whether or not the >> photographer knows what he wants and know how to use the meter. All meters >> are equal in this regard independent on whether the meter is physically >> located in a camera body or not. >> The advantage of meters like in the LX is that you can set exposure more >> accurate than 1/3 of a stop something that's impossible to do consistently >> with any hand-held meter. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: B&W negative scanning
Begin Original Message From: Christian Skofteland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:08:32 -0500 To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: B&W negative scanning >Is there anything >wrong with scanning the B&W as color and converting the scan to grey- >scale? >The results look good and the higher resolution scans are more to my >liking. I just read a review of the Epson 1250 scanner vs an Agfa of some sort on the net(yesterday)He showed a comparision of what you are speaking of.It did seem to make a difference but the scan quality of the 1250 was not to hot.The author seemed to like this method of scanning B&W and adjusting in PS. As far as the link,i'm not sure what it was.I found it doing a google search on "epson 1250" Hope this helps (I think i'm going with the Epson 1650 photo scanner) Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Revive the Spotmatic name! Yeah!
'Asahi Pentax Spotmatic II' is Japanese/Greek/English/Greek/Latin. Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[6]: getting LX - worth it? (repairs,...)
Bob, What you say makes sense. It make the LX more versatile than many other cameras. It still doesn't make the usage of the center weighted only meter any better than other bodies. There are many on the list who seem to continually refer to the metering capability as something godlike. I feel like the kid who said "The emporer has no clothes!" For those who need and utilize the many finders and unusual focusing screens (by unusual I mean types that other cameras don't have available), I can see the LX being the proper camera, but a center weighted only meter in general is nothing special. Please bear in mind that I am not slamming the whole camera, merely stating the observation that I read repeatedly, about this wonderful meter (as the feature - not the versatility of finders) that doesn't seem all that special to me. On a side note - I found it odd that each year, Pop Photograhpy does a camera roundup where they list the main models of each maker. The LX has not been shown for a very long time, even though it could still be purchased new, when the Olympus OM-3,4 and Contax RTSII have always been featured. One wonders if there is a reason for that. Bruce Dayton Friday, January 11, 2002, 8:54:09 AM, you wrote: BB> Because the LX meters off the film plane and not through the focus screen, it is not BB> sensitive to the "brightness" (translucence) of the focus screen as is the MX or any other BB> camera that has to meter through the screen. This allows the use of many different types BB> of screens without having to compensate separately for each screen (or no screen at all in BB> special circumstances). It also makes possible the use of a myriad of finders (or no BB> finder at all!) while maintaining the ability to meter in a consistent manner. BB> Regards, BB> Bob... BB> BB> "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, BB> and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us BB> from the former, for the sake of the latter. BB> The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls BB> for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, BB> and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we BB> suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, BB> we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' BB> It is a very serious consideration that millions yet BB> unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." BB> - Samuel Adams, 1771 BB> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Bob, >> >> Ok, I read through it. I still say, compared to modern cameras, that >> outside of low light readings, there doesn't appear to be anything >> overly special about using the meter in the LX. I understand it reads >> from the film plane, but outside of long exposures, I don't think that >> is much, if any, advantage over meters in the viewfinder. I'm trying >> to think where else it would have an advantage - fireworks, lightning. >> >> I think the lack of spot metering is a big take-away that has to be >> balanced against the low-light capability. >> >> Bruce Dayton >> >> Friday, January 11, 2002, 6:22:02 AM, you wrote: >> >> BB> http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/ BB> - BB> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, BB> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to BB> 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 .
