Re: Multiflash Distributor
< Hey guys, > > I've been watching this auction (that never gets bid on) for the > past month or two. The seller just keeps relisting it without lowering > the price any. Is a multiflash distributor REALLY worth this much? > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1364422523>> Isn't the seller in some way connected with the extremely nasty switch & bait scam merchants so beloved of the photonet neighbor to neighbor files? Their FA2 at $125 seemed worthy of a bid, from my pov; however I am unwilling to entertain their scams. I don't know much about NY business law, but is it possible that they chose eBay as it is not as policed and regulated as their former business? Kind regards Peter
Interesting article from PIR
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Herbert Keppler's take on today's digital SLR issues: http://www.photoreporter.com/2002/08-15/features/the_way_it_is.html The Way It Is Photokina 2002: New Day Dawning for Digital SLRs? < you know that copying the entire article breaks a lot of copyright rules. posting the article's URL doesn't. and y9our summary of it and any comments doesn't. Herb
Interesting article from PIR
Herbert Keppler's take on today's digital SLR issues: http://www.photoreporter.com/2002/08-15/features/the_way_it_is.html The Way It Is Photokina 2002: New Day Dawning for Digital SLRs? Herbert Keppler Did it ever occur to you that there was something mighty peculiar about the disparity in size between the interchangeable lens digital SLRs and most of the point-and-shoot digital cameras? Many point-and-shoot digitals are miniature marvels. Why aren't digital SLRs? After all, digital interchangeable lens SLRs are freed from all the wind and rewind gearing that are an absolute necessity with 35mm SLRs. With the possibility of electronic viewfinders, pentaprisms should vanish along with the need for rapid return mirrors. In the Beginning So why are the interchangeable lens digital SLRs as big and heavy or maybe more so than their 35mm predecessors? (Ooh, film burning photographers aren' t going to like that word, predecessors. Let's call them sister cameras.) The major part of the answer, of course, is that every interchangeable lens digital SLR camera body and lens mount started life as either a Canon or Nikon 35mm SLR-and that includes the Fuji and Kodak digital SLRs too. Just pick up any one of these cameras, look through the viewfinder and you can instantly identify what 35mm SLR camera brand and model formed its optical and mechanical base. Well, using already available 35mm SLR shells, autofocusing and lens aperture stop-down systems are ways to keep R&D plus engineering costs down while electronics engineers concentrate on the sensors, chips, boards and LCD panels necessary for digital interchangeable lens SLRs. Why no Minolta or Pentax interchangeable lens digital SLRs? Because as good as Minolta and Pentax lenses are, their lens systems are inadequate in variety to satisfy the pros and advanced amateurs camera makers see as the prime customers. The incredible scopes of the Canon and Nikon lens systems are indeed prime reasons for every electronic camera to use them. Virtually all present and many past Canon and Nikon lenses plus those from independent lens makers can and will fit the new breed of digital SLRs. Bigger Doesn't Mean Better Prices of successive digital SLRs keep falling as the pixel counts climb. How wonderful-at least for consumers who care little that camera makers are producing an unbelievable number of digital cameras but are making little or no profit due to the short life span of the cameras and cut-throat prices. Not so wonderful: The whole concept of today's interchangeable lens digital SLRs has an Achilles heel. All 35mm SLR camera lenses have been designed to cover a 24x36mm film format. So not surprisingly the electronics engineers have been hard at work trying to produce high megapixel, moderate cost 24x36mm CMOS or CCD digital sensors to take full advantage of the 24x36mm coverage. But is such a large sensor really needed at all? Nikon and Canon have found that their considerably smaller format sensors can produce pro quality results to six megapixels and probably beyond. In other words, unlike film, the bigger sensor area does not necessarily produce needed higher resolution. You might say that in every 24x36mm capable Canon, Fuji, Kodak or Nikon digital camera body is a smaller digital sensor wanting to break out. A smaller sensor covering a narrower view means that the equivalent 35mm camera focal length of every lens is, in effect, increased when attached to a digital camera just as it would be if you were shooting on smaller-than-35mm film. For instance, with a Canon EOS D30, you must multiply the marked focal length by 1.6, with the Nikon D1x and Fuji FinePix S1 Pro by 1.5, and with the Kodak DCS 760 by 1.3. While telephoto lens users may be delighted with a 300mm f/2.8 that becomes a 450mm lens as if by magic, a wide-angle lens owner must buy a big and very expensive 14mm lens to get the equivalent of a 21mm lens on a 35mm SLR. And he can get no shorter focal length. A photographer happy using a 28-105mm zoom on a 35mm camera may not be so delighted when it is transformed into a 42-157.5mm lens. The Achilles Heel But wait, we haven't hit the real Achilles heel yet. Lens designers predict that they will in the future be able to produce shorter focal length lenses than 14mm for digital use only. Now the heel. Since all these cameras have sensors covering a far smaller area than the 24x36mm capability of the rest of the Nikon and Canon lens lines, isn't this a frightening waste of covering power? If lenses only need to cover a smaller sensor area, couldn't the lenses be made far smaller and lighter with larger apertures and zooms have incredibly greater focal-length ratios? Theoretically at least, it would be possible for Nikon and Canon to produce a new series of such lenses for their present Canon and Nikon cameras, but this would be like wedding a new lens system onto old 35mm camera body technology. Olympus Steps Up Be there a camera manufacturer so
Looking for a 300mm cheap
I need a long lens but do not want to spend a how lot of maony. I want something fairly sharp. It does not need to be a fast lens as I will be using a tripod. Thanks in advanced for all recommandations. Jim Fellows
Re: Great Motorsports Photo
Woo Hoo! What a shot! -frank Doug Franklin wrote: > Here's a great motorsports photo that didn't require any FPS, but did > require a lot of judgement on being in the right place and timing it > right. > > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/020901/168/25tc0.html > > TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
RE: Best 400 speed CN film
Hi JCO: I have been using Kodak's Supra 400 for some time now, and really like it. It's sharp, no grain worth worrying about (but I haven't made any huge enlargements from it yet), with excellent contrast capability and good saturation. Don't really know about the second question: I always rate at the manufacturer's nominal speed for C41, and experience with under-exposure shows that grain really shows up worse than with over-exposure, IMV. HTH John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Monday, September 02, 2002 10:13 PM, J. C. O'Connell [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Whats the opinions on the finest > c-41 400 speed color in terms of > film grain (or lack of it). I'm not > so concerned about saturation or > contrast. > > I've been using Fuji superia 400 > lately which is excellent for a 400 > film, but I'm wondering if theres > something even better. > > Also what gives finest grain: > > Rated film speed? > Slight underexposure? > Slight overexposure? > > JCO >
Re: September PUG is open
Thanks to both Jostein and Adelheid for getting mine in there for me. Truly, above and beyond the call of duty... thanks and regards, frank Jostein wrote: > It's now also included in the September PUG. > Adelheid & Jostein > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: September PUG is open
Hi, Paul, Thanks for the kind words. By now you've probably noticed that through the efforts of Jostein and Adelheid, mine was a late addition to PUG. As you've probably read, it was part of an annual event here in Toronto, the Centre Island Dock Jump. Actually, my best shots were with my Leica, taken from a boat almost under the take off spot, but of course they weren't eligible for PUG. I didn't jump - watching, taking pictures, and enjoying a few brews was the extent of my involvement. I may be nuts, but I'm not crazy! regards, frank Paul Stenquist wrote: > Great shot, Frank! Is the guy on the bike working for you, or were you > just in the right place at the right time? > Paul > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
RE: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
I know about the manual focus and think i could live with it. I'm not sure about the AF though - maybe it was just the specimen I played with, but it seemed mighty quiet to me. Łukasz -Original Message- From: Paul Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s I've used a G2 once and the AF was really noisy and manual focus was essentialy useless. Paul - Original Message - From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 9:28 AM Subject: RE: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s > Hi Rob, > I wouldn't consider buying a Contax were it not for the vibration-free > shutter and the solid feeling similar to the Canon P rangefinder I have, > plus it's way quieter than my MX (not to mention the Super A :). Also, I've > just learned that the Fuji GS645s is not a folder, which was a major > advantage for me (I want portability). The GS645 that actually IS a folder > has got a 75/3.4 lens - focal lenght I already have on my Rolleiflex, and > the GS645s with a wide lens (non-folder) is not really smaller that this > TLR, so I guess I have my answer :) > > Regards, > Lukasz > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:10 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s > > > On 3 Sep 2002 at 0:10, ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of > these > > cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much > I > > loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium > format is > > very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... > > > > I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of > > happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) > > Hi ukasz, > > If you are at all pleased with your Pentax 35mm kit then don't bother with > the > Contax. I owned a G2 +16,21,28,35,45 and 90mm lens kit and whilst I can > attest > to the quality of the images produced by the kit they didn't happen as > regularly as I might have liked. The problem is that the G2 has a lot of > user > quirks that must be overcome before it becomes truly useful and then it > still > has some obvious limitations. I'd vote for the Fuji GS645s, it would be a > much > wiser way to spend your money. > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html >
Re: 5n Gripe, I guess
Hi Cory, In a similar situation, I used the cable release and self timer in combination. Just lay the cable out in front of the camera, take your place, lean forward and pick up the cable-release and push the button, then sit back and wait. Okay, it's not the ideal solution, but it avoids the mad scramble between camera and group ;-) -- Kristian On Monday, Sep 2, 2002, at 12:54 Europe/Dublin, CBWaters wrote: > So far I've had a very enjoyable time with my MZ-5n. I've had only > that one > worrisome time when I thought the film advance motor was toast. > (Turned out > that it was some poorly packed film cartridges from Kodak.) > I've found something I wish it would do though. A few times recently > I've > been in a position to use the self-timer to take family photos with > myself > in the shot. These shots included several family members who are > together > only once in a couple years. > I wanted to use the self-timer in conjunction with the auto-bracket > function > so I cold hit the button and run to the group and watch the camera take > three pictures. This would avoid my having to recompose because > everybody > moved when the camera flashed and I got up. The whole process would > be over > quickly so the children could get on with their running amuck. > AND it would also eliminate the shot I have of several family members > looking quite disheveled because I slipped on some sand trying to get > back > to my position and crashed into the group ;) > > Any thoughts? Am I missing something simple? > > Cory Waters > Everyone liked the pictures even if nobody wanted to be IN them... >
Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
I own the GS645 folder. Optically it's top notch. Mechanically, it has a few issues. It's now at Fuji Canada having the bellows replaced. The GS645S has a fixed lens, so it doesn't suffer from the dreaded pinholed bellows. Optcally, it's also excellent. It's not as compact as the folder, but still not too large. Jeff - Original Message - From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 6:10 PM Subject: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s > Hi all, > > I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of these > cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much I > loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium format > is very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... > > I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of > happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) > > Regards, > > Łukasz > > >
RE: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
On 2 Sep 2002 at 19:56, David Chang-Sang wrote: > The G2 is beautiful.. and it's got more functionality than you'd imagine... slow > sync, multiple exposure, continuous shooting.. continuous or single AF... and > the lenses are sweet. > > Easily enlarging to 11x14 with great resolution and clarity The Contax G1/G2 is one piece of kit that really seems to generate very polarized user responses. Users seem to either fall in love it or get fed up with it and dump it (usually at a huge loss). In any case if you purchase one and get it under control you will be able to produce images that will stand up to 11x14 enlargement with most of the lenses just as most good 35mm Pentax glass will allow :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
RE: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
Well.. I can't resist commenting on this one.. (as I'm sure Jeff will as well).. I did have the G2.. had it for about 6 months.. had to give it up because I got the Blad.. traded one Zeiss machine for another. The G2 is beautiful.. and it's got more functionality than you'd imagine... slow sync, multiple exposure, continuous shooting.. continuous or single AF... and the lenses are sweet. Easily enlarging to 11x14 with great resolution and clarity Jeff can comment on the Fuji. What you'll find about the Contax, should you get it, is that you'll start to feel like you're using a P&S with more bells and whistles. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed that feeling, because no matter what review I read; even the ones that claimed that the low light AF was bad.. if I followed what the instruction manual said.. you can consistently get great shots out of the camera. All that and Zeiss too.. *sigh*.. I do miss mine maybe somewhere in the future I'll see one again. Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: Łukasz Kacperczyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 6:10 PM To: pentax Subject: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s Hi all, I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of these cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much I loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium format is very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) Regards, Łukasz
Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
I've used a G2 once and the AF was really noisy and manual focus was essentialy useless. Paul - Original Message - From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 9:28 AM Subject: RE: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s > Hi Rob, > I wouldn't consider buying a Contax were it not for the vibration-free > shutter and the solid feeling similar to the Canon P rangefinder I have, > plus it's way quieter than my MX (not to mention the Super A :). Also, I've > just learned that the Fuji GS645s is not a folder, which was a major > advantage for me (I want portability). The GS645 that actually IS a folder > has got a 75/3.4 lens - focal lenght I already have on my Rolleiflex, and > the GS645s with a wide lens (non-folder) is not really smaller that this > TLR, so I guess I have my answer :) > > Regards, > Lukasz > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:10 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s > > > On 3 Sep 2002 at 0:10, ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of > these > > cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much > I > > loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium > format is > > very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... > > > > I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of > > happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) > > Hi ukasz, > > If you are at all pleased with your Pentax 35mm kit then don't bother with > the > Contax. I owned a G2 +16,21,28,35,45 and 90mm lens kit and whilst I can > attest > to the quality of the images produced by the kit they didn't happen as > regularly as I might have liked. The problem is that the G2 has a lot of > user > quirks that must be overcome before it becomes truly useful and then it > still > has some obvious limitations. I'd vote for the Fuji GS645s, it would be a > much > wiser way to spend your money. > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html >
RE: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
Hi Rob, I wouldn't consider buying a Contax were it not for the vibration-free shutter and the solid feeling similar to the Canon P rangefinder I have, plus it's way quieter than my MX (not to mention the Super A :). Also, I've just learned that the Fuji GS645s is not a folder, which was a major advantage for me (I want portability). The GS645 that actually IS a folder has got a 75/3.4 lens - focal lenght I already have on my Rolleiflex, and the GS645s with a wide lens (non-folder) is not really smaller that this TLR, so I guess I have my answer :) Regards, Lukasz -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:10 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s On 3 Sep 2002 at 0:10, ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > Hi all, > > I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of these > cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much I > loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium format is > very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... > > I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of > happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) Hi ukasz, If you are at all pleased with your Pentax 35mm kit then don't bother with the Contax. I owned a G2 +16,21,28,35,45 and 90mm lens kit and whilst I can attest to the quality of the images produced by the kit they didn't happen as regularly as I might have liked. The problem is that the G2 has a lot of user quirks that must be overcome before it becomes truly useful and then it still has some obvious limitations. I'd vote for the Fuji GS645s, it would be a much wiser way to spend your money. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
On 3 Sep 2002 at 0:10, ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > Hi all, > > I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of these > cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much I > loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium format is > very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... > > I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of > happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) Hi ukasz, If you are at all pleased with your Pentax 35mm kit then don't bother with the Contax. I owned a G2 +16,21,28,35,45 and 90mm lens kit and whilst I can attest to the quality of the images produced by the kit they didn't happen as regularly as I might have liked. The problem is that the G2 has a lot of user quirks that must be overcome before it becomes truly useful and then it still has some obvious limitations. I'd vote for the Fuji GS645s, it would be a much wiser way to spend your money. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
On 2 Sep 2002 at 17:54, Dr E D F Williams wrote: > Will someone please tell us how image stabilisers, that have been mentioned in > recent posts, work? Don, Try here :-) http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/imagestabilizer.html Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: OT: Telephoto and wide angles for Speed graphic
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Paul Stenquist wrote: > I too was glad that you posted the response on the forum. I have a Speed > Graphic with a Wollensak 127mm lens, and I've been thinking about adding > some more glass. Seems we have a Speed Graphic contingent here. I'm waiting for someone to say something about weenie little negatives now... -- http://www.infotainment.org "The destructive character is cheerful." - Walter Benjamin
RE: E-Bay Question
Hi Rob, You are of course absolutely right. The choice to post or not to post is entirely at the discretion of the vendor. It was (as I said in another post somewhere) just an observation. We all have to go through more or less the same process to ship goods out of our countries, and we all (should) insist that the buyer pays the postage costs, so I just can't see the problem. Buy anyway...each to their own. Cheers Shaun Canning PhD Student Department of Archaeology School of European and Historical Studies La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 3 September 2002 12:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: E-Bay Question On 2 Sep 2002 at 17:57, Shaun Canning wrote: > Without meaning to start some full scale inter-continental feud, can someone > please tell me why German sellers on e-bay almost invariably wont post outside > Germany? Is it something to do with customs or GST/VAT restrictions? I have a > German seller who has just told me it would be more to ship an AF500FTZ and > TR200 battery pack to Australia than the auction price. This makes the postage > somewhere in the vicinity of $AUD400.00 give or take. What's with that? Hi Shaun, For some reason the Germans (and many eBayers from the USA) seem quite reticent to send goods outside their borders. It can be done and is more expensive then the US but about on par with the cost of shipping from Britain however it shouldn't bother them as the buyer most often pays in any case. There is in "special" paper-work, they have to fill out basic customs declarations the same as anyone in any other country. If you can get their bank details you can TT the cash direct to their account in Euro via St George Bank for AU$27.00 and they would be able to draw on it in about 3 days. What it boils down to though is that they have every right to refuse to ship outside their country so you either have to refrain from bidding or find a pal in Germany who is willing to double handle shipping for you? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: [OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
In a message dated 9/2/02 5:07:34 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Hi all, I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of these cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much I loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium format is very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) Regards, >> I don't own the Contax but a friend of mine (a working pro) has the G2 and swears by it. It's a very nice camera
RE: N*** HK-4 Hood for a 28-70 lens
Thanks Steve, I thought that, because often people claim that their 28mm hoods are usable with 24mm lenses, it could be the same here, but I guess it's a different story with zoom lenses. Łukasz -Original Message- From: Steve Larson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 12:21 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: N*** HK-4 Hood for a 28-70 lens I would say it`s questionable for 28mm, at 35mm there is not much room left. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California
Re: N*** HK-4 Hood for a 28-70 lens
I would say it`s questionable for 28mm, at 35mm there is not much room left. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 2:38 PM Subject: N*** HK-4 Hood for a 28-70 lens Hi all, I've posted this question yesterday, but no one bothered to answer so I thought I could try to be persistent, and so here it is again :-) Some people on the list have written that a Nikon HK-4 hood is perfect for the VS1 35-80. I was wondering if it would be shallow enough for a 28-70 lens (namely - a Tokina AT-X AF, the first one with the rotating front element), or would there be a ligh fall-off? Anyone has ever used this hood on such a lens? Thanks, Łukasz
[OT] Contax G1/2 vs. Fuji GS645s
Hi all, I've almost decided I want to trade my Canon P rangefinder for one of these cameras. Firstly I thought about the Contax but then I remembered how much I loved the look and the prospect of shooting the Fuji (plus the medium format is very tempting). I'm still leaning towards the Contax but who knows... I know these are two very different beasts, but I'd like to see opinion of happy/unhappy users. Maybe someone will persuade me :) Regards, Łukasz
Re: Kiron 28/2 vs. Pentax M 28/2.8
I have no knowledge of the Kiron lens. However, I did replace my 28/2.8 M with a 28mm/f3.5 K. The performance difference is huge, provided you don't need a faster lens. Bob - Original Message - From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 7:43 AM Subject: Kiron 28/2 vs. Pentax M 28/2.8 Hi all, do I really want to replace my M 28 with this Kiron lens? :) How big is the Kiron (I like the compactness of the M and its 49mm filter ring)? How does it behave wide open? How does it handle flare? Does it focus the right (Pentax) way? Well, that's about it. I seem to ask a lot of questions lately, but haven't bought anything yet, hope this tendency changes :) Regards, Łukasz
Re: 5n Gripe, I guess
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, CBWaters wrote: > I wanted to use the self-timer in conjunction with the auto-bracket function > so I cold hit the button and run to the group and watch the camera take > three pictures. This would avoid my having to recompose because everybody Can ou do this with the cable release on and locked down? -- http://www.infotainment.org "The destructive character is cheerful." - Walter Benjamin
Re: OT: Telephoto and wide angles for Speed graphic
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Now that I've got a film scanner that > can handle 4X5 film I'm interested in shooting > with my Speed graphic again. I haven't been paying TOO much attention to the scanning threads, I presume a Epson 1280? I bought a low-cost Umax Astra 4450 for this. > Problem is I only have one a lens, a 135mm, > which is a slight wide angle. I'd like to I also have the Optar 135mm. > The key is the speed graphic has a limited > bellows extension range so a telephoto design > is needed for the 300mm. I guess I could get > by with a short extension for the 75mm but I'm not > sure. I've got a Dagor 4 3/8" that barely extends at all, and I can't use the drop bed as it doesn't even extend that far. I would like a 75mm might be far too short without a recessed lensboard. The Angulon and even more so, Super Angulon both have excessive coverage, and are 90mm. I believe 65mm lenses are the shortest that have full coverage for 4x5, without movements. For something over 300, you'll probably end up with a tele-xenar (I think that's what it is) or a tele-raptar, which is 360mm. I recently purchased a 210mm commercial ektar which I'm also quite happy with, and it has movements that would work more than adequetly with 5x7! Take a look at http://www.graflex.org for extensive details on what your Speed will do. I'd like to send this off-list, but I don't have your email address in top, and I can't easily move back to teh message index. Sorry everyone, I continue to push the offtopicness of the PDML.. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org "The destructive character is cheerful." - Walter Benjamin
RE: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
Only if it was digital Shaun -Original Message- From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 2 September 2002 10:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > It certainly would! IT would be pretty big too I would have thought!!! Hehe... Bet it would. Those features just about sums up everything people on the list have been lusting for in a good while. Maybe it's to be called the PDML converter...:-) Jostein (oh jez, it's only monday yet...) > > -Original Message- > > From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > A TC that allows for T/S... hmmm. Think I would buy one of > > those too... But hey, imagine the Ultimate Solution here: a > > TC with T and S and IS and maybe AF with a USM to allow for > > mf lenses. That would be something. :-) Jostein > >
RE: E-Bay Question
G'Day Pete, It seems to work out at a really rough conversion rate of Australian dollar = euro = usd as far as the 'sticker price' for postage. The difference of course is in the exchange rates. The dearest thing I have ever shipped was a canvas camping swag 30 inches long, 12 inches thick and weighing about 9 kg. I shipped that to California using good old Aussie Post for about 40.00 (roughly 20-22 euros/usd). Looking at the European postage charges, I would have needed a bank loan... Cheers Shaun -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 2 September 2002 9:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: E-Bay Question The shipping does souns a tad expensive, from a "rip-off Britain" (har) pov. If I sent a 2kg package to Australia by TNT courier it would cost GBP25 consignment fee, plus GBP5/kg. GBP35 ie US$52 odd. Although I should add that the weight is also based on volumetric so although the goods might only weigh 1.5kg packed, the volumetric weight might come to 3kg. Funny old world. Peter
Re: Re: TOPDML get together-posters
Hi Vic.I was waiting for a reply from Dario(he was on vacation) on a way to send the money.We both have a Wester Union transfer station near us,so i will be sending the money off ASAP. I will inform.:) Chris B. I have ordered 2 as you requested. Pat and Brad,yours will be mailed,as yours Vic,unless you can make it to a TOPDML meet after they come in. Dave Begin Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 09:37:40 EDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TOPDML get together-posters any word on the Pentax posters for TO group.. Vic End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Epson 1280 Update
I am satisfied with my Canon S800,for my working computers,but now you'v got me thinking about a dedicated printer for my main home computer. Does this one have the 6 ink wells and,like the Canon,are the magenta and cyan also in photo? Dye or Pigments? Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: TOPDML get together-posters
any word on the Pentax posters for TO group.. Vic
Re: Best 400 speed CN film
Hi JCO. I can only comments on the Kodak T400CN product,as thats all i have used so far.I know some of the traditional B&W shooters on the list Poo Poo it but i find the grain to be good ie:no were near like Delta 3200.(to me it look the same as the Tmax 100,but thats only a personal observation from a 1/2 blind guy:))The local lab prints only glossy papers and they look fine to me.I usually get them to print all the proofs on colour paper,as sometimes the sepia effect works well. Speed is rated 400 but i have never under or over exposed it Begin Original Message From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 08:12:49 -0400 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Best 400 speed CN film Whats the opinions on the finest c-41 400 speed color in terms of film grain (or lack of it). I'm not so concerned about saturation or contrast. I've been using Fuji superia 400 lately which is excellent for a 400 film, but I'm wondering if theres something even better. Also what gives finest grain: Rated film speed? Slight underexposure? Slight overexposure? JCO End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
RE: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
A TC which does IS would be a very interesting object. Since it would probably be unwieldy you would still want to have IS lenses. Nonetheless, Having something which could add IS to the existing lense base would be interesting, especially since there is good evidence that camera shake adds more blur than lense quality for most folks not using a tripod or even just MLU. I'm not sure there would be as big a market fro an autofocus TC or even adding autofocus to a IS TC (with or without T/S). Ok, I've used all the letters and can finish now. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TOPDML get together
Sounds like i missed another 'good meet'.Hopefully our next one will be fully attended.It was a nice day Saturday.I spent it in Pickering Ontario doing a reining show,not a cloud in the sky.Did not see any planes though,must have turn around somewere else:( Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
Like Jostein, I kind of had the idea that this was for 645 lenses, but as you say, a TC already projects a wider image circle than the attached lens. The only downside is that you'd lose resolution and speed. Speed wouldn't be much of a problem for the applications you'd use a tilt/shift lens in, as the subject generally isn't going anywhere ;-), but resolution would be. However, starting with a really sharp lens like the 24/2 it wouldn't be too bad... I was tempted by a second hand 28/2.8 shift once, but I wouldn't have used it nearly enough to justify the cost. An adaptor for my 24/2 would be a different story altogether (at 1.4x, you get a 35/2.8, which is still very useful) - or you could just get silly and see what a 280/5.6 shift lens can do ;-) A converter for the 645 lenses still seems like the most likely prospect, though. From a marketing point of view, it even makes sense- as it gets 35mm users into the 645 system without them having to buy a 645 body ;-) -- Kristian On Monday, Sep 2, 2002, at 07:29 Europe/Dublin, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 1 Sep 2002 at 15:39, Jostein wrote: > >> A converter for which lenses? t/s demands that the lens can cover a >> larger >> negative size than what's inside the camera. Maybe this is a >> converter for >> using 645 or 67 lenses on 35mm. > > Interesting prospect, I'd guess that MF lenses wouldn't be necessary > to afford > T/S as a TC can be engineered to project a larger image circle, its > effect is > magnification after all. > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html >
FS: USER 55mm F3.5 SMC Takumar for 6X7
FS: 55mm F3.5 SMC Takumar for 6X7 View equal to a 28mm wide angle on a 35mm camera. == This is definately a "user" lens 1. Filter ring dented badly, no way to use a filter or hood. 2. Auto/Manual switch missing but it's working in the "Auto" mode fine. No way to do DOF preview. 3. Fine scratches in front coating and 1 spec about half the size of a pin head. Rear element OK 4. Focus smooth and easy but there is a slight backlash, not quite as silky as Taks usually are but still very easy to focus. Good part is it still takes great pix with execellent contrast and sharpness These usually go for $400-500 mint on ebay. If you need some wide angle shots and aint got the big bucks, heres a solution. Your client will never know the difference because the results are still professional. Original Case included, but no caps. $175 plus $10 shipping/insurance. Return if not satisfied (less all shipping costs) email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Later, JCO
RE: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
Yeah, but we would still complain about whether it was silver, or black or perhaps red only in the States, Green only in Europe and every colour plus snakeskin in Japan!!! What we need is for is also to have a chameleon coating so that it changes colour automatically to match the lens mounted on it!!! > -Original Message- > From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Hehe... Bet it would. Those features just about sums up > everything people on the list have been lusting for in a good > while. Maybe it's to be called the PDML converter...:-)
Re: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > It certainly would! IT would be pretty big too I would have thought!!! Hehe... Bet it would. Those features just about sums up everything people on the list have been lusting for in a good while. Maybe it's to be called the PDML converter...:-) Jostein (oh jez, it's only monday yet...) > > -Original Message- > > From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > A TC that allows for T/S... hmmm. Think I would buy one of > > those too... But hey, imagine the Ultimate Solution here: a > > TC with T and S and IS and maybe AF with a USM to allow for > > mf lenses. That would be something. :-) Jostein > >
Best 400 speed CN film
Whats the opinions on the finest c-41 400 speed color in terms of film grain (or lack of it). I'm not so concerned about saturation or contrast. I've been using Fuji superia 400 lately which is excellent for a 400 film, but I'm wondering if theres something even better. Also what gives finest grain: Rated film speed? Slight underexposure? Slight overexposure? JCO
RE: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
It certainly would! IT would be pretty big too I would have thought!!! > -Original Message- > From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 02 September 2002 12:56 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina > > > A TC that allows for T/S... hmmm. Think I would buy one of > those too... But hey, imagine the Ultimate Solution here: a > TC with T and S and IS and maybe AF with a USM to allow for > mf lenses. That would be something. :-) Jostein > > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Interesting prospect, I'd guess that MF lenses wouldn't be > necessary > > to > afford > > T/S as a TC can be engineered to project a larger image circle, its > > effect > is > > magnification after all. > >
Re: K-AF3 lens mount coming at Photokina
A TC that allows for T/S... hmmm. Think I would buy one of those too... But hey, imagine the Ultimate Solution here: a TC with T and S and IS and maybe AF with a USM to allow for mf lenses. That would be something. :-) Jostein From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Interesting prospect, I'd guess that MF lenses wouldn't be necessary to afford > T/S as a TC can be engineered to project a larger image circle, its effect is > magnification after all.
5n Gripe, I guess
So far I've had a very enjoyable time with my MZ-5n. I've had only that one worrisome time when I thought the film advance motor was toast. (Turned out that it was some poorly packed film cartridges from Kodak.) I've found something I wish it would do though. A few times recently I've been in a position to use the self-timer to take family photos with myself in the shot. These shots included several family members who are together only once in a couple years. I wanted to use the self-timer in conjunction with the auto-bracket function so I cold hit the button and run to the group and watch the camera take three pictures. This would avoid my having to recompose because everybody moved when the camera flashed and I got up. The whole process would be over quickly so the children could get on with their running amuck. AND it would also eliminate the shot I have of several family members looking quite disheveled because I slipped on some sand trying to get back to my position and crashed into the group ;) Any thoughts? Am I missing something simple? Cory Waters Everyone liked the pictures even if nobody wanted to be IN them...
Re: E-Bay Question
The shipping does souns a tad expensive, from a "rip-off Britain" (har) pov. If I sent a 2kg package to Australia by TNT courier it would cost GBP25 consignment fee, plus GBP5/kg. GBP35 ie US$52 odd. Although I should add that the weight is also based on volumetric so although the goods might only weigh 1.5kg packed, the volumetric weight might come to 3kg. Funny old world. Peter
Re: September PUG is open
It's now also included in the September PUG. Adelheid & Jostein - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 4:23 AM Subject: Re: September PUG is open > I sent mine in before I went on vacation, in early August. Autopug confirmed > my submission by return e-mail. But I don't see mine up. Did I screw up? :-( > > If anyone wants to look at it, here it is: > > http://urbancaravan.com/images/kayak.jpg > > regards, > frank >
OT: Telephoto and wide angles for Speed graphic
Now that I've got a film scanner that can handle 4X5 film I'm interested in shooting with my Speed graphic again. Problem is I only have one a lens, a 135mm, which is a slight wide angle. I'd like to buy two lenses something in the 75mm and 300mm range. Preferable with shutters but not absolutely needed as the camera has a built-in focal plane shutter. The key is the speed graphic has a limited bellows extension range so a telephoto design is needed for the 300mm. I guess I could get by with a short extension for the 75mm but I'm not sure. Any recomendations of what I should get? I should also point out that absolute resolution isnt critical either, I'm just considering 4X5 to eliminate film grain which I find quite annoying. I want the 300mm for portraits so the focus distance will be kinda short, maybe 6 ft. JCO
RE: E-Bay Question
Thanks Heiko, your information is much appreciated. And yes, the postage
fees are high compared to what we pay here to ship to Europe.
Cheers
Shaun Canning
PhD Student
Department of Archaeology
School of European and Historical Studies
La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086.
Phone: 0414-967644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Heiko Hamann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 2 September 2002 7:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: E-Bay Question
Hi Shaun,
on 02 Sep 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
>It is just an observation I made, and I do not wish to pick on our
>German colleagues, however, it has me intrigued. Perhaps one of kind
>German friends has the answer?
Shipping with the "Deutsche Post" might be expensive, but it is
possible. And as far as the buyer pays the shipping, I wouldn't have a
problem selling overseas...
The actual price list says:
"Postpaket international" (up to 4KG):
Zone 1 (EU, Poland, Switzerland, Slovakia, Czech R.): 15,50 Euro
Zone 2 (rest of Europa) 25,00 Euro
Zone 3 (North America, Northern Africa, Near East): 28,00 Euro
Zone 4 (rest of the world): 34,50 Euro
As far as I understand it, the insurance of the standard post parcel
("Postpaket") is insufficient. So you should add "Luftpost Service"
(i.e. air mail), as this service includes an insurance up to 500,00
Euro. Unfortunately it costs 19,00 Euro extra. There might be a cheaper
way, as the price list mentions a service "Wert international". This
should be an insurance for a standard international parcel up to 500,00
Euro and costs 5,00 Euro extra. Each further 100,- Euro insurance costs
1,00 Euro.
So the cheapest way to ship something to Australia (insured up to 500,00
Euro) costs 34,50+5,00= 39,50 Euro. Faster should be air mail:
34,50+19,00= 53,50 Euro.
Besides shipping and insurance the money transfer might be difficult. As
credit cards are not as common as in America (and Australia?), Paypal
won't work for the most Germans. If you send a cheque, the banks will
take high fees from the seller (afair 10,00 Euro and more). The most
accepted method would be a money transfer to the account of the seller.
This should be easy and quite cheap in the EU but I don't know how the
situation is in the rest of the world.
All in all it is quite expensive and uncomfortable. Banking and
logistics still haven't caught up with e-commerce. If you have any
further questions or a specific problem regarding a German-overseas
transaction, feel free to contact me.
Regards, Heiko
(Germany)
RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
He has an article about that too: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/d60-night.shtml Seems that up to 30 secs exposure the D60 aint too bad, unlike many others, so I guess they are getting there. I have never heard of a multiscan for this, but its an interesting idea. > -Original Message- > From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > This got me thinking. Do any of the current > DSLRs have a multi scan mode with low light conditions > so you could put the camera on a tripod and get better > noise performance or is a simple long exposure time good > enuff to do the job? > > JCO
RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
Stopping down would be a problem if ambient light was low and you were using flash. And yes a LCD on the back would be good for composition but unless it had a zoom mode it would be useless for manual focusing ( but if the RF was quality then that wouldnt be needed). This got me thinking. Do any of the current DSLRs have a multi scan mode with low light conditions so you could put the camera on a tripod and get better noise performance or is a simple long exposure time good enuff to do the job? JCO > -Original Message- > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:44 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff > on Pentax digital) > > > Or they could put a digital viewfinder on it. The nice thing about this > would be that you could ALWAYS have DOF preview engaged, and not have a > dark image to try and see properly. > > I think with digital, using a rangefinder would be less of a problem > anyway as you could always verify stuff on the LCD if you wanted. > > > -Original Message- > > From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 02 September 2002 10:36 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace > > (inc stuff on Pentax digital) > > > > > > but arent all high end digital cameras > > SLRS? I dont think it would be possible > > to make a SLR which could take the leica M > > lenses do to short flange to sensor distance. > > Maybe they could develop the world's first > > digital rangefinder? > > JCO > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:19 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace > > (inc stuff on > > > Pentax digital) > > > > > > > > > From "http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/get-it.shtml"; > > > > > > Manufacturers. Don't get me started! Well, maybe a little. > > > > > > The saying goes that "The Internet changes everything", and to some > > > extent it's true. But try telling that to some of the large > > Japanese > > > manufacturers. Epson is a good example. They release products in > > > Europe ahead of North America and then when reviews appear > > online and > > > questions start to be asked their U.S. office plays dumb. > > New printer. > > > What new printer? > > > > > > They then ship essentially the same product but with quite > > different > > > accessories, and a different product number. Most memorable is the > > > fiasco of not including the Gray Balancer that ships with > > the European > > > Photo Stylus 2100 with the North American 2200 model. Back > > before the > > > Internet (say, prior to 1995) no one would be the wiser. An > > American > > > might buy a UK photo magazine months later, read about the > > difference, > > > shrug and think that these were two different products. Not > > anymore, > > > and Epson just doesn't get it. > > > > > > Not to pick only on that estimable printer manufacturer. We all owe > > > them a debt of gratitude for their advances in photographic inkjet > > > printing technology. There are other examples. Mamiya is > > one already > > > mentioned, for assuming that consumers still can't figure > > out the huge > > > price differential being charged for the same product in different > > > countries. Click. Ahh, so that's what the price is in the U.K. > > > > > > Pentax is another, but for different reasons. They make two > > excellent > > > medium format cameras, the 645 Nii and the 67ii. There is a huge > > > installed base of lenses, especially for the 67, which has > > been around > > > for some 30 years. But almost alone among medium format makers they > > > are being sidelined by digital. Most medium format makers > > have models > > > with interchangeable backs. This means that digital backs > > can be used, > > > and they increasingly are by professionals. The economics of > > > professional photography demand this, if nothing else. > > > > > > But the Pentax 67 can't take any backs, and the ones on the > > Pentax 645 > > > are inserts, not full backs. Unless Pentax addresses this situation > > > soon they will be marginalized in the medium format arena as > > > photographers increasingly move to digital. There may be > > nothing they > > > can do with the 67 format, but certainly they can bring out a body > > > that accepts digital backs and that uses the array of autofocus and > > > prior lenses for their 645 system. If they don't, and soon, > > legions of > > > photographers with investments in Pentax MF systems will start to > > > abandon them. > > > > > > Then there's Leica. Dear old Leica, maker of arguably some of the > > > finest (and needless to say, most expensive) 35mm > > photographic lenses > > > ever made. There's no way that they have the financial
Re: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
Hi Rob, - Original Message - From: "Rob Brigham" I read the original article in addition to your message. The things I got out of it are different than what was presented. Digital will come, but it is not here yet. In the consumer area, it has arrived - much like the 126 and 110 of years ago. It is hot due to the instant nature of the medium. Quicker than Polaroid! Digital in MF, at present, is not a digital back, but a scanner that will digitise the image. The photographer still has the original image and the image is not threatened by a system crash or sloppy editing - where the original has been edited beyond recognition. I have been involved with personal/hobby computers since 1976. My system, as of 1981, had an overall investment of over $5,000. It was fast, twin 8" floppies and a whopping 96K of ram. Digitals are at that level now. Agreed, with the exponential rate of development in the electronics industry, it won't take 20 years for the digital industry to make the same advances. Pentax, and other conservative manufacturers will pace themselves while the others spend all their profits on outpacing the others. Film is not dead and digital is coming. We need to recognise the fact but be patient and conservative on our direction. Regards, Bob
RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
Or they could put a digital viewfinder on it. The nice thing about this would be that you could ALWAYS have DOF preview engaged, and not have a dark image to try and see properly. I think with digital, using a rangefinder would be less of a problem anyway as you could always verify stuff on the LCD if you wanted. > -Original Message- > From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 02 September 2002 10:36 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace > (inc stuff on Pentax digital) > > > but arent all high end digital cameras > SLRS? I dont think it would be possible > to make a SLR which could take the leica M > lenses do to short flange to sensor distance. > Maybe they could develop the world's first > digital rangefinder? > JCO > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:19 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace > (inc stuff on > > Pentax digital) > > > > > > From "http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/get-it.shtml"; > > > > Manufacturers. Don't get me started! Well, maybe a little. > > > > The saying goes that "The Internet changes everything", and to some > > extent it's true. But try telling that to some of the large > Japanese > > manufacturers. Epson is a good example. They release products in > > Europe ahead of North America and then when reviews appear > online and > > questions start to be asked their U.S. office plays dumb. > New printer. > > What new printer? > > > > They then ship essentially the same product but with quite > different > > accessories, and a different product number. Most memorable is the > > fiasco of not including the Gray Balancer that ships with > the European > > Photo Stylus 2100 with the North American 2200 model. Back > before the > > Internet (say, prior to 1995) no one would be the wiser. An > American > > might buy a UK photo magazine months later, read about the > difference, > > shrug and think that these were two different products. Not > anymore, > > and Epson just doesn't get it. > > > > Not to pick only on that estimable printer manufacturer. We all owe > > them a debt of gratitude for their advances in photographic inkjet > > printing technology. There are other examples. Mamiya is > one already > > mentioned, for assuming that consumers still can't figure > out the huge > > price differential being charged for the same product in different > > countries. Click. Ahh, so that's what the price is in the U.K. > > > > Pentax is another, but for different reasons. They make two > excellent > > medium format cameras, the 645 Nii and the 67ii. There is a huge > > installed base of lenses, especially for the 67, which has > been around > > for some 30 years. But almost alone among medium format makers they > > are being sidelined by digital. Most medium format makers > have models > > with interchangeable backs. This means that digital backs > can be used, > > and they increasingly are by professionals. The economics of > > professional photography demand this, if nothing else. > > > > But the Pentax 67 can't take any backs, and the ones on the > Pentax 645 > > are inserts, not full backs. Unless Pentax addresses this situation > > soon they will be marginalized in the medium format arena as > > photographers increasingly move to digital. There may be > nothing they > > can do with the 67 format, but certainly they can bring out a body > > that accepts digital backs and that uses the array of autofocus and > > prior lenses for their 645 system. If they don't, and soon, > legions of > > photographers with investments in Pentax MF systems will start to > > abandon them. > > > > Then there's Leica. Dear old Leica, maker of arguably some of the > > finest (and needless to say, most expensive) 35mm > photographic lenses > > ever made. There's no way that they have the financial > wherewithal to > > develop a digital camera that can utilize them themselves. But, > > they've recently partnered with Matsushita (Panasonic), and Leica > > branded lenses are showing up on Panasonic digicams, and Leica is > > OEMing these under their own brand. > > > > Matsushita also makes advanced imaging chips. In fact the > chip in one > > of the major high-end DSLRs from another major camera > manufacturer is > > from them. So, how about taking Panasonic's chip technology and > > manufacturing capabilities and marrying these with a some high-end > > Leica glass? That would put Leica back on the map and would > give them > > something worthwhile to do other than produce green lizard-skin > > covered M6's for the Japanese collector market. > > > >
RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
but arent all high end digital cameras SLRS? I dont think it would be possible to make a SLR which could take the leica M lenses do to short flange to sensor distance. Maybe they could develop the world's first digital rangefinder? JCO > -Original Message- > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on > Pentax digital) > > > From "http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/get-it.shtml"; > > Manufacturers. Don't get me started! Well, maybe a little. > > The saying goes that "The Internet changes everything", and to some > extent it's true. But try telling that to some of the large Japanese > manufacturers. Epson is a good example. They release products in Europe > ahead of North America and then when reviews appear online and questions > start to be asked their U.S. office plays dumb. New printer. What new > printer? > > They then ship essentially the same product but with quite different > accessories, and a different product number. Most memorable is the > fiasco of not including the Gray Balancer that ships with the European > Photo Stylus 2100 with the North American 2200 model. Back before the > Internet (say, prior to 1995) no one would be the wiser. An American > might buy a UK photo magazine months later, read about the difference, > shrug and think that these were two different products. Not anymore, and > Epson just doesn't get it. > > Not to pick only on that estimable printer manufacturer. We all owe them > a debt of gratitude for their advances in photographic inkjet printing > technology. There are other examples. Mamiya is one already mentioned, > for assuming that consumers still can't figure out the huge price > differential being charged for the same product in different countries. > Click. Ahh, so that's what the price is in the U.K. > > Pentax is another, but for different reasons. They make two excellent > medium format cameras, the 645 Nii and the 67ii. There is a huge > installed base of lenses, especially for the 67, which has been around > for some 30 years. But almost alone among medium format makers they are > being sidelined by digital. Most medium format makers have models with > interchangeable backs. This means that digital backs can be used, and > they increasingly are by professionals. The economics of professional > photography demand this, if nothing else. > > But the Pentax 67 can't take any backs, and the ones on the Pentax 645 > are inserts, not full backs. Unless Pentax addresses this situation soon > they will be marginalized in the medium format arena as photographers > increasingly move to digital. There may be nothing they can do with the > 67 format, but certainly they can bring out a body that accepts digital > backs and that uses the array of autofocus and prior lenses for their > 645 system. If they don't, and soon, legions of photographers with > investments in Pentax MF systems will start to abandon them. > > Then there's Leica. Dear old Leica, maker of arguably some of the finest > (and needless to say, most expensive) 35mm photographic lenses ever > made. There's no way that they have the financial wherewithal to develop > a digital camera that can utilize them themselves. But, they've recently > partnered with Matsushita (Panasonic), and Leica branded lenses are > showing up on Panasonic digicams, and Leica is OEMing these under their > own brand. > > Matsushita also makes advanced imaging chips. In fact the chip in one of > the major high-end DSLRs from another major camera manufacturer is from > them. So, how about taking Panasonic's chip technology and manufacturing > capabilities and marrying these with a some high-end Leica glass? That > would put Leica back on the map and would give them something worthwhile > to do other than produce green lizard-skin covered M6's for the Japanese > collector market. >
Epson 1280 Update
I've had the Epson 1280 printer for about 2 weeks now and have been very satisfied with the 8.5 X11" prints I have been getting from both 35mm and 6X7 originals (even though I only scan @2400 ppi). Out of curiousity I did a web search for a hi-resolution test image to see what the printer was really capable of. I found one (sorry, I didnt save URL). It's a 10MB color jpg which uncopresses to about 50MB rgb image. It's got still lifes, portraits, grey scales, color swatches, etc all in one file. It's probably a composite shot(s) with a MF digital back. I printed it at 8.5 X11 @ 2880dpi and all I can say is OH MY GOD!!! This epson 1280 printer is fantastic! The test image is so damn sharp it probably exceeds what is possible with an optical print (enlarging lens limits). I am now finally convinced the the digital darkroom beats conventional by a wide margin. Presumably a larger print would even look better @ same dpi ( I will try 11" X17" as soon as i get the paper). For any of you still sitting on the fence, GET OFF. With the $100 rebate, this printer is a steal. I am so pshyched up now about color printing just its so damn good. Nuff said. JCO
Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
>From "http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/get-it.shtml"; Manufacturers. Don't get me started! Well, maybe a little. The saying goes that "The Internet changes everything", and to some extent it's true. But try telling that to some of the large Japanese manufacturers. Epson is a good example. They release products in Europe ahead of North America and then when reviews appear online and questions start to be asked their U.S. office plays dumb. New printer. What new printer? They then ship essentially the same product but with quite different accessories, and a different product number. Most memorable is the fiasco of not including the Gray Balancer that ships with the European Photo Stylus 2100 with the North American 2200 model. Back before the Internet (say, prior to 1995) no one would be the wiser. An American might buy a UK photo magazine months later, read about the difference, shrug and think that these were two different products. Not anymore, and Epson just doesn't get it. Not to pick only on that estimable printer manufacturer. We all owe them a debt of gratitude for their advances in photographic inkjet printing technology. There are other examples. Mamiya is one already mentioned, for assuming that consumers still can't figure out the huge price differential being charged for the same product in different countries. Click. Ahh, so that's what the price is in the U.K. Pentax is another, but for different reasons. They make two excellent medium format cameras, the 645 Nii and the 67ii. There is a huge installed base of lenses, especially for the 67, which has been around for some 30 years. But almost alone among medium format makers they are being sidelined by digital. Most medium format makers have models with interchangeable backs. This means that digital backs can be used, and they increasingly are by professionals. The economics of professional photography demand this, if nothing else. But the Pentax 67 can't take any backs, and the ones on the Pentax 645 are inserts, not full backs. Unless Pentax addresses this situation soon they will be marginalized in the medium format arena as photographers increasingly move to digital. There may be nothing they can do with the 67 format, but certainly they can bring out a body that accepts digital backs and that uses the array of autofocus and prior lenses for their 645 system. If they don't, and soon, legions of photographers with investments in Pentax MF systems will start to abandon them. Then there's Leica. Dear old Leica, maker of arguably some of the finest (and needless to say, most expensive) 35mm photographic lenses ever made. There's no way that they have the financial wherewithal to develop a digital camera that can utilize them themselves. But, they've recently partnered with Matsushita (Panasonic), and Leica branded lenses are showing up on Panasonic digicams, and Leica is OEMing these under their own brand. Matsushita also makes advanced imaging chips. In fact the chip in one of the major high-end DSLRs from another major camera manufacturer is from them. So, how about taking Panasonic's chip technology and manufacturing capabilities and marrying these with a some high-end Leica glass? That would put Leica back on the map and would give them something worthwhile to do other than produce green lizard-skin covered M6's for the Japanese collector market.
RE: E-Bay Question
We have a client in Belgium. They used to receive cheques from customers in Holland. Both countries use the Euro, both bank accounts are Euro accounts. They get charged 26 Euro to pay the cheques in due to the fact it is a foreign cheque - even though the currency is the same! For goods typically costing 10-15 Euro, this obviously wasn't going to work so they don't take cheques anymore! > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 02 September 2002 10:01 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: E-Bay Question > > > Shaun, > > Saw the same auction and got the same answer. > > For some reason, shipping from Germany is expensive. > US Postal service is much cheaper, > but nobody insures packages beyond their own borders. > > Shipping and payment make German Ebay deals difficult. I > haven't found a > good way to pay. Germans typically want bank transfers. > These cost $35US vs > $3.00 for a money order or $0.15 for a check. It makes > bargains pretty > difficult to realize. > > Regards, Bob S. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << Without meaning to start some full scale inter-continental > feud, can > someone > please tell me why German sellers on e-bay almost invariably > wont post outside Germany? Is it something to do with > customs or GST/VAT restrictions? I have a German seller who > has just told me it would be more to ship an AF500FTZ and > TR200 battery pack to Australia than the auction price. This > makes the postage somewhere in the vicinity of $AUD400.00 > give or take. What's with that? >> > >
Re: E-Bay Question
Hi Shaun,
on 02 Sep 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
>It is just an observation I made, and I do not wish to pick on our
>German colleagues, however, it has me intrigued. Perhaps one of kind
>German friends has the answer?
Shipping with the "Deutsche Post" might be expensive, but it is
possible. And as far as the buyer pays the shipping, I wouldn't have a
problem selling overseas...
The actual price list says:
"Postpaket international" (up to 4KG):
Zone 1 (EU, Poland, Switzerland, Slovakia, Czech R.): 15,50 Euro
Zone 2 (rest of Europa) 25,00 Euro
Zone 3 (North America, Northern Africa, Near East): 28,00 Euro
Zone 4 (rest of the world): 34,50 Euro
As far as I understand it, the insurance of the standard post parcel
("Postpaket") is insufficient. So you should add "Luftpost Service"
(i.e. air mail), as this service includes an insurance up to 500,00
Euro. Unfortunately it costs 19,00 Euro extra. There might be a cheaper
way, as the price list mentions a service "Wert international". This
should be an insurance for a standard international parcel up to 500,00
Euro and costs 5,00 Euro extra. Each further 100,- Euro insurance costs
1,00 Euro.
So the cheapest way to ship something to Australia (insured up to 500,00
Euro) costs 34,50+5,00= 39,50 Euro. Faster should be air mail:
34,50+19,00= 53,50 Euro.
Besides shipping and insurance the money transfer might be difficult. As
credit cards are not as common as in America (and Australia?), Paypal
won't work for the most Germans. If you send a cheque, the banks will
take high fees from the seller (afair 10,00 Euro and more). The most
accepted method would be a money transfer to the account of the seller.
This should be easy and quite cheap in the EU but I don't know how the
situation is in the rest of the world.
All in all it is quite expensive and uncomfortable. Banking and
logistics still haven't caught up with e-commerce. If you have any
further questions or a specific problem regarding a German-overseas
transaction, feel free to contact me.
Regards, Heiko
(Germany)
Re: E-Bay Question
Shaun, Saw the same auction and got the same answer. For some reason, shipping from Germany is expensive. US Postal service is much cheaper, but nobody insures packages beyond their own borders. Shipping and payment make German Ebay deals difficult. I haven't found a good way to pay. Germans typically want bank transfers. These cost $35US vs $3.00 for a money order or $0.15 for a check. It makes bargains pretty difficult to realize. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Without meaning to start some full scale inter-continental feud, can someone please tell me why German sellers on e-bay almost invariably wont post outside Germany? Is it something to do with customs or GST/VAT restrictions? I have a German seller who has just told me it would be more to ship an AF500FTZ and TR200 battery pack to Australia than the auction price. This makes the postage somewhere in the vicinity of $AUD400.00 give or take. What's with that? >>
Re: Midroll rewind & ZX-5n
Personally, I use an Ilford film retriever (about $ 16), which is very reliable. It comes with a small pouch and it's always in my camera bag. A self-made retriever, like some others mentioned, should also work well and saves some money. Rod. - Original Message - From: "Pat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 04:54 Subject: Midroll rewind & ZX-5n > Hello fellow ZX-5n users: > > It's a fact that the ZX-5n doesn't lead the film > leader out as one re-winds midroll. How do you folks > deal w/ retrieving the film leader on a partially > exposed roll? > > Thanks, > Pat > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance.yahoo.com >
RE: E-Bay Question
Flavio, $400 Aussie dollars is roughly $200 US Dollars. So, a 500 FTZ with TR200 power pack is pretty good value at that price. As far as the difficulties and costs of shipping stuff, you can not get any further away from the rest of the world than we are here in Australia, and I am more than happy to post overseas. I know that the costs of using our postal service are positively bargain basement compared with say the USPS, but surely Germany (or anywhere else for that matter) can not be that expensive to post. It is just an observation I made, and I do not wish to pick on our German colleagues, however, it has me intrigued. Perhaps one of kind German friends has the answer? Cheers Shaun. P.S: I paid about 225.00 USD for my second hand 500 FTZ about 6 months ago and was pretty happy with the price. -Original Message- From: Flavio Minelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 2 September 2002 6:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: E-Bay Question Shaun Canning wrote: > > Without meaning to start some full scale inter-continental feud, can someone > please tell me why German sellers on e-bay almost invariably wont post > outside Germany? Is it something to do with customs or GST/VAT restrictions? > I have a German seller who has just told me it would be more to ship an > AF500FTZ and TR200 battery pack to Australia than the auction price. This > makes the postage somewhere in the vicinity of $AUD400.00 give or take. > ... Shaun, I don't know how much money 400 AUD might be, but if you buy a used 500FTZ with that it's way too much, IMO. Generally speaking high shipping costs make transaction at long distances more problematic. Maybe thay don't want to be hassled by complicate shipping procedures or get caught getting money from their IRS equivalent through customs or avoid having their auctions get nowhere just because the high bidder folded after seeing the amout of money the shipping would cost. As far as the buying party agrees to pay whatever the costs are there should be no problem but I don't think I'd do that in this case... HTH, ciao, Flavio
Re: E-Bay Question
Shaun Canning wrote: > > Without meaning to start some full scale inter-continental feud, can someone > please tell me why German sellers on e-bay almost invariably wont post > outside Germany? Is it something to do with customs or GST/VAT restrictions? > I have a German seller who has just told me it would be more to ship an > AF500FTZ and TR200 battery pack to Australia than the auction price. This > makes the postage somewhere in the vicinity of $AUD400.00 give or take. > ... Shaun, I don't know how much money 400 AUD might be, but if you buy a used 500FTZ with that it's way too much, IMO. Generally speaking high shipping costs make transaction at long distances more problematic. Maybe thay don't want to be hassled by complicate shipping procedures or get caught getting money from their IRS equivalent through customs or avoid having their auctions get nowhere just because the high bidder folded after seeing the amout of money the shipping would cost. As far as the buying party agrees to pay whatever the costs are there should be no problem but I don't think I'd do that in this case... HTH, ciao, Flavio
Re: Super A shutter problem
£ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > > Hi all, > my recently acquired and recently servised Super A has developed a problem > with the shutter release. Sometimes it just won't fire - by that I mean I > can't depress the release (at least to the position where it fires). Could > it be that the batteries are old? When this happens, after a few seconds > everything is back to normal i.e. the shutter realease depresses smoothly > and the shutter fires. > ... Seems to be a mechanical problem related to the release button, I'd try fresh batteries and a check with a remote release, just to see if it's the button... I'm just guessing. Ciao, Flavio
E-Bay Question
Without meaning to start some full scale inter-continental feud, can someone please tell me why German sellers on e-bay almost invariably wont post outside Germany? Is it something to do with customs or GST/VAT restrictions? I have a German seller who has just told me it would be more to ship an AF500FTZ and TR200 battery pack to Australia than the auction price. This makes the postage somewhere in the vicinity of $AUD400.00 give or take. What's with that? Cheers Shaun
