Re: favourite photos
How apt that Bob's email domain is yahoo. I did look for Bob's winky smiley but in it's absence I guess he was in earnest, still not sure, though? I enjoy some spicy contention and I don't object to some playful badinage as long as it's not malicious or childish. We've been dabating some emotive topics so it's to be expected that the blood may boil at times. However it is a good idea to cool down first and try to be more cold blooded in responses. That's not to say that you shouldn't be cheeky, and retaliation in kind is a fair thing when it's deserved, but getting hot-blooded rarely helps. Cliched summation: Been there, done that. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Bob Poe [EMAIL PROTECTED] GET THE F** (snip
Re: OT: D1s review
It appears that in recent comparisons film has been downgraded from earlier estimates of either 70 or 40 megs (I recall both numbers at different times). There might be a confusion over capture resolution and resultant file size, and it would be helpful if the writers of these essays could be more specific. A digital camera will create a file which, if it's uncompressed to begin, or when it's decompressed, is 3 or 4 times larger than its megapixel measurement (depending on the format it writes to: RGB, CMYK, as a TIFF or a Photoshop file s). Also, as long as the best digicams still use an RGGB matrix on the chip a lot of the colour data in their files is presumed by interpolation (Foveon is the great hope here but only time will tell if it prevails). The colour data at every pixel of a scanned film is true, ie. non-interpolated, data. BTW a 10,000 line drum scanner would produce a 150 megapixel file from a 35mm frame (I don't know how to calculate the file size though). I very sincerely doubt that the hard-nosed businesspeople of the printing trade would spend so much money to buy a 10,000 line drum scanner when a desktop film scanner like a Flextight would get the maximum result from films. Obviously, some facts are missing from the film/digital comparisons we've seen so far, but never mind, they've been replaced by some serviceable prejudices ;-) Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) According to Keppler in his recent Popular Photography article, referenced earlier in this forum, 35mm film records the equivalent of 24 megapixels of data.
Re: Re[2]: OT: D1s review
On 26 Sep 2002 at 21:18, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: There has been a longish thread on a professional photographer's digital forum and their comments are similar: Digital must be treated like slide, and not print film when it comes to exposure - don't blow out the highlights. It's easy to check the histogram in the camera to make sure. Shadow detail is there, it just may need some PS help. Overall, the dynamic range is similar to print film, i.e. grater than slide film. This has been my experience with digital also. My camera has three in-camera contrast settings, the high contrast setting provides similar latitude to slide and the lowest provides a very wide usable latitude. The correlation with slide film behaviour is very easy to make since digital is also a positive media. Slide film saturates (shows only base media) when it gets too much light digital has no more bits to store the data (it clips). Cheers, 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: Re[2]: OT: D1s review
On 26 Sep 2002 at 21:18, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: There has been a longish thread on a professional photographer's digital forum and their comments are similar: Digital must be treated like slide, and not print film when it comes to exposure - don't blow out the highlights. It's easy to check the histogram in the camera to make sure. Shadow detail is there, it just may need some PS help. Overall, the dynamic range is similar to print film, i.e. grater than slide film. This has been my experience with digital also. My camera has three in-camera contrast settings, the high contrast setting provides similar latitude to slide and the lowest provides a very wide usable latitude. The correlation with slide film behaviour is very easy to make since digital is also a positive media. Slide film saturates (shows only base media) when it gets too much light digital has no more bits to store the data (it clips). Cheers, 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: PZ-1p and autofocus speed...
I have read lots of reviews on the PZ1p how does it compare to... , isn't the AF old, blah, blah, blah. Most of the reviews are favorable. It is highly regarded to be so old. In practice, I find the AF to be dead on accurate, fast, etc. I think the reason you hear so much negative about it on the group is that some of the more vocal members(not to be taken as an insult) don't care for its overall-user interface, AF speed, one AF point, etc. I disagree. In use, I find it a pleasure. The performance you seem to get from yours is remarkable considering you are using slow lenses. A testament to its AF abilities. I bet the camera would really shine with an 80-200 f2.8(maybe a Tokina if you can't get the Pentax). I have found the AF speed of the Z-1p much depends on which lens was used. Some slow, some fast. regards, Alan Chan
Re: Problems with List
Probably overheated from all the flame posts :-) Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) I guess the poor old server's been having issues :( (snip)
RE: Pentax lenses.
Lukasz Kacperczyk wrote: These links don't work for me :( Technically, underscores are not meant to be allowed in a URL. Some software is more forgiving. I set mine up to allow them but my ISP's proxy returns an error. I got around it by temporarily disabling the proxy in my web browser. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ (out of date)
Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600 and Bye bye
I sent this to the list and to Don yesterday. Don has read it and replied but it hasn't shown up in my PDML folder yet so I'm resending. Apologies to anyone who gets it twice. --- Don, My apologies for my misreading of your post. I took the meaning that you objected to the language of the insults, rather than the insults themselves. I certainly wasn't aware that you had been the recipient of any insults before your Bye bye message was posted. If I was a doctor I'd enjoy being called Doc. Excuse me for assuming that you would, too. FWIW I was the recipient of the sh*t-for-brains comment, and while it was framed in other words I and the whole list knew what the meaning was. I'm pleased to say that I carved up Bruce Rubenstein for that (using all the Sang Froid I could muster) and he has been too gutless to respond to me since, it seems he's only interested in easy little victories. So you see I've had to endure the insults and not just read them. As for the language, I have no problem, but this time around the worst I've written was fart so the list-moms shouldn't be too upset :-) Come back soon, these things always blow over. Regards, Anthony Farr
Re: What about a film flagship?
In a message dated 26/09/02 16:00:11 GMT Daylight Time, Rob writes: Be nice to him, he's a pop start! I am sure you meant to write pop tart, no? Kind regards Peter
Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600 and Bye bye
Don, My apologies for my misreading of your post. I took the meaning that you objected to the language of the insults, rather than the insults themselves. I certainly wasn't aware that you had been the recipient of any insults before your Bye bye message was posted. If I was a doctor I'd enjoy being called Doc. Excuse me for assuming that you would, too. FWIW I was the recipient of the shit-for-brains comment, and while it was framed in other words I and the whole list knew what the meaning was. I'm pleased to say that I carved up Bruce Rubenstein for that (using all the Sang Froid I could muster) and he has been too gutless to respond to me since, it seems he's only interested in easy little victories. So you see I've had to endure the insults and not just read them. As for the language, I have no problem, but this time around the worst I've written was fart so the list-moms shouldn't be too upset :-) Come back soon, these things always blow over. Regards, Anthony Farr
The Big Yellow Papa speaks...
Hi, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2278678.stm Quite frankly people do not want films or digital cameras they just want pictures --- Cheers, Bob
Re: RE: Re[3]: Pentax AutoFocus / Consumer Fast Film
No but i'll try some.Thanks Tom Dave Begin Original Message From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Have you used any of the Fuji NPx stuff? It seems to be about a 1/2 stop faster...skin tones and contrast are good, as you would expect from a portrait film, though I suspect the color balance has quite a bit to do with the paper it's printed on. Portra is useless on anything other than Kodak paper. There's a built-in color shift. NPZ kicks mucho ass. tv 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: Pop Photo's Herb Keppler on The Digital Take Over?
I see your meaning. Nonetheless, I think this number is as low as it is because of the PS's, digital or otherwise. The choice is no longer between a fine camera and an Instamatic. A $200 PS can take great shots and if you are happy with 4x6 the pictures are great. I've seen some nice stuff from my colleagues Pentax 150 Sl now that she has gotten past camera shake problems. (She's just more careful now). For most folks, a PS is the best way to go. There once was a group of folks who had an SLR simply because they wanted a nicer camera. Now the SLR is more for those who are actually more serious about photography, i.e., where it as least has some hobby aspects. And, of course, many of the technophiles instead buy digital. Since I in true confessions mode, I'll admit that I would like to get a Pentax 928 (it's a little faster) for snapshot stuff or, if I ever had money to burn, that Contax PS with the f2.8 35 mm lens. However, my ZX- with the 40mm is so small it's hard to justify, i.e., not put the money toward more lenses 8^) Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Even Pal is ready to jump ship
No, No, you're nowhere near the edge of the cliff, plenty of room behind you, step back! From: John Mustarde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Get a 500/4 IS and stand a couple feet further back...
Re: PZ-1p and autofocus speed...
In a message dated 9/26/02 11:15:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's exactly why I mentioned what lenses I have been using. I purchased the manual focus Tokina 80-200/2.8 because I really wanted to save up for the Pentax in AF. But I think I'm going to spring soon for the AF Tokina cause I really like AF, and it'll prolly be awhile before I can get the Pentax. Nick Wright wrightfoto.com Nick let me know when you want to sell the manual focus version... Vic
re: travel tripod - OT
Hi Francis, I have a Benbo Trekker. It is light, adaptable, waterproof up to the first joint (one joint/two part legs) and goes up to about 1.8m/5'10. You do need a PhD in Civil Engineering to erect it, though. mike
re: The big yellow papa speaks
Hi, I'm not sure I agree with his comment The internet explodes the number of people that have access to pictures. The point is made often in this forum that the majority of human beings have difficulty getting access to things like clean water, never mind esoteric electronic goods. Film is not going to go away because it is the best way to get a print might also be seen as contentious. I find it amusing that we are heading for a situation where the average person is going to expect nothing more than an image with the (technical) quality of a neolithic cave painting. mike
Re: PZ-1p and autofocus speed...
I agree wholeheartedly. I think when a few very vocal members of the PDML begin to discredit a lens or camera everyone starts to believe it as fact. The SMC 85mm F2 is a good example. An excellent lens that, in some test cases, proves sharper than the faster Pentax 85s yet can't get no respect on the list But I digress I have a pile of LXs and a PZ1. There are things about the PZ1 I would like to change, but I must admit that whenever I use it the results are excellent. I find it perfect for the times I either don't want to think about exposures etc., or do not have the time. It's a great camera. In fact, there is one right now sitting at a camera store nearby with a 28-105mm on it selling for just over $400 Cdn. I think I paid that for the lens alone. Anyway, enjoy... Vic In a message dated 9/27/02 4:47:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Nick, I have read lots of reviews on the PZ1p how does it compare to... , isn't the AF old, blah, blah, blah. Most of the reviews are favorable. It is highly regarded to be so old. In practice, I find the AF to be dead on accurate, fast, etc. I think the reason you hear so much negative about it on the group is that some of the more vocal members(not to be taken as an insult) don't care for its overall-user interface, AF speed, one AF point, etc. I disagree. In use, I find it a pleasure. The performance you seem to get from yours is remarkable considering you are using slow lenses. A testament to its AF abilities. I bet the camera would really shine with an 80-200 f2.8(maybe a Tokina if you can't get the Pentax). Robert
Re: DSLR...
Is everyone getting a lot of blank emails with just the tag-line stuff on them and no questions or responses Vic
Re[2]: The big yellow papa speaks
My SO has a PhD, works at Harvard and cannot imagine herself with web access slower than 1Mbps, so she's not exactly technophobic. Now, when it comes to pictures, she gets mad if I just develop and scan the weekend snapshots, instead of giving her 4x6s she can put in her album. Even the $3 vs $15 cost argument doesn't work. People like books (as opposed to e-books). People like albums. It is familiar. It is convenient. It is a damn good user interface (although I personally do miss hyperlinks in paper books) ! Mishka -Original Message- From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: re: The big yellow papa speaks Hi, I'm not sure I agree with his comment The internet explodes the number of people that have access to pictures. The point is made often in this forum that the majority of human beings have difficulty getting access to things like clean water, never mind esoteric electronic goods. Film is not going to go away because it is the best way to get a print might also be seen as contentious. I find it amusing that we are heading for a situation where the average person is going to expect nothing more than an image with the (technical) quality of a neolithic cave painting. mike
RE: Re[2]: OT: D1s review
Shadow detail may be there but, from everything I have seen, it is full of SERIOUS noise. -Original Message- From: Bruce Rubenstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 September 2002 02:18 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re[2]: OT: D1s review There has been a longish thread on a professional photographer's digital forum and their comments are similar: Digital must be treated like slide, and not print film when it comes to exposure - don't blow out the highlights. It's easy to check the histogram in the camera to make sure. Shadow detail is there, it just may need some PS help. Overall, the dynamic range is similar to print film, i.e. grater than slide film. From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] One thing to remember is if the detail isn't captured (blown out or blocked up) you can't Photoshop it in. What I have seen of digital so far appears to be fairly narrow latitude with highlights being blown out very easily.
re: The big yellow papa speaks
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 15:02, mike wilson wrote: I find it amusing that we are heading for a situation where the average person is going to expect nothing more than an image with the (technical) quality of a neolithic cave painting. I resent that. Cave technology is actually great. Let's talk a little bit about image permanency. Under optimal storage conditions, you can expect something like: - 200 years BW film - 100 years BW prints color slide film - 50 years color photographic prints - 25 years color digital prints - next computer crash - HD stored digital images - next file format change - CD/DVD stored digital images Compare that with cave paintings. Which were stored in far from optimal storage conditions. cheers, the caveman
Cotty's September PUG review
Well, after missing out August's venerable submissions, I thought I better put digit to keyboard and do this month's before it becomes history. Some bright spark suggested I could easily access August on the website, and this is true. Who knows, I might get around to doing it one day. As the sign says: Free Beer, Tomorrow. I thought it would be nice to see something about actually making photographs during these turbulent times, what with a few bouts of bad language and the odd off-topic post (and I'm guilty of that, too ;-) not to mention the list going down for a short while the other day. Some of us thought that poor Doug Brewer had had enough and pulled the plug! Funny how one doesn't realise the value place on something until it's gone. Right, straight to it. Usual disclaimers. I'll gloat over the ones that jump out of the screen at me, grab me by the lapels and slap me in the face. It goes without saying that they're *all* good. I simply don't have the time to comment on them all (I'm off to work in just over an hour, and that's barely time to do these: Kite Girl Pat White Lovely pic, great composition. Tells the story, don't it? Nice one, Pat. Red Umbrella Gerald Lewis Striking composition verging in the abstract. The white streak reminds me of a dove in flight. Well thought out. Vigeland Park Dan Matyola Interesting image. Lots of ways to read this, I find a strong male presence, reinforced by the phallic structure behind. Difficult to shoot I would imagine, Dan's done very well here. Chair Bob Poe Good rendition of chair detail. I particularly like the abstract shadows formed by the cross-bracing. Well observed with a thoughtful square crop. Nice. Chandos Dan Mills Nice monochrome study in form with this view of a balcony with its ornate pillars, and the bush that grows in front. Exposure was tricky, with plenty of direct sunlight and deep shade to contend with. Dan has coped well and the shot is a good one. Cape Buffalo Danie Nel Stunning wildlife shot of this buffalo, his horns curling right around and giving the image a defining shape that guides your eye right back to his face. Echoed behind by a softer horn. Exposure has been pushed in favour of the highlights, but this doesn't detract too much, the shadows containing sinister undertones to the overall feel. Beautiful photograph, Danie. Super! So Young, Yet Already Lost in Thought Melchi Manoah Michel Pleasing study of young innocence with this small girl gazing into her future. The wire door adds a stark and gritty balance to this purest of images, the soft and gentle repose. The crop may be tight for some, but the face is the important bit and that is spot-on. Very nice indeed. Massi is a Stroke Albano Garcia Once again, Albano illustrates his abilities as a photographer extraordinary. This stylish example (of one of Albano's friends) proves that there's nothing ordinary about it: vast swathes of area behind are bleached out. The subject rests uneasily to one side, looking 'the wrong way' (one might normally have the poser looking into the frame). These 'rules' are unashamedly broken, yet the image works. Why? That's for you to decide. Sensational imagery. It's time you had an exhibition, my lad! My runner up for this month. Boy Zhang Min Serene portrait of a young oriental lad clutching a rather large hat. Wonderful muted colours lead the scene here, the textures of stone and wood satisfy easily, the intent gaze of those eyes into the lens instil curiosity. A tight crop again, perhaps the nice round echo of the hat in the large oval stone behind could add if allowed a bit more room. Lovely shot. Waiting for the Palio Gianfranco Harsh brick wall draped with rugs and stains is interrupted by gentle beauty of a young girl framed in a window. Nice work as always from a real Pentax trooper. Jimmy and his Mom Paul Stenquist Great capture of a private moment between mother and child. Interesting custom framing adds novelty to this superb black and white shot. Works for me! Haircut William Johnson The eyes have it! What a cute little face. Good tonality, contrast in this attention-grabbing image. No Title G Fenstermacher Lit by a porch light, the photographer has produced a well-observed rendition of a simple leaf in monochrome. A very striking image, stands up to much scrutiny. If I didn't know it was a porch, I'd swear it was a studio shot with hours of preparation. Nice. More Reeds Ken Waller Gentle abstract of a few reeds with reflections. This shot reminds me of neuvelle cuisine in that it doesn't appear to be much, but the taste is there to savour. Minimal content with maximum effect. I can see this on a bare white wall, 6 feet by 9, and costing several thousands of dollars for the privilege! Beautiful and pleasing. Skyey Wavelets Petr Pazour Stunning landscape, or rather skyscape, featuring streaking cloud formations. The title put me off, but when the image opened, I
RE: So?..
Bruce, can you send the humble pie back - looks like it will be us eating it! What I don't understand though is why we hear NOTHING about Pentax. Sure there is speculation that they have nothing new, but no-one has confirmed that. Are the reporters not even bothered to go and have a look on their stand? Did Pentax even turn up? Could they just have their new products hiding under the desk? Would this all make any sense? I just wonder why the people saying Pentax has nothing are only speculating, no-one has actually confirmed this - seems a little odd... -Original Message- From: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 September 2002 04:05 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: So?.. http://luminous-landscape.com/new/photokina2002.shtml Friday, 27 September, 2002 Either announcements from Photokina have died out, or the people reporting from Cologne are too busy eating Bratwurst and drinking Pils. My guess is that its the former, as I know how hard working a major trade show can be. But if that's the case then some major companies have not made needed announcements, and this is bad news for them. One that immediately comes to mind is Pentax, who really needed to position themselves properly vis-a-vis a digital solution for their 645 system. The salience is deafening. With their competitors Mamiya, Contax and now Hasselblad offering comparability with the very popular Kodak DCS Pro Back Pentax becomes the only major 645 format camera maker with no digital offering. It's my belief that unless they do so no later than PMA, many professionals will start to abandon them.
RE: Problems with List
OK - now what is this? I've tried to unsubscribe and then subscribe again, but haven't seen any test messages I sent, but now I get this one. What's going on? My posts don't show up on the pdml archive website. If anyone get this one, please contact me off-list. Listen people - I'm bored, and this PDML-abstination isn't doing me any good :) Regards, Lukasz -Original Message- From: Anthony Farr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 8:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Problems with List Probably overheated from all the flame posts :-) Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) I guess the poor old server's been having issues :( (snip)
re|: The big yellow papa speaks
Hi, The caveman grunted: I resent that. My deepest apologies if you were offended. Once more my inadquate descriptive skills leap to the fore. I was meaning that, with the advent of such things as videophones (for crying out loud!) people were happy with an image which required as much personal imaginative input to decipher as a cave painting. Maybe film is actually an azimuth: the highest (technical) quality (real) image which lasts for the longest time. mike
Re: So?..
Well, Pentax NEVER said they'd be showing anything noteworthy at photokina. It was the incurable optimists here on the list that fed the rumour-mill. I personally think they were set back years by the abortive alliance with Hewlett-Packard. Just think about all the development time they spent getting the EI cameras into the shops to have them be such a letdown. So they found themselves well into the digital era with no joint-venture partner to provide the IT side of a digicam development, and had to restart from scratch. It's a miracle that the Optio cameras got to market so soon after the demise of the EI cameras. And the need to staff an IT RD division could explain a little of the increase of employee numbers. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 27 September 2002 7:23 PM Subject: RE: So?.. Bruce, can you send the humble pie back - looks like it will be us eating it! What I don't understand though is why we hear NOTHING about Pentax. Sure there is speculation that they have nothing new, but no-one has confirmed that. Are the reporters not even bothered to go and have a look on their stand? Did Pentax even turn up? Could they just have their new products hiding under the desk? Would this all make any sense? I just wonder why the people saying Pentax has nothing are only speculating, no-one has actually confirmed this - seems a little odd... -Original Message- From: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 September 2002 04:05 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: So?.. http://luminous-landscape.com/new/photokina2002.shtml Friday, 27 September, 2002 Either announcements from Photokina have died out, or the people reporting from Cologne are too busy eating Bratwurst and drinking Pils. My guess is that its the former, as I know how hard working a major trade show can be. But if that's the case then some major companies have not made needed announcements, and this is bad news for them. One that immediately comes to mind is Pentax, who really needed to position themselves properly vis-a-vis a digital solution for their 645 system. The salience is deafening. With their competitors Mamiya, Contax and now Hasselblad offering comparability with the very popular Kodak DCS Pro Back Pentax becomes the only major 645 format camera maker with no digital offering. It's my belief that unless they do so no later than PMA, many professionals will start to abandon them.
test
Sorry -- having problems posting to the list the past day or so Bill Peifer Rochester, NY
RE: favourite photos
You can be sure about that, knarf :)) Lukasz -Original Message- From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 11:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: favourite photos The best way to deal with offensive language (perceived or real) is ignore it. The best way to deal with those who are offended by offensive language is to ignore them. Now that I've entered this silly little fray, I guess you can all ignore me, too! g -knarf Paul Jones wrote: i was about to do exactly the same thing :) - Original Message - From: Bob Poe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 3:49 AM Subject: Re: favourite photos GET THE F**K OVER IT...WHO DO THE F**K DO YOU THINK YOU ARE..THE F**KING WORD POLICE? LEAVE, A**HOLE. NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED. --- Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hiya All Yep, thanks to all who corrected me. I was thinking of Edward Wesston. Unfortunately though I can see the pictures in my head they don't come with subtitles. My apologies to all. On another note I think the langauge of this forum needs to cleaned up. There are people of various ages, nationalities and sexes on this list and being disrespectful to another person is not only unbecoming but just not plain acceptable. When you do it in public and in writting its just plain dumb. So, I don't know what the rest of the groups opinion is but, if the various people involved could kindly settle their differences with simple debate without resorting to childishness I think it would go a long way to making everybody feel a bit more comfortable. I see lots of e-mail from people saying HiI'mbeen a lurker for X time, maybe some people have something to say but are intimidated by the harsh behaviour of the more outspoken members. I thought that this forum was for the discussion of Pentax products and the various aspects of photography in general. I could almost understand if some of the debate was between a nikon a pentax user, but no. You guys all have one uniting provision - we all love Pentax. With all her faults and shortcomings, we still use Pentax gear to take photo's. Some of us do it for pleasure, some of us like myself do it for money. I like the quick funny ever now and then, then but when we start to attack one another personaly then its is no longer a debate but a war. And considering the age we are in I think there is far too much of it. Play the ball not the man! Comments?!? Feroze Where Angels Fear Thread = What boots up must come down. __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
RE: So?..
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 12:23, Rob Brigham wrote: Did Pentax even turn up? Yes. Could they just have their new products hiding under the desk? Not anymore. I already bought all the samples they had. This leaves me with some excessive stock. Before putting the items on e-bay, I'll offer the PDML gang a chance to buy them. The most interesting item is the 61/1.9 limited lens. I have the silver, gold and black versions. I decided to keep the silver one for my ZX-L, so the gold and black can go. Cool design - they have a nice MF/AF lever. In AF setting, it engages the distance sensor (the metal strips) and the AF lens-to-camera coupling gear. In MF setting, it disengages the AF related internals and couples instead a dampening mechanism. very very smooth and quiet, feels like the M-series lens. They also come with individual data sheets (a la Zeiss), including MTF tests. The black sample is slightly sharper at f/8 in the image center. The gold sample has a flatter wide-open curve. Highest bid gets the lens. cheers, the caveman P.S. Stop drooling and calm down. It was a joke. ;- P.P.S. Was it ?
RE: OT: Another story about The Man (tm) coming down on photogs..
William Robb described the erosion of civil rights since 11 September: I am thinking more like the loss of civil rights in Germany, circa mid to late 1930's Seems quite a few folks, both in the US and abroad, have noticed that similarity. Damned frightening, indeed. Personally, I'm glad to see that the current administration in Germany has the backbone to call Bush for what he is. Given that the US was built by the collective toil of immigrants, it's scary how quickly the American public can be whipped into a frenzy of contempt, suspicion, and paranoia regarding recent immigrants, foreign visitors -- even fellow American citizens of foreign descent. You need more than a regime change, more like a paradigm shift. Look at how successful the war on drugs has been, and then think about how successful the war on terrorism will be. Indeed! Couldn't have put it better myself, Bill. Either way, an informed and thinking electorate is really a prerequisite. Therein lies the rub. Call me a cynic, I guess. There's often a fine line between democracy and mob tyranny. Bill Peifer Rochester, NY
Re: test
Its been off and on since noon Thursday Bill.Your not alone.Three posts of nmine have yet to reach. Dave Begin Original Message From: Peifer, William [OCDUS] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 11:31:33 -0400 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: test Sorry -- having problems posting to the list the past day or so Bill Peifer Rochester, NY 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: favourite photos
me too - test test - i haven't been able to post to the list for half a day now -Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: favourite photos Test Test -Original Message- From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 5:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: favourite photos The best way to deal with offensive language (perceived or real) is ignore it. The best way to deal with those who are offended by offensive language is to ignore them. Now that I've entered this silly little fray, I guess you can all ignore me, too! g -knarf Paul Jones wrote: i was about to do exactly the same thing :) - Original Message - From: Bob Poe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 3:49 AM Subject: Re: favourite photos GET THE F**K OVER IT...WHO DO THE F**K DO YOU THINK YOU ARE..THE F**KING WORD POLICE? LEAVE, A**HOLE. NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED, NAKED. --- Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hiya All Yep, thanks to all who corrected me. I was thinking of Edward Wesston. Unfortunately though I can see the pictures in my head they don't come with subtitles. My apologies to all. On another note I think the langauge of this forum needs to cleaned up. There are people of various ages, nationalities and sexes on this list and being disrespectful to another person is not only unbecoming but just not plain acceptable. When you do it in public and in writting its just plain dumb. So, I don't know what the rest of the groups opinion is but, if the various people involved could kindly settle their differences with simple debate without resorting to childishness I think it would go a long way to making everybody feel a bit more comfortable. I see lots of e-mail from people saying HiI'mbeen a lurker for X time, maybe some people have something to say but are intimidated by the harsh behaviour of the more outspoken members. I thought that this forum was for the discussion of Pentax products and the various aspects of photography in general. I could almost understand if some of the debate was between a nikon a pentax user, but no. You guys all have one uniting provision - we all love Pentax. With all her faults and shortcomings, we still use Pentax gear to take photo's. Some of us do it for pleasure, some of us like myself do it for money. I like the quick funny ever now and then, then but when we start to attack one another personaly then its is no longer a debate but a war. And considering the age we are in I think there is far too much of it. Play the ball not the man! Comments?!? Feroze Where Angels Fear Thread = What boots up must come down. __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
RE: Update - SMC-A 35-105 f3.5 fix ? - Kominek
Good luck, Dave. Keep us posted. Lukasz -Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 1:58 AM To: Pentax Discussion Mailing List Subject: Update - SMC-A 35-105 f3.5 fix ? - Kominek Let's try this again Dave -Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 7:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Update - SMC-A 35-105 f3.5 fix ? - Kominek Ok.. IF this gets through here's the scoop on my recent 35-105 F3.5 SMC-A troubles and fixes - first, let me bring you up to speed on the problem: The Helicoid and rollers are gone on the lens and Pentax Canada said that they couldn't fix it because they didn't have the parts and it's an old lens (that was all they had to say). I took it to Kominek Camera ( http://www.kominek.com ) and here's what they had to say: Firstly they called today as they promised they would (their Pentax guy picks up the stuff on Wednesdays and has a price for them and they call me the next day). They told me that the estimate to fix the lens would be $167.50 plus taxes if they had or could get the parts. Considering the orignal cost of the lens (about $150 US) it was almost a no brainer to tell them to go ahead and fix it. I've only seen ONE of these lenses locally in a retail location and the price was $499.00 CDN so to cough up an extra $180 CDN to get it back to sweet working order was more than fine by me. They told me that it should be ready in about 10 days (week after next). I have so far been pretty pleased with Kominek's service for a number of reasons: 1) They called me back as they said they would on the day they said they would. 2) They have set reasonable expectations with me, their customer (which is ALWAYS good from a customer service standpoint) 3) They've been able to go a lot further than Pentax Canada would go for me regarding an old lens (old by Pentax Canada's terms) I'm hoping that they can fix the lens (i.e. have the parts) and they did say that they would call me if they did not have the parts or were not able to attain the parts for the fix. They also told me that the estimate is a firm one and that once that estimate is set, the price is not more than what has been noted in the estimate so there's no surprises when I go get the lens. I think that all in all, they've given me good service so far. Here's hoping that they can get the parts and fix a beautiful lens. Cheers, Dave P.S. Be prepared, as I will be selling my LX and potentially other K-mount lenses
Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5
Hi all, my question has nothing to do with a DSLR, personal attacks, or... err - I don't think we've seen anything else for the past few days :) I know the M 135/3.5 has a built-in hood, but it's very shallow, so I though about getting something else for it. I found a beautiful metal hood for long Takumars. It's got Takumar 1:3.5 135mm, 1:4 150mm, 1:5.6 200mm written on it. It's dedicated for the same focal lenght, it has the same filter thread diameter, so it shouldn't cause light fall-off, but I'm not sure. Anyone ever used this combination? What's the easiest way to check whether a lenshood is too long? Thanks in advance, ukasz PS. I'm sending this post again after it hasn't showed for 40 minutes, so don't be surprised if it finally shows up twice - maybe next week :)
test
test
Re: Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5
You can check a hood's clearance by looking through the film gate with the shutter held open open at B. Sight from the corner of the frame into the lens and ideally you shouldn't see the hood. Personal experience, 'though, tells me that sometimes the hood can be seen without vignetting actually occurring. True. But to have the exact time, hold or tape some diffusion paper (I don't find the exact word, but you can find some in your kitchen) in place of the film and point the lens (set at minimum aperture as Anthony mentionned) towards a bright light source. On a LX, you only need to take the prism off to have a 100% view. Andre --
Re: Was Pentax AutoFocus......
Bruce asked: Which Nikon body do you own, or have had the long term use of? I own a 1975 Nikon F + Photomic FTn with Nikkor-H.C Auto 1:2 50mm lens. The lens is super, and I have only experienced flare when I added a UV filter. This lens has the Nikon Hard Coat as well as the anti-reflective multi-coating. I use predominantly Pentax, but when I do use my Nikon F, the results warrant it's use. James (6th attempt)
Re: Fw: Steve's Digicams - Digital Cameras From Minox
How utterly marvelously silly! At 05:38 PM 9/26/2002 -0600, you wrote: Digital Leica http://www.steves-digicams.com/cameras/minox.html 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 .
Looks like I'm back!
After several attempts to re-subscribe it appears to have worked. I don't like the new format and lost my links to PDML and associates after a crash. Can someone point me to the new PDML links pages etc., James
Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600
Thanks I think. At 01:40 PM 9/26/2002 -0500, you wrote: On Wednesday, September 25, 2002, at 11:26 AM, Peter Alling wrote: But the congnisoti, (I'm not even sure that I spelled that correctly and the damned spell checker is no help), will know who you are. Cognisnotty is the correct spelling, I believe. Dan Scott
RE: Looks like I'm back!
I guess I'm back too :) Yippie! I think the addresses are the same - www.pdml.net and the archives are at http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss%40pdml.net/ Regards, Lukasz -Original Message- From: James Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 8:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Looks like I'm back! After several attempts to re-subscribe it appears to have worked. I don't like the new format and lost my links to PDML and associates after a crash. Can someone point me to the new PDML links pages etc., James
Re: Cotty's September PUG review
Cotty wrote: Vigeland Park Dan Matyola Interesting image. Lots of ways to read this, I find a strong male presence, reinforced by the phallic structure behind. Just what I was thinking too but didn't like to say so. (*blush*) --- Wendy Beard Mosaid Technologies Inc
Re: So?..
Bruce wrote: Shame, really had an attractive odor about it. Anyway, one needn't be a great sleuth reading financial reports, patent applications, eavesdropping in Japanese men's rooms and studying chicken entrails to see where Pentax is going. All one needs to do is take two steps back from wishful thinking and look at what Pentax has and is actually selling. Aside from the MZ-S, which sort of looks like we must have something to sell from that development project, Pentax has been selling lightly reworked variations of the same basic ZX platform since 1996. With a shrinking 35mm SLR market, and increasing development costs (cameras are complicated, cost a lot to develop and even more to put into production) Pentax is just milking what they have for as long as they can. They may be playing with a load of interesting things, but it's an immense jump from the lab to the store. It is also apparent that Pentax has decided, for the foreseeable future, to pass on mid and high end digital. If they had anything they thought people would buy, they would sell it. There is a lot of money in digital. More money is being spent on digital cameras than film cameras. The catch is that the unit numbers are smaller, because the prices are higher. Pentax seems to have biggest, least risky segment (digital PS) and stick to that. Pentax has shown no commitment to delivering leading edge, world class imaging technology for 20 years; why to do you expect to see it now? REPLY: A correct analysis. To your last point: Pentax has a new agressive management, a new boss and a new company name. A total restructuring of their factories and production lines. They also stated to their distributors that their product sortiment may change in the next few years. I for one expect to see some changes to their product policy. Exactly what is debatable but there are no reason to assume that things will be like they have been for the last 20 years. It's noteworthy that Pentax have said that their to boost their brand value and image. As we all know, this is impossible witholut suitable products. I have high hopes but you can't fault those who have given up... Pål
Re: So?..
Anthony wrote: I personally think they were set back years by the abortive alliance with Hewlett-Packard. Just think about all the development time they spent getting the EI cameras into the shops to have them be such a letdown. So they found themselves well into the digital era with no joint-venture partner to provide the IT side of a digicam development, and had to restart from scratch. It's a miracle that the Optio cameras got to market so soon after the demise of the EI cameras. And the need to staff an IT RD division could explain a little of the increase of employee numbers. I believe the are in-cahoots with Epson. All kinds of disclaimers apply as I can't remember where I got that from :-) Pål
Photokina?
The last couple of Photokinas we have had a few members of PDML on hand and giving reports to us, they even talked with the Pentax reps, I believe. There has been such a lack of information on the list about Photokina this year am I to assume we had no one on hand? Oh well, might as well hope for something at PMA in March.The PMA 2003 website is up and running. DG
Re: Cotty's September PUG review
I was not conscious of the phallic nature of the obelisk as I was taking the picture, but it is there, of course. On the other hand, as Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Anyone who has visited Vigeland Park knows that Vigelan was not at all shy about frankly portraying what Monty Python would refer to as the naughty bits of human anatomy. Dan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cotty wrote: Vigeland Park Dan Matyola Interesting image. Lots of ways to read this, I find a strong male presence, reinforced by the phallic structure behind. Just what I was thinking too but didn't like to say so. (*blush*) --- Wendy Beard Mosaid Technologies Inc -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://geocities.com/dmatyola/ Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399
Re: Problem with List?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, Let's see if I get the same Relaying Denied mail not delivered message with a newly subscribed e-mail address. (still receiving list mail btw) --- Wendy Beard Mosaid Technologies Inc A Relaying Denied error message is a problem at your end, or at your providers'. -R
Re: So?..
Pål Jensen wrote: Anthony wrote: I personally think they were set back years by the abortive alliance with Hewlett-Packard. Just think about all the development time they spent getting the EI cameras into the shops to have them be such a letdown. So they found themselves well into the digital era with no joint-venture partner to provide the IT side of a digicam development, and had to restart from scratch. It's a miracle that the Optio cameras got to market so soon after the demise of the EI cameras. And the need to staff an IT RD division could explain a little of the increase of employee numbers. I believe the are in-cahoots with Epson. All kinds of disclaimers apply as I can't remember where I got that from :-) Pål Seems like Casio to me. (perhaps they are the same company) R
RE: So?..
What I don't understand though is why we hear NOTHING about Pentax. Sure there is speculation that they have nothing new, but no-one has confirmed that. Are the reporters not even bothered to go and have a look on their stand? Did Pentax even turn up? Could they just have their new products hiding under the desk? Would this all make any sense? I just wonder why the people saying Pentax has nothing are only speculating, no-one has actually confirmed this - seems a little odd... I would say that it is bizarre. Have they lost the plot?? Cotty Oh swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
F 35-135 mm 3.5-4.5
Hello Has anyone used the SMCP-F 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 lens? Just curious about the optical characteristics of this lens: sharpness, contrast, flare resistence, distortion, vignetting, etc. I'm considering purchasing one. Any info would be greatly appreciated. Thx Cliff _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Re: Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5
It should work fine. At 11:32 PM 9/26/2002 +0200, you wrote: Hi all, my question has nothing to do with a DSLR, personal attacks, or... err - I don't think we've seen anything else for the past few days :) I know the M 135/3.5 has a built-in hood, but it's very shallow, so I though about getting something else for it. I found a beautiful metal hood for long Takumars. It's got Takumar 1:3.5 135mm, 1:4 150mm, 1:5.6 200mm written on it. It's dedicated for the same focal lenght, it has the same filter thread diameter, so it shouldn't cause light fall-off, but I'm not sure. Anyone ever used this combination? What's the easiest way to check whether a lenshood is too long? Thanks in advance, £ukasz PS. I'm sending this post again after it hasn't showed for 40 minutes, so don't be surprised if it finally shows up twice - maybe next week :)
Re[2]: The big yellow papa speaks
Hi Valentin, nice to hear the sound of digital speleology again g. There's a flaw in your argument, unfortunately. We only get to see the cave paintings that have survived. Maybe, 60,000 years ago, there were as many cave paintings as there are now photographs, but they only lasted a few years. Perhaps, in 60,000 years, the shell-shocked survivors will be amazed at our few photographic remains that were lucky enough to be kept in cold, dark, dry storage, or frozen like Oetzi or some mammoth... --- Cheers, Bob I don't know much about Art, but I know what I hate Montgomery Burns, The Simpsons Friday, September 27, 2002, 3:17:53 PM, you wrote: I resent that. Cave technology is actually great. Let's talk a little bit about image permanency. Under optimal storage conditions, you can expect something like: - 200 years BW film - 100 years BW prints color slide film - 50 years color photographic prints - 25 years color digital prints - next computer crash - HD stored digital images - next file format change - CD/DVD stored digital images Compare that with cave paintings. Which were stored in far from optimal storage conditions. cheers, the caveman
Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600
But the congnisoti, (I'm not even sure that I spelled that correctly and the damned spell checker is no help), will know who you are. Cognisnotty is the correct spelling, I believe. Cognoscenti, maybe? Fred
Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600
Some people are Cognoscenti, but far more are Cognisnotty. I love that phrase! Fred wrote: But the congnisoti, (I'm not even sure that I spelled that correctly and the damned spell checker is no help), will know who you are. Cognisnotty is the correct spelling, I believe. Cognoscenti, maybe? Fred -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://geocities.com/dmatyola/ Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399
OT: Photojournalism
I started to write an email to the list with two purposes: a) to convey my happiness about a local cover that I made today, and b) to share some thoughts that had crossed my mind as a result of what was essentially my first experience at anything resembling the fabled genre of photojournalism. But the post got way too long and out-of-hand... and Pentax content was pretty minimal... so I cut and pasted it to my photo journal on my website for anyone interested. http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome/about3.htm PS... my condolences to all who were eagerly anticipating a Pentax DSLR, or anything new and worthwhile for that matter at Photokina. I know that has to be a heart-breaker. - jerome ___ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
Points of View
Hi Gang, I personally enjoy the different points of view on the group even if they aren't all pro-Pentax. Spice is good. Take it all with a grain of salt and things will be OK. Regards, Robert ___ GO.com Mail Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com
Test
Is the relationship between Yahoo and PDML on the mend? Time will tell. __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: Points of View
I personally enjoy the different points of view on the group even if they aren't all pro-Pentax. Robert, I agree, especially with the last part. Specifically, during the Pentax AutoFocus / Consumer Fast Film thread I was somewhat surprised (and actually very glad to see) that so many people were willing to just say Hey, you're right, Pentax AF technology is not exactly cutting edge. Brand X clearly has an advantage because As everyone's favorite list member mentioned yesterday (in his own special way), sometimes it seems as if it's almost taboo to say anything anti-Pentax on the list, even when it may be helpful to others... and thats not a good environment at all for learning and exchanging true experiences. - jerome
Re: Photokina?
I think a few members will visit Saterday. On Friday 27 September 2002 19:30, dick graham wrote: The last couple of Photokinas we have had a few members of PDML on hand and giving reports to us, they even talked with the Pentax reps, I believe. There has been such a lack of information on the list about Photokina this year am I to assume we had no one on hand? Oh well, might as well hope for something at PMA in March.The PMA 2003 website is up and running. DG -- Frits J. Wüthrich (Sent with Kmail)
Re: DSLR...
On Friday 27 September 2002 10:19, Anthony Farr wrote: Thanks for the numbers. I did extract the search info from the link and use them successfully in the search box. Steven Desjardins had no luck with linking directly to the search results, while Ryan Brooks did link straight in, so it appears the US Patent Office is fickle about who it talks to :-) Perhaps at high traffic times they spit us out. The Australian Tax Office does the same at lodgement time :-( I don't think that that is the problem. Due to wrapping of the text in the email message a lot of email clients will recognize only the first line of the copied URL as such and ignore the rest. I had that problem too. I copied all three lines into a text editor, removed the returns, so it formed one long URL and copied that in my web browser. Then it worked perfect. -- Frits J. Wüthrich (Sent with Kmail)
no test
this is not a test -- Frits J. Wüthrich (Sent with Kmail)
Re: So?..
On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 05:12 AM, Pål Jensen wrote: I've been out of touch with Japan for awhile. I've just been told than Pentax wasn't really expected to show anything before October 1. This is the date when Asahi change name and their restructuring program (including new factory lines) take place. Pål Hi Pål, I missed out on the name change, what is going to be? Dan Scott
Re: Too bad it's Friday
Don't cry, Collin. I'm sure the cat had no ill intent when it shredded your paper towels. And you don't sound *that* American. You'd have to use more profanity. Sounds to me like you've got The Blues. Them's is some deep-down, dirty South, hurricane watchin' blues. Get yourself a guitar and strum those babies away. Deb in TX with a guitar all her own __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: DSLR...
Rüdiger wrote: No Pentax news (no DSLR, no IS converter, no USM lens, no KAF3 mount, no limited lens, no LX-AF, no AF converter...) I for one had at least expected a Limited lens. Pål
Re: So?..
- Original Message - From: Dan Scott Subject: Re: So?.. I missed out on the name change, what is going to be? Enron Camera Corp. You will be able to buy shares in it. WW
James's September PUG picks
Skyey Wavelets by Petr Pazour, Dianna by Ma McRae, More Reeds by Ken Waller, Boy by Zhang Min, Peggy's Cove by Martin Mielke,
Re: Points of View
We definitely don't have to have the same point of view here. But it is a Pentax list. I'm sure all of us have problems with Pentax, I know I do. Voicing these is no problem. The only problem is when a member puts-down another, or uses insulting words. I really love the saying If you don't have anything good to say, don't say it at all. Debating with respect should be expected here. Myself and others don't come here to see people bickering. I was part of that once, and want no more of it. I can only hope others do the same. - Original Message - From: Jerome Daryl Coombs-Reyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 4:24 PM Subject: Re: Points of View I personally enjoy the different points of view on the group even if they aren't all pro-Pentax. Robert, I agree, especially with the last part. Specifically, during the Pentax AutoFocus / Consumer Fast Film thread I was somewhat surprised (and actually very glad to see) that so many people were willing to just say Hey, you're right, Pentax AF technology is not exactly cutting edge. Brand X clearly has an advantage because As everyone's favorite list member mentioned yesterday (in his own special way), sometimes it seems as if it's almost taboo to say anything anti-Pentax on the list, even when it may be helpful to others... and thats not a good environment at all for learning and exchanging true experiences. - jerome
Re: Too bad it's Friday
Thanks for the kind thoughts. Actually, I'm not at all depressed. Just bored to death. But maybe, just maybe (and very unfortunately) I brought some of those emotions from Oklahoma up to Columbus. I'm looking out my office 11th-floor window watching the clouds begin to rise and thin, with some blue peeking through here and there. I have a Guitar. Classical. Yamaha G-235. Nice, mid-range unit. Sounds nice. But the cat broke one of the strings. I've threatened to oblige her to replace it. Wife doesn't like that idea. Maybe I'll buy some new strings on the way home tonight. Then, with the old ones, I'll fix the cat! (But, really, what are cats good for but mousing and, when they get old, guitar strings!) Collin p.s., I'm not really the kind of person to use profanity. From: Debra Wilborn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Too bad it's Friday Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Don't cry, Collin. I'm sure the cat had no ill intent when it shredded your paper towels. And you don't sound *that* American. You'd have to use more profanity. Sounds to me like you've got The Blues. Them's is some deep-down, dirty South, hurricane watchin' blues. Get yourself a guitar and strum those babies away. Deb in TX with a guitar all her own
[HOTTEST] Photokina news
The cave team reports: The MZ-D was just unveiled. The rep was kind enough to let us play with it for about 30 minutes. Here's the scoop: It actually comes in three pieces: - A MZ-S with digital back - a remote unit - 2 software CDs Now the details: The digital back holds nothing but the CCD sensors, a microprocessor, RAM/ROM chips and a low power wireless network chip and antenna. No flash memory slots, no LCD screen, no buttons, no wheels, no nothing. These are all located on the remote unit. This is a small box (cigarette pack size), with various connector slots all around. You may connect different additional modules to it. You can choose between 2 LCD screens (a smaller one and a bigger one), a 40 Gb or 80 Gb miniature hard drive, various flash memory cards, additional Li-Ion power packs, etc. Inserting about all possible modules makes it the size of 4 cigarette packs lined in a row. A workable configuration (LCD screen, flash memory and small power pack) is the size of two cigarette pack. A belt clip makes it easy to carry it around. or you can use a bracelet to secure it on your arm. The nice touch is that apart from the traditional functions offered by digital backs, the remote unit is indeed a remote controller too. You can control all the camera's functions from it. We tested this - we hid the camera in the ladies room and had lots of fun with the remote box for about 10 minutes. Then we accidentally turned on the camera's flash and got discovered. After some dealing with the security staff (we explained that it was a scientific experiment, and they seemed to believe us - they even asked for copies of the pics so they could conduct some research too), we got the camera back and proceeded to further investigations. It appeared that instead of the remote unit you may use a laptop or desktop computer. The only requirement is that the computer is equipped with a wireless network card, and you install the software from the 2 CDs. We tried it on our toshiba satellite and whoa! it was really cool. We were impressed by having such a huge display of the image. We could control all the camera's function, and even program it to automatically take images. A timed mode was available (e.g. every 5 minutes), together with an event-driven mode - i.e.the image meets some criteria (changes in the image, eg.). We could easily program it to take an image each time someone used a flash in the room. While studying the software menus, we also concluded that you can control several cameras from the same computer. Very nifty. Unfortunately our 30 minutes ended here, and we had to return the camera to the rep. Asked on why this particular arrangement of camera back + remote unit, the rep told us that it allows for easy, inexpensive upgrades when higher res CCD sensors become available, and helps keeping the camera small and light. Further details and the exact specs are unknown to us. We'll be back soon with more news. cheers, the caveman P.S. Yes, this was yet another cave joke. P.P.S. Perhaps.
My LX with 40mm, 3 finders, winder and accessories is on ebaywith no reserve
British and Mainland Europe Pentaxians, check it out on http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1384539714 Andrea
Re: Cotty's September PUG review
Cotty wrote: Vigeland Park Dan Matyola Interesting image. Lots of ways to read this, I find a strong male presence, reinforced by the phallic structure behind. Just what I was thinking too but didn't like to say so. (*blush*) LOL. I'm glad you didn't Wendy - it would have ruined my vision of you :-) Cot Oh swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Photokina?
Pentax is DEAD! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Long live the PENTAX! Life goes on. I still like my kit. I know that I won't replace it with anything that doesn't afford me at least the same options and cost significantly less than what's currently the case. Fortunately, my client is me. I can pursue what's important to me and use any means I damn well like. Most pros are driven to provide what their clients expect. My sympathies to them. Somewhere down the line, I may get the equivalent of a Canon G2 (or whatever the future equivalent will be, maybe even a Pentax), but it would be to replace my Yashica point and shoot, not my Pentax kit: ZX-5n, FG grip, Autobellows A, Refconverter M, AF500 FTZ, FA 24mm f:2, FA 35mm f:2, A 50mm f:1.7, A 50mm f:2, FA 77mm f:1.8, FA 100mm f:2.8, M 135mm f:3.5 . I actually like all this stuff and get great pleasure using it whenever I can. I intend to keep doing so for awhile yet. Peace Dan Scott
OT: Photojournalism
Congrats Jerome, Nice story, nice lessons. Enjoyed the read. http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome/about3.htm BTW, I think this is an excellent idea - posting experiences that are mostly OT onto one's website, and then posting the URL as an Off Topic subject. That way, the folks who don't want to read aren't offended before they hit the delete button (and a few are), and the rest can tune in and enjoy a web page with pics and links... Well done Jerome. Cotty Oh swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: [HOTTEST] Photokina news
I heard Nikon's new full-frame digital SLR (not announced at Photokina but coming soon, trust me) has no LCD at all - it comes with a 17 CRT monitor that's connected to the camera via a cable. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Re: So?..
Dan wrote: I missed out on the name change, what is going to be? Eh...Pentax! They are now called Asahi Optical. Pål
Re: Problem with List?
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 13:41:01 -0500 From: Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] A Relaying Denied error message is a problem at your end, or at your providers'. -R That's what I'd normally expect. Only it's not just me getting this error message. The others with the same problem probably haven't managed to get a message to the list yet ;-) --- Wendy Beard Mosaid Technologies Inc
Re: More on EOS1Ds review
I don't see how anyone could conclude that 35mm film is still a superior media after seeing these pictures. -R The only thing I've concluded from this comparison is that his scanner is badly out of focus and/or needs service From the lumnious landscape review: (Note that the same lens Canon 70-200mm f/2.8l IS lens was used at the same aperture, and because the 1Ds is full-frame the image size recorded is identical (no magnification factor to confuse things. The difference in resolution is therefore solely due to the camera / imager and no other factor). This is quite misleading. There is a second optical system (the film and scanner) at play here. There is quality of film processing at play here. I know from experience that's a huge factor when scanning film. There is internal image processing (in the camera) vs. external image processing (during and after the scan) at play here. Even though the author has gone to some lengths to equalize things, it winds up in the old apples/orange bin. The image from the Canon is excellent but this comparison is rather weak. Regards, Chris L.
Re: [HOTTEST] Photokina news
I heard Nikon's new full-frame digital SLR (not announced at Photokina but coming soon, trust me) has no LCD at all - it comes with a 17 CRT monitor that's connected to the camera via a cable. Hmmm... And I've heard that C*n*n has a DSLR coming out that doesn't use any monitor at all, except that it comes with a special contact lens (connected with a cable to the digicam) that you stick onto your eye and view directly. ;-) Fred
Re: [HOTTEST] Photokina news
Valentin Donisa wrote: The cave team reports: The MZ-D was just unveiled. The rep was kind enough to let us play with it for about 30 minutes. Here's the scoop: It actually comes in three pieces: - A MZ-S with digital back - a remote unit - 2 software CDs Now you're just being mean. :-) R
RE: My LX with 40mm, 3 finders, winder and accessories is on ebaywith no reserve
Andrea Rocca wrote: British and Mainland Europe Pentaxians, check it out on http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1384539714 Wow! That looks fantastic. I'd love to bid for that - but for some reason, I know not why - the words eBay and camera in the same sentence cause a disturbing and frankly scary reaction by my wife. Malcolm
Re: Too bad it's Friday
That's why I always have a backup set of strings for my Fender. Unfortunately I cannot blame a cat, but my abuse :) Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 4:45 PM Subject: Re: Too bad it's Friday Thanks for the kind thoughts. Actually, I'm not at all depressed. Just bored to death. But maybe, just maybe (and very unfortunately) I brought some of those emotions from Oklahoma up to Columbus. I'm looking out my office 11th-floor window watching the clouds begin to rise and thin, with some blue peeking through here and there. I have a Guitar. Classical. Yamaha G-235. Nice, mid-range unit. Sounds nice. But the cat broke one of the strings. I've threatened to oblige her to replace it. Wife doesn't like that idea. Maybe I'll buy some new strings on the way home tonight. Then, with the old ones, I'll fix the cat! (But, really, what are cats good for but mousing and, when they get old, guitar strings!) Collin p.s., I'm not really the kind of person to use profanity. From: Debra Wilborn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Too bad it's Friday Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Don't cry, Collin. I'm sure the cat had no ill intent when it shredded your paper towels. And you don't sound *that* American. You'd have to use more profanity. Sounds to me like you've got The Blues. Them's is some deep-down, dirty South, hurricane watchin' blues. Get yourself a guitar and strum those babies away. Deb in TX with a guitar all her own
Re: Just unveiled accessories for Pentax at Photokina!
It certainly does... - Original Message - From: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 6:48 PM Subject: Re: Just unveiled accessories for Pentax at Photokina! On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 05:10 PM, Rob Brigham wrote: Turn your expensive camera into a P.O.S., sorry, no P. S. The LOREO Lens in a Cap is a new body cap for SLR cameras. It protects standard and digital SLR cameras from dust and dirt while keeping them ready for snapshots. It incorporates a fixed focus lens, which turns any SLR into a point-and-shoot camera, slim enough to pocket. Focal length is 35mm, and aperture is adjustable from f/5.6 - f/64. The aperture acts as a built-in lens shade. You can also have a PC lens for $22!! http://www.loreo.com/ http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/loreo_lubot_lenscap.html Does that look like a Pentax to anyone else? Dan Scott
Re: So?..
- Original Message - From: Cameron Hood Subject: Re: So?.. Pentax delays in digital are costing me a lot of money. And I can't believe it is taking this long. This is now ridiculous. My next camera will definitely be a digital. I just hope I don't have to sell all my lenses, bodies, and flashes and jump ship to do it. Why not just buy whatever body suits your needs and a couple of zooms for it? You can offset the cost of the lenses by not losing any more money. I'm quite serious here. Think of the digital as a different format. If the lack of a 4x5 was costing you money, you would buy one, and the fact Pentax doesn't support it wouldn't be a big deal.
Re: Photokina?
May 1 Oct. will be a time for a major when Pentax changes its name to Nitax, or is it Cantax? Jim A. From: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 15:58:47 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Photokina? Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:00:51 -0400 Pentax is DEAD! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Long live the PENTAX! Life goes on. I still like my kit. I know that I won't replace it with anything that doesn't afford me at least the same options and cost significantly less than what's currently the case. Fortunately, my client is me. I can pursue what's important to me and use any means I damn well like. Most pros are driven to provide what their clients expect. My sympathies to them. Somewhere down the line, I may get the equivalent of a Canon G2 (or whatever the future equivalent will be, maybe even a Pentax), but it would be to replace my Yashica point and shoot, not my Pentax kit: ZX-5n, FG grip, Autobellows A, Refconverter M, AF500 FTZ, FA 24mm f:2, FA 35mm f:2, A 50mm f:1.7, A 50mm f:2, FA 77mm f:1.8, FA 100mm f:2.8, M 135mm f:3.5 . I actually like all this stuff and get great pleasure using it whenever I can. I intend to keep doing so for awhile yet. Peace Dan Scott
Re: F 35-135 mm 3.5-4.5
Cliff, I have this lens. I've only had it a short while though. It seems very heavy for the apparent construction materials. I got it because it was cheep ($125 shipped from KEH)and I like it's range. It seems to hunt a bit more than my F35-80 and the manual focus feel is nothing short of terrible. I've only taken a bunch of snapshots so far, no real sharpness tests or anything. I'm always quick to blame those problems on myself anyway... I understand the list's opinion of this lens to be less than stellar though. Cory Waters - Original Message - From: Cliff Nietvelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: F 35-135 mm 3.5-4.5 Hello Has anyone used the SMCP-F 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 lens? Just curious about the optical characteristics of this lens: sharpness, contrast, flare resistence, distortion, vignetting, etc. I'm considering purchasing one. Any info would be greatly appreciated. Thx Cliff _ Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Re: Just unveiled accessories for Pentax at Photokina!
- Original Message - From: Dan Scott Subject: Re: Just unveiled accessories for Pentax at Photokina! http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/loreo_lubot_lenscap.html Does that look like a Pentax to anyone else? Dan Scott From: Brad Dobo It certainly does... I guess that should quelch the concern that third party lens makers were dropping support for Pentax. William Robb
RE: Is anyone else using Kodak Elite Chrome Extra Color?
Tom, I've used it a couple of times and have another roll in the fridge waiting for the fall colors around the Toronto area. It's a NICE film as far as I'm concerned. Not as vivid or saturated as Velvia but at the same time just enough saturation to give it a nice PUNCH. The other draw to this film is the price. Up here in Toronto it costs about $11 plus processing for Velvia. The Kodak Elitechrome ExtraColor, while being 100 asa vs Velvia's 50asa is only $7.00 plus processing. Savings can add up should you decide to stick with the Kodak. Sample: http://www.chang-sang.com/photos/crop0004.jpg Taken in July in Stanley Park Vancouver British Columbia Canada. Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 6:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Is anyone else using Kodak Elite Chrome Extra Color? I've been trying the Elite Chrome Extra Color and I'm impressed with the color and how sharp this stuff is. I know the hot slide film is Velvia and Sensia but I'm determined to stick with US stuff. IMO, it's a great product at a great price. Is anyone else using it? If so, what's your opinion on it? Tom Reese
Re: Photokina?
- Original Message - From: Jim Apilado Subject: Re: Photokina? May 1 Oct. will be a time for a major when Pentax changes its name to Nitax, or is it Cantax? I think last Photokina we decided it would be Kotax William Robb
Where is Pentax? (was Re[2]: pentax-discuss-d Digest V02 #209)
Cameron, Mr. Rubenstein was fairly correct in his assessment of the Pentax situation. Canon is the gadget and marketing king and as such, will release new stuff more often with more innovation than anybody else. Nikon will release just enough to not get blown away by Canon. Minolta and Pentax have already been blown away. The one area that Pentax has any strength in that we might have interest is medium format. Even there, recent developments are looking grim for Pentax unless they start taking some chances. However, they have shown in the past long while that they are not willing to take chances and compete. I would say that if you are not happy with the current offerings, then the time may have come to start looking to one of the others. I, myself, am satisfied for the time being. Medium Format is occupying my interests and development for now. A digital SLR is not of interest until I can get a full frame sensor because I can't stand to lose that much on the wide end. Based on prices, it will be a long while before I pick up something. Who knows where Pentax will be then? In the meantime, I have no needs or expectations that weren't already being met by the current product line so I am fine. I do understand how many of you may feel. I wish you luck in your search. Sorry that this has been a dead end. Bruce Friday, September 27, 2002, 4:09:21 PM, you wrote: CH While Canonophile's are still realing from the too many cameras released in CH too short a time, we are reduced to hunting through obscure patent CH applications to see pencil drawings of things that will probably never be. CH This is totally ing ridiculous. CH Cameron Hood CH on 09/27/02 3:46 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at CH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 23:31:38 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: DSLR... Message-ID: 003101c265a4$1aad4480$a0ac4382@oemcomputer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Rüdiger wrote: No Pentax news (no DSLR, no IS converter, no USM lens, no KAF3 mount, no limited lens, no LX-AF, no AF converter...) I for one had at least expected a Limited lens. Pål
Re: DSLR's and Film Scanners
- Original Message - From: Cliff Nietvelt Subject: DSLR's and Film Scanners Been thinking: While I think the hype around DSLR's has been facilitated by the Luminous Landscape, I'm not convinced that the EOS-1Ds test vs film was at all accurate. It seems to me that scanning the negative is the electronic equivalent of making a copy negative. Anyone who has dealt with them knows how much quality loss there can be. William Robb
RE: Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5
Keith, M is a line of Pentax lenses in K mount dedicated for the M series cameras. M 135/3.5 is not a M-42 lens, but a PK bayonet lens. And, well... what about my question? :) I'm pretty sure the hood is OK, but more positive feedback would be welcome :) Regards, Lukasz -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5 Not sure you'll get this post in return. I have 5 posts backed up that were refused, for some reason... keith whaley £ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: Hi all, my question has nothing to do with a DSLR, personal attacks, or... err - I don't think we've seen anything else for the past few days :) I know the M 135/3.5 has a built-in hood, but it's very shallow, so I though about getting something else for it. I have one that doesn't... Too old? Too new? What? Minew's a Super Takumar. No sliding or other built-in hood. Wait, are you talking about a Pentax-M? All these incomplete designations confuse... I don't have a history of the f/3.5 135mm M-42 lenses, so I'm not sure. I found a beautiful metal hood for long Takumars. It's got Takumar 1:3.5 135mm, 1:4 150mm, 1:5.6 200mm written on it. It's dedicated for the same focal lenght, it has the same filter thread diameter, so it shouldn't cause light fall-off, but I'm not sure. Anyone ever used this combination? What's the easiest way to check whether a lenshood is too long? Thanks in advance, £ukasz PS. I'm sending this post again after it hasn't showed for 40 minutes, so don't be surprised if it finally shows up twice - maybe next week :)
Re: So?..
On 27 Sep 2002 at 16:34, Cliff Nietvelt wrote: Don't think I'll jump the Pentax ship, since I'm quite happy with what I got. Just curious if they are releasing new lenses, especially FA*. To me this is more important than a higher-end flagship camera...or a DSLR for that matter... I'm afraid that many Pentax 35mm SLR users (not just the subscribers to this list) couldn't care if Pentax never bring out another lens or film body if there is no announcement of a forthcoming K-mount DSLR very very soon. :-( And justs to clarify I'm talking people interested in buying new equipment. I'm happy with the performance of my dead end Pentax film equipment too. 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: Is anyone else using Kodak Elite Chrome Extra Color?
Tom, I use the stuff and love it. I have four fresh rolls just waiting to be burned. It's hard to find in my area. The local CVS fetches $7.49 per roll of 24 exp. Robert ___ GO.com Mail Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com
Re: So?..
On 27 Sep 2002 at 12:12, Pål Jensen wrote: Mishka wrote: But if that's the case then some major companies have not made needed announcements, and this is bad news for them. I've been out of touch with Japan for awhile. I've just been told than Pentax wasn't really expected to show anything before October 1. Their marketing manager must have a brain the size of a peanut or else he has his d*ck in the till so to speak :-( Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: So?
What's all this about a flagship camera? Isn't the MZ-S the flagship of the line? It's the dream camera that appears to have been designed with most of the hopes of the PDMLers in mind. What's it missing, a removable finder? 10fps winder? I'm happy that Pentax has a camera to compete with the F100 and EOS-3. The MZ-S does all that I ask of it, has build quality to be proud of, and is friendly enough that you could just hug it. Does anyone really want Pentax to make an F5 equivalent, that costs twice the price of an MZ-S and takes 8 AA batteries? For that money, just grab a 67II and be done. Most top pros shooting fashion and portraits are shooting medium format anyway. N***n and C***n don't even try to compete in that field. Do their list members beat their chests over that? I doubt it. Pat White
Re: Points of View
On 27 Sep 2002 at 16:24, Jerome Daryl Coombs-Reyes wrote: sometimes it seems as if it's almost taboo to say anything anti-Pentax on the list, even when it may be helpful to others... and thats not a good environment at all for learning and exchanging true experiences. Hi Jerome, Contributors to the PDML have traditionally been very tolerant and not at all dismissive of other brands of equipment so I suspect that the responses that you are referring to are more a product of the delivery than the object. As some listers may be aware, I switched from P67/645 to Mamiya 7 about 18moths ago. However I don't tell every P67 user who posts an enthusiastic remark to the list that their camera is a steaming pile of poo. I recognize that each system has it merits and I can't see the value of denigrating other peoples choices. 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: Just unveiled accessories for Pentax at Photokina!
William Robb wrote: I guess that should quelch the concern that third party lens makers were dropping support for Pentax. HAR! smirk !8^D - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: So?
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:12:58 -0700 Pat White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's all this about a flagship camera? Isn't the MZ-S the flagship of the line? It's the dream camera that appears to have been designed with most of the hopes of the PDMLers in mind. What's it missing, a removable finder? 10fps winder? The only thing that I personally miss in the MZ-S, is multi-spot metering (as in the Olympus OM3, OM4 and their Ti cousins). However seeing how much (or rather little) I use this particular feature in my OM4, I can easilly live without it. I'd guess that I do about 95% of my shots in full-manual exposure and with a single spot metering, the rest in either point-and-shoot mode (auto-everything) or with multi-spot metering. However if you press me really hard for a shortcomming, I'd say it would be the lack of multi-spot capability. I'm thus far happy with the MZ-S, which - indeed - seems to have been designed with me and my needs very mucy in mind. However needs may vary Notice, that what I do does not require a lightening snappy AF or a double-digit fps winder. I imagine that if you do motorsports, for example, such might come handy. And I do not know how well the MZ-S would fare in that field SNIP Does anyone really want Pentax to make an F5 equivalent, that costs twice the price of an MZ-S and takes 8 AA batteries? For that money, just grab a 67II and be done. I do not care that much about the money - photography is, over the years, an expensive hobby anyways. What I do care about is size and weight. I had an F5 a while back when I was looking for supplements to the dying OM system I use as my primary kit. While I am a pretty big guy (190 cm tall), I found the F5 to be uncomfortably heavy and big - both for use and for carrying. I do lots of travelling, where I bring 3-4 cameras along, so size is really important to me. The F5 is an excellent camera, but my priorities went in favour of small and light. The MZ-S fit that bill, even with the BG-10 attached. Again, this being my preferences - to others, the power of the F5 may be the priority, weight and size being secondary or of no concern. SNIP If you want really big, then take a 4x5 :) -- --- Thomas Heide Clausen Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt) M.Sc in Computer Engineering E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop ---
Re: Takumar lenshood for an M 135/3.5
Lukasz Kacperczyk wrote: Keith, M is a line of Pentax lenses in K mount dedicated for the M series cameras. M 135/3.5 is not a M-42 lens, but a PK bayonet lens. Okay...I have a 50mm f/1.4 lens, Pentax-M, with bayonet mount. Only lens I have that's so marked. I should have recognized the terminology. However, I'm still learning, a year after getting my nice little MG... And, well... what about my question? :) I'm pretty sure the hood is OK, but more positive feedback would be welcome :) Since I don't have that lens (I wish I did...) I can't help you. I have the identical Pentax hood that fits the 3.5, but don't know if the Takumar sees the very same view as the bayonette version. I'll be testing it soon as I can... keith whaley Regards, Lukasz
