Re: New Pentax Site
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Bob Rapp wrote: > Pentax has changed their Japan website with a new look, but no new > products. > http://www.pentax.co.jp I noticed the online shop (is this new or did I miss it before?). Mainly accessories, and it has that Sharan mini-spotmatic for sale. I also noticed new F 1.7x AF adapter/teleconverter for sale at 27,000 yen - I thought this was supposed to be discontinued in 1997?! (according Bojidar's K-mount equipment page.) Don't think it would ship outside Japan though. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4--
RE: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n (Now it's long)
Pat wrote: > I originally went w/ Sunpak for value vs. features; it > hasn't let me down w/ the minor exception of size. I > will put the 444D on my list to be explored. Just in case you need any more convincing, I agree that the 444D is a very good choice. I considered selling mine when I picked up a 500FTZ, until I discovered the Pentax flash is incompatible with the LX. (I probably shouldn't have bought the 500, considering how often I actually use a flash) Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
New Pentax Site
Hi gang, Pentax has changed their Japan website with a new look, but no new products. http://www.pentax.co.jp Bob
WTB: Strap for 645
Hi, If any one has for sale the strap with lugs or just the lugs to attach a strap for Pentax 645, could you email me off list at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks
Re: OT: (spiked) Monopod feet
The "El Cheep-o" Adoramma monopod I bought last year has a rubber foot that you can rotate to expose the spiky center post. I've found it nice when shooting on Astro Turf but not so fun when shooting on hardwood floors :) Cory Waters - Original Message - From: "Jerome Daryl Coombs-Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jerome Daryl Coombs-Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:21 PM Subject: Re: OT: (spiked) Monopod feet > > Thanks, Bruce. Thats actually good to hear because I *just* realized that > the spiked feet are not compatible with the monopod that I have chosen. > [So nevermind everyone!] > > Thanks again, > jerome > > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Bruce Dayton wrote: > > > I use my Bogen monopod with rubber bottom in wet grass quite often > > with a 200/2.8 or 400/5.6 and have noticed no problem at all. > >
Re: C41
Feroze, My Cibachrome retouching dyes came from a professional photographic supplier. I'd seen the Marshalls products in city camera stores but not small suburban stores. I haven't been looking out for them for years so I can't comment on their current availability. Some of the oldest B&W papers were naturally warmer toned than present papers because they were silver chloride papers not silver bromide. The two existed together for a while and while I can't confirm that chloride papers are extinct any that might still exist are rare. Some old prints weren't always brown but have "sulphided" due to a combination of age, chemical instability and chemical contamination. Tom has already explained this well so I won't repeat his explanation. What you now find are warm toned papers and warm toned developers, as well as a wide range of colour toners that are used post development. If you're adventurous you might explore some of these toners to get different base colours in preparation for hand colouring with dyes. Apart from the Kodak sepia toner and Agfa brown toner the only other type I've used was "Canchem" brand which is Australian and I doubt is exported. It's even possible to multiple tone a print. You can work on small areas of print with fine brushes and swabs being careful not to let toners run out of the intended areas. You can also use artists' masking fluid to allow toning only on selected areas, I've experimented with this but did get problems at the boundaries of differently toned areas, so it may be necessary to leave a margin of untoned emulsion around each differently treated area, and later blend the tones by hand colouring. One other technique that I've seen used successfully is to copy a B&W print onto colour film, but rather than make a single exposure, each area for different colouring is spot-lit and the appropriate coloured gel put over the camera lens. "Painting with light", using a penlight torch, can solve the problem of odd shaped details of the print. As well, Jobo makes a glass stage for special effects copying, which allows you to put masks or gels between the lens and the original photo at a position where the edges will be unfocussed and more easily blended. It is such a simple device that you could easily make your own if you liked. It was on their website last time I looked (just search for "Jobo"). If you're colouring prints from a consumer lab work gently because the emulsions of plastic papers are delicate when they're damp. And when you're finished don't forget to scan your work, because some of the chemical cocktails you'll get when you mix photos with dyes or pigments that weren't necessarily made for that purpose could reduce the life expectancy of a print in unpredictable ways. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (snip) > Isn't the sepia tint a natural thing that happens to old > photo's anyway? or has this been designed out of modern papers? > (snip) > Are the inks you using the only > available ones and are they sold in an shop or as a photgraphic item? > (snip)
Re[2]: AF teleconvertor for Pentax SMC-F + Takumar-F
Beyond the obvious optical quality loss, the speed is too slow to use in AF mode. You need to have a 5.6 lens or faster to AF. When you put a 2X converter on a lens that is 5.6, you make it a F11 lens. AF won't function very well. You will be best served just picking up a longer lens than what you currently have. Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 9:42:47 PM, you wrote: BR> My own personal opinion is to use teleconverters on prime lenses only. They BR> compromise the performance of the lens and, in the case of a zoom, the lens BR> is already compromised. BR> Bob Rapp BR> - Original Message - BR> From: "James Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BR> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BR> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:44 PM BR> Subject: AF teleconvertor for Pentax SMC-F + Takumar-F >> What AF Tele-converter would >> you recommend for use with the >> Pentax SMC Pentax-F 1:3.5-4.5 >> 28-80mm and Takumar-F 1:4-5.6 >> 70-200mm Auto Focus lenses. >> >> I currently have a Vivitar MC >> 2X [PK-A/R-PK] Tele Converter >> and an Izumanon X 2X Auto Tele >> Converter [PK]. Neither of >> which work with AF lenses. >> James >> >>
Re: AF teleconvertor for Pentax SMC-F + Takumar-F
My own personal opinion is to use teleconverters on prime lenses only. They compromise the performance of the lens and, in the case of a zoom, the lens is already compromised. Bob Rapp - Original Message - From: "James Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:44 PM Subject: AF teleconvertor for Pentax SMC-F + Takumar-F > What AF Tele-converter would > you recommend for use with the > Pentax SMC Pentax-F 1:3.5-4.5 > 28-80mm and Takumar-F 1:4-5.6 > 70-200mm Auto Focus lenses. > > I currently have a Vivitar MC > 2X [PK-A/R-PK] Tele Converter > and an Izumanon X 2X Auto Tele > Converter [PK]. Neither of > which work with AF lenses. > James > >
AF teleconvertor for Pentax SMC-F + Takumar-F
What AF Tele-converter would you recommend for use with the Pentax SMC Pentax-F 1:3.5-4.5 28-80mm and Takumar-F 1:4-5.6 70-200mm Auto Focus lenses. I currently have a Vivitar MC 2X [PK-A/R-PK] Tele Converter and an Izumanon X 2X Auto Tele Converter [PK]. Neither of which work with AF lenses. James
Re: desubscribing
Instructions are on http://www.pdml.net on the services page. At 8:42 PM -03009/30/02, Margo Ellen Gesser wrote, or at least typed: >Dear Petaxians, > >It's not that I don't enjoy all these messages, but things are getting busy >for me and I need to desubscribe. So far, all my requests have been ignored >or bounced back. Any ideas? > >Margo -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.com
Re: Pentax SMC-F 35-135mm vs FA 28-105mm's
I can only comment on the F 35-135/3.5-4.5. It is an excellent lens. It is sharp, and the color and contrast are good. Focussing is rapid and sure. The zoom ring is large and easy to turn. The focus ring is very small, but it still feels nice while in manual focus. My one big problem with this lens is it's close focussing distance. Closest focus is at just under 1.6 meters. But I now use this lens solely for shooting sports where the action is not too far away (ie- volleyball, basketball, sometimes hockey). I bought this lens while working for a little league sports portraits outfit. The owner required that I have one lens for doing individuals and team shots. This lens seemed like a good candidate, and it has served me well. It is also my only real "macro" lens and I like to play with it in that capacity sometimes. -- Nick Wright http://www.wrightfoto.com/ -- >From: "Cliff Nietvelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Pentax SMC-F 35-135mm vs FA 28-105mm's >Date: Mon, Sep 30, 2002, 9:42 PM > > SMC-F 35-135 mm f3.5-4.5 (would need to buy used) > SMC-FA 28-105mm f4-5.6 (power zoom) > SMC-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL (newest lens) > > If anyone could comment on the optical performance of any or all of these > lenses, it would be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks > > Cliff
Re: Pentax SMC-F 35-135mm vs FA 28-105mm's
Simple, Get the power zoom and live with its rotating front section. A very good lens IMHO. Bob Rapp - Original Message - From: "Cliff Nietvelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:42 PM Subject: Pentax SMC-F 35-135mm vs FA 28-105mm's > Hello, > > I'm looking for a replacement lens for my pentax FA 28-70 f4. This lens > needs repair to the focusing mechanism (loses focus), and overall I'm not > that impressed with this lens optically. Perhaps I have a bad sample. I > primarily use my FA 20-35 mm f4 which is an outstanding optic, and is in a > different league optically than the 28-70 mm f4. It should be an FA* lens > IMHO. > > Anyway, since I'd rather not spend the $$$ on the FA 28-70 f2.8 yet, which > Pentax lens would you recommend?: > > SMC-F 35-135 mm f3.5-4.5 (would need to buy used) > SMC-FA 28-105mm f4-5.6 (power zoom) > SMC-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL (newest lens) > > If anyone could comment on the optical performance of any or all of these > lenses, it would be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks > > Cliff > > > > > > > _ > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com >
Pentax SMC-F 35-135mm vs FA 28-105mm's
Hello, I'm looking for a replacement lens for my pentax FA 28-70 f4. This lens needs repair to the focusing mechanism (loses focus), and overall I'm not that impressed with this lens optically. Perhaps I have a bad sample. I primarily use my FA 20-35 mm f4 which is an outstanding optic, and is in a different league optically than the 28-70 mm f4. It should be an FA* lens IMHO. Anyway, since I'd rather not spend the $$$ on the FA 28-70 f2.8 yet, which Pentax lens would you recommend?: SMC-F 35-135 mm f3.5-4.5 (would need to buy used) SMC-FA 28-105mm f4-5.6 (power zoom) SMC-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL (newest lens) If anyone could comment on the optical performance of any or all of these lenses, it would be greatly appreciated! Thanks Cliff _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: photokina report
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:04:02 -0500, you wrote: >>"Pentax representatives has said that they will show their DSLR next >>year - probably at the PMA show -, but I strongly believe that it will >>not only be showned, it will be released." >> >>Roland Mabo - on Photozone.de Yeh, yeh, that's when it's gonna show... next year at PMA. On any day, "next year at PMA" will be the correct answer to the question "when will Pentax formally announce/release/actually offer for sale" a KAF2 mount DSLR. of course, we shoulda all guessed that... I remember someone saying the Pentax guys at Photokina were spelling out "DSLR-PMA" on their Ouija Board, between sneak visits (resume in hand) over to the Canon booth. You know, it give me a really crummy feeling knowing FillFactory (makers of the Kodak 14mp sensor) is actively looking for a similar project, and could probably give Pentax a pretty good 6 to 15mp CMOS sensor in a camera in about three months. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
Re: MZ-S flash metering
That's very clear, Alin. Thanks. Pat White
Re: desubscribing
Ya gotta love computers. Obviously PDML "senses" membership, geographically, and if numbers in certain areas get too low, dis-allows unsubscriptions. Obviously, there aren't enough Nova Scotians on the list. You're stuck with us for life, baby! -frank Margo Ellen Gesser wrote: > Dear Petaxians, > > It's not that I don't enjoy all these messages, but things are getting busy > for me and I need to desubscribe. So far, all my requests have been ignored > or bounced back. Any ideas? > > Margo -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: OT: Need portrait help...
On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 09:11 PM, tom wrote: > I've noticed that in most before/after shots, the subject has a big > unhappy frown before, and a big happy grin in the after shot. > > In the before shot the subject should be looking directly into the > camera. In the after shot they need a jaunty angle...as in most > portraits. > > The background should change too. Maybe cinder blocks before, > something pastoral after. > > Listen to Robb re the lighting. > > A makeup person would be helpful too. > > tv > Teeth, and an eyepatch. An eyepatch in the before, and a full set of teeth in the after. Dan Scott
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:16:47 -0400, you wrote: >Haven't we already had this discussion? > >Surely there's some place on AOL explaining how to tell the difference between email >and a web site. > There is just such a site. Just type in AOL Keyword "whatsthedifference". Now stand back, so you don't get crushed by the crowd rushing to discover this magical secret. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
RE: OT: Need portrait help...
I've noticed that in most before/after shots, the subject has a big unhappy frown before, and a big happy grin in the after shot. In the before shot the subject should be looking directly into the camera. In the after shot they need a jaunty angle...as in most portraits. The background should change too. Maybe cinder blocks before, something pastoral after. Listen to Robb re the lighting. A makeup person would be helpful too. tv > -Original Message- > From: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 9:51 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: Need portrait help... > > > LOSL > Lots Of Soft Light. > > Diffusion reduces the contrast of a portrait. > Soft boxes, reflectors, umbrellas: All are useful. > Just don't use any direct light on the AFTER shots. > Use only direct light on the BEFORE shots. > That way the results will look even more improved. > (Is this deceptive? No. Just making the AFTER look as > good as it can.) > It's soft light that makes even the sharper images of studio > medium format look more appealing than the ultra-sharp images > from 35mm with a direct flash. Direct lighting adds too much > contrast and damages the results. > Experiment & enjoy yourself. > > Collin > > At 09:27 PM 9/30/02 -0400, you wrote: > >Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:06:10 -0500 > >From: "Nick Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: OT: Need portrait help... > > > >I met a skin care specialist who is interested in having > me shoot "before" > >and "after" portraits of some of her clients for her > portfolio. My dilemma > >is this. Whilst studying portraiture, I've always focused > on ~diminishing~ > >blemishes etc to make the subject "look better." I need > some hints and tips > >for photographing people so that their skin imperfections show more > >accurately on film. Thanks in advance. > > > >-- > >Nick Wright > >http://www.wrightfoto.com/
Re: desubscribing
Subscription Information To subscribe to the mailinglist, simply send a message with the word 'subscribe' in the Subject: field to the -request address of that list To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: subscribe To subscribe to the digest, simply send a message with the word 'subscribe' in the Subject: field to the following address. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: subscribe To send email to the mailinglist, write to the following address: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from the mailinglist, simply send a message with the word 'unsubscribe' in the Subject: field to the -request address of that list To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: unsubscribe To unsubscribe from the digest, write a email like this: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: unsubscribe At 8:42 PM -03009/30/02, Margo Ellen Gesser wrote, or at least typed: >Dear Petaxians, > >It's not that I don't enjoy all these messages, but things are getting busy >for me and I need to desubscribe. So far, all my requests have been ignored >or bounced back. Any ideas? > >Margo -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.com
Re: OT: Need portrait help...
LOSL Lots Of Soft Light. Diffusion reduces the contrast of a portrait. Soft boxes, reflectors, umbrellas: All are useful. Just don't use any direct light on the AFTER shots. Use only direct light on the BEFORE shots. That way the results will look even more improved. (Is this deceptive? No. Just making the AFTER look as good as it can.) It's soft light that makes even the sharper images of studio medium format look more appealing than the ultra-sharp images from 35mm with a direct flash. Direct lighting adds too much contrast and damages the results. Experiment & enjoy yourself. Collin At 09:27 PM 9/30/02 -0400, you wrote: >Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:06:10 -0500 >From: "Nick Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: OT: Need portrait help... > >I met a skin care specialist who is interested in having me shoot "before" >and "after" portraits of some of her clients for her portfolio. My dilemma >is this. Whilst studying portraiture, I've always focused on ~diminishing~ >blemishes etc to make the subject "look better." I need some hints and tips >for photographing people so that their skin imperfections show more >accurately on film. Thanks in advance. > >-- >Nick Wright >http://www.wrightfoto.com/
RE: desubscribing
> -Original Message- > From: Margo Ellen Gesser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Dear Petaxians, > > It's not that I don't enjoy all these messages, but things > are getting busy > for me and I need to desubscribe. So far, all my requests > have been ignored > or bounced back. Any ideas? We don't want you to leave. Actually, I think the sub/unsub procedures may have changed. Since the pdml.net web server isn't functional at the moment, maybe someone could post the procedures. tv
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is it possible to number the topics and corresponding subject > messages. This is a VERY DIFFICULT site to read. See Nikon site for > example of ease of use. One must read all of this to get to one > subject. Oh, and if you're talking about how user-friendly the Nikon email list is (which one, BTW?), this is a recent post to the one on Yahoo groups (easy to get information, isn't it?): >From [snipped] Mon Sep 30 20:14:34 2002 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:08:16 EDT From: [snipped] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [nmlist] [OT] Gossen Luna-Pro SBC I have the original instruction manual and I could make a copy for you provided you reimburse me for my expenses. Let's see what that would come to: Time to scan document (my secretary would do this): .5 hours She earns $22.00 per hour. Cost: $11.00 Time to file and send via email: .25 hours (secretary): $5.50 Excluding any additional costs the total would be: $16.50 If you wanted me to do it multiply by a factor of 10, as this is what I bill for my time. Let me know what you want to do.
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is it possible to number the topics and corresponding subject > messages. This is a VERY DIFFICULT site to read. See Nikon site for > example of ease of use. One must read all of this to get to one > subject. Ignoring your bewildering use of the word "site," I'll give you the same answer you got the last time you asked this question. Doug Brewer is managing this list out of his own spare time, sweat, money, etc. If you think you can do a better job, then why don't you talk to him about your taking over responsibility for it? Or, better yet, just start your own list and see how much time you're willing to put into it. In either case, don't look the gift horse in the mouth. Sheesh. chris
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
Haven't we already had this discussion? Surely there's some place on AOL explaining how to tell the difference between email and a web site. At 9:54 AM -04009/30/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, or at least typed: >Is it possible to number the topics and corresponding subject messages. This is a >VERY DIFFICULT site to read. See Nikon site for example of ease of use. One must read >all of this to get to one subject. >Thanks, >Burt Yust >NYC >USA >[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.com
Re: Proper exposure in self timer operation
On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 04:25 PM, Stephen Hoffman wrote: > I understand that when the shutter release button is depressed halfway > then > focus and exposure is set. If I'm trying to take a self-portrait and > focus > on the chair I will sit in, will the exposure be set for the chair > also? I > want the focus set there but I want the exposure set for me and not the > chair. This is using Programmed AE mode. I'm sure there's a simple > answer > but I can't think of it. Thanks. > > Stephen > If you have one of the MZ/ZX bodies you can prefocus in manual mode, hit the self timer and have a sit in the chair, your meter will will take care of the rest in most situations. If your body has exposure lock you could sit a friend of similar complexion and attire in the chair, hit the exposure lock, set the self timer and play aquick round of musical chairs. Whip out your trusty remote switch, if long enough, sit in the chair, put on your best scowl, glare, or whatever you deem is most flattering and snap your shot. Dan
Re: OT: Need portrait help...
On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 06:06 PM, Nick Wright wrote: > I met a skin care specialist who is interested in having me shoot > "before" > and "after" portraits of some of her clients for her portfolio. My > dilemma > is this. Whilst studying portraiture, I've always focused on > ~diminishing~ > blemishes etc to make the subject "look better." I need some hints and > tips > for photographing people so that their skin imperfections show more > accurately on film. Thanks in advance. > > -- > Nick Wright > http://www.wrightfoto.com/ Hi Nick, A sharp lens (I use Pentax's FA100/2.8 macro) strong light, and any of the many cheap and abundant consumer print films found in the photo aisle at Target or Walmart will do an excellent job of recording marks, blemishes, scars, clogged pores, wrinkles, spider veins, zits, chaffing, dead skin, oily skin, dry skin, skin that needs a good scrubbing with a strong solvent, pock marks and the like quite well. Hope that helps, Dan Scott (unflattering portrait specialist)
RE: [OT] Oct PUG - "What Rain?"
At least you got the name of the goalie right :) Another funny thing about the guy is that after the World Cup his biography sold for ridiculously low prices. You'd never guess - it was entitled "Safe Hands" :))) Regards, Lukasz "Totally-Off-Topic" Kacperczyk -Original Message- From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OT] Oct PUG - "What Rain?" Could I get anything else wrong?!? OF COURSE YOU'RE RIGHT! Geez, it only happened back in the summer. The Olympics were 2 years ago. Oh well. My little attempt at humour went right down the flusher, didn't it? I wonder if it would have been funny if I'd have gotten all the details right? I think I'll go to bed now... red faced, frank £ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > And Frank - well, it wasn't the Olympics, but the World Cup. > Now you know :) > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
desubscribing
Dear Petaxians, It's not that I don't enjoy all these messages, but things are getting busy for me and I need to desubscribe. So far, all my requests have been ignored or bounced back. Any ideas? Margo
Re: [OT] Oct PUG - "What Rain?"
Could I get anything else wrong?!? OF COURSE YOU'RE RIGHT! Geez, it only happened back in the summer. The Olympics were 2 years ago. Oh well. My little attempt at humour went right down the flusher, didn't it? I wonder if it would have been funny if I'd have gotten all the details right? I think I'll go to bed now... red faced, frank £ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > And Frank - well, it wasn't the Olympics, but the World Cup. > Now you know :) > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Proper exposure in self timer operation
If the ambient light level is high, then you really want the eye piece covered in any AE mode, because stray light entering the eyepiece will throw the metering off. Even shading it with your hand when depressing the shutter will work. From: "Stephen Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I understand that when the shutter release button is depressed halfway then focus and exposure is set. If I'm trying to take a self-portrait and focus on the chair I will sit in, will the exposure be set for the chair also? I want the focus set there but I want the exposure set for me and not the chair. This is using Programmed AE mode. I'm sure there's a simple answer but I can't think of it. Thanks.
RE: photokina report
Actually, it would be a perfect Pentax product: unchanging year after year, century after century, eon after eon. Now, if you want a new, updated sun get Canon to do it. BR From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> You sayin' the sun's not coming back? ;-)
Re: Re[2]: A 400/5.6
Actually the Japanese site also states the A1.4X-L is particular good on FA*300/2.8 too. But that's all they said. regards, Alan Chan > Alan, > > Thanks for the info. I often wondered if it would fit because of the > snout on it. If it is anything like the 1.4X-L it should be quite > good. That FA *200/2.8 is one of the best lenses I have ever > purchased! > > > Bruce > > > > Monday, September 30, 2002, 2:55:14 PM, you wrote: > > AC> Don't think it's useful on your decision making, but the Pentax Japan web > AC> site mentioned the A2X-L is the perfect match for this FA*200/2.8. > > AC> regards, > AC> Alan Chan > > >> Over the last two weekends, I have been using and comparing my A > >> 400/5.6 lens to my FA *200/2.8 using a 1.5XL Converter and a Tamron 2X > >> AF converter. The obvious advantage to the 200 package is mobility. I > >> have that lens with me anyway and the size and weight of converter > >> isn't too much. Also I get to retain AF with the converter and the > >> 200 where the 400mm is a manual focus lens. > >> > >> I think that the images shot with the 200+Tamron 2X lose some contrast > >> and possibly some edge sharpness (isn't hurting the shots I am taking) > >> compared to the 400. With the 1.5XL I don't see any obvious > >> differences. > >> > >> My dilemma is this - I rarely carry the 400 - has it's own round > >> tubular case with carrying strap. I almost always opt for the 200 and > >> converters. That all fits in my normal carrying case. I haven't > >> found a great need for the 400mm but am a little hesitant to sell it. > >> I could really use a new Quantum QFlash T2 and the money from the 400 > >> would help towards that end. > >> > >> So are there any opinions on the list as to hanging onto this lens vs. > >> selling or any interested parties? >
Re[2]: A 400/5.6
Alan, Thanks for the info. I often wondered if it would fit because of the snout on it. If it is anything like the 1.4X-L it should be quite good. That FA *200/2.8 is one of the best lenses I have ever purchased! Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 2:55:14 PM, you wrote: AC> Don't think it's useful on your decision making, but the Pentax Japan web AC> site mentioned the A2X-L is the perfect match for this FA*200/2.8. AC> regards, AC> Alan Chan >> Over the last two weekends, I have been using and comparing my A >> 400/5.6 lens to my FA *200/2.8 using a 1.5XL Converter and a Tamron 2X >> AF converter. The obvious advantage to the 200 package is mobility. I >> have that lens with me anyway and the size and weight of converter >> isn't too much. Also I get to retain AF with the converter and the >> 200 where the 400mm is a manual focus lens. >> >> I think that the images shot with the 200+Tamron 2X lose some contrast >> and possibly some edge sharpness (isn't hurting the shots I am taking) >> compared to the 400. With the 1.5XL I don't see any obvious >> differences. >> >> My dilemma is this - I rarely carry the 400 - has it's own round >> tubular case with carrying strap. I almost always opt for the 200 and >> converters. That all fits in my normal carrying case. I haven't >> found a great need for the 400mm but am a little hesitant to sell it. >> I could really use a new Quantum QFlash T2 and the money from the 400 >> would help towards that end. >> >> So are there any opinions on the list as to hanging onto this lens vs. >> selling or any interested parties?
Re: A 400/5.6
Don't think it's useful on your decision making, but the Pentax Japan web site mentioned the A2X-L is the perfect match for this FA*200/2.8. regards, Alan Chan > Over the last two weekends, I have been using and comparing my A > 400/5.6 lens to my FA *200/2.8 using a 1.5XL Converter and a Tamron 2X > AF converter. The obvious advantage to the 200 package is mobility. I > have that lens with me anyway and the size and weight of converter > isn't too much. Also I get to retain AF with the converter and the > 200 where the 400mm is a manual focus lens. > > I think that the images shot with the 200+Tamron 2X lose some contrast > and possibly some edge sharpness (isn't hurting the shots I am taking) > compared to the 400. With the 1.5XL I don't see any obvious > differences. > > My dilemma is this - I rarely carry the 400 - has it's own round > tubular case with carrying strap. I almost always opt for the 200 and > converters. That all fits in my normal carrying case. I haven't > found a great need for the 400mm but am a little hesitant to sell it. > I could really use a new Quantum QFlash T2 and the money from the 400 > would help towards that end. > > So are there any opinions on the list as to hanging onto this lens vs. > selling or any interested parties?
Re: Less than 27 hours to go....
Arnold, favourites (that I have) 1.135 f2.5 SMC Pentax 2.200 f4.0 SMC Pentax Wished I had none Bob Rapp > Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello again, dear list members, > > > > have you already voted in the "SMC Pentax K-Mount Medium Telephoto Prime > > Lens Poll"? If not, please choose your favourite 3 lenses among the SMC > > Pentax K-mount primes with focal length between 120mm and 200mm now. > > [...] >
Re: Need portrait help...
Łukasz Kacperczyk wrote: >Well, these ar pretty obvious, but anyway: > >1. use a tripod to avoid any possibility of camera shake >2. set a small aperture (f/22 or something of the sort) for greater depth of >field >3. for the "before" photo use a film that's not flattering for human >complexion (something with lotsa red comes to mind - I'm no expert, but many >people on the list will happily tell which ones these are) > Fuji Superia 400 >4. and you can always shoot the "before" photo with a wide angle, and the >"after" photo with a telephoto > >And that's about it. Hope this helps. > >BTW - it was interesting to think how to make someone look bad for a change >:) > >Regards, >Lukasz > >-Original Message- >From: Nick Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:06 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: OT: Need portrait help... > > >I met a skin care specialist who is interested in having me shoot "before" >and "after" portraits of some of her clients for her portfolio. My dilemma >is this. Whilst studying portraiture, I've always focused on ~diminishing~ >blemishes etc to make the subject "look better." I need some hints and tips >for photographing people so that their skin imperfections show more >accurately on film. Thanks in advance. > >-- >Nick Wright >http://www.wrightfoto.com/ > > > >
RE: Need portrait help...
Well, these ar pretty obvious, but anyway: 1. use a tripod to avoid any possibility of camera shake 2. set a small aperture (f/22 or something of the sort) for greater depth of field 3. for the "before" photo use a film that's not flattering for human complexion (something with lotsa red comes to mind - I'm no expert, but many people on the list will happily tell which ones these are) 4. and you can always shoot the "before" photo with a wide angle, and the "after" photo with a telephoto And that's about it. Hope this helps. BTW - it was interesting to think how to make someone look bad for a change :) Regards, Lukasz -Original Message- From: Nick Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Need portrait help... I met a skin care specialist who is interested in having me shoot "before" and "after" portraits of some of her clients for her portfolio. My dilemma is this. Whilst studying portraiture, I've always focused on ~diminishing~ blemishes etc to make the subject "look better." I need some hints and tips for photographing people so that their skin imperfections show more accurately on film. Thanks in advance. -- Nick Wright http://www.wrightfoto.com/
Re: Less than 27 hours to go....
Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello again, dear list members, > > have you already voted in the "SMC Pentax K-Mount Medium Telephoto Prime > Lens Poll"? If not, please choose your favourite 3 lenses among the SMC > Pentax K-mount primes with focal length between 120mm and 200mm now. [...] My Favourites: 1: M135/f3.5 (stovepipe). Pretty good glass and dirt-cheap over here. 2: K200/f4, provided it is better than: 3: M200/f4 -- http://members.chello.nl/~j.schoone\\|// Registered Linux user #78364 - The Linux Counter - http://counter.li.org Assume nothing, expect anything.
RE: C41
> -Original Message- > From: Feroze Kistan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Tue, 30 Apr 2002 19:19:32 +1000 > Anthony Farr wrote > > Look at your grandparents (or great grandparents).. > > I know. My grandfather was the only wedding photographer in > this area at the > time. But he used to tint the prints with a weak solution > of tea. And then > he had little bookets of paper which he used to tint water > and used that to > dye the prints. Isn't the sepia tint a natural thing that > happens to old > photo's anyway? or has this been designed out of modern papers? This is complicated. These days, you can get a "sepia" toned print by 1 - Bleaching and toning a print with a thiocarbamide or sulphide toner. (very archival) 2 - Printing C-41 B+W on color paper with the "correct" filtration. (not archival at all, and hit-or-miss to boot) 3 - Printing on a warm-toned paper. (not really sepia, just warm) In the old days, some of the processes we would think of as "alternative" had a brownish tone that look sepia-like to eyes used to cold prints. Very old photos that have turned brown have oxidized. The brown color you see is actually the same stuff as you'd see on tarnished silver. The bleach and redevelop process actually reproduces this effect, but does it evenly. Happily, it can't oxidize any further, so it's archival. B+W photos that have been fixed and washed properly should not turn brown for a very long time. RC prints can bronze, but this is a different process and is ugly. If you're interested in toning, do an Amazon search for Tim Rudman's book, it's the definitive tome on the subject as far as I know. tv
Re[2]: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 08:27:02 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote: "However, the analog flash units will work with the digital bodies. The beauty there is that the AF280T will work with any body made by Pentax. From the K1000 to the MZ-S." -- Bruce: Thanks for this tidbit of info. I also have a K1000 sitting to the side. Am glad to know that I could use the AF280T for both the K1000 & Zx-5n. Thanks, Pat in SF __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: October PUG
Dan, I'm glad that it lifted you day a bit. This is one of my favorite places too. I wish that I had been there as often as you. We are looking at going back in the spring. But this time we'll be up near Lahaina. We shall go down and hang out a bit in Kihei though. Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 1:57:41 PM, you wrote: DJM> Well, I know which entry is my favorite from the October PUG! " Kihei Beach, " DJM> by Bruce Dayton, is just what I needed to see on a very frustrating afternoon. DJM> Besides being a very good photograph, it depicts my favorite place in the DJM> entire world, and the spot I'd most like to be right now. My wife and I have DJM> gone to Maui at least every other year for the past two decades, and we always DJM> stay in Kihei, Near the Kamaole Beach Parks. In fact, for several years we DJM> owed a condo in Kamaole Sands, across the street from the beach. We are going DJM> there again in February, but that seems very far off indeed. DJM> Thanks, Bruce, for making my day! DJM> Dan
Re: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good?
Hi, Lukasz, I agree. I've handled a Voigtlander, and I found it plasticky feeling as well, most likely because the body's skin is made of plastic . It is noisy (your comparison to an MX is about right), and vibrates more than I'd like. My Leica CL (which isn't as quiet and vibration-free as an M6) is better than the Voigtlander in both regards. For what they're asking for one here in Canada, it didn't seem worth the money, for a new body. FWIW... regards, frank £ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > >From my non-user experience and these rare occasions I handled the camera (a > few R's) - very nice viewfinder, very plasticky feel, terrible shutter. As > loud as my MX, and causing as much vibration as an SLR. This disqualifies it > as a rangefinder camera for me. A rangefinder is supposed to be quiet, and > vibationless so that the shooter could handhold it at slow speeds. I must > say that at first I was very enthusiastic towards the camera, but from the > first (but not the last - I thought maybe it was the particular specimen I > handled) time I took in my hands I was VERY dissapointed. > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: OT: (spiked) Monopod feet
Jerome, I use my Bogen monopod with rubber bottom in wet grass quite often with a 200/2.8 or 400/5.6 and have noticed no problem at all. Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 1:43:10 PM, you wrote: JDCR> It is interesting that this topic was spawned recently, as I have also JDCR> been in the midst of this decision. Well, I've finally made my decision JDCR> and now have the following question: JDCR> Has anyone invested in the spiked foot that can be bought for the Bogen JDCR> family of monopods? It sells for about $7 and (at least in theory) sounds JDCR> like a good idea... But I was wondering how it faired in practice. More JDCR> specifically, with a heavy lens in a dirt / grass environment this seems JDCR> like it may be a worthwhile investment for added stability. I went to a JDCR> local camera shop today and played with the monopod, head and lens combo JDCR> that I intend to use, and the rubber bottom seemed a bit slippery... but JDCR> the store unfortunately had no spiked feet for me to bore holes into the JDCR> floor with. Go figure! JDCR> Thanks in advance, JDCR> jerome JDCR> ___ JDCR> Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes JDCR> PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech JDCR> http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
Re: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n (Now it's long)
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002 19:47:48 -0700, Debra Wilborn wrote: "A while back I asked a similar question and got some good responses. It's been almost a year now and I still haven't bought a flash. Turns out I prefer ambient light and fast glass, so I haven't missed not having a flash. Still, maybe someday..." Fast glass sometimes comes w/ the same drawback as a flash, namely by adding more dimension/depth/size to an SLR. And a flash is a slightly more, ah, "frugal" way to add size to my Zx-5n versus fast glass. :) Pat in SF __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
RE: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n (Now it's long)
--- "Peifer, William [OCDUS]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The [Sunpak] 433D and 444D are both great flashes for the > money, IMHO. Guide number > 120 (in feet), bounce and swivel, three auto modes, > five variable power > output settings in manual mode (full power, 1/2, > 1/4, 1/8, and 1/16) -- plus > TTL mode on the 444D. (snip) Sunpak > accessories for off-camera flash are considerably > cheaper than the > corresponding Pentax accessories for, e.g., the > 280T. Finally, the 444D is > in current production, whereas the Pentax AF280T is > not. and Dick Graham wrote: "The Sunpack 444D is a good third party alternative value. Tilt and swivel head, femovable diffuser that's good out to 135mm. TTL, auto and manual with manual adjustment for fill flash. Plenty of power." I originally went w/ Sunpak for value vs. features; it hasn't let me down w/ the minor exception of size. I will put the 444D on my list to be explored. Thanks, Pat in SF __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
C41
Tue, 30 Apr 2002 19:19:32 +1000 Anthony Farr wrote Look at your grandparents (or great grandparents).. I know. My grandfather was the only wedding photographer in this area at the time. But he used to tint the prints with a weak solution of tea. And then he had little bookets of paper which he used to tint water and used that to dye the prints. Isn't the sepia tint a natural thing that happens to old photo's anyway? or has this been designed out of modern papers? The pencils I have are the Derwent watercolour ones. If you wet them first or wet the artwork later they work the same as watercolour paints or translucent inks. I tried on colour prints and they work fine as long as you use a fixative or laminate the print. Are the inks you using the only available ones and are they sold in an shop or as a photgraphic item? I work as a graphic designer, all day, sometimes 18hr shifts, the last thing I want to do is edit on photopaint. Excluding the drum scan time it would take me 20 minutes to do it on a PC. And that unfortunately would negate the purpose of my whole intent in the first place - make sense?? Thanks Feroze "Where Angels Fear Thread"
[no subject]
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002 23:15:48 +0100 Frits J. Wüthrich wrote I sincerely believe this is a misconception (snip) That is not a misconception. Take for instance the light bulb that edison originally built. It still works and hasn't been to best of my knowledge switched off yet. How long does your light bulb work??? Take inkjet printers, manufacturers sell the printer at a low almost cost price and then recover the money on the inkjet cartridges. Take a look at lexmark and epson printer prices and then caluclate how much you really payed when you factor in the cost of consumables. It dosn't apply to items stolen either, take a look at how many car decks are face off or other. You cannot steal a late model BMW or merc because of its security system. Here if you buy a new BMW and its stolen or hijacked BMW will give you a new one. But they cannot produce products that will last forever, its not economical sense. Most manufacturers test their products for MTF for critical parts and try and bring a new product to replace it (this, before I get slapped upside the head for insolence probally does not include Pentax) Now to DSLR most likely the reason that that a high end model costs so much is they know that once the sale is done, what else they gonna sell you. Ever try an buy a suit and walk out with socks and tie and shoes. What will a dealer sell you if your already have a comprehensive SLR system and are just adding another body??? Building a really robust model is also costly where most of the cost is the cmos and CCD and such, how much more would you pay for an alloy DSLR. Rest of the world dosn't have such heavy consumer rights and most times its just luck of the draw and if you don't like it just too bad Feroze "Where Angels Fear Thread"
RE: MZ-S flash metering
> -Original Message- > From: Pat White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > According to the MZ-S owner's manual, when using P-TTL > (with the Pentax 360 > flash), six-segment flash metering is provided, but there's > no mention of > metering type with other flash models. Does anyone know > whether this also > applies when using regular TTL flash, say a Metz 40 or > Pentax 500FTZ, or > does the camera switch to center-weighted for flash > metering? What about > with the built-in flash? I think it's center-weighted otherwise. In any case, it's *very* accurate. > > Also, when using flash, does the meter switch have any > effect, or does the > camera just switch to one particular metering mode? Just curious. It doesn't affect the flash metering, it does affect the ambient metering. tv
October PUG
Well, I know which entry is my favorite from the October PUG! " Kihei Beach, " by Bruce Dayton, is just what I needed to see on a very frustrating afternoon. Besides being a very good photograph, it depicts my favorite place in the entire world, and the spot I'd most like to be right now. My wife and I have gone to Maui at least every other year for the past two decades, and we always stay in Kihei, Near the Kamaole Beach Parks. In fact, for several years we owed a condo in Kamaole Sands, across the street from the beach. We are going there again in February, but that seems very far off indeed. Thanks, Bruce, for making my day! Dan
October PUG favorites
Hi gang, Had a quick look at the new gallery this afternoon, and really enjoyed this month's postings -- as I always do! I confess I haven't been good about posting comments, but this month I will. Starting now! "Thru the Windscreen" by Facit. My favorite this month, I think. Simply beautiful. What good luck to have the camera to eye, with shutter cocked, at just the right moment! "Another Scorcher" by Bob Poe. This resonates with me. The weather here in upstate NY was much the same this summer as what Bob describes for SC. There's a rusty old tractor (horse-drawn) sitting on the scorched lawn of what used to be a farm, down the road from me. I was thinking about shooting a roll of it for this month's theme, capturing the barbed wire fence, the rusty tractor, and the parched earth around it. Never got a chance. You did a nice job with this concept, Bob. By chance, did you happen to capture any views with the scorching afternoon sun in the same frame as this tractor? That would have been interesting as well. "I See the Light" by Ken Waller. I love the cold blues and the crashing waves. Ken writes, "I believe this photo captures some of the essence of a stormy fall day in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan." Ken, I believe you're absolutely right. Good shot! And those lightning shots by G. Fenstermacher, Simon King, Brendan MacRae, and Christian Skofteland are shots I enjoyed as well, particularly from a technical perspective. I think I now have a better appreciation for how difficult these shots can be. This year, the little bit of lightning we've had here in Rochester has generally been accompanied by dense, low-lying clouds -- not very good for photographing lightning bolts. I'd love to capture some images like these gentlemen have. Nice work! That's all the comments for now. Bill Peifer Rochester, NY
OT: (spiked) Monopod feet
It is interesting that this topic was spawned recently, as I have also been in the midst of this decision. Well, I've finally made my decision and now have the following question: Has anyone invested in the spiked foot that can be bought for the Bogen family of monopods? It sells for about $7 and (at least in theory) sounds like a good idea... But I was wondering how it faired in practice. More specifically, with a heavy lens in a dirt / grass environment this seems like it may be a worthwhile investment for added stability. I went to a local camera shop today and played with the monopod, head and lens combo that I intend to use, and the rubber bottom seemed a bit slippery... but the store unfortunately had no spiked feet for me to bore holes into the floor with. Go figure! Thanks in advance, jerome ___ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
Re: photokina report
The real difference between Pentax product release and Spring, is that you know when to expect the latter... Jostein - Original Message - From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 10:08 PM Subject: RE: photokina report > You sayin' the sun's not coming back? ;-) > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 30 September 2002 20:13 > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: photokina report > > > > > > Roland used to take part in this forum, and was always a big > > Pentax flag waver. For people living near the Artic Circle, > > Pentax releasing new products is an article of faith; like > > "the sun will come back". > > > > From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > ".." > > > > Roland Mabo - on Photozone.de > > > > > >
Re: Re[4]: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
Good try Bruce. I'm thinking I'll just bring it back tomorrow. No problem I'm sure. I can get the older flash for about $140 less. Think I'll put the extra toward a sweet little SMC 100/f2.8 M lens he has waiting for me.. Vic
Re: photokina report
Nah... I figured he was being abstract here. The "Artic Circle" must be a Circle of Faith. You know, the one that contains the said Article of Faith... I don't tread those circles. :-) Jostein - Original Message - From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 10:08 PM Subject: RE: photokina report > You sayin' the sun's not coming back? ;-) > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 30 September 2002 20:13 > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: photokina report > > > > > > Roland used to take part in this forum, and was always a big > > Pentax flag waver. For people living near the Artic Circle, > > Pentax releasing new products is an article of faith; like > > "the sun will come back". > > > > From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > ".." > > > > Roland Mabo - on Photozone.de > > > > > >
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
>The nomail option is once again available. I've been using it for a few >weeks. Pat, could you post info on how to subscribe to it (or send info directly to me)? There wasn't anything on the subscription info webpage as of last week, which is why I didn't think the option was available. I just need the subscrition request address as I assume it works like the other two. thanks, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: PUG interpretation
Interesting. Out of 45 images, one describes scouring heat, one describe dry wind, and one describe cold. The rest is devoted to water in some form. What's even more interesting is that I keep thinking about many images that "hey, that doesn't look too bad". But who am I to judge. :-) Jostein - Original Message - From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 10:02 PM Subject: PUG interpretation > I need to let the mind go abit on the PUG.I thought > bad weather but not ALL the possibilities. > Some nice shots and interpretations this month > folks. > > Dave > > Begin Original Message > > From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 15:51:41 -0400 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: October PUG is open > > > Sounds fair.Now if i can only remember the cut off > dates > > Dave > > Begin Original Message > > From: "Adelheid v. K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:36:33 +0200 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: October PUG is open > > > -- > About resizing your pics: > > To make the procedure easier I am going to resize them without further > notice - but if somebody is unhappy with the result, please send me > one you > like better in the proper size and I'll swap it on the server. I hope > this > is a fair deal. > > > > > > > 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 > > > > 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 > >
MZ-S flash metering
According to the MZ-S owner's manual, when using P-TTL (with the Pentax 360 flash), six-segment flash metering is provided, but there's no mention of metering type with other flash models. Does anyone know whether this also applies when using regular TTL flash, say a Metz 40 or Pentax 500FTZ, or does the camera switch to center-weighted for flash metering? What about with the built-in flash? Also, when using flash, does the meter switch have any effect, or does the camera just switch to one particular metering mode? Just curious. Pat White
RE: photokina report
You sayin' the sun's not coming back? ;-) > -Original Message- > From: Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 30 September 2002 20:13 > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: photokina report > > > Roland used to take part in this forum, and was always a big > Pentax flag waver. For people living near the Artic Circle, > Pentax releasing new products is an article of faith; like > "the sun will come back". > > From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ".." > > Roland Mabo - on Photozone.de > >
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
The nomail option is once again available. I've been using it for a few weeks. Pat White
RE: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good?
The lenses seem to be pretty good. As for a standard - lotsa users rave about the 50/2.5 Heliar (if I'm not mistaken). Check out an excellent Stephen Gandy's site www.cameraquest.com >From my non-user experience and these rare occasions I handled the camera (a few R's) - very nice viewfinder, very plasticky feel, terrible shutter. As loud as my MX, and causing as much vibration as an SLR. This disqualifies it as a rangefinder camera for me. A rangefinder is supposed to be quiet, and vibationless so that the shooter could handhold it at slow speeds. I must say that at first I was very enthusiastic towards the camera, but from the first (but not the last - I thought maybe it was the particular specimen I handled) time I took in my hands I was VERY dissapointed. I think that if you can live without the 1/2000 speed you'd be better off with a Canon P with a dedicated lightmeter or the Voigtlander meter and Voigtlander lenses. The camera has a worse viewfinder than the Bessa (more flare prone but at the sametime it offers a 1:1 view - you can shoot with both eyes open), but everything else is MUCH better - no vibrations (and I mean NO), quiet shutter (not as quiet as Leicas but close), ultrasmooth film advance, and very solid feel. Wow, that was a long one. Regards, Lukasz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 8:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good? Yippee - I've picked up a reasonably priced flight to Tokyo so plan to obtain one of those rather endearing R Olive bodies and a couple of appropriate lenses; maybe a 35 1.7 and something else. Any good? Kind regards Peter
Re: PUG interpretation
That's easy - 20th of the month. jma - Original Message - From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 1:02 PM Subject: PUG interpretation I need to let the mind go abit on the PUG.I thought bad weather but not ALL the possibilities. Some nice shots and interpretations this month folks. Dave Begin Original Message From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 15:51:41 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: October PUG is open Sounds fair.Now if i can only remember the cut off dates Dave Begin Original Message From: "Adelheid v. K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:36:33 +0200 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: October PUG is open -- About resizing your pics: To make the procedure easier I am going to resize them without further notice - but if somebody is unhappy with the result, please send me one you like better in the proper size and I'll swap it on the server. I hope this is a fair deal. End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brook sdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/m yhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brook sdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/m yhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Less than 27 hours to go....
Having just lost out on ebay for a A*85/1.4, I'll have to compensate by dreaming about: 1. A*135/1.8 (to up the ante on my K135/2.5) 2. FA*200/4 Macro ED&IF (to up the ante on my A100/2.8 Macro) 3. and then a lens I actually own and love: M150/3.5 (just used it at a friend's wedding with great results, a great impromptu people lens). Tom > From: Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Universität Hamburg > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:04:49 +0200 > To: PDML <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Less than 27 hours to go > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:13:17 -0400 > > Hello again, dear list members, > > have you already voted in the "SMC Pentax K-Mount Medium Telephoto Prime > Lens Poll"? If not, please choose your favourite 3 lenses among the SMC > Pentax K-mount primes with focal length between 120mm and 200mm now. > > Please imagine that you have no medium telephoto prime lens for your > k-mount camera. Also imagine that you have more than enough money (or a > rich uncle in his spending money mood) and a good opportunity to buy > Pentax lenses. What SMC Pentax k-mount medium telephoto lens would you > like to get most (1st choice)? What lens would you pick as your 2nd > choice, if your first choice was not available? What lens would you pick > as your 3rd choice (if your 1st and 2nd choice were not available)? > Photokina has not brought any new Pentax lens, thus please choose among > the following lenses: > > K120/f2.8 > M120/f2.8 > A*135/f1.8 > K135/f2.5 > A135/f2.8 > F135/f2.8 IF > FA135/f2.8 IF > K135/f3.5 > M135/f3.5 > M150/f3.5 > K150/f4 > K200/f2.5 > A*200/f2.8 ED > FA*200/f2.8 ED&IF > K200/f4 > M200/f4 > A200/f4 > A*200/f4 Macro ED > FA*200/f4 Macro ED&IF > > Rules: > > 1.) Pick your 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice (please choose different lenses). > You may choose less than 3 but not more than 3 choices. > > 2.) Please send your vote to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exception: Send your > vote to the PDML if you have commented your choices, and you want the > members of the PDML to know your comments. > > 3.) I will count all votes that are sent before Tuesday, October 1st, > 21:00 hours German time. > > Arnold > > > >
PUG interpretation
I need to let the mind go abit on the PUG.I thought bad weather but not ALL the possibilities. Some nice shots and interpretations this month folks. Dave Begin Original Message From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 15:51:41 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: October PUG is open Sounds fair.Now if i can only remember the cut off dates Dave Begin Original Message From: "Adelheid v. K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:36:33 +0200 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: October PUG is open -- About resizing your pics: To make the procedure easier I am going to resize them without further notice - but if somebody is unhappy with the result, please send me one you like better in the proper size and I'll swap it on the server. I hope this is a fair deal. 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 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: October PUG is open
Sounds fair.Now if i can only remember the cut off dates Dave Begin Original Message From: "Adelheid v. K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:36:33 +0200 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: October PUG is open -- About resizing your pics: To make the procedure easier I am going to resize them without further notice - but if somebody is unhappy with the result, please send me one you like better in the proper size and I'll swap it on the server. I hope this is a fair deal. 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
October PUG is open
Hi *, the October PUG is ready to go. Another month with great pics. Cheers Adelheid -- About resizing your pics: To make the procedure easier I am going to resize them without further notice - but if somebody is unhappy with the result, please send me one you like better in the proper size and I'll swap it on the server. I hope this is a fair deal.
RE: photokina report
Roland used to take part in this forum, and was always a big Pentax flag waver. For people living near the Artic Circle, Pentax releasing new products is an article of faith; like "the sun will come back". From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ".." Roland Mabo - on Photozone.de
Re: photokina report
Rob Brigham wrote: >"Pentax representatives has said that they will show their DSLR next >year - probably at the PMA show -, but I strongly believe that it will >not only be showned, it will be released." > >Roland Mabo - on Photozone.de > > > And isn't nice that PMA has a countdown right on their main page: http://www.pmai.org/ -R
RE: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good?
I tried the 28/2 and 50/1.7 (1.8?). The 50 was ok - pretty nice, but nothing to get too excited about. I was quite pleased with the 28, though mostly due to the lack of distortion which I guess is typical of RF wides in comparison to SLR wides. These are the only 2 my friend had, therefore the only ones I tried. tv > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 2:56 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: OT: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good? > > > Yippee - I've picked up a reasonably priced flight to Tokyo > so plan to obtain > one of those rather endearing R Olive bodies and a couple > of appropriate > lenses; maybe a 35 1.7 and something else. Any good? > > Kind regards > > Peter
RE: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
I suspect we'll se a AF500FGZ before too longthe smaller flash is probably a more popular size. -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.bigdayphoto.com 301-758-3085 > -Original Message- > From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 2:11 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n > > > Yes, one can wonder why Pentax comes out with a new flash > for it's new > camera, then makes it less powerfull, and takes away a > popular feature like > the swivel head. I still love it, but someone in Pentax > needs a beating. :) > > Brad Dobo > - Original Message - > From: "Nick Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 8:57 AM > Subject: Re: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n > > > > The only thing that I will miss with the 360fgz is > > having a swivel head. But then again, with wireless > > TTL this is fairly easy to overcome. > > > > Nick Wright > > wrightfoto.com > > > > --- Brad Dobo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I must say I *love* the AF360FGZ, especially since I > > > own the MZ-S. Some > > > complain about this more advanced flash not having > > > the power of the 500, but > > > I've found for my uses anyway, the gn of 36 is fine. > > > Of course we all dream > > > of a 150gn in metres or does Nikon already have one? > > > :) > > > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! > > http://sbc.yahoo.com > >
Re[2]: A 400/5.6
Rüdiger, It is the Pentax Rear Converter-A 1.4X-L. Even though it has the long snout on it, it fits the FA*200/2.8 just fine. The biggest downside is that I lose AF when I use it. Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 11:32:11 AM, you wrote: RN> Hallo, RN> what 1.5x converter you are using. The Kenko AF Konverter? RN> regards RN> Rüdiger RN> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- RN> Von: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RN> An: PDML <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RN> Datum: Montag, 30. September 2002 19:52 RN> Betreff: A 400/5.6 >>Over the last two weekends, I have been using and comparing my A >>400/5.6 lens to my FA *200/2.8 using a 1.5XL Converter and a Tamron 2X >>AF converter. The obvious advantage to the 200 package is mobility. I >>have that lens with me anyway and the size and weight of converter >>isn't too much. Also I get to retain AF with the converter and the >>200 where the 400mm is a manual focus lens. >> >>I think that the images shot with the 200+Tamron 2X lose some contrast >>and possibly some edge sharpness (isn't hurting the shots I am taking) >>compared to the 400. With the 1.5XL I don't see any obvious >>differences. >> >>My dilemma is this - I rarely carry the 400 - has it's own round >>tubular case with carrying strap. I almost always opt for the 200 and >>converters. That all fits in my normal carrying case. I haven't >>found a great need for the 400mm but am a little hesitant to sell it. >>I could really use a new Quantum QFlash T2 and the money from the 400 >>would help towards that end. >> >>So are there any opinions on the list as to hanging onto this lens vs. >>selling or any interested parties? >> >>Thanks, >> >> >> Bruce >>
OT: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good?
Yippee - I've picked up a reasonably priced flight to Tokyo so plan to obtain one of those rather endearing R Olive bodies and a couple of appropriate lenses; maybe a 35 1.7 and something else. Any good? Kind regards Peter
Re: A 400/5.6
Hallo, what 1.5x converter you are using. The Kenko AF Konverter? regards Rüdiger -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: PDML <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Datum: Montag, 30. September 2002 19:52 Betreff: A 400/5.6 >Over the last two weekends, I have been using and comparing my A >400/5.6 lens to my FA *200/2.8 using a 1.5XL Converter and a Tamron 2X >AF converter. The obvious advantage to the 200 package is mobility. I >have that lens with me anyway and the size and weight of converter >isn't too much. Also I get to retain AF with the converter and the >200 where the 400mm is a manual focus lens. > >I think that the images shot with the 200+Tamron 2X lose some contrast >and possibly some edge sharpness (isn't hurting the shots I am taking) >compared to the 400. With the 1.5XL I don't see any obvious >differences. > >My dilemma is this - I rarely carry the 400 - has it's own round >tubular case with carrying strap. I almost always opt for the 200 and >converters. That all fits in my normal carrying case. I haven't >found a great need for the 400mm but am a little hesitant to sell it. >I could really use a new Quantum QFlash T2 and the money from the 400 >would help towards that end. > >So are there any opinions on the list as to hanging onto this lens vs. >selling or any interested parties? > >Thanks, > > > Bruce >
Re[2]: [2]: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650
David, So how are you cutting your negs. I store mine in neg pages that hold up to 3 in a strip. That works just fine in the scanner without further cutting. What are you doing? Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 11:22:13 AM, you wrote: DB> So you did cave in eh BruceGlad to hear this ones DB> better.I just widh i did not have to cut my MF DB> negs to scan them.Oh and i wish my daughter had her DB> own computer.I think i have only done 40-50 scans DB> in 6 months:) DB> Dave DB> Begin Original Message DB> Bruce Dayton wrote: >> I guess I should give a few quick words about the 2450 as I have had >> my second one now for a couple of weeks. I have about 300 scans on >> it so far. I am having much better luck with this new unit DB> Pentax User DB> Stouffville Ontario Canada DB> http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ DB> http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses DB> Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Less than 27 hours to go....
1 >A*135/f1.8 2 >K200/f2.5 3 >FA*200/f4 Macro ED&IF > William in Utah. > > >
Re: Wide angle digital - was: So?
>If this has made sense to you so far, remember that the light from a wide >angle lens will fall 'straight down' on the film for objects in the center of >the field of view, but will strike at a big angle for objects at the edge of >the film... This is all valid reasoning. However, since the minimum distance between the rearmost element and the film is fixed (on A Pentax K-mount, about 40mm), wouldn't this reasoning affect all lenses with a focal length of <=40mm? thanks, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [2]: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650
So you did cave in eh BruceGlad to hear this ones better.I just widh i did not have to cut my MF negs to scan them.Oh and i wish my daughter had her own computer.I think i have only done 40-50 scans in 6 months:) Dave Begin Original Message Bruce Dayton wrote: > I guess I should give a few quick words about the 2450 as I have had > my second one now for a couple of weeks. I have about 300 scans on > it so far. I am having much better luck with this new unit 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: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
Yes, one can wonder why Pentax comes out with a new flash for it's new camera, then makes it less powerfull, and takes away a popular feature like the swivel head. I still love it, but someone in Pentax needs a beating. :) Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Nick Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 8:57 AM Subject: Re: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n > The only thing that I will miss with the 360fgz is > having a swivel head. But then again, with wireless > TTL this is fairly easy to overcome. > > Nick Wright > wrightfoto.com > > --- Brad Dobo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I must say I *love* the AF360FGZ, especially since I > > own the MZ-S. Some > > complain about this more advanced flash not having > > the power of the 500, but > > I've found for my uses anyway, the gn of 36 is fine. > > Of course we all dream > > of a 150gn in metres or does Nikon already have one? > > :) > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! > http://sbc.yahoo.com >
A 400/5.6
Over the last two weekends, I have been using and comparing my A 400/5.6 lens to my FA *200/2.8 using a 1.5XL Converter and a Tamron 2X AF converter. The obvious advantage to the 200 package is mobility. I have that lens with me anyway and the size and weight of converter isn't too much. Also I get to retain AF with the converter and the 200 where the 400mm is a manual focus lens. I think that the images shot with the 200+Tamron 2X lose some contrast and possibly some edge sharpness (isn't hurting the shots I am taking) compared to the 400. With the 1.5XL I don't see any obvious differences. My dilemma is this - I rarely carry the 400 - has it's own round tubular case with carrying strap. I almost always opt for the 200 and converters. That all fits in my normal carrying case. I haven't found a great need for the 400mm but am a little hesitant to sell it. I could really use a new Quantum QFlash T2 and the money from the 400 would help towards that end. So are there any opinions on the list as to hanging onto this lens vs. selling or any interested parties? Thanks, Bruce
RE: Re[2]: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650
Bruce Dayton wrote: > I guess I should give a few quick words about the 2450 as I have had > my second one now for a couple of weeks. I have about 300 scans on > it so far. I am having much better luck with this new unit Hi Bruce, Thanks for that update. I knew you were considering a second shot at the 2450. Good to hear that your experiences with this new one are positive. Perhaps I'll keep an eye on prices for the time being. The difference between my two options now is only $120 -- still a not-insignificant chunk of change. However, if Epson has any rebate programs, that $120 cost differential may decrease. Thanks again, Bill Peifer Rochester, NY
RE: Pentax + Photokina = 645D - NOW HOLD ONTO YOUR HATS!!!
Anyone know what the deal is with this chip? 645-sized or smaller? Performance in low light? tv > -Original Message- > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:56 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Pentax + Photokina = 645D - NOW HOLD ONTO YOUR HATS!!! > > > Reports suggest that this back will also work on older 645 > systems and > expect the use of the KAF-22000CE CCD 22 mp chip. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jim Apilado [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 30 September 2002 05:34 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Pentax + Photokina = 645D - NOW HOLD ONTO > YOUR HATS!!! > > > > > > Hope this option will work with the original 645 and not just > > the later models. But I will wait for the smaller insert > > when and if it materializes. Jim A. > > > > > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Organization: AudioBias Systems Engineering > > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:53:06 +1000 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Pentax + Photokina = 645D - NOW HOLD ONTO > YOUR HATS!!! > > > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Resent-Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 20:54:26 -0400 > > > > > > On 29 Sep 2002 at 22:16, Rob Brigham wrote: > > > > > >> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/photokina2002.shtml > > > > > > I'm glad to see that this option is in the pipeline, it's > > pretty sad > > > to see that a third part manufacturer beat Pentax to the > > punch though. > > > > > > 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[4]: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
Vic, So how much would you want to trade your 500FTZ for my almost brand new (I bought it new and never use it) AF280T? Bruce Monday, September 30, 2002, 9:56:20 AM, you wrote: Pac> Yes Bruce you are right. That is what I was thinking. I knew the flashes were Pac> compatible one way or another. This gets me thinking whether I should keep Pac> the 500FTZ or get the 280T instead and use it with the PZ1. The 500 does have Pac> some nice features though... Pac> Any thoughts... Pac> Vic Pac> In a message dated 9/30/02 10:57:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Pac> << If the discharge and flash recycle times are the same for both tests, Pac> then the flash is not working in TTL with that body. By Pentax's own Pac> design, the digital units will not work with the analog bodies (LX, Pac> SuperProgram). However, the analog flash units will work with the Pac> digital bodies. The beauty there is that the AF280T will work with Pac> any body made by Pentax. From the K1000 to the MZ-S. Bruce >>>
Re: photokina report
William Robb wrote: > Perhaps they will show it at the Ulan Bator show. Isn't that show scheduled for Timbuktu this time around? ;^)Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: SMC M100mm f2.8...
A great little lens. Compact, fast, sharp, great bokeh. I love mine Regards Albano
RE: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
This wouldn't be a wind up would it? Someone wanting a 'digital' list...? > -Original Message- > From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 30 September 2002 17:53 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS > > > Oh no. Now our list is not as good as Nikon's. If we talk > about the PDML's deficiencies, maybe that will take our minds > off of the whole Photokina thing. > > >What Nikon site would that be? > >www.nikon.com ?) > >www.nikon.jp ? > >Pray tell. Not that I'm likely to go and look, mind. > >--- > >Wendy Beard > >Mosaid Technologies Inc > > > > > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
In a message dated 9/30/02 10:02:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << No , it´s not. The TTL system is not working with LX , because of "digital" design of 500FTZ. >> Really that's surprising. I think I've used the 330 with the LX with no problems, Is there a difference?
RE: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
Re: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
I use a PZ1 and currently have the AF330FTZ. It works nicely but with no bounce capability it can be a little limiting. Just today I found a AF500FTZ used (but virtually brand new complete with box for $320 Cdn. Grabbed it quick. I think the extra money for the power and the swivel (as well as the built-in slave unit) is worth the cost. PS. Is anyone using the 500FTZ with an LX. That's my main camera system. I suspect, knowing Pentax, it is completely backward compatible Vic In a message dated 9/30/02 1:48:32 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << My second TTL flash is the AF330FTZ. Also a great flash. Prolly the smallest > of the Pentax "BIG" flashes (ie-greater than GN30/m), someone correct me if > I'm wrong. No bounce or swivel but it does have a zoom head. Doesn't eat > batteries like the 500. I shot football with it all last season got great > pix at 1600iso. You are not wrong, I used to have the AF330FTZ, and found it quite useful on my MZ-5n. > The AF360FGZ will be my fourth TTL flash. Even though it does not have a > swivel head (it does have bounce), I am still going to get it. Two main > reasons. 1, I intend to get an MZ-S sometime and will want to be able to use > the advanced flash functions available with that body. And 2, I like to use > the older bodies as well (ie- K1000) and this flash will be able to be used > effortlessly on them because it also has an "AUTO" mode. I must say I *love* the AF360FGZ, especially since I own the MZ-S. Some complain about this more advanced flash not having the power of the 500, but I've found for my uses anyway, the gn of 36 is fine. Of course we all dream of a 150gn in metres or does Nikon already have one? :) > As far as stealth is concerned the 330ftz would prolly be the best bet, as > far as flashes are concerned. But I tend to agree with Debra if it's > imparative that you be unnoticed spend your money on fast glass and go > available light. I don't understand the stealth part? Is it invisible on radar? Perhaps Bruce can use it with his military spec. DSLR :) (Sorry Bruce, just a little ribbing, couldn't help it when I saw stealth :) Brad Dobo >>
Re: Rollei was the biggest news at Photokina!
Didn't Rollei make one of these before called the Rolleiflexwide or something? Evan From: "Robert Soames Wetmore" > 1. A wide-angle "50mm Rolleiflex TLR"! Simply awesome news. I finally have > a good reason to upgrade from my Yashica TLR. I'm drooling like a fool > right now. > > > > Robert Soames Wetmore
Re: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 7:54 AM Subject: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS > Is it possible to number the topics and corresponding subject messages. This is a VERY DIFFICULT site to read. See Nikon site for example of ease of use. One must read all of this to get to one subject. I suppose that is because this is an emai list, not a website. William Robb
RE: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
Lukasz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 3:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS Is it possible to number the topics and corresponding subject messages. This is a VERY DIFFICULT site to read. See Nikon site for example of ease of use. One must read all of this to get to one subject. Thanks, Burt Yust NYC USA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650
Taka wrote: > I'm not sure where you got your prices, but I purchased > an Epson 1660 Photo for $180 at Circuit City a few weeks > ago Hi Taka, That's the price I saw also, but it doesn't include the optional transparency adapter necessary for medium- and large-format transparencies -- an additional $100 option. However, the standard $180 model will do 35mm scans out-of-the-box. > Another one to consider is the 2400 You're correct about its improved optical resolution (2400 dpi vs. the 1600 dpi of the 1660). However, I believe the 2400 will not accommodate medium- and large-format transparencies, which is the only reason I'm considering upgrading from my current scanner. Again, thanks for the information, Taka. Regards, Bill Peifer Rochester, NY
NUMBERING TOPICS AND SUBJECTS
Is it possible to number the topics and corresponding subject messages. This is a VERY DIFFICULT site to read. See Nikon site for example of ease of use. One must read all of this to get to one subject. Thanks, Burt Yust NYC USA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650
I have only the Epson 1200 so I couldn't venture an opinion on the differences between the 1650/1660 and 2450. Maris - Original Message - From: "Peifer, William [OCDUS]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 8:11 AM Subject: RE: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650 > Maris Lidaka wrote: > > A reasonable alternative would be the Epson 1650 flatbed with a > > transparency adapter > > Hi Maris, > > Interesting that you bring this up. I was just looking at some Epson > scanners the other day, as I need capability for scanning medium format. > (My current Canon flatbed handles 35mm at up to 2400 dpi.) The Epson > 1650/1660 and Epson 2450 seem to be two reasonable options. Looks like the > 2450 is running somewhere in the neighborhood of US $400 or thereabouts, > while the 1650/1660 with optional transparency scanner is in the > neighborhood of US $280. > > Do you -- or anyone else for that matter -- have personal experience with > the Epson 1650/1660 for medium- or large-format scanning? Other than the > difference in optical resolution (1600 dpi for the 1650/1660 vs. 2400 dpi > for the 2450), are there any significant performance differences between > these two models? I'm particularly interested if the optional transparency > adapter for the 1650/1660 is any better/worse than the built-in adapter for > the 2450. Any information you might have would be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks in advance, > > Bill Peifer > Rochester, NY >
Re: FS: LX and more
Mike, I don't have the camera here with me at work. I'll probably drop home in about an hour and get the serial # for you. Cheers, Dave Original Message: - From: Mike Ignatiev [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 17:44:26 +0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FS: LX and more what the serial # on the LX? mishka -Original Message- From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:24:05 -0400 Subject: FS: LX and more > > Seeing as how we were having List problems on Friday and I wasn't sure > whether stuff was going to get through - I'll post this stuff today. > > My apologies to any who are offended by the For Sale on a Monday rather > than on the usual Friday. > > Here we go: > > 1. Pentax LX - in KEH EX+ to LN- condition - comes with FA-1 finder, > standard split microprism screen (SC-21) and mint condition Leather LX case > (includes box for case), original instruction manual and extra SE-20 > Screen. The only issue is the SE-20 screen has a bit of a mark on it in > the top left corner and does not hinder the critical focus mid point. New > batteries just put into the LX - I've used this for the past 5 months and > all speeds are accurate with no "sticky mirror syndrome" - > $640.00 CDN or $420.00 USD > > 2. Sigma 90mm f2.8 Macro in K-mount - in KEH EX- condition - metal > construction except for the aperture ring - an excellent lens for 1:2 macro > and portraiture. An all around solid lens that takes shots like this: > http://www.usefilm.com/showphoto.php?id=17106 > 52mm filter size. > $165.00 CDN or $110.00 USD > > > More to come later. > > Cheers, > Dave > > > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > > mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
RE: Negative/slide scanner -- and the Epson 1650
Bill- I'm not sure where you got your prices, but I purchased an Epson 1660 Photo for $180 at Circuit City a few weeks ago. I'd definitely say this one is a keeper for the price- scans at 1600dpi (35mm negatives) come out quite nice, although making sure the negatives are dust free and clean is rather difficult. I haven't printed from it yet and will do so in the coming weeks, once I get some of my negatives scanned and burned to CD so I can print at my friend's place on his Epson printer (2450?). Another one to consider is the 2400- has the resolution of the 2450 without all of the features, still has a transparency adapter IIRC. Should be about $50 less than the $400 2450. I tried the Canon 1250U2F before the Epson- the software in the Canon was nicer, I thought, and it came with more bundled software, but the scans were nowhere near the quality of the Epson, although the Epson was $30 more and that has to be taken into consideration. I don't use med/lg. format, so I can't speak to the suitability of these scanners for that purpose, but I hope this info is useful to someone. I haven't bought a dedicated film scanner due to lack of funds and am pleasantly surprised that this flatbed seems to be adequate enough at least for reviewing photos and small prints, which was my intended purpose (will print 8x10"s the conventional way, once I figure out which photos are worthy from the Lime Rock Vintage Festival). Taka --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 - Release Date: 9/19/02
Re: FS: LX and more
what the serial # on the LX? mishka -Original Message- From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:24:05 -0400 Subject: FS: LX and more > > Seeing as how we were having List problems on Friday and I wasn't sure > whether stuff was going to get through - I'll post this stuff today. > > My apologies to any who are offended by the For Sale on a Monday rather > than on the usual Friday. > > Here we go: > > 1. Pentax LX - in KEH EX+ to LN- condition - comes with FA-1 finder, > standard split microprism screen (SC-21) and mint condition Leather LX case > (includes box for case), original instruction manual and extra SE-20 > Screen. The only issue is the SE-20 screen has a bit of a mark on it in > the top left corner and does not hinder the critical focus mid point. New > batteries just put into the LX - I've used this for the past 5 months and > all speeds are accurate with no "sticky mirror syndrome" - > $640.00 CDN or $420.00 USD > > 2. Sigma 90mm f2.8 Macro in K-mount - in KEH EX- condition - metal > construction except for the aperture ring - an excellent lens for 1:2 macro > and portraiture. An all around solid lens that takes shots like this: > http://www.usefilm.com/showphoto.php?id=17106 > 52mm filter size. > $165.00 CDN or $110.00 USD > > > More to come later. > > Cheers, > Dave > > > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > >
Re: FS: LX and more
Great shot Davis,the lens looks fine:) If only i was not saving for a MF camera.Might be interested in the 90 though.I'll have to ponder. Dave Begin Original Message From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:24:05 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FS: LX and more Seeing as how we were having List problems on Friday and I wasn't sure whether stuff was going to get through - I'll post this stuff today. My apologies to any who are offended by the For Sale on a Monday rather than on the usual Friday. Here we go: 1. Pentax LX - in KEH EX+ to LN- condition - comes with FA-1 finder, standard split microprism screen (SC-21) and mint condition Leather LX case (includes box for case), original instruction manual and extra SE-20 Screen. The only issue is the SE-20 screen has a bit of a mark on it in the top left corner and does not hinder the critical focus mid point. New batteries just put into the LX - I've used this for the past 5 months and all speeds are accurate with no "sticky mirror syndrome" - $640.00 CDN or $420.00 USD 2. Sigma 90mm f2.8 Macro in K-mount - in KEH EX- condition - metal construction except for the aperture ring - an excellent lens for 1:2 macro and portraiture. An all around solid lens that takes shots like this: http://www.usefilm.com/showphoto.php?id=17106 52mm filter size. $165.00 CDN or $110.00 USD More to come later. Cheers, Dave mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . 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: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n
The Sunpack 444D is a good third party alternative value. Tilt and swivel head, femovable diffuser that's good out to 135mm. TTL, auto and manual with manual adjustment for fill flash. Plenty of power. DG At 05:04 PM 9/28/02 -0400, you wrote: >Geez, there are all sorts of Pentax ones and 3rd party ones. Guess it >depends on your needs. I'd prefer a flash with decent power, that has IR >AF-assist, among many other things. I picked up the AF360FGZ when I got my >MS-S. I used to own the AF330, when I owned the MZ-5n. Hopefully someone >will add a little more than my thin knowledge of flashs. :) > >Brad Dobo >- Original Message - >From: "Pat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 3:26 PM >Subject: Flash suggestions for Zx-5n > > > > Hi all- > > > > Was looking for suggestions on a hot shoe flash for > > the Zx-5n. Open to Pentax & 3rd party suggestions. > > > > Thanks, > > Pat in SF > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! > > http://sbc.yahoo.com > >
FS: LX and more
Seeing as how we were having List problems on Friday and I wasn't sure whether stuff was going to get through - I'll post this stuff today. My apologies to any who are offended by the For Sale on a Monday rather than on the usual Friday. Here we go: 1. Pentax LX - in KEH EX+ to LN- condition - comes with FA-1 finder, standard split microprism screen (SC-21) and mint condition Leather LX case (includes box for case), original instruction manual and extra SE-20 Screen. The only issue is the SE-20 screen has a bit of a mark on it in the top left corner and does not hinder the critical focus mid point. New batteries just put into the LX - I've used this for the past 5 months and all speeds are accurate with no "sticky mirror syndrome" - $640.00 CDN or $420.00 USD 2. Sigma 90mm f2.8 Macro in K-mount - in KEH EX- condition - metal construction except for the aperture ring - an excellent lens for 1:2 macro and portraiture. An all around solid lens that takes shots like this: http://www.usefilm.com/showphoto.php?id=17106 52mm filter size. $165.00 CDN or $110.00 USD More to come later. Cheers, Dave mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
