Nice M42 SMCT gear I'm selling....(plus a couple of K mount lenses)
Hi All, All the discussion about the abscence of pentax in the SLR digital market, the woeful signs of some pros who lurk these halls beginning to sell their pentax gear in disgust. I'm selling my nice stuff too, but for different reasons: I feel compelled to reduce my equipment into more of a shooting collection than a "bookshelf" collection. Especially now that I have a fairly complete set of glass for autofocus and manual focus K mount gear I will offer to the pdml list first, then head for ebay. Please make offer off list if interested. 1- SMCT 85/1.8 Lens, the early version with SMC spelled out instead of initials; with case, hood. In approximately mint minus. A few signs of use, but would serve admirably on a bookshelf for "collector's" gear. The case shows slight signs of wear. 1- Fisheye Takumar 17/4. A very nice lens. The front element (and interior as well) are spotless and pristine. Difficult to find signs of use. A solid mint minus a tiny little bit. In case, the case has slight signs of use. 1- SMCT 28/3.5 Mint minus. Case also, with slight signs of use. 1- SMCT 300/4. A beautiful lens. Solid Mint minus. It retains the shine of a new lens, it has, however more signs of use than the 85/1.8. Not on the places that would detract from its beauty, but on the high points on the focusing ring there are a few places where it shows "paint rubs". I will include the k mount adapter that I kept on it most of the time. I used this lens last fall to shoot the sideline football shots for my university newspaper. I was extremely careful with it, and it went back inside its case the moment it was not being used at all times. With original front cap and rear. The case is original. It is one of those "fake" pigskin cases Asahi experimented with way back when, so it shows a good deal of wear. It is however, functionally secure, and mechanically sound. A beautiful lens. 1- MIR 20/3.5 lens. This is a far superior lens compared to the Asahi 20/4.5 It is in pristine condition, includes the 3 behind the rear element filters, all in original case. I am also offering in kmount: 1- Russian 20/2.5 lens, the one commonly seen on ebay. It is in new condition, it also is accompanied by the rear filters, all in new condition case. 1- Tokina 400/5.6 "A" lens. Nice performer, what I used last year in addition to the SMCT 300/4. I now have a Sigma APO AF 400/5.6 and it makes my job alot easier. 1- SMC-A 50/2.8 lens and case. A beautiful lens. Made dispensible when I bought an FA 50/2.8 lens from list member Tom V. In solid mint, including the case. 1- SMC 28-50 "M" series zoom lens. I thought I would use this more than I have. It is also a solid mint. I think I have a generic case for it too. I also have a few other assorted lenses of less note, including an SMCT 135/3.5, an off brand (Makinon) 28/2.8 M 42, A soligor K mount 28/2.8, a spotmatic F, and some everready cases that fit spotties and K1000s, , a spare hood for a 100/4, and a hood for a 200/4. there are some other pieces that will eventually go, including a steel camera and gear case, as soon as I get it all cataloged I will repost, if I find anything worth mentioning. Anyone see anything they'd like, make me an offer! The rest goes to ebay, probably by next Sunday. Sid
Re: Reality Check Part 4
> They don't advertise. They must advertise like Nikon and Canon if you ever > want to see USM, IS, DSLR, etc, because then people will know about our > little company called Pentax. Because they do not advertise, they find few > buyers, and that does not help with profits. Question. USM would require the motors to be in the lens AND a mechanical drive for focus for compatibility - is it really worth it?
Re: Pentax and Film - Was(Re[2]: Cameron's Pentax Comments)
> Anyone else have any experience or opinion to share? I now carry two films, Portra 160NC and superia 400. I have settled on them being the ones that give the best results in both my SLR and P&S. Tried the portra 400 films and find that detail seems lacking, not worth the money!
Re: Reality checks Part 1
What if I told you that I am a Pentax Executive? What type of company would Pentax be? From my mail can you guess what I would be planning? :) - Original Message - From: "Otis Wright, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:27 AM Subject: Re: Reality checks Part 1 > I'm sure that the product/program staff dial in at least when they need a laugh. > > Otis > > Rob Studdert wrote: > > > On 13 Oct 2002 at 19:36, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > Hey, > > > > > > It seems that those who replied to my email only argued one point. That Big > > > Brother is watching. > > > > I don't know that BB is watching but Pentax used to watch the list, to the > > point where it become too uncomfortable for them to host. No why it should be > > different here to several other lists that I have participated in I don't know > > however just because no one appears to be responding as a Pentax representative > > doesn't mean that they aren't watching. Stranger things have happened (and have > > in the past, pre-Dobo) > > > > 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: fish-eyes: Sigma or Zenitar?
At 00:33 14.10.2002 -0600, you wrote: >I¹m pondering buying a not-too-costly fish-eye lens as it will not be used a >great deal. However, I would like something capable of producing sharp >8X10-inch prints and, once in a while, an 11X14. Does anybody know how good >the Sigma F2.8 multicoated Sigma XQ filtermatic lens is? I believe it¹s a >1980s lens. Perhaps, I¹d be just as well off to buy a new Russian Zenitar >lens??? Does anybody have experience with either of these lenses? >Thanks, >RW Are you looking for a fish-eye lens which will produce circular or full-frame pictures ? The Russian 8mm will produce a circular image on the film. I don't know about the older Sigma since you did not mention the focal length... etc. If you wish for a full-frame image, take a look at an older SMC Pentax 17mm f4. Those are not too pricey... and are pretty nice optically and mechanically. Antti-Pekka --- * Antti-Pekka Virjonen * Fiskarsinkatu 7 D * GSM: +358 500 789 753 * * Computec Oy Turku* FIN-20750 Turku Finland * Fax: +358 10 264 0777 *
Re: digital - a story
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I wonder how many megabytes it would take to compete with a 20x24 > negative. Just one pixel would be sufficient if you forgot the dark slide... Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
fish-eyes: Sigma or Zenitar?
I¹m pondering buying a not-too-costly fish-eye lens as it will not be used a great deal. However, I would like something capable of producing sharp 8X10-inch prints and, once in a while, an 11X14. Does anybody know how good the Sigma F2.8 multicoated Sigma XQ filtermatic lens is? I believe it¹s a 1980s lens. Perhaps, I¹d be just as well off to buy a new Russian Zenitar lens??? Does anybody have experience with either of these lenses? Thanks, RW
Re: Reality checks Part 1
I'm sure that the product/program staff dial in at least when they need a laugh. Otis Rob Studdert wrote: > On 13 Oct 2002 at 19:36, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > It seems that those who replied to my email only argued one point. That Big > > Brother is watching. > > I don't know that BB is watching but Pentax used to watch the list, to the > point where it become too uncomfortable for them to host. No why it should be > different here to several other lists that I have participated in I don't know > however just because no one appears to be responding as a Pentax representative > doesn't mean that they aren't watching. Stranger things have happened (and have > in the past, pre-Dobo) > > 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: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
And sometimes it appears that signal noise created by the power aberrations activates the write sequence in the controller just long enough to overwrite critical data. See this a lot on platters we have analyzed for recovery. Especially where there are multiple on off cycles. Otis Feroze Kistan wrote: > They can when the head unit bounces and hits the platter when the surge > cause the tip to jump higher than normal > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 1:18 AM > Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > > The disc platters themselves are magnetic metal and probably > not capable of being damaged by a power surge.
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Well put! Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Shaun Canning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 12:58 AM Subject: RE: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > Brad, > > Canadians, like Australians use English, not President Taft's Version > thereof. Sorry to all our American colleagues. > > Shaun Canning > PhD Student > Department of Archaeology > School of European and Historical Studies > La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. > > Phone: 0414-967644 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -Original Message- > From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, 14 October 2002 2:43 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > Hey Peter, > > Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails > (I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like > 'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and other > odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In > serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly > btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. > Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. > > Brad Dobo > - Original Message - > From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM > Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > > before I > > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in > subtlety. > > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should > talk). > > > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we > all > > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and > > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the > crap > > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area > 51, > > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell > New > > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the > truth > > >is out there. > > > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services > > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > > > >Brad Dobo > > >- Original Message - > > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write > that > > > > > you do. > > > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Lost me again on that one. > > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the ^ Pickie pickie...geez :) Mount OK? Mount mount mount mount mount :P - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 12:54 AM Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > I was just wondering if Pentax had a new product what by the way is a monut, > something like a donut? > > At 12:43 AM 10/14/2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Hey Peter, > > > >Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails > >(I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like > >'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and other > >odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In > >serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly > >btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. > >Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. > > > >Brad Dobo > >- Original Message - > >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > > > before I > > > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in > >subtlety. > > > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should > >talk). > > > > > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we > >all > > > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > > > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and > > > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the >^ > >crap > > > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area > >51, > > > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell > >New > > > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the > >truth > > > >is out there. > > > > > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services > > > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > > > > > >Brad Dobo > > > >- Original Message - > > > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > > > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write > >that > > > > > > you do. > > > > > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
RE: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
I must say your theory makes more sense. I'm just getting silly it's time to go to bed. At 03:08 PM 10/14/2002 +1000, you wrote: >Yeah, a monut is similar in principle to a monopod. > >Shaun Canning >PhD Student >Department of Archaeology >School of European and Historical Studies >La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. > >Phone: 0414-967644 >e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >-Original Message- >From: Peter Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Monday, 14 October 2002 2:55 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > >I was just wondering if Pentax had a new product what by the way is a monut, >something like a donut? > >At 12:43 AM 10/14/2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Hey Peter, > > > >Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails > >(I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like > >'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and >other > >odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In > >serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly > >btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. > >Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. > > > >Brad Dobo > >- Original Message - > >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > > > before I > > > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in > >subtlety. > > > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should > >talk). > > > > > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think >we > >all > > > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > > > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me >and > > > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the >^ > >crap > > > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area > >51, > > > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell > >New > > > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the > >truth > > > >is out there. > > > > > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection >Services > > > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > > > > > >Brad Dobo > > > >- Original Message - > > > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > > > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, >everyone > > > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write > >that > > > > > > you do. > > > > > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE >DAY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
RE: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Yeah, a monut is similar in principle to a monopod. Shaun Canning PhD Student Department of Archaeology School of European and Historical Studies La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Peter Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 14 October 2002 2:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! I was just wondering if Pentax had a new product what by the way is a monut, something like a donut? At 12:43 AM 10/14/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Hey Peter, > >Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails >(I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like >'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and other >odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In >serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly >btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. >Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. > >Brad Dobo >- Original Message - >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > > before I > > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in >subtlety. > > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should >talk). > > > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we >all > > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and > > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the ^ >crap > > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area >51, > > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell >New > > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the >truth > > >is out there. > > > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services > > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > > > >Brad Dobo > > >- Original Message - > > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write >that > > > > > you do. > > > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
I was just wondering if Pentax had a new product what by the way is a monut, something like a donut? At 12:43 AM 10/14/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Hey Peter, > >Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails >(I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like >'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and other >odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In >serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly >btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. >Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. > >Brad Dobo >- Original Message - >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > > before I > > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in >subtlety. > > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should >talk). > > > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we >all > > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and > > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the ^ >crap > > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area >51, > > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell >New > > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the >truth > > >is out there. > > > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services > > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > > > >Brad Dobo > > >- Original Message - > > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write >that > > > > > you do. > > > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
RE: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Brad, Canadians, like Australians use English, not President Taft's Version thereof. Sorry to all our American colleagues. Shaun Canning PhD Student Department of Archaeology School of European and Historical Studies La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 14 October 2002 2:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! Hey Peter, Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails (I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like 'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and other odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > before I > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in subtlety. > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should talk). > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we all > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the crap > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area 51, > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell New > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the truth > >is out there. > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > >Brad Dobo > >- Original Message - > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write that > > > > you do. > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Dumb computer question
I have everything on all the time (at least in the software), only thing I do is turn off the monitor when I go to bed. Fans sometimes like to make a fuss, so I just take out the offending part or power supply (when on, of course! :)) and clean the bearings, grease 'em, and put them back in. I think I have 11 fans in this system. Actually I have a 300W PS and still find the need to splice wires together for different things. - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:55 PM Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > Spinning them up and down tends to wear out the bearings. > > At 01:02 PM 10/13/2002 -0600, you wrote: > >Hi; > >My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > >minutes of inactivity. > >Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > >Thanks > > > >William Robb >
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Hey Peter, Heh...well, speeling isn't my strongest area. I tend to find in my emails (I always seem to read them over and over) that I make stupid errors like 'one' coming out as 'on' or like just now 'as' coming out as 'at', and other odd crap. I think my brain is just running faster than my fingers In serious work, my grammar is quite excellent. What did I spell incorrectly btw? I just scanned it over and didn't see anything jump out at me. Remember, we Canucks have a different version of English than Americans. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:51 PM Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas > before I > returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in subtlety. > (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should talk). > > At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we all > >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > > > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and > >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the crap > >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area 51, > >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell New > >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the truth > >is out there. > > > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services > >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > > > >Brad Dobo > >- Original Message - > >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write that > > > > you do. > > > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > > > > > >
Re: dslr
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 11:31:57 -0400, you wrote: >"On sale" means in stock in B&H. Using that definition give me a projected >date, and I'll suggest a wager. > >BR Hell, if that's the criteria, neither the D100 nor the D60 nor the S2 are "on sale" right now, even though they all were introduced months ago. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
Re: Digital thoughts
> OM-88?? > And who remembers the T-80? Isn't that a type of tank? > William Robb >
Re: Dumb computer question
- Original Message - From: "Shaun Canning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:19 PM Subject: RE: Dumb computer question > It's a combination of everything Brad. You only need one line of code in one > program to not like another program trying to access a part of the memory > stack, or any other infinite combinations of things to make a PC or Mac s**t > itself. You're a geek, you know that. Hey Shaun, ya, I'm a proud geek at that! > Hardware certainly plays its part, as > I have had bits and pieces over the years that didn't like each other much. > Some motherboards don't like particular graphics cards for instance, no > matter how often you update drivers or patch the BIOS. I have heard and seen my fair share of this piece not liking this piece, but surprisingly, never on my own systems. > The problem I see > with many of the GIS apps is that they were designed and built on the UNIX > platform, and have not translated 100% to Windoze, and neither are they > available for LINUX, which would be the obvious choice for many. ArcView for > instance is generally stable, but will fall over. MapInfo is more stable, > but not as powerful. IDRISSI is a killer GIS app, but it's a bitch to learn. > ArcInfo likewise (although now its menu driven rather than command line). > These programs (i.e. ArcInfo cost upwards of $7500.00 in Australia, so we > don't tend to chop and change to often). I run MapInfo 5.0, ArcView 3.2a, > and IDRISSI 32 all at once. Of them all IDRISSI is the most stable. GRASS is > available for LINUX, but not a particularly easy package to grapple with. Well, I have this to say, you are luckyor I was very unlucky. I was in the Honours Geography program at UWO, and unfortunately, our big GIS guy had a wife that worked in a research facility associated with the university. He started a GIS app, which was further developed by his wife and a team, at the facility. What was it? Map Factory by ThinkSpace, Inc. Heard of it? I'd be surprised if you did! It was crap. And was only for the Mac OS (at the time) Other programs with other professors used great programs like ArcInfo and IDRISSI, and we were not happy we got stuck with Map Factory. I was quite disappointed. I cannot recall what program we used for Remote Sensing. Damn. > As far as hardware is concerned I run 2 different systems. My main machine > is an AMD Athlon @ 1610 mhz. I run an ABIT KT-266 motherboard, 512mb 266 mhz > sd-ram (Hyundai), 80gb Seagate barracuda, 30 gb Quantum fireball, LG CDRW, > Pioneer DVD, Creative Sblive, MSI Starforce 64mb graphics card (nvidia TNT > MX400), a modem, and an Intel Ethernet card. This thing runs W2K SP3, and > all my main application requirements. My other machine is a P3 500mhz > running 512mb of 133mhz sd-ram, and a little itty bitty 8gb hd. What can I say, you have good tastes! Love the Abit motherboards and AMD, I have much the same (though not *quite* as up to date as you) because lately my cash is going into cameras and not solely to computers. > I run both machines through a 17" monitor using a > really funky Belkin KVB switch. I keep everything tucked up safe and warm > behind a firewall, and scan incessantly for viruses. > Now, what's all this got to do with Pentax. Well I did take some nice photos > just the other day. I recently upgraded my monitor on my main system to a 19" flatscreen NEC. Wonderful unit. I'm running XP Pro, and despite what I said about software firewalls and windoze (which is true) I do run a Zone Labs on the system because I'm ultra paranoid about security and privacy. Of course the hardware router is my main line of defense. I check every week for any updates on almost all my stuff (but beware! I'm a pirate and I can't install the SP1 upgrade for XP because of course, I don't pay for anything anymore, but they somehow figured a way to detect an illegal version...buggers :)) I may have to *shutter* buy it! I use NAV which some will point out is not the best, but I like it, and I'm consistently checking to make sure it's up to date. Full systems scans of all files at least once a week. Don't ya just love being a geek? :) Oh ya, and what does this all have to do with Pentax? Well, I'm reading the PDML with it :) Brad Dobo
Re: Dumb computer question
On 13 Oct 2002 at 23:59, Jeff wrote: > Spinning continuosly tends to wear out bearings also. Jeff, The better drives now have fluid bearings, the fluid is a cushion of air, they suffer virtually no wear and are extremely robust WRT shock. Also spinning drive up and down leads to thermal fatigue, however this effect is more pronounced in high performance drives. Cheers, Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: FS: Huge Collection of Pentax 35mm Gear
My Pentax gear is selling fairly fast. More info and photos at: http://www.photolin.com/forsale/forsale.htm Thanks, -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
Re: Reality Check Part 4
- Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:15 PM Subject: Re: Reality Check Part 4 > Advertise hell, they should actually get some product into stores as well. How true Peter, that is one of my biggest gripes about Pentax, I cannot try a demo model, almost every damned thing must be ordered! Brad Dobo
Re: Dumb computer question
True but less so than cycling them. At 11:59 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:55 PM >Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > > > > Spinning them up and down tends to wear out the bearings. > > > >Spinning continuosly tends to wear out bearings also. > >Jeff.
Re: Dumb computer question
- Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:55 PM Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > Spinning them up and down tends to wear out the bearings. > Spinning continuosly tends to wear out bearings also. Jeff.
RE: Dumb computer question
i'm taking this offline. Herb...
Re: Dumb computer question
Spinning them up and down tends to wear out the bearings. At 01:02 PM 10/13/2002 -0600, you wrote: >Hi; >My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few >minutes of inactivity. >Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? >Thanks > >William Robb
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
I think I should apologize to Aaron for damaging the Brotherhood Ninjas before I returned them, those Pentax agents really could use some lessons in subtlety. (and just as an aside, Brad could use a spell checker, like I should talk). At 06:17 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Hahaha...you guys are are a hoot! This is a great place, but I think we all >get a little too carried away with things. :) Speaking of > >Some guy smoking a cigarette and in a black trenchcoat approached me and >told me that a *real* Pentax DSLR full frame, 15MP, K monut kicks the crap >out of anything on the current market has been made, but it is in Area 51, >apparently it was found in an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell New >Mexico in the 1940s. He suggested that I should look into it, as the truth >is out there. > >As for my termination, I have recently gone to Nikon Protection Services >Bureau to seek aid in providing me with a new identity. > >Brad Dobo >- Original Message - >From: "Pentax Research and Destroy Branch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:35 PM >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > And come on guys, you want Pentax to know what you think? Write a > > > letter addressed to their main headquarters. Write a lot, everyone > > > write one, start a petition list. Don't believe that Pentax spies > > > watch this mailing list. You really look foolish went you write that > > > you do. > > > > YOU HAVE BEEN MARKED FOR TERMINATION, AS PER PENTAX MARKET RESEARCH > > DIVISION BYLAW PRS-M-3700 SUBSECTION L PARAGRAPH 3. HAVE A NICE DAY. > > > > > >
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Sorry you feel that way Brad some of us remember the switch over. Why sponser a group if you're going to ignore it. Why stop watching once it's self supporting. Hell I have a friend who's job was to search the Internet for information about his company and the competition. This is easier we do the research for them. At 04:11 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Heh -- unbelieveable some of you would *think* that. Maybe you guys should >put the foil hats back on? >- Original Message - >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 10:51 AM >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading! > > > > Actually Pentax probably does watch this list, after all at one time they > > did sponsor it. It's an interesting way to get market feed back. Wether > > they do anything about it or not is another thing. > > > > At 06:20 AM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > >- Original Message - > > >From: "Tim S Kemp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 3:58 AM > > >Subject: Re: Digital! I got digital! > > > > > > > > > > > And back to my first sentence, is there any way we can kill off the >DSLR > > > > > thread? since Pentax doesn't make one and we've beat the topic to >death > > > > > about 5000 times too many. > > > > > > > > It wouldn't surprise me if people from Pentax read this list and >comment > > > > back, if they don't know what a small percentage of their fans want >then > > > > they'll never bother. > > > > > >Tim, that would surprise me!! I'm sorry, but that is fantasy in it's > > >extreme! Having Pentax people watching the list, like we are important. > > >Hahaha. Never. If they did monitor the Almighty PDML, they'd be more > > >likely to notice that many people here have been working with Pentax for > > >many long years, and instead of taking out the MZ-S and putting only FA* >on, > > >they use the old equipment for various and valid reasons, don't get me > > >wrong. But that is indeed what many people here do, like it or not, > > >disagree or not, it's very much a fact. Now, they don't dismiss or buy >new > > >equipment, but they are almost more of older Pentax camera memoriblia > > >collectors. Like I said, nothing wrong with it. I'm sure when Mr. Asahi > > >(ya ya, don't comment, I know the answer) sees this he'll be touched, but > > >that's about all. "Small percentage" was used, and that is very much the > > >case! We are but a grain of sand in a large beach. Oh sure we have >people > > >from all over the world here, much to our benefit. But really, do all >those > > >that own digital P&S or 35mm P&S or the MZ entry level cameras care as >much > > >about them as we do? We are a minority in a minority. I'm geez, my dad >is > > >a Minolta guy, loves his camera, uses it a lot and surfs the web, but >unless > > >he needs a camera, he doesn't think about it. He couldn't give a fart >about > > >a Minolta list. Fact is that he, as do most people owning cameras of ANY > > >make, don't care like the vocal members here. We're mostly a small group >of > > >dedicated members (with the odd exception) Pentax SLR is very small >market, > > >I can't find poop around here, I tripped to Toronto and wasn't even that > > >impressed with what Henrys CBD store had. Is it safe for me to assume >that > > >everyone here at least owns a Pentax 35mm camera? I know people use >other > > >systems or have switched, but they surely must have something, or why be > > >here? So most of the 'vocal' group has SLRs of various ages and level. >I > > >know that there are the silent lurkers who read and learn. I'd wager a >bet > > >they own the Pentax P&S or the Optios. > > > > > >I'm tired, and finally, what you and I say means nothing. Pentax is not > > >watching us (so throw away your foil hats) A Pentax DSLR is a dream. It > > >doesn't exist. Why talk about it? Have we gotten anywhere? We just >bicker > > >and speculate. Geez, most of the digital topics are OT!! I'm beginning >to > > >think, besides his manner of approach, Bruce R. has a good handle on >things. > > > > > >This is not the DDML (Digital Distribution Mailing List) Guess what? >It's > > >PDML, and I used to think it stood for Pentax Distribution Mailing list. > > >Sure you can talk digital, Pentax has the Optio series, but it's rare for > > >that to come up...why? If those crazy spies from Pentax report to there > > >bosses we aren't into digital P&S of Pentax make, they could very likely > > >assume we have no interest in digital at all. But I'll continue to beat >a > > >dead horse, we don't have a DSLR, I'm sure we'll get one, but not for a >long > > >while, and when and if it shows up seems like we are expecting to compete > > >with Nikon and Canon..is that what Pentax does? I think the DSLR >that > > >they come out with will disappoint those here that want it, and then >there > > >will be bitching
Re: Reality Checks Part 3
That's very true. The only new piece of equipment that's tempted me in a long time was the Nikon FM3a. If Pentax built an updated MX around that electromechanical shutter and sold it for the same price as the Nikon I'd snap one up immediately. I'll bet a lot of others would as well. At 07:44 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Many in this group are collectors (and users) of older Pentax equipment >(which I indeed find really quite cool). In fact, if Big Brother is >watching us, they might notice what I notice, some do not buy, or rarely >buy, new Pentax equipment. Look at the polls we have going on. I see >screwmount lens, A, M and the odd FA* in peoples favorite top 3. Big >Brother is going to assume we aren't interested in the newer equipment and >favor the older equipment.
Re: Digital thoughts
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, William Robb wrote: > - Original Message - > From: Chris Brogden 'Subject: Re: Digital thoughts > > > AFAIK, the only AF 35mm SLR with interchangeable lenses that > Olympus > > produced was the OM-77, > > OM-88?? > And who remembers the T-80? > > William Robb I didn't know about the OM-88; thanks for the info. Yup, I remember the T-80, though the 50 and 70 are everywhere. A friend of mine still shoots with the T-90 now and then, and likes it. chris
Re: Digital thoughts
- Original Message - From: Chris Brogden 'Subject: Re: Digital thoughts > > AFAIK, the only AF 35mm SLR with interchangeable lenses that Olympus > produced was the OM-77, OM-88?? And who remembers the T-80? William Robb
Re: Digital thoughts
AFAIK, the only AF 35mm SLR with interchangeable lenses that Olympus produced was the OM-77, and that was a hunkajunk, poorly built and poorly spec'd. I don't disagree with what you say, but my main point was that companies who don't follow the major movements of the market lose visibility in that market very quickly. Olympus made OM SLR's until just very recently, but how many people bought them when they were looking for SLR's? Even though Olympus made fine MF cameras, people still bought FM2's or MZ-M's, just because Nikon and Pentax had greater visibility because of their AF SLR's. If Pentax stays out of the DSLR market or only introduces one camera, how many people are going to buy Pentax SLR's, even the film ones? I'd hate to see any more blows to Pentax's SLR line... it's sparse enough as it is. chris On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > It isn't that Olympus didn't "get it", they did. The came out with a couple > of AF SLRs, realized how tight the competition was and how high the cost was > developing these things and opted out of the market. They decided to expand > their P&S line (very successfully) and just keep making the same non AF SLRs > they always did for as long as they could make money doing it. What Olympus > did with AF (pass on it) is what Minolta and Pentax have done with DSLRs. > > BR > > > - Original Message - > From: "Chris Brogden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > .. the move to > > digital, like the move to auto-focus, *is* a permanent transition, and > > companies (like Olympus with the move to AF) who don't recognize these > > permanent transitions are in danger of dying out. > >
Re: Shooting Auroras
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >I had been making exposures ranging from 5 - 20 seconds with 400 speed film and F2.8 lenses and not getting enough light. Lately I've been doing 30s. The film is still in the freezer so I don't know how successful these latest attempts have been. < well, there is a way to be sure on the spot, if you have a capable enough digital camera. set the ISO the same, set aperture priority and see what happens, if your camera can expose that long. then use your film, accounting for any reciprocity failure. i'm limited to 8 seconds so i can't do these types of exposures, but i shoot fireworks that way. as someone else pointed out, the LX would do it right without help. Herb
RE: Dumb computer question
I hear that Herb. I just e-mailed a blurb on my set-up, which is not that different from yours really (apart from you running double the RAM). I have kept my machines stable by avoiding unnecessary third party software installations and using good to very good quality components. Occasionally I generate shape files or 3D images in the 100mb range, but not very often. I too mainly use ArcView, and would sometimes prefer to just use Illustrator. Who have you been mapping for? Cheers Shaun Canning PhD Student Department of Archaeology School of European and Historical Studies La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 14 October 2002 12:51 PM To: INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Dumb computer question Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Well Herb, you are running a damn site better Win 98 install than I have ever seen. Either that or you are amazingly patient. What GIS are you using incidentally? As for keeping several 100m files in memory at the one time, this implies that you have at least several hundred MB of RAM. I too run plenty of RAM (512mb) but can still run out occasionally. As for a 500 mb Photoshop file, that's huge. What could you use that is that big? Map scans? Shaun Canning< the GIS program i usually use is ArcView, although i work mostly in Adobe Illustrator for day to day stuff because that is where i do my cartography. i run 1G of ECC RIMM memory on my Pentium 4 system and it's not really enough, but about all that can be easily supported on Win98. much more and there are stupid configuration problems in Win98. i run ArcView on my #2 system which is a Win 2K or Linux dual Pentium 750 system with 768M of ECC DIMM memory. the really large files are when i do high resolution shaded relief rendering of large areas. i end up with files that are about 10K x 8K pixel images a fair bit. at least once, i had to work with a 700+ MB file. 100+ MB files are when i am scanning my photos from my slides. 4000 dpi at 48-bit mode means about 110MB for a normal scan because i scan mounted slides. unmounted and they would be bigger. sometimes, for special effects, i layer these images. the key words for stability are reliable hardware first and controlled installation of trusted software. ECC RAM is critical for stability over 128MB and so is a stable power supply with ample power reserve. there are a few people who run Win98 systems as reliable as mine, but not many. Herb
Re: Reality Check Part 4
Advertise hell, they should actually get some product into stores as well. At 07:56 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Anyone who is serious about photography, or a professional, uses (in here) >Pentax Medium Format. Big Brother is going to say, let's work on them. > >Dispite the bickering we have had some members make the switch to other >companies to get the newer techologies that they either need, or want. Just >like those with 36 lenses for K-mount, you really don't expect those that >switch to switch back just because Pentax came out with something new. > >They don't advertise. They must advertise like Nikon and Canon if you ever >want to see USM, IS, DSLR, etc, because then people will know about our >little company called Pentax. Because they do not advertise, they find few >buyers, and that does not help with profits. > >My instructor in photography. 3 classes at night during the week, 30 to a >class. He finds me fascinating. Because I'm the best in the classes? No! >Because I'm the only one out of 90, yes 90 people who has a Pentax. That is >NOT a good sign. > >Ask random strangers on the street, name a camera company. What are 99% of >the answers? Nikon and Canon.
RE: Dumb computer question
It's a combination of everything Brad. You only need one line of code in one program to not like another program trying to access a part of the memory stack, or any other infinite combinations of things to make a PC or Mac s**t itself. You're a geek, you know that. Hardware certainly plays its part, as I have had bits and pieces over the years that didn't like each other much. Some motherboards don't like particular graphics cards for instance, no matter how often you update drivers or patch the BIOS. The problem I see with many of the GIS apps is that they were designed and built on the UNIX platform, and have not translated 100% to Windoze, and neither are they available for LINUX, which would be the obvious choice for many. ArcView for instance is generally stable, but will fall over. MapInfo is more stable, but not as powerful. IDRISSI is a killer GIS app, but it's a bitch to learn. ArcInfo likewise (although now its menu driven rather than command line). These programs (i.e. ArcInfo cost upwards of $7500.00 in Australia, so we don't tend to chop and change to often). I run MapInfo 5.0, ArcView 3.2a, and IDRISSI 32 all at once. Of them all IDRISSI is the most stable. GRASS is available for LINUX, but not a particularly easy package to grapple with. As far as hardware is concerned I run 2 different systems. My main machine is an AMD Athlon @ 1610 mhz. I run an ABIT KT-266 motherboard, 512mb 266 mhz sd-ram (Hyundai), 80gb Seagate barracuda, 30 gb Quantum fireball, LG CDRW, Pioneer DVD, Creative Sblive, MSI Starforce 64mb graphics card (nvidia TNT MX400), a modem, and an Intel Ethernet card. This thing runs W2K SP3, and all my main application requirements. My other machine is a P3 500mhz running 512mb of 133mhz sd-ram, and a little itty bitty 8gb hd. I can't remember what else is in it, as its 3 years since I built it. I use the second machine purely for translating data sets from one GIS format to another. This is a time consuming process, so I use the secondary machine, which is networked, to my main machine. I also use a laptop when I am on the road as well. The only machine running Win98 is the laptop, as some of it's hardware is not supported by W2K (a hot-swapable CDRW for instance). My machines are virtually never switched off, and only the monitor is allowed to power down. Although I did just do a restart to get my motherboard details. I run both machines through a 17" monitor using a really funky Belkin KVB switch. I keep everything tucked up safe and warm behind a firewall, and scan incessantly for viruses. Now, what's all this got to do with Pentax. Well I did take some nice photos just the other day. Shaun Canning PhD Student Department of Archaeology School of European and Historical Studies La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic, 3086. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Shooting Auroras
At 11:18 AM -0400 10/13/02, Wendy Beard wrote: >Right, >Question for all you out there who do any sort of sky/night time photography. >Is there any rule of thumb for shooting Auroras. >Open the shutter and count to 10 - 20? 30? Set the camera on auto >and let it sit and expose for a few minutes? >I suspect it's all just trial and error but I'd still like some hints. Trial and error works. :^) I had been making exposures ranging from 5 - 20 seconds with 400 speed film and F2.8 lenses and not getting enough light. Lately I've been doing 30s. The film is still in the freezer so I don't know how successful these latest attempts have been. I'm afraid to go much longer because the stars will start to look trailed. -- Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Reality Checks Part 2
I think Rob makes a good point, and if Pentax are late to the market I am sure they will pick the eyes out of competitive products. In addition, I would be reasonably certain that the experience gained in making the Optio series will stand them in good stead when making a DSLR, as much of the technology will be the same. If I were making the business plan for Pentax vis-a-vis a DSLR, I would be looking at accepting that Generation 1 will lose money: I would plan to use it to gain market share and user awareness, through widespread advertising. I would expect to incorporate a combination of good, well-proven, but not necessarily cutting-edge technology, reliability, flexibility (existing glass usage), and affordability. I might expect to sink $X million into this, but to build on the results for a longer-term, profit-making operation. To some extent, the doom-sayers who say that Pentax (or anyone else for that matter) who can't make money from DSLR's because of the ever-advancing technology tend to lose sight of the fact that much of that advance is incremental, and does not mean you have to throw away everything you do right now. At this stage I wouldn't necessarily be worrying about full-frame chips - get to the market with something that works, at 6 MP or greater, or stack two side by side and sort the integration out electronically. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Monday, October 14, 2002 9:50 AM, Rob Studdert [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > If Pentax does produce DSLR then they have no excuses whatsoever for > not ensuring that it is flawless within its design specifications. They > have a pretty good track record to this point in film cameras and now tens of > competing products from their peers to scrutinize. > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert
RE: Dumb computer question
Yes Bob, this happens a _lot_! I probably shut down and restart on average three times a week, sometimes more. However, I feel it is more to do with the bloated software we have to use, together with all the band-aid patches that MS have had to put together to deal with various security threats to the OS and IE. My older systems (DOS versions 2-6 and Windows version 3.10 seemed to be much more stable than current versions. I will soon be migrating to 2000 or XP in the hope of more stable systems, but I still have to maintain W98 (and indeed W95) support capacity for my clients. Maybe I can retire soon and just use a Mac for my personal stuff! John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Monday, October 14, 2002 9:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Bill, > I'm on the other side of the argument from John. > I shut down my basement computer when not in use and > my work computer at least daily. I find that the quality of > Bill Gate's software leaves much to be desired. > Sometimes I have to reboot during the day on the > network at work as the machine goes off into never-never land... > Blue screen of death or a full freeze up - no keyboard or mouse > response... > Regards, Bob S. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << Hi Bill: > I leave my systems on all the time, as I find the wait while a hard > drive fires up _intensely_ annoying, particularly when it is a > network > drive I am trying to access. Hell, I get itchy when the monitor has > to > light up again after being in power-saver mode! In 15 years of > running > computers and networks at home, using mainly clone machines, I have > only ever had one HD fail, and that was a 10-year old system which > had > been long consigned to a minor storage role. > > Save aggravation, leave 'em on! > > HTH > > John Coyle > Brisbane, Australia >>
Re: Pentax and Film - Was(Re[2]: Cameron
Hey Bruce, I have been using Fuji NPS, NPH and Kodak Portra 160NC for my "portraits" (friends, family, my baby, etc.). In the summer of 2001 I was really hooked on NPS. My lab was printing it beautifully(Kodak Royal paper-equipment? probably Fuji). This past spring, it seemed as though skin tones were off, too pink-red(I didn't fuss at the lab) so I explored Portra 160 NC. Loved it. Skin tones ALWAYS good. The only thing I've noticed is that sometimes peoples eyes look black(when they are blue) and brunettes look really, really dark haired, unnaturally so. Recently, I tried NPH and NPS again and specifically asked the lab to "give me good, natural skin tones and make the NPH print its best", you know, set the channels properly, etc. Man they did it right. The pics were great. I have also gotten excellent skin tones using Agfa Vista 400 though inconsistent. I use the same lab all the time. I guess the lesson here is that the lab makes the difference. If they make the effort, they can make any of the aforementioned films shine.(I have to make the effort to communicate my preferences to the lab also) In summary, my current favorite portrait(people) films are: Fuji NPS and Fuji NPH === Also good: Kodak Portra 160 NC Agfa Vista 400 Kodak Royal Gold 100 Fuji Superia Reala Slide film: Kodachrome 64 and 200(hard to find as hens teeth in Greenville SC) Black and White: Kodak TriX Pan and Ilford HP5 Want to try(have two rolls in the fridge): Agfa Portrait 160 My favorite lenses for people: Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 and FA 50mm f1.4(at about f4 to f8) Other good people lenses: FA 28-105 f4-5.6 Power Zoom SMC 135 f3.5 SMC M 50mm f1.4 Tamron 70-300(great bokeh and handy 1:2 macro at 180-300) (E.R.N. Reed take note: I still want an FA 80-320) Favorite walk around body/lens combos for people shots: ZX5n with FA 50mm f1.4 = Other favs: Spotmatic with SuperTak 50mm f1.4 ME Super with SMC M 50mm f1.4 For me, an amateur, FILM RULES. I am very excited about some new films coming to market(Agfa Ultra 100, etc.). With regard, Robert ___ GO.com Mail Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com
Re: Pentax and Film - Was(Re[2]: Cameron
Hey Bruce, I have been using Fuji NPS, NPH and Kodak Portra 160NC for my "portraits" (friends, family, my baby, etc.). In the summer of 2001 I was really hooked on NPS. My lab was printing it beautifully(Kodak Royal paper-equipment? probably Fuji). This past spring, it seemed as though skin tones were off, too pink-red(I didn't fuss at the lab) so I explored Portra 160 NC. Loved it. Skin tones ALWAYS good. The only thing I've noticed is that sometimes peoples eyes look black(when they are blue) and brunettes look really, really dark haired, unnaturally so. Recently, I tried NPH and NPS again and specifically asked the lab to "give me good, natural skin tones and make the NPH print its best", you know, set the channels properly, etc. Man they did it right. The pics were great. I have also gotten excellent skin tones using Agfa Vista 400 though inconsistent. I use the same lab all the time. I guess the lesson here is that the lab makes the difference. If they make the effort, they can make any of the aforementioned films shine.(I have to make the effort to communicate my preferences to the lab also) In summary, my current favorite portrait(people) films are: Fuji NPS and Fuji NPH === Also good: Kodak Portra 160 NC Agfa Vista 400 Kodak Royal Gold 100 Fuji Superia Reala Slide film: Kodachrome 64 and 200(hard to find as hens teeth in Greenville SC) Black and White: Kodak TriX Pan and Ilford HP5 Want to try(have two rolls in the fridge): Agfa Portrait 160 My favorite lenses for people: Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 and FA 50mm f1.4(at about f4 to f8) Other good people lenses: FA 28-105 f4-5.6 Power Zoom SMC 135 f3.5 SMC M 50mm f1.4 Tamron 70-300(great bokeh and handy 1:2 macro at 180-300) (E.R.N. Reed take note: I still want an FA 80-320) Favorite walk around body/lens combos for people shots: ZX5n with FA 50mm f1.4 = Other favs: Spotmatic with SuperTak 50mm f1.4 ME Super with SMC M 50mm f1.4 For me, an amateur, FILM RULES. I am very excited about some new films coming to market(Agfa Ultra 100, etc.). With regard, Robert ___ GO.com Mail Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com
Re: Re[6]: Dumb computer question
Thanks I'll go have a look - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 3:19 AM Subject: Re[6]: Dumb computer question > Feroze, > > Take a look at The Bat from www.ritlabs.com. I have run it on much > less powerful hardware than you have. The requirements are low, the > price is low and the handling is very similar to OE (I like the > interface, just not all the problems). > > > Bruce > > > > Sunday, October 13, 2002, 6:01:59 PM, you wrote: > > FK> Bruce, > > FK> So far its ok, what are the other options, what do you use. Bear in mind > FK> that I have a 1.7G AMD XP, windows XP and 512MB ram and I don't want to > FK> write MCSE to use it and don't want to upgrade my PC either > > FK> TIA > FK> Feroze > FK> - Original Message - > FK> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > FK> To: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > FK> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:51 AM > FK> Subject: Re[4]: Dumb computer question > > > >> Feroze, > >> > >> Microsoft stuff can get annoying at times. Thanks for looking into > >> it. I have had a lot fewer problems with my mail client once I quit > >> using Outlook Express. > >> > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >> > >> Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:48:08 PM, you wrote: > >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >
Re: Reality Checks Part 3
Should we lie and say we buy new Pentax cameras? The old ones are better. And for the most part, ditto the lenses. Perhaps Pentax will accept that as a challenge to get their product line moving. If not, to hell with them. Paul Stenquist Who has never bought anything new from Pentax but owns eight bodies and about 40 lenses. Brad Dobo wrote: > > Many in this group are collectors (and users) of older Pentax equipment > (which I indeed find really quite cool). In fact, if Big Brother is > watching us, they might notice what I notice, some do not buy, or rarely > buy, new Pentax equipment. Look at the polls we have going on. I see > screwmount lens, A, M and the odd FA* in peoples favorite top 3. Big > Brother is going to assume we aren't interested in the newer equipment and > favor the older equipment.
Re[6]: Dumb computer question
Feroze, Take a look at The Bat from www.ritlabs.com. I have run it on much less powerful hardware than you have. The requirements are low, the price is low and the handling is very similar to OE (I like the interface, just not all the problems). Bruce Sunday, October 13, 2002, 6:01:59 PM, you wrote: FK> Bruce, FK> So far its ok, what are the other options, what do you use. Bear in mind FK> that I have a 1.7G AMD XP, windows XP and 512MB ram and I don't want to FK> write MCSE to use it and don't want to upgrade my PC either FK> TIA FK> Feroze FK> - Original Message - FK> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FK> To: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FK> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:51 AM FK> Subject: Re[4]: Dumb computer question >> Feroze, >> >> Microsoft stuff can get annoying at times. Thanks for looking into >> it. I have had a lot fewer problems with my mail client once I quit >> using Outlook Express. >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:48:08 PM, you wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
Re: Shooting Auroras
- Original Message - From: Wendy Beard Subject: Re: Shooting Auroras > > That's what I thought.(didn't think of compensation though) Then my nerve > failed when the shutter seemed to have been open for an eternity. I > switched it to B and counted to 10, then 20, then 30. > It wasn't a particularly impressive display anyway, mostly white with a > hint of green. If I get to see the lights again then I'll be a bit better > prepared (hopefully) Auroras and the like are actually pretty dim, so you want to have a fast lens, wide open. My best Hale-Bopp stuff was with the LX on auto and the 50mm f/1.2 wide open. With the comet, I set the exposure comp to minus 2 stops because of the scene type. With northern lights, I would give a plus exposure comp for the same reason. We had the same light show here in Regina. Foolishly, I missed it. Imagine throwing cupric chloride into a camp fire.. I guess it was quite the show farther west, and somewhat north. William Robb
Re: Pentax and Portrait Film - Was(Re[2]: Cameron's Pentax Comments)
Bruce Dayton wrote: > > I have had the best consistent luck so far with Kodak Portra NC. I have > had some good and bad luck with both Fuji and Agfa portrait films. > The bad times with Fuji were quite grainy pictures (35mm weeny format) > and the bad luck with Agfa was some real hot spots with fill flash > that I haven't seen before. > Anyone else have any experience or opinion to share? > Hi Bruce, I've become very fond of Kodak Portra NC for portrait work. I use it in 6x7 format and rate it at 100. I find that the 1/3 stop or so of overexposure gives it a little more punch. I don't make wet prints. I scan the negs and print on an Epson 1200. Paul Stenquist
Re: Shooting Auroras
f1.4 is just a good starting point. f4 with 400ASA would come out to a 1/2 second exposure with my table. Did you shoot the LX on AP? How long do you think the exposure was? I bet the LX nailed it though. Let us know what you get back. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "Wendy Beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 3:30 PM Subject: Re: Shooting Auroras > At 08:39 AM 10/13/2002 -0700, you wrote: > >Hi Wendy, > > Wow, a question regarding film! You can just put the camera on auto > >(LX good choice), or try this, a little guide I made: > > > > ASAf stopExposure time > > > > 100 1.4 1/4`s > > > > Adjust as needed. I`ve had great results with it. > >Steve Larson > > Steve, > Thanks for the guide > and to Peter for the other link > > >http://www.ptialaska.net/~hutch/aurora.html > > I've noticed that you both use wide open. Is this to get the shutter speed up? > > For eclipse stuff, the guides are usually calculated around f8 (but that > could just be because it's as wide open as you're going to get with an > extreme long lens!) > > I used my LX and M20mm the other night but that has only a max aperture of > f4. Grabbed some Royal Gold 400 and shot a few frames. I'll drop the roll > off on Tuesday - won't get my hopes up that I've caught anything worthwhile! > > Wendy > > >
Re: *Sigh* One last note (then maybe I'll leave ya allow for a bit :))
At 05:39 PM 10/13/2002 -0700, Bruce wrote: >You want to see some cool equipment and results - check out the P67II >or the 645NII. When you work with the equipment and then view an MF >slide through a loupe, it totally blows you away. I'll second that. Took a roll of slides on the 67 in the Rockies. WOW! Thought I'd have an enlargement done of one of them. Took it to Blacks - big mistake! Just got to wait until I can get to one of the other processing shops to try again! (Even if I could scan it, my printer's not up to much) Mind you, I tried 35mm slides again for the first time in ages on the same trip and they were pretty amazing too. Wendy
Re: dumb computer question\electrical surge
Thanks for all the replies to my question. It looks like the concensus is to leave em running all the time when the computer is on. It also sounds like I am pretty lucky where I am. Power outages or surges are a real rarity where I live. Thanks again William Robb
Re: Digital thoughts
It isn't that Olympus didn't "get it", they did. The came out with a couple of AF SLRs, realized how tight the competition was and how high the cost was developing these things and opted out of the market. They decided to expand their P&S line (very successfully) and just keep making the same non AF SLRs they always did for as long as they could make money doing it. What Olympus did with AF (pass on it) is what Minolta and Pentax have done with DSLRs. BR - Original Message - From: "Chris Brogden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .. the move to > digital, like the move to auto-focus, *is* a permanent transition, and > companies (like Olympus with the move to AF) who don't recognize these > permanent transitions are in danger of dying out.
Re: dumb computer question\electrical surge
I am on the side that does not consider surges or spikes rare, nor do I think they only happen on power lines. I lost 3 48 port Cisco Switches, 5 Nortell Hubs, and 1 Cisco 48 port line card to a surge that went through the network wiring. Two weeks ago I had a surge that destroyed one of my UPSes (well my employers, but I think of them as mine :) ) but protected $30,000 USD worth of networking gear that powered up fine once connected to a functional UPS. The cost of a UPS and or surge protector is pocket change compared to the cost of what they protect. Jeff At 08:16 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 19:24:27 -0400 >From: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Dumb computer question >Message-ID: <043701c2730f$ad07abe0$0200a8c0@brad> >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >As a real computer and internet junkie, and part-time tech, I *always* leave >my stuff on. On thing is I turn of monitors at night. Running XP Pro on 2 >computers, on with Win98SE, one Windows 2000 Corporate Server, and one >laptop networked running NT4. I've never had anything fail on me, I keep >strict maintenance, and consider the chance of a power surge to be an >overrated experience and rare. I rarely have to reboot ANY of the machines. >On UPS, they are an invaluable tool for those occasional brown-outs.
Re: Re[4]: Dumb computer question
Bruce, So far its ok, what are the other options, what do you use. Bear in mind that I have a 1.7G AMD XP, windows XP and 512MB ram and I don't want to write MCSE to use it and don't want to upgrade my PC either TIA Feroze - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:51 AM Subject: Re[4]: Dumb computer question > Feroze, > > Microsoft stuff can get annoying at times. Thanks for looking into > it. I have had a lot fewer problems with my mail client once I quit > using Outlook Express. > > > Bruce > > > > Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:48:08 PM, you wrote: > > >> >> > >> > >> > >
Re[4]: Dumb computer question
Feroze, Microsoft stuff can get annoying at times. Thanks for looking into it. I have had a lot fewer problems with my mail client once I quit using Outlook Express. Bruce Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:48:08 PM, you wrote: FK> Sorry bruce, I found the option thingy that turns it off, should work fine FK> now, but I'm am using microsoft stuff, so if anyone still getting receipt FK> requests tell me FK> - Original Message - FK> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FK> To: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FK> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:41 AM FK> Subject: Re[2]: Dumb computer question >> Brad, >> >> You're not alone. I get them too from Feroze. They piss me off and I >> refuse to send the reply. My software asks and I always say no. >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:33:45 PM, you wrote: >> >> BD> Feroze? Can I ask just one little thing? Not about your email FK> contents, I >> BD> think they are fine. However, I do get the ever annoying 'sender FK> wants a >> BD> read reciept' when you send the emails. Would it be too much to ask FK> you to >> BD> turn that off? I haven't seen an comments from other members, so I FK> don't >> BD> know if I'm the only one. I used to once upon a time use that FK> feature, and >> BD> I found out that it just pissed off people. >> >> BD> Thanks, >> >> BD> Brad Dobo >> >> BD> - Original Message - >> BD> From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> BD> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> BD> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:24 PM >> BD> Subject: Re: Dumb computer question >> >> >> >> Servers are set to run all the time and many are never really switched >> BD> off, >> >> most of them have the same consumer drives you using. It only saves >> >> electricty though which isn't much anyway but you do over work the FK> drive >> >> when you keep rebooting it often. >> >> >> >> BTW I use western digital drives, a 6.4 to boot and a 40GB for my work >> >> files. If my OS fails then I only have to format the 6.4 and reinstall >> BD> which >> >> takes 27 min's and both are NTFS format. Dosn't get corrupted and so FK> far >> >> can't be virused. Everything important is backed to CDR and at 59 US FK> cents >> >> each it beats any other media. >> >> >> >> ..my 2 cents >> >> >> >> Feroze >> >> >> >> On Monday, October 14, 2002 5:02 AM, William Robb >> >> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: >> >> > Hi; >> >> > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few >> >> > minutes of inactivity. >> >> > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? >> >> > Thanks >> >> > >> >> > William Robb >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
Re: Re[2]: Dumb computer question
Sorry bruce, I found the option thingy that turns it off, should work fine now, but I'm am using microsoft stuff, so if anyone still getting receipt requests tell me - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:41 AM Subject: Re[2]: Dumb computer question > Brad, > > You're not alone. I get them too from Feroze. They piss me off and I > refuse to send the reply. My software asks and I always say no. > > > Bruce > > > > Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:33:45 PM, you wrote: > > BD> Feroze? Can I ask just one little thing? Not about your email contents, I > BD> think they are fine. However, I do get the ever annoying 'sender wants a > BD> read reciept' when you send the emails. Would it be too much to ask you to > BD> turn that off? I haven't seen an comments from other members, so I don't > BD> know if I'm the only one. I used to once upon a time use that feature, and > BD> I found out that it just pissed off people. > > BD> Thanks, > > BD> Brad Dobo > > BD> - Original Message - > BD> From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > BD> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > BD> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:24 PM > BD> Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > > > >> Servers are set to run all the time and many are never really switched > BD> off, > >> most of them have the same consumer drives you using. It only saves > >> electricty though which isn't much anyway but you do over work the drive > >> when you keep rebooting it often. > >> > >> BTW I use western digital drives, a 6.4 to boot and a 40GB for my work > >> files. If my OS fails then I only have to format the 6.4 and reinstall > BD> which > >> takes 27 min's and both are NTFS format. Dosn't get corrupted and so far > >> can't be virused. Everything important is backed to CDR and at 59 US cents > >> each it beats any other media. > >> > >> ..my 2 cents > >> > >> Feroze > >> > >> On Monday, October 14, 2002 5:02 AM, William Robb > >> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > >> > Hi; > >> > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > >> > minutes of inactivity. > >> > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > >> > Thanks > >> > > >> > William Robb > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >
Re: Dumb computer question
Oops forgot about that one, its automatic when I send work mail. No you the second one to ask me though-sorry. I don't know how to turn if off permantly though. I've keep un-clicking it but every time I re-start OE its back - Original Message - From: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:33 AM Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > Feroze? Can I ask just one little thing? Not about your email contents, I > think they are fine. However, I do get the ever annoying 'sender wants a > read reciept' when you send the emails. Would it be too much to ask you to > turn that off? I haven't seen an comments from other members, so I don't > know if I'm the only one. I used to once upon a time use that feature, and > I found out that it just pissed off people. > > Thanks, > > Brad Dobo > > - Original Message - > From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:24 PM > Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > > > > Servers are set to run all the time and many are never really switched > off, > > most of them have the same consumer drives you using. It only saves > > electricty though which isn't much anyway but you do over work the drive > > when you keep rebooting it often. > > > > BTW I use western digital drives, a 6.4 to boot and a 40GB for my work > > files. If my OS fails then I only have to format the 6.4 and reinstall > which > > takes 27 min's and both are NTFS format. Dosn't get corrupted and so far > > can't be virused. Everything important is backed to CDR and at 59 US cents > > each it beats any other media. > > > > ..my 2 cents > > > > Feroze > > > > On Monday, October 14, 2002 5:02 AM, William Robb > > [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > > Hi; > > > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > > > minutes of inactivity. > > > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > > > Thanks > > > > > > William Robb > > > > > > > > > > >
Re[2]: Dumb computer question
Brad, You're not alone. I get them too from Feroze. They piss me off and I refuse to send the reply. My software asks and I always say no. Bruce Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:33:45 PM, you wrote: BD> Feroze? Can I ask just one little thing? Not about your email contents, I BD> think they are fine. However, I do get the ever annoying 'sender wants a BD> read reciept' when you send the emails. Would it be too much to ask you to BD> turn that off? I haven't seen an comments from other members, so I don't BD> know if I'm the only one. I used to once upon a time use that feature, and BD> I found out that it just pissed off people. BD> Thanks, BD> Brad Dobo BD> - Original Message - BD> From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BD> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BD> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:24 PM BD> Subject: Re: Dumb computer question >> Servers are set to run all the time and many are never really switched BD> off, >> most of them have the same consumer drives you using. It only saves >> electricty though which isn't much anyway but you do over work the drive >> when you keep rebooting it often. >> >> BTW I use western digital drives, a 6.4 to boot and a 40GB for my work >> files. If my OS fails then I only have to format the 6.4 and reinstall BD> which >> takes 27 min's and both are NTFS format. Dosn't get corrupted and so far >> can't be virused. Everything important is backed to CDR and at 59 US cents >> each it beats any other media. >> >> ..my 2 cents >> >> Feroze >> >> On Monday, October 14, 2002 5:02 AM, William Robb >> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: >> > Hi; >> > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few >> > minutes of inactivity. >> > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? >> > Thanks >> > >> > William Robb >> > >> >> >>
Re: *Sigh* One last note (then maybe I'll leave ya allow for a bit :))
Brad, You want to see some cool equipment and results - check out the P67II or the 645NII. When you work with the equipment and then view an MF slide through a loupe, it totally blows you away. Or when you have something printed up to 8X10 or larger and start looking at the captured detail - not grain issues - detail, it really starts to put 35mm in it's place. Bruce Sunday, October 13, 2002, 5:29:42 PM, you wrote: BD> Ok, most of you (except those that put Brad Dobo on an ignore list) have BD> read my emails. Some are pure crap just for a laugh, and not just for me, BD> I'm not trying to stir trouble, but a laugh for everyone. I have said some BD> outlandish things. I do however have do some quite serious emails as well BD> (I hope you can tell them apart). Just wanted everyone to know that I do BD> like Pentax, I feel unique and proud. And I like most of you! Ya! I have BD> learned much from this group, and enjoy it every day. So don't see me in a BD> bad light, I'm actually quite a nice guy. :) I am just sick of the talk of BD> equipment that does not now, nor maybe ever, exist. I'd like to talk about BD> something I can get my hands on. BD> Brad Dobo
OT: Enlarger Lens also
Forgot. Won't need this any more either. Fujinon ES 135/4.5 $50. Collin (But I'm keeping my 105/4.5 ES!)
Re: Dumb computer question
Feroze? Can I ask just one little thing? Not about your email contents, I think they are fine. However, I do get the ever annoying 'sender wants a read reciept' when you send the emails. Would it be too much to ask you to turn that off? I haven't seen an comments from other members, so I don't know if I'm the only one. I used to once upon a time use that feature, and I found out that it just pissed off people. Thanks, Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:24 PM Subject: Re: Dumb computer question > Servers are set to run all the time and many are never really switched off, > most of them have the same consumer drives you using. It only saves > electricty though which isn't much anyway but you do over work the drive > when you keep rebooting it often. > > BTW I use western digital drives, a 6.4 to boot and a 40GB for my work > files. If my OS fails then I only have to format the 6.4 and reinstall which > takes 27 min's and both are NTFS format. Dosn't get corrupted and so far > can't be virused. Everything important is backed to CDR and at 59 US cents > each it beats any other media. > > ..my 2 cents > > Feroze > > On Monday, October 14, 2002 5:02 AM, William Robb > [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > Hi; > > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > > minutes of inactivity. > > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > > Thanks > > > > William Robb > > > > >
Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
Back when I was in IT, surge arresters were a dime a dozen and seldom failed to protect a computer in a lightning strike. Back then, I used constant-voltage-transformers with input MOVs. The primary protection came from the transformer as it provided isolation and automatically bucked spikes. It also provided brownout protection. For UPS supplies, get one with a CVT or add a CVT to one. All but the most expensive supplies use silicon for conditioning and they will fail with a hit although, they will protect the computer. This experience came from the lightening ravaged mountains in Colorado. Bob
*Sigh* One last note (then maybe I'll leave ya allow for a bit :))
Ok, most of you (except those that put Brad Dobo on an ignore list) have read my emails. Some are pure crap just for a laugh, and not just for me, I'm not trying to stir trouble, but a laugh for everyone. I have said some outlandish things. I do however have do some quite serious emails as well (I hope you can tell them apart). Just wanted everyone to know that I do like Pentax, I feel unique and proud. And I like most of you! Ya! I have learned much from this group, and enjoy it every day. So don't see me in a bad light, I'm actually quite a nice guy. :) I am just sick of the talk of equipment that does not now, nor maybe ever, exist. I'd like to talk about something I can get my hands on. Brad Dobo
Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
They can when the head unit bounces and hits the platter when the surge cause the tip to jump higher than normal - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 1:18 AM Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) The disc platters themselves are magnetic metal and probably not capable of being damaged by a power surge.
Re: Dumb computer question
Servers are set to run all the time and many are never really switched off, most of them have the same consumer drives you using. It only saves electricty though which isn't much anyway but you do over work the drive when you keep rebooting it often. BTW I use western digital drives, a 6.4 to boot and a 40GB for my work files. If my OS fails then I only have to format the 6.4 and reinstall which takes 27 min's and both are NTFS format. Dosn't get corrupted and so far can't be virused. Everything important is backed to CDR and at 59 US cents each it beats any other media. ..my 2 cents Feroze On Monday, October 14, 2002 5:02 AM, William Robb [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Hi; > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > minutes of inactivity. > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > Thanks > > William Robb >
The final chapter in Reality Checks
The single largest Reality Check: No one wants to hear the true and are too stubborn to change and too stubborn to concede a point to me. I know the emails I have written are a waste, that's my reality check. Brad Dobo
Re: Reality checks Part 1
> Stranger things have happened (and have > in the past, pre-Dobo) Yes like an alien spacecraft that happens to travel millions of light years to Earth only to crash in Roswell New Mexico USA. Who is the only state hung up on things like this? The U.S.A. Nevermind that 70% of the world is water and that the percentage of land that the US has in quite small. Amazing they'd end up there. Conspiracy theories and wackos are a unique problem in the US. Now, you're not American I know. Pre-Dobo times must have been quite a bore, no? :) Cheers back at ya, Brad Dobo > 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: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
Bob, I don't need to re-read your message again, I got it all the first time. I know of no one in my personal experience that I call my life, that has every had such problems. I work and hang out with guys who are far more advanced than me that think and see the same thing. You are one of the few unfortunate cases of this happening. It's sort of like Norton Internet Security for a Windows box. Absolutely useless software. It's a huge market scam in fact. As those in the know (not those that sell) Keep it updated from Microsoft and scan regularly with up to day virus scanners and you have no need to worry about your Windows Box because they really are not that exploitable. They are if you don't have a good virus scanner, or do and don't use it, or have never updated your OS. In my experience only idiots and the ignorant get actually affected by a virus. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 7:46 PM Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > Brad, > > Reread my message again. > I have experienced a power surge which damaged my TV. > I don't live in the boonies or a 3rd world country, but a nice suburb of > Chicago. > I paid $160 to have the TV fixed, and > nothing for the computer because of the surge protector. > We were running both of these devices at the time of the spike. > > If you are experiencing uninterrupted electric service you are fortunate. > I feel the electric service has grown much less reliable in the past 50 years. > In the past, we had surplus power capacity. The only outage we saw in my > childhood was from storms taking power lines down or lightening strikes on > pole mounted transformers. Today we experience 3-4 brownouts per summer when > the temperatures go up and air conditioning needs drain the electric supply. > This was unheard of in the past. > > Regards, Bob S. > > In a message dated 10/13/02 6:32:13 PM Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << Surge protectors are fine, I use them, but more like additional power > outlets. Do you know why these companies have insurance or guarantees of > various sums? Because they rarely happen. Any *real* power surge, be it a > power company failure or due to a lightning strike, do you know what > happens? They simply just jump the surge barrier. In that case, you are in > trouble, but there is nothing you can do against it besides unplugging every > component after use. The upside? This rarely happens. > > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 7:18 PM > Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > > > > Wendy, > > > > Get that surge protector into use. Buy two, they are cheap! > > > > Back when I had a computer with Pentium I chip, I saw a flash outside the > > basement window and the power went out. An underground transformer across > > the street had blown, but not before spiking the voltage. When the power > > came back up, the computer was fine (protected by the surge protector), > but > > the TV in the bedroom wasn't. $160 later, we had the appropriate chips in > > the TV replaced. It has a surge protector now too! > > > > I like what John Coyle said about the chips in the hard drives or the > > controllers. The disc platters themselves are magnetic metal and probably > > not capable of being damaged by a power surge. The wee electronic chips > are > > another matter. Short of buying US Department of Defense, hardened > against > > Electromagnetic Pulses chips, this gear needs surge protection. > > > > Regards, Bob S. > > >> >
Reality Check Part 4
Anyone who is serious about photography, or a professional, uses (in here) Pentax Medium Format. Big Brother is going to say, let's work on them. Dispite the bickering we have had some members make the switch to other companies to get the newer techologies that they either need, or want. Just like those with 36 lenses for K-mount, you really don't expect those that switch to switch back just because Pentax came out with something new. They don't advertise. They must advertise like Nikon and Canon if you ever want to see USM, IS, DSLR, etc, because then people will know about our little company called Pentax. Because they do not advertise, they find few buyers, and that does not help with profits. My instructor in photography. 3 classes at night during the week, 30 to a class. He finds me fascinating. Because I'm the best in the classes? No! Because I'm the only one out of 90, yes 90 people who has a Pentax. That is NOT a good sign. Ask random strangers on the street, name a camera company. What are 99% of the answers? Nikon and Canon.
Re: Reality Checks Part 2
On 13 Oct 2002 at 19:39, Brad Dobo wrote: > Some in this group have stated that they would pass on the first generation > Pentax DSLR. If Big Brother is watching, what do you think will happen? They > make their own first generation DSLR, few buy it, the rest waiting for the > second generation. Do we expect that Pentax should suffer huge profit losses on > a first generation DSLR to give us *few* devotees a second generation DSLR? Some people are a little cautious, I bet the same was said when Oly first brought out the E-10, didn't hurt sales in the end and I bet once the paranoid got wind of just how reliable and well designed it was they too bit the bullet. If Pentax does produce DSLR then they have no excuses whatsoever for not ensuring that it is flawless within its design specifications. They have a pretty good track record to this point in film cameras and now tens of competing products from their peers to scrutinize. 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: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
Brad, Reread my message again. I have experienced a power surge which damaged my TV. I don't live in the boonies or a 3rd world country, but a nice suburb of Chicago. I paid $160 to have the TV fixed, and nothing for the computer because of the surge protector. We were running both of these devices at the time of the spike. If you are experiencing uninterrupted electric service you are fortunate. I feel the electric service has grown much less reliable in the past 50 years. In the past, we had surplus power capacity. The only outage we saw in my childhood was from storms taking power lines down or lightening strikes on pole mounted transformers. Today we experience 3-4 brownouts per summer when the temperatures go up and air conditioning needs drain the electric supply. This was unheard of in the past. Regards, Bob S. In a message dated 10/13/02 6:32:13 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Surge protectors are fine, I use them, but more like additional power outlets. Do you know why these companies have insurance or guarantees of various sums? Because they rarely happen. Any *real* power surge, be it a power company failure or due to a lightning strike, do you know what happens? They simply just jump the surge barrier. In that case, you are in trouble, but there is nothing you can do against it besides unplugging every component after use. The upside? This rarely happens. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 7:18 PM Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > Wendy, > > Get that surge protector into use. Buy two, they are cheap! > > Back when I had a computer with Pentium I chip, I saw a flash outside the > basement window and the power went out. An underground transformer across > the street had blown, but not before spiking the voltage. When the power > came back up, the computer was fine (protected by the surge protector), but > the TV in the bedroom wasn't. $160 later, we had the appropriate chips in > the TV replaced. It has a surge protector now too! > > I like what John Coyle said about the chips in the hard drives or the > controllers. The disc platters themselves are magnetic metal and probably > not capable of being damaged by a power surge. The wee electronic chips are > another matter. Short of buying US Department of Defense, hardened against > Electromagnetic Pulses chips, this gear needs surge protection. > > Regards, Bob S. > >>
Re: Reality checks Part 1
On 13 Oct 2002 at 19:36, Brad Dobo wrote: > Hey, > > It seems that those who replied to my email only argued one point. That Big > Brother is watching. I don't know that BB is watching but Pentax used to watch the list, to the point where it become too uncomfortable for them to host. No why it should be different here to several other lists that I have participated in I don't know however just because no one appears to be responding as a Pentax representative doesn't mean that they aren't watching. Stranger things have happened (and have in the past, pre-Dobo) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Reality Checks Part 3
Many in this group are collectors (and users) of older Pentax equipment (which I indeed find really quite cool). In fact, if Big Brother is watching us, they might notice what I notice, some do not buy, or rarely buy, new Pentax equipment. Look at the polls we have going on. I see screwmount lens, A, M and the odd FA* in peoples favorite top 3. Big Brother is going to assume we aren't interested in the newer equipment and favor the older equipment.
Avedon at the Met.
After touring the old high school with some of my fellow classmates - we really have not changed too much - I decided to go to the Metropolitan Museum of Art before heading home. Along with their numerous halls with some outstanding art, they are having an exhibit of Richard Avedon's photographs. Another PDMLer had already mentioned it previously. My sister pointed it out to me once I got here. Maybe it was because it was has been a constant rain for the past few days, but there were more people than I expected to see on a Friday afternoon. Looking at his work made me wonder a lot about composition. There were often times when he would crop the tops of their heads, or placed them off center - this with usually a plain white background. Interesting, many could complain about the technicalities of the photos - varying depths of field in what should have been a constant studio set up, composition - but what was most important were the people he was able to photograph. Knowing about the person added so much more to the photo, much like a photograph taken by yourself bringing back memories of the moment in time and the people involved. He was conveying his thoughts and views on the subject. The one thing that did come through was the familiarity of the subject. They seemed to be at ease with him. It was especially interesting to watch where the eyes were pointed. That speaks volumes of him as a portraitist. I noted that when assigned to shoot 'ordinary' people along the Midwest his compositions tended to be centered, uncropped heads, extensive depth of field so they were completely in focus - or much more than his 'famous' people shots. Allow the viewer come up with their own opinion of the subject. Along the lines that have been mentioned here in terms of blurry or out of focus shots familiar to most people in their everyday shooting, I heard quite a few comments about how sharp certain photos were. My father even brought this point home to me when he showed me a shot taken with his p&s. I commented on the people in it and such, and then noted that those closer to the camera were slightly out of focus, the photographer was too close. He waved it off and said that you could tell who they were and it was just a p&s, etc., etc., etc. The people just have to be identifiable. There were a couple of shots of Avedon's that were blurred and I would not think to display them, but they were of famous people and that made them worthy of exhibition... All in all a good time. It was great seeing such large photographs, noting the skill in the lighting, metering, printing to bring the images to such a state, and the composition used by such a 'master'. The PUG can definitely stand on its own :-P And it was fun to walk around with no other agenda in mind than to react to something that catches your eye and not having to look at every object in the hall. César Panama City, Florida in NYC
Reality Checks Part 2
Some in this group have stated that they would pass on the first generation Pentax DSLR. If Big Brother is watching, what do you think will happen? They make their own first generation DSLR, few buy it, the rest waiting for the second generation. Do we expect that Pentax should suffer huge profit losses on a first generation DSLR to give us *few* devotees a second generation DSLR?
Reality checks Part 1
Hey, It seems that those who replied to my email only argued one point. That Big Brother is watching. Now, Pentax does not make competing flagship SLRs like Nikon and Canon. Why on earth do some here think they will all of a sudden put out a DSLR that competes?
Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
Surge protectors are fine, I use them, but more like additional power outlets. Do you know why these companies have insurance or guarantees of various sums? Because they rarely happen. Any *real* power surge, be it a power company failure or due to a lightning strike, do you know what happens? They simply just jump the surge barrier. In that case, you are in trouble, but there is nothing you can do against it besides unplugging every component after use. The upside? This rarely happens. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 7:18 PM Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > Wendy, > > Get that surge protector into use. Buy two, they are cheap! > > Back when I had a computer with Pentium I chip, I saw a flash outside the > basement window and the power went out. An underground transformer across > the street had blown, but not before spiking the voltage. When the power > came back up, the computer was fine (protected by the surge protector), but > the TV in the bedroom wasn't. $160 later, we had the appropriate chips in > the TV replaced. It has a surge protector now too! > > I like what John Coyle said about the chips in the hard drives or the > controllers. The disc platters themselves are magnetic metal and probably > not capable of being damaged by a power surge. The wee electronic chips are > another matter. Short of buying US Department of Defense, hardened against > Electromagnetic Pulses chips, this gear needs surge protection. > > Regards, Bob S. >
Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
> And of course, removable disks sitting on the shelf never have any > problems?? Generally no, as they have not been 'burned' or dyes altered yet. > My experience is that all of these approaches work, if you understand the medium > and work with it accordingly. > > My experience around here is that there is a relatively small amount of critical > data on the hard drives that is easily and quickly backed up to CDs (which we > read verify in addition to the verify after write process). Four times a year > the complete drives are backed up to tape. Once every year or so the computers > are taken down, cleared and reloaded with the recovery disks and then updated to > clear the machine of gremlins that seem to creep in no matter what you do. No > very sophisticated, but it seems to get the job done. > > Otis > > Brad Dobo wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 1:26 AM > > Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > > > > > CD-R's are very easy to damage either physically or during a write > > > operation. Lost a > > > lot data on a cd doing an incremental backup. One bad file write lead to > > > an un-readable > > > un-recoverable CD. > > > > Just to add a technical note to this. Peter is exactly correct about the > > CD-R. However, I would like to add that a CD-RW is potentially worse, and > > even with a successful write and proper storage, a CD-RW can actually become > > unstable, or in other words, 'go bad'. > > > > Brad Dobo >
Re: Dumb computer question
I think, neither. Keeping it ON 100% time is bad for it. Turning it on and off every two minuts is MUCH worse. Keeping it OFF 100% time doesn't damage it at all. I guess there must be a balance -- like turning it off at night. Best, Mishka - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 3:02 PM Subject: Dumb computer question > Hi; > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > minutes of inactivity. > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > Thanks > > William Robb > > >
Digital thoughts
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > This is not the DDML (Digital Distribution Mailing List) Guess what? > It's PDML, and I used to think it stood for Pentax Distribution > Mailing list. Until you found out that it's the Pentax Discuss Mailing List. :) On an unrelated note... Personally, I have no doubt that Pentax will produce a DSLR with interchangeable lenses. None at all. And I also have no doubt that when they do it won't be as fully pro-spec'ed as N/C ones, which will satisfy some people and piss others off. Look at APS. Pentax didn't jump on the initial bandwagon like Kodak, Nikon, Canon, etc. did. They waited until they had an idea of what the market was like, and then came out with a couple of models that were well built (metal bodies) and small in size, and they even managed to put in a longer zoom lens than Canon's Elph at the time (3x instead of 2x). Now they're doing the same thing with digital p&s's. They partnered up with HP so they could ease into the market more smoothly by taking advantage of the knowledge of a well-established company, and then branched out into Pentax-only cameras. Now they're trying the same strategy that worked with their film p&s: small, well-built and well-featured. The problem is that going digital introduces a whole new set of problems that they either didn't anticipate or didn't succeed in overcoming. And so the Optios have a horrible battery life, awful auto white balance, poor macro (this one bewilders me; even Nikon's Coolpix 2500 will focus down to a couple centimeters), and they're overpriced relative to other models. I think Pentax honestly tried their best with the full-frame DSLR but the problems with the Phillips chip finally made them give up in frustration. By the time it would have got on the market it would have been overpriced for what it did and they would have lost a ton of money. (Did you hear the Contax N was recalled once even after it came out?) But I don't doubt that Pentax recognizes the need to produce a DSLR, and I don't doubt that they will put one out as soon as they can. All of this is new for them, so it's just a matter of time. I expect to see a Pentax DSLR on sale before Christmas of 2003, but that's just speculation. On the off chance that anyone there is listening, Pentax would have the most success with a DSLR based on an MZ body that sold for significantly less than C/N's entry-level models. If a customer can pick up a stripped-down DSLR for just a touch more than a prosumer digital (Coolpix 5700, Dimage 7i, etc.), that would tempt a lot of people. Look at the K1000. Stripped down (not even a self timer), but it did everything an SLR needed to and nothing more. Most people who know Pentax seem to know it because of the K1000. Right now most people haven't made the jump to DSLR's because of the cost and complexity of them, but if Pentax captured the cheap-and-simple DSLR market they could attract a slew of people. So that's my wishful thinking for today. In reality, I'm confident that Pentax sees the need to come out with a DSLR, but I'm not so sure that they understand the need to embrace DSLR's as a permanent transition. The move to APS was not a longterm transition, and so Pentax was wise not to put out tons of p&s's and any SLR's using it. However, the move to digital, like the move to auto-focus, *is* a permanent transition, and companies (like Olympus with the move to AF) who don't recognize these permanent transitions are in danger of dying out. I'm sure analogue will co-exist with digital for a long time (look at watches, computer vs. pen and paper, etc.), but people are not going to move away from digital in the forseeable future... the movement will be towards it. If Pentax doesn't recognize the need to put out new DSLR's on a regular basis like they would with film SLR's, they could find themselves in a lot of trouble. chris
Re: Dumb computer question
Hi Bill, The only thing it is going to hurt if left on is the bearings. My machine is never shut down, and I haven`t had a bearing failure yet, but HD`s are replaced with larger ones every once in a while. To me, it is annoying to walk up to my computer and wait while the hard drive is initializing. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 12:02 PM Subject: Dumb computer question > Hi; > My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few > minutes of inactivity. > Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? > Thanks > > William Robb >
Dumb computer question
Hi; My computer is set up to shut the hard drives off after a few minutes of inactivity. Is this a good thing, or should they run all the time? Thanks William Robb
Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs), Anton
The computer trade says: 'Data doesn't exist unless it exists in two separate locations.' I'm into film but I subsequently use computers for my images, not to mention my music making and production, finances, work etc. etc. I have multiple hard disks and those disks are partitioned but that doesn't really count as separate locations. Back-up to CD or whatever and store off-site is my suggestion. If you do a lot of work, do this every week. Pain in the neck but if you're serious there's no other way. Two years ago I switched my machine on and went to brew my coffee. When I came back I was greeted with a black screen saying 'invalid system disk'. We've all seen that before? Floppy left in the drive... err no! panicking phone calls ensued and the swapping of hard disks between machines (it's great to have a spare machine on these occasions) revealed that quite simply my 3 month old IBM (class product) hard disk had died. The other disk and the rest of the machine was okay (so no spikes etc.) I had a two week old back-up of my data and an image of C: so I bought a new disk and was up and running in half and hour but the loss of two weeks data was a pain. Hard disks are mechanical spinning devices and they will fail. Fact! The questions is when, the answer is the next second or the next ten years or anywhere in between. Back-up and be happy. Anton ___ Freeserve AnyTime, only £13.99 per month with one month's FREE trial! For more information visit http://www.freeserve.com/time/ or call free on 0800 970 8890
RE: Sent to all email addresses I could find on the Penatx Worldwide Gateway
Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > Pentax's not having a DSLR has nothing to do with technical issues. It has > to do with where they see their company in the market, and which customers > they choose to go after. Folks here seem to think that something can be > done, technically, then it will be done, but there is no reason to think > that if a company can make a product that they will make a product. Much as I would like to disagree, I believe the final decision will be financial not technical. Malcolm
Re: digital - a story
- Original Message - From: Raimo Korhonen Subject: Vs: digital - a story > There was once a question put to Playboy - one photo enthusiast reader asked if they used soft filters. The answer: no, we use very soft girls. And perhaps not the sharpest lens. William Robb
Re: Shooting Auroras
"correct" exposure time for auroras varies a lot with the intensity of the light. William Robb suggested 1+ compensation and print film. Print film is probably a good idea because of its wider latitude. In my limited experience, setting exposure compensation to -2 worked fine, but that was there and then, I guess. Also, the length of the exposures varied _much_ with the intensity of the auroras. I have some of the images on my web. Best, Jostein http://oksne.net - Original Message - From: "Wendy Beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 5:18 PM Subject: Shooting Auroras > Right, > Question for all you out there who do any sort of sky/night time photography. > Is there any rule of thumb for shooting Auroras. > Open the shutter and count to 10 - 20? 30? Set the camera on auto and let > it sit and expose for a few minutes? > I suspect it's all just trial and error but I'd still like some hints. > > tia > Wendy > > Wendy Beard > Ottawa, Canada > http://www.beard-redfern.com > > >
November swap meet
BlankJust heard, the next swap meet is on the first Saturday in November at the Cameron Centre near Lougheed Mall, Burnaby BC. James
Re: Cameron's Pentax Comments
> If, and this is a big if, Pentax chooses to market a DSLR (and I > don't think they will), it will be based on the MZ-5 chassis, > and will not have pro specifications. Observation here. Pentax have built the 230, 330 and 430 optio on the same operating system and display, so the electronics obviously handle different sensors, and also designed around CF cards, not SD, MMC or other smaller, easier to interface units. Only technical reason for CF is the higher acheivable data rate and storage capacity, smartmedia is cheaper to produce and memory stick and SD are smaller. All these cameras (230, 330, 430, 330RS 430RS, 330GS) are built as small as possible. And the 330GS is about the cheapest 3.3 megapixel there is. Could it just possibly be that they have decided that they will hit the market when the full frame sensor price allows them to make a basic MZ50 class low end camera with 5-6MP (notice no 5 MP P&S from them this year?) and an MZ-S class camera with a 10+MP sensor? CMOS sensors are cheaper to make, and Canon have just launched one Also any DSLR user would want to be able to use CF cards, microdrives
Vs: digital - a story
There was once a question put to Playboy - one photo enthusiast reader asked if they used soft filters. The answer: no, we use very soft girls. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 13. lokakuuta 2002 15:07 Aihe: Re: digital - a story > >- Original Message - >From: gfen >Subject: Re: digital - a story > > > >> >> Really? I didn't know their centerfolds were LF, that's kinda >neat.. I'd >> actually really like to look at some for, uhm, technical >reasons now, but >> I don't think that answer wouldflyu. > >Getting a bit OT, but I think it is a cool story anyway. >Some years ago, I worked with a fellow here in Regina that had >worked at Playboy in technical support. >For the centerfolds, they were using a custom built Deardorff >which was exactly the size of the double truck centerfold. >The quality is better if you don't enlarge. >Apparently this was how they get the really nice quality that >the centerfolds are known for. >There is no airbrushing done on them, it is all careful >lightning and quality styling and makeup work, contrary to >popular belief. > >William Robb >
Re: Cameron's Pentax Comments
> It is interesting that neither Nikon or Canon produced new lens mounts > for Digital. But Canon did produce a new lens mount when they went to > Auto-Focus. > This in spite of drawbacks inherent in using a smaller than full frame 35mm > sensor > with 35mm lenses. (Just food for thought). I think they always saw the small sensor thing as a stop gap, and probably an advantage to the press photographers who want ease of transmission (snap, plug in, upload) and tend to use longer lenses (so with a small sensor a 28-100 and a100-300 would be enough for 90% of work) with work ending up in newsprint so resolution less of an issue! Notice how they are now pushing full size sensors! If I made money taking photos I'd be buying the new Kodak..
Re: Digital! I got digital!
> I don't have a webpage but I can send you some pictures tomorrow. How > big may the files be? Best quality is ca. 1.8MB. Any size you like, I have DSL and a big mailbox, not sure if there is a max message size... just looking at my inbox and theres a 6.5 meg attachment on one of them. so should be OK thanks!
Re: Digital! I got digital! Long but worth actually reading!
Couldn't think what to snip, so I cut the lot. Any internet discussion group is full of enthusiasts about the topic, I like driving, all the guys on the driving groups are amazingly into driving, and yes, sometimes they have wish lists too! I have an MZ50, it's my first Pentax, my last decent 35mm was a Minolta AL rangefinder that I learned to take pictures with. For me a camera is about the pictures, capturing the moment, not about features, bells and whistles. I need a lens, shutter and media that I can carry anywhere, so I have a flightcased MZ50, 100-300 sigma, 28mm 2.8 pentax and 35-80 pentax, flash, batteries, film, cleaning stuff and a lightweight, cheap and nasty tripod, in the boot of my car. It's small, light and very flexible. I also have a Yashica Microtec zoom 70 P&S, some of my favourite (if not best technically) shots have been taken with that camera over the last 8 years. I now want my P&S to be digital (as I've not printed a film for about a year now, my photography is as digital as it can be!) as it's the camera I use most and it's a pain having to scan and store all those negs. A 3.3MP digital P&S will replace it, and will be more than adequate. I don't want a Canon or Nikon DSLR. I want Pentax to make me one, my lenses are only cheap ones but I would rather use film than throw them away and buy new ones. Current DSLRs are bulky, Pentax have always made compact and lightweight cameras, when, not if, they make a DSLR it will be a typical pentax I'm sure, I'm also sure it'll be full frame, and good value. If they can't make a compact full frame DSLR at a good price now then they will wait until they can, and I will wait with them for a couple of years at least. Technology is a strange business, the high end gets higher and the low end gets cheaper, my 1.7 GHz PC bought this year cost less than the 233MHz one I bought five years ago, electronics get smaller and cheaper with popularity, I have few friends now who do not have some form of digital camera (my video camera for example is digital). I am convinced that in the next two years the high end digital SLR will be 20MP or more in a standard sized Nikon / Canon body, and the entry level SLR will be a 6-10MP in a similar sized body to our current MZ pentax / Dynax minolta with the bare essentials. Remember how much flash memory used to be? Remember how long camcorder batteries didn't last? Two years is a long time in technology, until then I'll keep developing and scanning. As for talking about it, if we didn't talk about, and pentax staff read this list, they might think "Well if the enthusiasts aren't interested we won't bother" I still await my optio 330GS...
Re: Shooting Auroras
Hi Wendy, Wow, a question regarding film! You can just put the camera on auto (LX good choice), or try this, a little guide I made: ASAf stopExposure time 100 1.4 1/4`s Adjust as needed. I`ve had great results with it. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "Wendy Beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:18 AM Subject: Shooting Auroras > Right, > Question for all you out there who do any sort of sky/night time photography. > Is there any rule of thumb for shooting Auroras. > Open the shutter and count to 10 - 20? 30? Set the camera on auto and let > it sit and expose for a few minutes? > I suspect it's all just trial and error but I'd still like some hints. > > tia > Wendy > > Wendy Beard > Ottawa, Canada > http://www.beard-redfern.com > >
Re: Shooting Auroras
This site has a chart! (Some interesting commentary as well). I've never tried this since I live in a very light polluted area and most of my traveling has been mostly in Southerly directions. (At least those times I've gone into less populated places). http://www.ptialaska.net/~hutch/aurora.html At 11:18 AM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Right, >Question for all you out there who do any sort of sky/night time photography. >Is there any rule of thumb for shooting Auroras. >Open the shutter and count to 10 - 20? 30? Set the camera on auto and let >it sit and expose for a few minutes? >I suspect it's all just trial and error but I'd still like some hints. > >tia >Wendy > >Wendy Beard >Ottawa, Canada >http://www.beard-redfern.com >
Re: Shooting Auroras
- Original Message - From: Wendy Beard Subject: Shooting Auroras > Right, > Question for all you out there who do any sort of sky/night time photography. > Is there any rule of thumb for shooting Auroras. > Open the shutter and count to 10 - 20? 30? Set the camera on auto and let > it sit and expose for a few minutes? > I suspect it's all just trial and error but I'd still like some hints. You have an LX if I remember correctly. Put it on a tripod, set the camera on auto with a stop of overexposure compensation (use print film) and open the shutter. The LX is good at this stuff. William Robb
Re: digital - a story
It all depends on the viewing distance. From 10 meters not many. BR - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I wonder how many megabytes it would take to compete with a 20x24 negative. >
RE: Cameron's Pentax Comments
William Robb wrote: > The convention in DSLR development is geared to the user of pro > oriented equipment. This is why the digital SLR bodies have been > based on pro oriented 35mm camera bodies. > Pentax doesn't have a history of pro support, and has no history > at all in the pro 35mm body segment. > We all bought into Pentax knowing what they made, and what they > had a history of making, and what markets they supported, and > what markets they had a history of supporting, and what markets > they had supported at one time and had dropped out of. > Or at least, I did. > Others may have walked in the door with a different set of > expectations. I bought into Pentax wanting the LX, but only having money for the MX. I finally got an LX from encouragement from this list, and 20 years of fault free Pentax ownership. New batteries only. > I think they were kidding themselves. Not me, even my elderly 67 is a winner. > You are asking for a camera from a company that doesn't make and > has never supported cameras in the market niche you are wanting > to buy into, digital or otherwise. A fair point. You must also consider the point that the real money is to be made with the take up of new camera users (90% of new camera sales to under 20s is digital), and maybe they consider what sells now is more important to the company. I know as a film user for an SLR camera, I am in a minority. I haven't put money directly into the hands of Pentax ever. > If, and this is a big if, Pentax chooses to market a DSLR (and I > don't think they will), it will be based on the MZ-5 chassis, > and will not have pro specifications. > If that happens, there won't be any cheering from the peanut > gallery, there will be another collective bitch-out because once > again, Pentax didn't get it right, and has failed their customer > base. > I liked this list a lot more when it was about film and > photography. I thought I had useful stuff to contribute back > then. I would have liked to see another body added for digital use of K-mount lenses. I also realise I can accept the fact that digital is another format, and deal with as appropriate. I agree with you about film topics, but use of 90s/00s computers, film scanners helps gets the pictures up to the PUG, doesn't it;-) I would like the availability of an integrated 35mm system, but I can live without it. I like my film cameras! Malcolm
Re: Cameron's Pentax Comments
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: Cameron's Pentax Comments > On 13 Oct 2002 at 8:56, William Robb wrote: > > > If, and this is a big if, Pentax chooses to market a DSLR (and I > > don't think they will), it will be based on the MZ-5 chassis, > > and will not have pro specifications. > > If that happens, there won't be any cheering from the peanut > > gallery, there will be another collective bitch-out because once > > again, Pentax didn't get it right, and has failed their customer > > base. > > Maybe you are correct about the "pro" spec, but really who gives a sh*t we > don't have a choice, anything is better than what we've got to choose from thus > far. If it's reliable but not as robust as an LX then I just won't do a tv on > it :-) Fer Christs sake Rob, of course I'm correct about the pro spec stuff. You know what Pentax has marketed over the past 4 decades as well as I have. The LX was a one off camera, with no history from the manufacturer of cameras of it's ilk. My experience with them is that you don't have to be a Van Veen to bust the things, you just have to baby them a bit and they will break all on their own. The reason you don't have a choice is because Pentax doesn't make cameras in the category. Never have, and I doubt if they ever will. > > > I liked this list a lot more when it was about film and > > photography. I thought I had useful stuff to contribute back > > then. > > I'm the last person on the list that would claim that what you have to offer is > not extremely useful and appreciated however things have changed in photography > and the scope of comment has to include such changes. It's still the same old > soap-box :-) When the equipment is out there, on the shelves and in peoples hands, the scope of comment will change in a useful manner. Right now, I am not seeing a lot of useful comment on the subject, simply because the subject is about non existent equipment. Let's start a thread about the Popes sex life. It will be about as relevant as Pentax DSLR's William Robb
Re: dslr
"On sale" means in stock in B&H. Using that definition give me a projected date, and I'll suggest a wager. BR - Original Message - From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hmmm. "On sale" is open to interpretation. > > I'm saying officially announced before the first day of summer 2003. > > What are you wagering? > > tv >
Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs)
Better yet -- as undeveloped B&W rolls in canisters... Mishka - Original Message - From: "Bob Rapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:19 AM Subject: Re: A must read! (WAS Re: Digital-only labs) > Imagine a digital gallery where the photographers works are displayed as a > collection of CD-RW/DVD-RW discs. Now that is style! Marked 1 of 500 - > individually signed by the photographer! > > Not on subject, but could not resist. > > Bob > > - Original Message - > From: "Otis Wright, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > And of course, removable disks sitting on the shelf never have any > > problems?? > > > > > >
Re: Cameron's Pentax Comments
On 13 Oct 2002 at 8:56, William Robb wrote: > If, and this is a big if, Pentax chooses to market a DSLR (and I > don't think they will), it will be based on the MZ-5 chassis, > and will not have pro specifications. > If that happens, there won't be any cheering from the peanut > gallery, there will be another collective bitch-out because once > again, Pentax didn't get it right, and has failed their customer > base. Maybe you are correct about the "pro" spec, but really who gives a sh*t we don't have a choice, anything is better than what we've got to choose from thus far. If it's reliable but not as robust as an LX then I just won't do a tv on it :-) > I liked this list a lot more when it was about film and > photography. I thought I had useful stuff to contribute back > then. I'm the last person on the list that would claim that what you have to offer is not extremely useful and appreciated however things have changed in photography and the scope of comment has to include such changes. It's still the same old soap-box :-) Respectfully, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
