Re: Some pictures from PDML UK @ Northumbria
On Tuesday, October 29, 2002, at 01:11 AM, Jostein wrote: Put out some images and text on my site. Hope it does some justice to showing what you missed, folks. Yer should have been there... http://oksne.net Click PDML_UK_III on the menu. The page is somewhat biggish, so be patient while it loads. Jostein Lovely shots Jostein. Great color and very sharp. I particularly liked Lindisfarne castle. Dan Scott
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
Are you still seeing the spots? Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 2:35 AM Subject: Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 > > On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 12:42 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > > > The most amazing thing about the shoot was > > I could see sun spots on the sun thru the finder! > > They didnt show up in the pix however. > > > > > > JCO, > > How did you manage to avoid damaging your retina? Or did you...? > > Dan Scott > >
Some pictures from PDML UK @ Northumbria
Put out some images and text on my site. Hope it does some justice to showing what you missed, folks. Yer should have been there... http://oksne.net Click PDML_UK_III on the menu. The page is somewhat biggish, so be patient while it loads. Jostein
28-135mm f/4.0 zoom
Has anyone ever own or used a Pentax-A 28-135mm f/4.0 macro zoom. I would like to get some feedback on it's quality. Thanks, Glen O'Neal
Re: Prints from slides questions
hi William Probally a dumb question but, do these machines have a lens like a normal darkroom enlarger or is the image made from this laser? Feroze - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 3:11 AM Subject: Re: Prints from slides questions > > - Original Message - > From: Butch Black > Subject: RE: Prints from slides questions > > > > The best results I've seen has been with a well set up Fuji > Frontier > > printing on Fuji Crystal archive paper and running Fuji > chemistry. We have a > > Noritsu 2711 at work and it "hoovers" compared to the > Frontier. The trick is > > to find a lab with one that is well set up, maintained, and > operated by > > someone that knows both photography and photo printing. Stay > away from the > > Ritz's and Wal*Marts on this one. > > The Noritsu 27 series is the first generation of digital printer > from Noritsu. And you are right, they don't do the best job. We > have a 2811 in the system, and it does a lot better. The image > density of the scan has been increased over the 27 series, the > dpi output size has been decreased, and colour gamut is somewhat > expanded. > The 27 series uses a fairly normal LED printing system. The 28 > series uses (this is what the TSR told me) something like a > small disco ball that reflects laser beams to the paper. > With lick, the lab I work in will be equipped with a 31 series > machine (3rd generation printing system) in the not to distant > future. > > William Robb > >
Re: Anybody out there do aerial photography
One time when I was flying Southwest Airlines I stuck my little point-and-shoot right up to the cabin window and took some pictures. That's the closest I've ever come to aerial photography. Have fun on that glider and don't drop your camera. Deb in TX __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
Re: OT Moon corona pic
This is pretty cool. In one sitting I've seen PDML images of both the sun (from JCO) and the moon. Nothing like the internet to give you the celestial tour. How long was your moon exposure? I notice a rainbow effect around the moon. The sky fades from yellow to orange to red on through violet. Is this a digital artifsct or does the light really do that around the moon? In a way, it reminds me of this Astronomy Picture of the Day: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010704.html Deb in TX --- Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Team, > > I though some of you astro buffs might appreciate an > image that I captured a > few nights back: > > http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/PA192767m.JPG > > BTW It's a digi-pic for those with an aversion for > such :-) > > All exposure information can be found embedded in > the file. > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html > __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
Whoa, warn me next time! Now I'm all sunburned. Really, these are nice. You even showed the gold edging on the clouds. I really like the ship, especially the colors. It is a good composition. If you settle for a smaller enlargement, the grain won't be as noticable. Don't worry too much about the underexposure. This is an anonymous freighter making its predawn passage to ports unknown. It would be *wrong* to show it as anything more than a shadow on the deep blue sea. Deb in TX --- "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shot the sunrise Sunday morning about 6:30 AM. > What do you all think of these? > > http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN1WEB.jpg > > http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN2WEB.jpg > > http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN5WEB.jpg > > Not that good, but it was only my first attempt. > > Technical data: > > Pentax Spotmatic SLR > 1000mm F8 Tele-Takumar Lens > Heavy Bogen tripod > Fuji Superia 400 > Pentax digital Spotmeter > 1/1000 @ F16 > Epson 2450 scanner @ 2400 ppi > Levels and gamma adjusted in PS6.0 > Reduced for web > > The most amazing thing about the shoot was > I could see sun spots on the sun thru the finder! > They didnt show up in the pix however. > > Here's another I took before sunrise. > 1/8 at f8 and its still underexposed > unfortunately. I didnt have the guts > to use 1/4 or 1/2 second with a 1000mm lens. > Too grainy. Too bad as I liked the composition. > > http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SHIPWEB.jpg > > JCO > > __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
Re: Screw mount to K mount: A permanent solution.
I've done that! But instead of using a screw to hold the adapter to the lens I used lok-tite (spelling? whatever..) witch basically glued the adapter to the lens. I think I even used the same technique for finding the position of the slot. Instead of a dremel I hand drilled VERY carefully. After all that work I used the lens maybe 5 times before replacing it with a k-mount equivalent. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 8:46 PM Subject: Screw mount to K mount: A permanent solution. > We were discussing the possibility of permanently mounting an > M42 to K-Bayonet adaptor to a screw mount lens some time ago. > On the surface, it is quite an easy modification to make, with > some caveats. > The biggie is that some screw mount lenses don't have a wide > enough base to catch the locking pin on the K-mount camera. > The 17mm fisheye Tak that I wanted to modify has a large enough > base. > The mod is incredibly simple. > You need to remove the spring clip from an M42 adaptor. This is > done simply by removing the screw that holds it on. The adaptor > I used had the spring removed already, so I had to find a > replacement screw to fit. Fortunately, I had dismantled a Nikon > FG-20 some years ago, and had kept a film tin with all the > little screws, so I was able to find a screw fairly easily. > On the adaptor that I used, the screw hole for the spring clip > was not quite drilled all the way through. I just forced a screw > through, enlarging the hole in the process. I then burnished the > metal bits off the inside of the adaptor. > After that, I mounted the adaptor to the lens, and torqued it on > fairly tightly. I just put the whole assembly onto a camera body > and turned it quite tight. > After that, I put the screw into the adaptor, and tightened it > until it locked the lens onto the adaptor. I had to thin down > the screw head a wee bit with the Dremel and a small cutting > wheel. > > The next part is to figure out just where to put the notch in > the lens mount for the pin. > > I decided the best way was to put a bit of ink onto the locking > pin of a dead camera body, and mount the lens while holding the > pin in, then releasing the pin when the lens was mounted. > Depress the lens release and hold it until the lens was off, and > I had a nice little round outline in the lens mount where the > pin wanted to be. > > After that, it was a simple task to cut a small slot into the > mount with a Dremel and a small rotary file that came with the > tool. The Dremel does tend to try to dance around a bit, and I > scored the mount in a couple of places, and I seem to have gone > a tad deeper than I needed to, > > It ain't the prettiest, but it worked, and my 17mm Fisheye Tak > can be mounted just like a K-mount lens. > > William Robb >
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
Yeah, me too. Along with the caps lock. W. At 09:56 AM 29/10/2002 +1100, you wrote: From: "Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The first option i turned off :) - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 9:28 AM Subject: RE: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 > INTERNET EXPLORER 6.0 AUTOMATICALLY > RESIZES PIX TO FIT YOUR SCREEN. > GET IT ITS FREE. > JCO > Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: Problem with Super A and winder
I don't remember what happened exactly, but my Super A/Program with MDA had the same problem many years ago. I remember everything was ok again when the camera was cleaned & lubricated, or was it the MDA? Sorry I can't be more helpful. regards, Alan Chan I bought a used Pentax Super A two months ago, took one roll of pictures with it, and it seems to work fine. I just bought a MEII winder from ebay and it is not working with the Super A. I don't have another body that can use the winder and I am trying to determine if it is the camera or the winder that has a problem. When I push the winder button without attaching the winder to the camera, the winder light comes on and the coupler spins. With the camera in the ready position (winded and turn on), pushing the winder at the single frame setting would take a picture, but does not wind to the next frame. Pressing the winder button again and the winder would only able to wind a portion of a frame. Repeating pressing the winder button would not advance the frame further. I took the winder off the camera and took a look at the coupler on the camera's bottom. I am guessing the the coupler should spin freely until it reaches the next frame, but I am unable to turn it. I winded the camera a few times manually and observe that, the coupler on the camera would spin following the winding lever. For example, when I use my thumb to push the winding lever to the right, the coupler would spin clockwise (with the bottom of the camera facing me). When I return the winding lever back to the ready position, the coupler would spin counterclockwise. Would someone please check if this is normal? Since the winder coupler only spins in one direction, shouldn't the camera's coupler also spin in one direction only? Please help me to diagnose whether the problem is with the winder or the camera. _ Get a speedy connection with MSN Broadband. Join now! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
Problem with Super A and winder
I bought a used Pentax Super A two months ago, took one roll of pictures with it, and it seems to work fine. I just bought a MEII winder from ebay and it is not working with the Super A. I don't have another body that can use the winder and I am trying to determine if it is the camera or the winder that has a problem. When I push the winder button without attaching the winder to the camera, the winder light comes on and the coupler spins. With the camera in the ready position (winded and turn on), pushing the winder at the single frame setting would take a picture, but does not wind to the next frame. Pressing the winder button again and the winder would only able to wind a portion of a frame. Repeating pressing the winder button would not advance the frame further. I took the winder off the camera and took a look at the coupler on the camera's bottom. I am guessing the the coupler should spin freely until it reaches the next frame, but I am unable to turn it. I winded the camera a few times manually and observe that, the coupler on the camera would spin following the winding lever. For example, when I use my thumb to push the winding lever to the right, the coupler would spin clockwise (with the bottom of the camera facing me). When I return the winding lever back to the ready position, the coupler would spin counterclockwise. Would someone please check if this is normal? Since the winder coupler only spins in one direction, shouldn't the camera's coupler also spin in one direction only? Please help me to diagnose whether the problem is with the winder or the camera. Thanks. __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
Re: PDML Server is sending emails to my hottmail Account
BlankFor some reason, the PDML Server has been sending emails to my hotmail Account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Last time this happened was when Doug Brewer was trying to sort out some problems and he contacted me via my hot mail account. James
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
Hi JCO! Well, you where playing with your eyes! The ultraviolet emission of the sun is invisible and undetectable by the naked eye. And while the sun may have been low in the horizon and so, there was more "filtering" from our atmosphere, you could have damaged your eyes. UV damage sometimes can be observed later, when you find some problems on your eyesight. Be very cautious. Good Luck Angel Ramos Arecibo, Puerto Rico Yes, 15 minutes away from the Arecibo Radio Telescope! J. C. O'Connell wrote: 1. it was sunrise, not mid day. sun isnt as bright then. Sun was a deep orange color. 2. the lens was stopped down to f16 so image view was even dimmer. No eye damage. seeing the sun spots was amazing. JCO -Original Message- From: Dan Scott [mailto:daniel559@;directvinternet.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 7:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 12:42 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: The most amazing thing about the shoot was I could see sun spots on the sun thru the finder! They didnt show up in the pix however. JCO, How did you manage to avoid damaging your retina? Or did you...? Dan Scott
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 07:49 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: 1. it was sunrise, not mid day. sun isnt as bright then. Sun was a deep orange color. 2. the lens was stopped down to f16 so image view was even dimmer. No eye damage. seeing the sun spots was amazing. JCO Good. Glad you are smarter than I am. :-) Dan Scott
Re: Re[2]: Prints from slides questions
> I've had better luck with a well set up Agfa D-Lab. I find the Fuji > Crystal Archive paper just a bit too contrasty. But I certainly agree > with staying away from Ritz and Walmart/Sams Club. Pretty much you > have to go with a lab that doesn't cater to people who only care about > the price and actually know how to take pictures. The lab I use > mostly processes sports team photography and weddings/portraits. They > do individual walk in stuff but it costs 3 times more than Sams club. Considering the amount of money we spend to take these images, and the time, and the care, paying a higher price for processing is just plain common sense.
Re[2]: Prints from slides questions
Butch, I've had better luck with a well set up Agfa D-Lab. I find the Fuji Crystal Archive paper just a bit too contrasty. But I certainly agree with staying away from Ritz and Walmart/Sams Club. Pretty much you have to go with a lab that doesn't cater to people who only care about the price and actually know how to take pictures. The lab I use mostly processes sports team photography and weddings/portraits. They do individual walk in stuff but it costs 3 times more than Sams club. Bruce Monday, October 28, 2002, 4:43:10 PM, you wrote: BB> The best results I've seen has been with a well set up Fuji Frontier BB> printing on Fuji Crystal archive paper and running Fuji chemistry. We have a BB> Noritsu 2711 at work and it "hoovers" compared to the Frontier. The trick is BB> to find a lab with one that is well set up, maintained, and operated by BB> someone that knows both photography and photo printing. Stay away from the BB> Ritz's and Wal*Marts on this one. BB> BUTCH BB> "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" BB> Hermann Hesse (Demian) BB> PS Thanks Doug for getting the digest working again
Re: Digital SLR
John, You should take somewhere, have the Nikon removed, have an expert put on Pentax and then take pictures of it and post them to web sites. People will go nuts ;-) - Original Message - From: "John Mustarde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:12 PM Subject: Re: Digital SLR > On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:47:30 +, you wrote: > > >The Pentax DSLR will be a mighty temptation, if only to have that > >glorious word 'Pentax' emblazoned on the front. > > My D100 sports the wonderful Pentax-logo neck strap from a PZ1p. Much > better looking than that Halloween-costume "Nikon Digital" > black-and-yellow thing they give you with the camera. > > I figure I'm only using the Nikon camera to get pixels, which are in > fact Pentax pixels due to the Pentax strap supporting the whole > system. VBG. > > I still think Pentax has one great opportunity here - introduce a DSLR > with the good features of a D100 or D60, but with two important > improvements: better autofocus and significantly lower price. Oh, yeh > - and 1/250 flash sync. > > -- > John Mustarde > www.photolin.com >
Re: Digital SLR
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:47:30 +, you wrote: >The Pentax DSLR will be a mighty temptation, if only to have that >glorious word 'Pentax' emblazoned on the front. My D100 sports the wonderful Pentax-logo neck strap from a PZ1p. Much better looking than that Halloween-costume "Nikon Digital" black-and-yellow thing they give you with the camera. I figure I'm only using the Nikon camera to get pixels, which are in fact Pentax pixels due to the Pentax strap supporting the whole system. VBG. I still think Pentax has one great opportunity here - introduce a DSLR with the good features of a D100 or D60, but with two important improvements: better autofocus and significantly lower price. Oh, yeh - and 1/250 flash sync. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
RE: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
1. it was sunrise, not mid day. sun isnt as bright then. Sun was a deep orange color. 2. the lens was stopped down to f16 so image view was even dimmer. No eye damage. seeing the sun spots was amazing. JCO > -Original Message- > From: Dan Scott [mailto:daniel559@;directvinternet.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 7:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 > > > > On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 12:42 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > > > The most amazing thing about the shoot was > > I could see sun spots on the sun thru the finder! > > They didnt show up in the pix however. > > > > > > JCO, > > How did you manage to avoid damaging your retina? Or did you...? > > Dan Scott >
RE: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
On 28 Oct 2002 at 17:09, Rob Brigham wrote: > The prosumer £2000 models seem to be more 'normal' sized SLRs without > the bulky vertical grip assembly below the lens. The MZ-D had an > integral grip like having the BG-10 permanently attached. I don't think > this makes sense for a cheaper version aimed at non-pros who don't want > a bulky camera. I concur totally with Pal here. I hope the supposed Pentax DSLR is based on the MR-52 chassis, Pentax will be making a big mistake if they head towards a path of unique rechargable batteries, I'd much prefer standard rechargeable AA cells like every other decent DSLR uses. You won't believe how hard these things are on batteries. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Screw mount to K mount: A permanent solution.
We were discussing the possibility of permanently mounting an M42 to K-Bayonet adaptor to a screw mount lens some time ago. On the surface, it is quite an easy modification to make, with some caveats. The biggie is that some screw mount lenses don't have a wide enough base to catch the locking pin on the K-mount camera. The 17mm fisheye Tak that I wanted to modify has a large enough base. The mod is incredibly simple. You need to remove the spring clip from an M42 adaptor. This is done simply by removing the screw that holds it on. The adaptor I used had the spring removed already, so I had to find a replacement screw to fit. Fortunately, I had dismantled a Nikon FG-20 some years ago, and had kept a film tin with all the little screws, so I was able to find a screw fairly easily. On the adaptor that I used, the screw hole for the spring clip was not quite drilled all the way through. I just forced a screw through, enlarging the hole in the process. I then burnished the metal bits off the inside of the adaptor. After that, I mounted the adaptor to the lens, and torqued it on fairly tightly. I just put the whole assembly onto a camera body and turned it quite tight. After that, I put the screw into the adaptor, and tightened it until it locked the lens onto the adaptor. I had to thin down the screw head a wee bit with the Dremel and a small cutting wheel. The next part is to figure out just where to put the notch in the lens mount for the pin. I decided the best way was to put a bit of ink onto the locking pin of a dead camera body, and mount the lens while holding the pin in, then releasing the pin when the lens was mounted. Depress the lens release and hold it until the lens was off, and I had a nice little round outline in the lens mount where the pin wanted to be. After that, it was a simple task to cut a small slot into the mount with a Dremel and a small rotary file that came with the tool. The Dremel does tend to try to dance around a bit, and I scored the mount in a couple of places, and I seem to have gone a tad deeper than I needed to, It ain't the prettiest, but it worked, and my 17mm Fisheye Tak can be mounted just like a K-mount lens. William Robb
Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training
Just in case you guys wanted to know, its 1:30am, its raining and its 24C good thing I have my sweater on, summer is still a month away don't want to catch a cold :) (frank do you lie in the snow before or after taking "anti-freeze") Feroze - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 12:55 AM Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > Normally, when I'm lying in the snow at -20 degrees, I've got so much > "anti-freeze" in me that I'm not feeling much of anything, let alone the > cold... > > -frank > > William Robb wrote: > > > Lying in snow at -20 is generally warmer than standing up > > at -20. > > > > William Robb > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The > pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > > >
Re: Poll: Normal Zooms
Please answer the following 3 questions: 1.) FA24-90/f3.5-4.5 IF&AL FA*28-70/f2.8 AL A35-105/f3.5 2.) What 3rd party zoom lenses covering at least the 40-70mm range would you consider good alternatives? Please name up to 3 3rd party zooms. No choice. Too afraid of flare. 3.) If you were dreaming, what would be your ideal (but realistic) SMC Pentax Zoom lens for k-mount, covering the at least the 40-70mm range? 31-77/2-2.8 (it would probably measure as f2.1 to f2.7...) Cheers! --
RE: LX's auto-flash disabling, why?
William Robb wrote: > I found the LX was at it's worst as a wedding camera because of > the flash failure "feature". Bill, With respect, much as I love my LXs there is a time and a place for 67 operation, and this is it. They love weddings :-) LXs go clack during church use, as I found out to my cost recently.!! Malcolm LX and 67 user - mainly slide.
Re: lens evaluation, et. al.
Issue #3 of Mike Johnston's 37th Frame Newsletter reviewed a number of 35mm lenses (Nikon, Zeiss, Hexanon, Canon, etc.) and I believe Issue #4 will review a number of Pentaxes in case anyone is interested. Any URL? Or it is the video journal (100$ to get 4 issues). If so, any conclusions that can be shared? Andre --
Re: LX's auto-flash disabling, why?
- Original Message - From: andre Subject: LX's auto-flash disabling, why? > >William Robb > > I tend to find myself in that situation once in a while with my LXs. > Even after a CLA. Is it a problem only related to bad contacts > inside the finder or is it due to the the body's electronics? > > Is it a common problem (most bodies have it)? Does it happen > frequently (when it does happen on a body)? Any pattern or random? The LX won't fire the flash unless it is in a full EV or more of underexposure situation. The pattern may appear random, but in fact if you check your exposure meter you can predict fairly well when the flash will be withheld. I found the LX was at it's worst as a wedding camera because of the flash failure "feature". I think the only other Pentax with this particular bug is the Super Program. The MZ-5 that I have works just fine with flash. You can disable the "feature" by covering the left side small contact on the hot shoe. William Robb
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
Hmmyes, that is an expensive throw-away item :) I wasn't thinking straight when I wrote the email. You have to you rechargeable of some kind, not Duracells, even in my tiny 230 it takes less than 5-10s to drain 2AA - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 5:40 PM Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > At about $300 Cdn for batteries for the N D1, no one's tossing used > batteries like cigarettes. > > The batteries are rechargeable. Problem is, a pro out on a shoot will likely > need at least two sets of batteries to get through the day. > > cheers, > frank > > Brad Dobo wrote: > > > Yup, they eat batteries like crazy, photographers will be like cigarette > > smokes, just toss 'em on the ground when ya replace 'em. That's not going > > to help the environment. Overboard? *slightly* > > > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist > fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > >
LX's auto-flash disabling, why?
They could also put in a few hidden bugs, such as auto flash disabling at the least opportune moment , like the LX... William Robb I tend to find myself in that situation once in a while with my LXs. Even after a CLA. Is it a problem only related to bad contacts inside the finder or is it due to the the body's electronics? Is it a common problem (most bodies have it)? Does it happen frequently (when it does happen on a body)? Any pattern or random? Andre --
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
The first option i turned off :) - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 9:28 AM Subject: RE: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 > INTERNET EXPLORER 6.0 AUTOMATICALLY > RESIZES PIX TO FIT YOUR SCREEN. > GET IT ITS FREE. > JCO > > > -Original Message- > > From: Cotty [mailto:cottycam@;mac.com] > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 4:24 PM > > To: Pentax List > > Subject: Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 > > > > > > > > > > >>Shot the sunrise Sunday morning about 6:30 AM. > > >>What do you all think of these? > > >> > > >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN1WEB.jpg > > >> > > >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN2WEB.jpg > > >> > > >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN5WEB.jpg > > >> > > >>Not that good, but it was only my first attempt. > > > > Very nice pics. May I suggest resizing them to fit on a 800X600 monitor? > > I view at 1024X768 but they still spill off my screen. The file size is > > rather large, although great for detail. > > > > Cheers from a 56Kmodem on a 33k line in the middle of the countryside... > > > > ;-) > > > > Cotty > > > > > > Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at > > http://www.macads.co.uk/ > > > > Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! > > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ > > > > >
Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training
Normally, when I'm lying in the snow at -20 degrees, I've got so much "anti-freeze" in me that I'm not feeling much of anything, let alone the cold... -frank William Robb wrote: > Lying in snow at -20 is generally warmer than standing up > at -20. > > William Robb -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training
- Original Message - From: Feroze Kistan Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > Thanks for that, I must say though that > you trully are dedicated to the craft to > get those photographs. I've seen a bit of > snow maybe 3 times in my life. Cannot imagine > how it must be to breathe let alone lie in > snow at -20. Lying in snow at -20 is generally warmer than standing up at -20. William Robb
Re: Pentax ZX-5n, FA Lenses, 500FTZ for Sale, more
Ya don't happen to have a release cable for the MZ-S do ya? ;-) - Original Message - From: "Michael St. Jean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 4:40 PM Subject: Pentax ZX-5n, FA Lenses, 500FTZ for Sale, more
Re[2]: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
On the plus side of my friend's now dead D100 - the battery that comes with it is quite good. He was able to get over 300 shots - some flash and viewing the LCD monitor during shooting. He had bought a spare battery to carry with him on his trip, but never needed it because he didn't shoot more than 300 per day. The battery aspect of the digicam seems to be reasonable, in my opinion. Bruce Monday, October 28, 2002, 2:27:54 PM, you wrote: LP> Battery consumption has never been a real consideration with the digital LP> cameras I use. They are Lithium Ion rechargeables and have plenty of power LP> to carry me through a wedding or any other assignment I get. I top off the LP> charge thhe night before I do the shoot and I have always had plenty of LP> power to spare. LP> Len LP> --- >>From: "Tim S Kemp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR >>Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:59:06 - >> >> >> >> >I agree. Unless Pentax makes a really dumb choice, you're gonna need a >>big >>battery pack. I don't think the smaller sensor >> >makes that much of a difference. >> >>There is little reason why a DSLR would be worse for battery consumption >>than a digital P&S, and there's no winding mechanism so there's more space >>in the body - I would suggest that a 4xAA system would be the best - use >>2xCR-V3 for long disposable use, NiMH for everyday and if you're caught >>short with no power buy some duracells... LP> _ LP> Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN. LP> http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
RE: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
J. C. O'Connell wrote: http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN2WEB.jpg Cracking shot, nice work (and nice equipment). Malcolm
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
At about $300 Cdn for batteries for the N D1, no one's tossing used batteries like cigarettes. The batteries are rechargeable. Problem is, a pro out on a shoot will likely need at least two sets of batteries to get through the day. cheers, frank Brad Dobo wrote: > Yup, they eat batteries like crazy, photographers will be like cigarette > smokes, just toss 'em on the ground when ya replace 'em. That's not going > to help the environment. Overboard? *slightly* > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Anybody out there do aerial photography
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:56 PM, P Temmerman wrote: Question, question, questions. Weather permitting, this weekend I have the chance of fulfilling the life-long dream of going gliding. I think that it will be a fairly short flight maybe only 15 or 20 minutes and my primary goal is to absolutely enjoy it. Having said that, I think that it might be too good of a chance not to take some shots. Ill probably take the MZ-3 but am not sure of lens or film choices. I only want to take 1 lens and can choose from the 20-35, 28-70/4, 43mm or 80-200. Could also get my hands on a 100mm. Perhaps the 20-35 is too wide and the 80-200 is physically too long. Any opinions out there? Go wide. You'll want to remember that "sitting in the cockpit" feeling. Have fun. Dan Scott
RE: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
INTERNET EXPLORER 6.0 AUTOMATICALLY RESIZES PIX TO FIT YOUR SCREEN. GET IT ITS FREE. JCO > -Original Message- > From: Cotty [mailto:cottycam@;mac.com] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 4:24 PM > To: Pentax List > Subject: Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8 > > > > > >>Shot the sunrise Sunday morning about 6:30 AM. > >>What do you all think of these? > >> > >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN1WEB.jpg > >> > >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN2WEB.jpg > >> > >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN5WEB.jpg > >> > >>Not that good, but it was only my first attempt. > > Very nice pics. May I suggest resizing them to fit on a 800X600 monitor? > I view at 1024X768 but they still spill off my screen. The file size is > rather large, although great for detail. > > Cheers from a 56Kmodem on a 33k line in the middle of the countryside... > > ;-) > > Cotty > > > Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at > http://www.macads.co.uk/ > > Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ > >
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
Battery consumption has never been a real consideration with the digital cameras I use. They are Lithium Ion rechargeables and have plenty of power to carry me through a wedding or any other assignment I get. I top off the charge thhe night before I do the shoot and I have always had plenty of power to spare. Len --- From: "Tim S Kemp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:59:06 - >I agree. Unless Pentax makes a really dumb choice, you're gonna need a big battery pack. I don't think the smaller sensor >makes that much of a difference. There is little reason why a DSLR would be worse for battery consumption than a digital P&S, and there's no winding mechanism so there's more space in the body - I would suggest that a 4xAA system would be the best - use 2xCR-V3 for long disposable use, NiMH for everyday and if you're caught short with no power buy some duracells... _ Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
>I agree. Unless Pentax makes a really dumb choice, you're gonna need a big battery pack. I don't think the smaller sensor >makes that much of a difference. There is little reason why a DSLR would be worse for battery consumption than a digital P&S, and there's no winding mechanism so there's more space in the body - I would suggest that a 4xAA system would be the best - use 2xCR-V3 for long disposable use, NiMH for everyday and if you're caught short with no power buy some duracells...
Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things...
>focal plain LOL! Jees I'm sloshed. Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Re: Digital SLR
Hi Lon, Yes, very interesting. I have been wandering in the back of my mind about this, and in a way, I suppose I am trying to subconsciously avoid it at the moment. I think that I am truly wound up too much in getting to know my current DSLR to suddenly chuck it all away and start again. Plus, as a point of principle, I would not consider buying a first generation DSLR. I tell you, I lusted and lusted after a D30, but I strained at the reins, holding back until its successor came along. I'm glad I did. The Pentax DSLR will be a mighty temptation, if only to have that glorious word 'Pentax' emblazoned on the front. At my time of life, with my experiences now, I am not the slightest bit interested in what folk think. I'd much rather carry the Pentax brand about with me rather than the Canon brand. In fact, I've mused with the idea of sticking a 'Pentax' logo over the pentaprism of the D60 just for a laugh, but it would be an injustice for the Pentax name. I'm sure Canonites would reel also. I tend to take most things at face value. I have no experience of the EOS system other than the D60, and what I find is a beautifully engineered machine that does the job it was designed to do, very well indeed. A Pentax camera would have to not only meet the same criteria, but exceed it for me to switch back. What we mustn't forget is that people change over the years. If I could somehow conjure up the original MX/LX design team into today's DSLR R and D, and get them to design the Pentax DSLR, I would buy one site unseen. But it's not the same team who designed the MX/LX, and at the end of the day, it's all about branding, and nothing else. I mean, can you name the head of Pentax? I can't. Nor can I name the head of Canon. They are basically large organisations with ghosts at the helm. We remember the brand name, and the quality (if any) and that's it. Funny how we *do* remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, for example. One of the main reasons I wanted a Mac was because Steve Jobs appeared to be the underdog, and I *love* supporting the underdog. Who doesn't?? With the Pentax DSLR, I will watch, and I will wait. I will gladly see what it's like, and I will make my decisions accordingly. It will take time, and at the moment, I'm having too much fun with the opposition. But if there was a fire, I know which camera I'd grab first on the way out the door. Yep. The MX. (Which is in a LowePro with the D60..) Rambling apres l'Anjou Blanc... I raise my glass to the PDML. *hic* >Cotty, > >This makes me wonder. You have started to stray from the Pentax >fold, not only lusting in your heart for harlot DSLRs, but >actually purchasing one, as I recall. > >Will you repent? Buy the new Pentax, insert your Nikanonlta into >a garbage disposal and turn the knob to "Heavy Shred"? > >Grin. > >-Lon > >Cotty wrote: >> >> >1. I am VERY excited about the announcement reagarding the upcoming >> >announcement of Pentax having a DSLR. (Note, they only stated that they >> >would announce a DSLR in Spring of 2003, not that they'd release one then). >> >> Hi Bill, >> >> I, too, queried this exact point with Pentax.It is my understanding that >> the camera will be announced 'in the spring' [northern hem.] (read: PMA), >> and on the shelves 'a few months later'. I would expect the first trickle >> into the shops June-ish, with most retailers having decent stock >> July/August-ish. This assumes no delays. >> >> HTH >> >> Cotty Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training
Thanks for that, I must say though that you trully are dedicated to the craft to get those photographs. I've seen a bit of snow maybe 3 times in my life. Cannot imagine how it must be to breathe let alone lie in snow at -20. Is the printer trashed or just one cartridge. I normally take the cartridge in soak the head for about 30 sec's in a saucer of boiling water (don't get the little brass squares wet) or until the ink starts running again. Works like a charm and uses less ink than that infernal epson head cleaning thing they put in. The most common reason that the jets block is that you havn't switched on the printer for some time. Your printer should go on at least once every 24 hrs, the machine heast the ink to a certain tempreture which prevent blockages. Maybe its just to cold brrr Feroze - Original Message - From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 2:30 PM Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > I choose one of the built in profiles that come with the Olympus ES10-S. > Usually one of them gives reasonable results with the film I'm using. The > profiles include several for Kodak and Fuji as well as Agfa, but only one > for slide film. I've scanned Kodachrome and Ektachrome and the results have > been fine. > > I can't say much about the printer because its kaput - a jet is blocked. But > I chose one of the selection that gave good results. By good I mean that you > get a print that resembles what you see on the monitor. I sold a lot of > prints of sled dogs and sled dog races. But its a terribly arduous task; > lying in the snow at temperatures that go down to -20C and trying to change > lenses, with gloves on, without filling the camera with snow. It gets much > colder than that here, but my friends don't race when its very cold. A > couple of the dogs appear on my website. In fact the two German pointers > were also printed (A4) and I had some bigger prints made in the city too - > on a Fuji with a digital head, from 12mbyte files. They were reasonably > sharp and the colours were good. > > Don > > Dr E D F Williams > > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery > Updated: March 30, 2002 > > > - Original Message - > From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 12:05 PM > Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > > > > Buts thats just the monitor, how do you set > > the profiles for your scanner, printer, monitor > > to all work together? > > > > Feroze > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 10:38 AM > > Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > > > > > > > Adobe Gamma is used to set the monitor's colour saturation and contrast, > > > red, green and blue channels independently or all together. Its supposed > > to > > > be compatible with Colorsync on the Macintosh. I'll install Corel 10 and > > see > > > what that has to offer. > > > > > > Dr E D F Williams > > > > > > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > > > Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery > > > Updated: March 30, 2002 > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:47 AM > > > Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I understand that. I used the colour management > > > > wizard that came with corel10. When testing the output > > > > (using a colorimeter half the time but mostly pantone > > > > colour charts) its pretty accurate. Is this similar > > > > to the Adobe routine your are using? > > > > > > > > Feroze > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 5:57 PM > > > > Subject: Re: Just say "No" to burn-out Re: Photographic Training > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very different results. Sometimes so different that you wouldn't > > believe > > > > it. > > > > > But its possible - by careful setting up and calibration - to get > > > results > > > > > that are similar. > > > > > > > > > > But even when using the same program and printer all the time its > > vital > > > > that > > > > > all settings be standardised, the correct colour space chosen and > many > > > > other > > > > > things too. All you need do, to make an incredible mess, is check > the > > > > wrong > > > > > box, or leave a choice unmade. List members who are Epson Printer > > > experts > > > > > can tell us much more about this. These mistakes can become very > > > > expensive. > > > > > > > > > > The new Samsung 17" I have just acquired has a Program called > Natural > > > > Color > > > > > that sets up both monitor and printer. This may
Fuji Press 1600 results
Just got back the 4x6's from Saturday's band competition shooting Fuji Press 1600. I'm very pleased with the results. I was using MZ-S/AF360FGZ/Tamron 75-300 on a monopod. Shot at 1/30 with lens open wide and let the flash take care of the exposure since I didn't want the background totally black. Colors are accurate considering part of the exposure was football field flood lights and saturation is excellent for 1600 speed film. Bill
Vs: Favorite Poll
Poll Jensen? All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 28. lokakuuta 2002 20:59 Aihe: Re: Favorite Poll >Nahhh, keep it up. >We love polls. We git to show folks how much >money we spent on lenses that we could have >spent on getting the kids' teeth fixed. > >Grin. > >-Lon > >Arnold Stark wrote: >> >> Norm Baugher schrieb: >> >> > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is...Norm >> >> Two more polls from me (one starting tonight), and then I will stop. >> Promise! >> >> Arnold >
Pentax ZX-5n, FA Lenses, 500FTZ for Sale, more
I may regret this later...but I am streamlining my photography. Back when I had time and money, I "enabled" myself more than necessary. Due in part to all the digital discussion on this list, the digital camera I got my mother (Pentax EI-100) for Christmas (which I have already opened had a blast with), the money spent on film and trips to Wal-Mart for processing, I am selling my film gear and taking the digital plunge. I am simplifying. I really wanted a future digital Pentax body to accommodate the lenses listed below, except I would have to sell the lenses listed below to afford a future digital Pentax body. Catch-22. So here it goes Pentax ZX-5n QD ($225 w/battery,remote) LN Condition w/Box. This is an excellent camera. The ZX-5n is very easy to operate with all the advanced features needed. I have probably run about 70 or so rolls of film through this camera. It still looks and operates as new. Pentax Battery Pack FG LN Condition w/Box. This unit not only powers the camera with 4 AA's, but adds an extra degree of comfort when hand holding the ZX-5n camera, especially with larger lenses mounted. Pentax Remote Release FG LN Condition w/Box. Adds the extra degree of precision when using the macro lens on a tripod mounted ZX-5n. Pentax 500FTZ AutoFlash ($200) LN Condition w/Box and Travel Case. Powerful pro-level TTL flash with bounce, swivel, and zoom. Pentax FA 28/2.8 AL ($125) LN Condition w/Box and Caps. This is a very sharp wide angle lens. It is generally reviewed as one of Pentax's best consumer lenses and one the best 28mm primes available on any system. Pentax FA 50/1.7($100) LN Condition w/Box and Caps. Sharp and fast lens. This is my standard indoor/available light lens. Pentax FA 100/2.8 Macro ($300) LN Condition w/Caps. I bought this from KEH in LN- condition. I spent about 2 minutes examining the lens to find the "-". I finally found a minute silver spot where some black paint has come off a body screw. An excellent, sharp, metal bodied macro lens. Pentax FA 135/2.8 ($200) LN Condition w/Box and Caps. This has been my primary portrait lens. Exceptional build and image quality. Build-in hood. I thought the manual focus ring felt loose, but after checking the Pentax Discussion Group and calling Pentax in Colorado, this is by design for the quick internal autofocus of the camera. Pentax FA 28-105/4.5-5.6($125) Cosmetically Bargain Condition and Optically Excellent w/Caps. I bought this from KEH in Bargain Condition. After using it for a month or so, I noticed a piece of fuzz inside the lens. I dismantled the lens to clean it out and quickly realized how stupid this was and I was in way over my head, so I bundled the whole thing up and sent it to Pentax. They returned it fully re-assembled, cleaned, and lubed. This has been my primary travel lens. Tokina 80-200/2.8 ATX SD($300) LN Condition w/Box, Leather Case, and Caps. Big, fast, and beautiful manual focus lens with tripod collar and hood. I am also including with this lens an expensive Hoya Super Multi-Coated skylight filter (77mm thread) and a Linear Polarizer (77mm thread). I am also including skylight filters (Hoya or Tiffen) for each lens. You can take a look at all this gear at ftp://www.psdri.net/mike Please email me off list with questions or interest. I fully believe that the above prices I am asking are very reasonable for the quality of the equipment and excellent condition I have kept them in. Also, if you are interested, I am running my Super A, Motor A, 280T, and 50/1.7A on ebay at the moment: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1393126149 Thanks Michael St. Jean Director of Technology Pawtucket School Department Pawtucket, RI 02860 Phone: (401) 729-6358 Fax: (401) 729-6498 http://www.psdri.net [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Favorite Poll
Myt favourite poll is in the other room reading. She's okay really ;-) Cotty > >On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 12:07 PM, Norm Baugher wrote: > >> I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... >> Norm >> > >I've always liked totem poles. > >Dan Scott > Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Re: Atlantic Sunrise w/ the 1000mm F8
>>Shot the sunrise Sunday morning about 6:30 AM. >>What do you all think of these? >> >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN1WEB.jpg >> >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN2WEB.jpg >> >>http://jcoconnell.com/temp/1000_SUN5WEB.jpg >> >>Not that good, but it was only my first attempt. Very nice pics. May I suggest resizing them to fit on a 800X600 monitor? I view at 1024X768 but they still spill off my screen. The file size is rather large, although great for detail. Cheers from a 56Kmodem on a 33k line in the middle of the countryside... ;-) Cotty Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things...
In have heard of this (literally). I used to have a Series One Vivitar 70-210 that sounded like a Bakerloo Tube train... >I have heard that one of the problems that zoom lenses can >induce is to blow dust around in the camera body as the lens >changes focal length. >I don't know if there is any truth to it though. >Comments? Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
This oneRe: DSLR, and other things...
Yes, they do indeed, don't know the price however and it doesn't work with the 230. - Original Message - From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 2:00 PM Subject: Re: DSLR, and other things... > > Doesn't one of the Optios have a two hunnered some dollah option > for an underwater housing? When I read that, I actually lusted > for an Optio for an hour, but then pulling out a few KXen and MXen > and stroking their pointy little prism housing heads made me feel > better. > > -Lon > > Dan Scott wrote: > > > > On Sunday, October 27, 2002, at 05:48 PM, Len Paris wrote: > > > > > Was it salt water? Circuit boards in electronic equipment don't like > > > to > > > get wet, or even damp, and if it was salt water that's the worst kind. > > > I'll bet the owners manual specifically says to avoid getting the > > > camera > > > wet. When I am shooting under conditions like that, I use a Yashica T4 > > > Super. Not that it's waterproof, just a lot cheaper to replace. > - snip > > Of course, $600 would probably buy one of those waterproof housings, > > wouldn't it? > - snip > > > > Dan Scott >
Re: DSLR, and other things...
- Original Message - From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 2:00 PM Subject: Re: DSLR, and other things... > > Doesn't one of the Optios have a two hunnered some dollah option > for an underwater housing? When I read that, I actually lusted > for an Optio for an hour, but then pulling out a few KXen and MXen > and stroking their pointy little prism housing heads made me feel > better. > > -Lon > > Dan Scott wrote: > > > > On Sunday, October 27, 2002, at 05:48 PM, Len Paris wrote: > > > > > Was it salt water? Circuit boards in electronic equipment don't like > > > to > > > get wet, or even damp, and if it was salt water that's the worst kind. > > > I'll bet the owners manual specifically says to avoid getting the > > > camera > > > wet. When I am shooting under conditions like that, I use a Yashica T4 > > > Super. Not that it's waterproof, just a lot cheaper to replace. > - snip > > Of course, $600 would probably buy one of those waterproof housings, > > wouldn't it? > - snip > > > > Dan Scott >
Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things...
I don't believe that there is particularly a difference. I think that if the DSLR is weather-proofed the same as the film camera (with electronics) then a similar result WRT invasion by water/etc will cause, er, similar results. What I mean is that a well weather-proofed DSLR should not (IMO) be any better or any worse than a similar model film camera... Cotty >I am a little bothered, however. Modern film cameras have a lot of >electronics, too. Why are digitals especially senstive? Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
Argh.who wants to lug that type of stuff around, camera body only too!! Imagine a good lens and a flash? Ha! Start bulking up guys ;-) - Original Message - From: "Michael Nosal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:47 PM Subject: RE: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > Adding the built-in grip/battery pack to the bottom of the MZ-S adds some > to the height of the MZ-D, and maybe something to the depth (but the right > hand grip on the MZ-S already sticks out pretty far), but I don't think it > would be significantly bigger than any of the models listed above. > > The Nikon D100 takes a big battery pack, same for the D60. (Don't know if > the Sigma has an external battery grip). > > Maybe the battery grip on the MZ-D will be optional, but I don't see them > using a chassis that is smaller than the current MZ-S. > > --Mike > > > > > >
Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things...
Of course. There are protocols for cleaning the CCD. Some DSLRs incorporate a barrier oin front of the CCD, in my case, CMOS. This aids cleaning by enabling removal of dust from a surface other than a CCD (or CMOS), and also providing a resting place for said dust that is not on the focal plain, and therefore not in focus. I have personally yet to see any problems with dust. Certainly I do not expect it to be as bad as the dust that accumulates in the corners of scanned negatives... >Indeed, but dust will rest on the mirror and inside the body, disturbed by >movement of mirror and will make it through shutter, not an issue on a film >camera as the film moves on, but in a DSLR the CCD is there forever, >accumulating dust. Cheers, Cotty Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Re: Anybody out there do aerial photography
My two year old has a Disney T-shirt with a picture of Ariel (Little Mermaid) and she's wearing it in most her recent portraits ... Sorry, that was bad.. Cory Waters not at work today and his mind is wandering toward the absurd - Original Message - From: "P Temmerman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 2:56 PM Subject: Anybody out there do aerial photography > Question, question, questions. > > Weather permitting, this weekend I have the chance of fulfilling the life-long dream of going gliding. I think that it will be a fairly short flight - maybe only 15 or 20 minutes - and my primary goal is to absolutely enjoy it. Having said that, I think that it might be too good of a chance not to take some shots. I'll probably take the MZ-3 but am not sure of lens or film choices. I only want to take 1 lens and can choose from the 20-35, 28-70/4, 43mm or 80-200. Could also get my hands on a 100mm. Perhaps the 20-35 is too wide and the 80-200 is physically too long. Any opinions out there? > > Also - film choices. I generally shoot Velvia or Provia, but would also consider print film for this. Along with film choice - any opinions on filters? I thought that I might take the polarizer but I'm concerned that I might be enjoying the experience too much to actually bother. > > May the weather gods smile on this corner of western Europe (and not blow a gale again..) > > Pat > > Pat Temmerman > [MZ3_fella] > ___ > GO.com Mail > Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com > >
Re: Favorite Poll
Or our favourite object to make fun of. Wich is ever so easy... Jens Bladt schrieb: > Yeah, poll are fine: > How about: > Favorite > -Pentax flash > -3rd party flash > -Slide film > -Portrait film > -all round film > -fast neg. film > -B&W film > -B&W paper > -B&W developer > -flash meter > -picture editor/munipulator > -favorite diggie > -at what price level will you stop buying film and go 100% digital > -favorite mail list > > endless posibilities... > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Lon Williamson [mailto:lonw@;one.net] > Sendt: 28. oktober 2002 21:18 > Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Emne: Re: Favorite Poll > > Nahhh, keep it up. > We love polls. We git to show folks how much > money we spent on lenses that we could have > spent on getting the kids' teeth fixed. > > Grin. > > -Lon > > Arnold Stark wrote: > > > > Norm Baugher schrieb: > > > > > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is...Norm > > > > Two more polls from me (one starting tonight), and then I will stop. > > Promise! > > > > Arnold
Re: Favorite Poll
My favourite 'poll' is private. Sorry ;-) - Original Message - From: "Norm Baugher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:07 PM Subject: Favorite Poll > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... > Norm > >
Re: Favorite Poll
You forgot: Our favourite objects to make fun of. Which is ever so easy. Jens Bladt schrieb > Yeah, poll are fine: > How about: > Favorite > -Pentax flash > -3rd party flash > -Slide film > -Portrait film > -all round film > -fast neg. film > -B&W film > -B&W paper > -B&W developer > -flash meter > -picture editor/munipulator > -favorite diggie > -at what price level will you stop buying film and go 100% digital > -favorite mail list > > endless posibilities... > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Lon Williamson [mailto:lonw@;one.net] > Sendt: 28. oktober 2002 21:18 > Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Emne: Re: Favorite Poll > > Nahhh, keep it up. > We love polls. We git to show folks how much > money we spent on lenses that we could have > spent on getting the kids' teeth fixed. > > > Grin.
Re: For Sale (some cool AF stuff)
Chris, just letting you know I'm interested perhaps. I assume you speak in USD? I'm a Canuck, so double that and it's still a good deal. Questionwhy are you dumping it? It rocks! (I used to own one, don't ask) Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Christopher Lillja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 12:47 PM Subject: For Sale (some cool AF stuff) > Pentax 28-70/4 FA AL excellent Condition $85 > This lens was purchased new in early '01, still nice. Constant F4 > aperture. This one of the Pentax's best zooms in this class, ever. > Optically, many user's rate it up there with the constant F 2.8 > $1000+ zoom.
RE: Favorite Poll
Yeah, poll are fine: How about: Favorite -Pentax flash -3rd party flash -Slide film -Portrait film -all round film -fast neg. film -B&W film -B&W paper -B&W developer -flash meter -picture editor/munipulator -favorite diggie -at what price level will you stop buying film and go 100% digital -favorite mail list endless posibilities... -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Lon Williamson [mailto:lonw@;one.net] Sendt: 28. oktober 2002 21:18 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Favorite Poll Nahhh, keep it up. We love polls. We git to show folks how much money we spent on lenses that we could have spent on getting the kids' teeth fixed. Grin. -Lon Arnold Stark wrote: > > Norm Baugher schrieb: > > > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is...Norm > > Two more polls from me (one starting tonight), and then I will stop. > Promise! > > Arnold
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
- Original Message - From: "Michael Nosal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:45 AM Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > Why? The K-mount is the same size, the mirror box is the same size. The > thing will still need plenty of battery power. The LCD screen still takes > up room. Yup, they eat batteries like crazy, photographers will be like cigarette smokes, just toss 'em on the ground when ya replace 'em. That's not going to help the environment. Overboard? *slightly* This time it is signed, Anon (refer replies to Bruce R.) ;-) > The Canon D30/D60 uses an APS size sensor and it isn't significantly > smaller than the EOS-3. > Olympus's E10/E20 are fairly substantial in size, and their "4/3rds system" > prototype appeared to be the same size. > > --Mike >
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
I hope you are right Rob. I cannot imagine if something breaks in it a year from now. I'll send it away and get it back a year later. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 12:16 PM Subject: RE: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > I don't quite buy this. > > IF the MD-S/MZ-D/MR-52 was designed SOLELY as a digital camera from the > beginning it would be unlikely that the body would be shaped in such a > way to make a film camera sensible. The insides would likely have been > designed in a way that the film gubbins did not sensibly fit. Unless > the change to produce the film version happenned early enough in the > life cycle that the design of the digital body could be altered to > factor this in. But if it happenned this early then the effect wont be > far different to developing them as twins anyway. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Pål Jensen [mailto:paaljensen@;sensewave.com] > > Sent: 28 October 2002 16:33 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > > > > > > Brad wrote: > > > > > I asked this before and was told they were developed as twins, that > > > the MZ-S was not a DSLR that didn't work out and ended up > > being made > > > into a 35mm camera. What's the real story? > > > > The MD-S was developed as a digital camera. Somewhere along > > the way, the bosses decided to make a film version of the > > camera to much dismay of the engineers. So MZ-S didn't figure > > into Pentax long term film slr plans (if they indeed have > > such plans!). > > > > Pål > > > > > > > > >
LX at night - comments please
Finally got a chance to play with the LX at night. Overall, I'm pretty impressed with the low light and OTF metering - I got by taking 2 or 3 of each rather than the 8 or so I was doing with the k1000 in low light. a couple samples are at http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=248862 I'd appreciate a little input on 1 in particular: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1091068&size=lg Part of the problem is my scanner - just not enough range to pick up the details of the slide. I'm planning on paying for a "good" scan later this week. My dilema is: The stray light in the left side is a light leak in the wall. We were staying in a converted 400 year old barn and it was a bit drafty. I think the stray light is distracting, my girlfriend however loves it. Comments? Mike Y
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
It is slowly becoming the latest Optio by the time it comes out. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 12:09 PM Subject: RE: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > The prosumer £2000 models seem to be more 'normal' sized SLRs without > the bulky vertical grip assembly below the lens. The MZ-D had an > integral grip like having the BG-10 permanently attached. I don't think > this makes sense for a cheaper version aimed at non-pros who don't want > a bulky camera. I concur totally with Pal here. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Michael Nosal [mailto:mike.nosal@;divine.com] > > Sent: 28 October 2002 16:46 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > > > > > > At 05:29 PM 10/28/02 +0100, Pål Jensen wrote: > > >I for one would expect a new APS sized CCD digital slr to be > > >significantly > > >smaller than the MR-52 prototype. > > > > > >Pål > > > > Why? The K-mount is the same size, the mirror box is the same > > size. The > > thing will still need plenty of battery power. The LCD screen > > still takes > > up room. > > > > The Canon D30/D60 uses an APS size sensor and it isn't significantly > > smaller than the EOS-3. > > Olympus's E10/E20 are fairly substantial in size, and their > > "4/3rds system" > > prototype appeared to be the same size. > > > > --Mike > > > > >
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
Ah heck, I really should have bought the Nikon F100. It wasn't as if I was tied down to Pentax thru lenses. I can imagine the nightmare getting parts to fix this thing in the future will be. Ya ya, it's a great camera now, enjoy it, yadda yadda, but how about accessories as well in the future? (This from a guy who's working now on nearly 3 months for a simple $&%$ cable release. Peeved Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:33 AM Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > Brad wrote: > > > I asked this before and was told they were developed as twins, that the MZ-S > > was not a DSLR that didn't work out and ended up being made into a 35mm > > camera. What's the real story? > > The MD-S was developed as a digital camera. Somewhere along the way, the bosses decided to make a film version of the camera to much dismay of the engineers. > So MZ-S didn't figure into Pentax long term film slr plans (if they indeed have such plans!). > > Pål > > >
Re: Anybody out there do aerial photography
- Original Message - From: P Temmerman Subject: Anybody out there do aerial photography When ballooning, I think I tried just about every lens from 16mm fisheye right up to 400mm telephoto over the 50 or so flights I have been on. I found the 80-200 to be the most useful lens I own. I found fast print films to be more useful than slide film, but then again, you might find otherwise. I don't know if the polarizer will be useful or not. I never found it to be all that usefull when ballooning. William Robb > Question, question, questions. > > Weather permitting, this weekend I have the chance of fulfilling the life-long dream of going gliding. I think that it will be a fairly short flight - maybe only 15 or 20 minutes - and my primary goal is to absolutely enjoy it. Having said that, I think that it might be too good of a chance not to take some shots. I'll probably take the MZ-3 but am not sure of lens or film choices. I only want to take 1 lens and can choose from the 20-35, 28-70/4, 43mm or 80-200. Could also get my hands on a 100mm. Perhaps the 20-35 is too wide and the 80-200 is physically too long. Any opinions out there? > > Also - film choices. I generally shoot Velvia or Provia, but would also consider print film for this. Along with film choice - any opinions on filters? I thought that I might take the polarizer but I'm concerned that I might be enjoying the experience too much to actually bother. > > May the weather gods smile on this corner of western Europe (and not blow a gale again..)
Re: DSLR and existing lenses at 1.5x
- Original Message - From: Lon Williamson Subject: Re: DSLR and existing lenses at 1.5x > Ahhh... filters beyond my measly Photoshop 5. Ther you go. You want your digital to look like film, just go out and buy some expensive software. Or, go out and buy some film.. William Robb
Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things...
I'm definitely waiting until buying and processing film because too expensive or a hassle. (For more than just reason) Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: "Tim S Kemp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 10:11 AM Subject: Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things... > > > Actually the sensor is far from being exposed: the shutter curtain rests > > in front of the sensor, just as it does on a film SLR, and the mirror > > rests in the down position. > > Indeed, but dust will rest on the mirror and inside the body, disturbed by > movement of mirror and will make it through shutter, not an issue on a film > camera as the film moves on, but in a DSLR the CCD is there forever, > accumulating dust. > >
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
- Original Message - From: Lon Williamson Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > Brother Bruce: > > Repent now for Seduction Of a Pdml'er or Prepareth Yourself > to Defend Wannabe Brother Lon in court when divorce #3409-b > comes up for settlement. Careful Brother Bruce, it sounds like soon-to-be-Brother Lon is preparing for a change of operating systems. Brother William
Re: DSLR, and other things...
What I'm wondering is what you do when first one pixel, then another, then 8 more, then the whole upper left square, of pixels decides to blink out on you. With film, you buy a new roll. With DigiWonderTech, you buy a new camera. -Lon Steve Desjardins wrote: > > I have always read that the F100 did have considerable weather sealing. > So I guess they did use the N80. > > I know that a huge problem with interchangeable lens digital cameras is > the sensor being exposed when the lens comes off. (Sigma actually stuck > a piece of glass in front of their sensor). I guess that would make the > lens body joint particularly sensitive. > Does anyone know if this is normally a very weather sensitive area.? > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
I agree. Unless Pentax makes a really dumb choice, you're gonna need a big battery pack. I don't think the smaller sensor makes that much of a difference. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/28/02 01:47PM >>> At 05:09 PM 10/28/02 +, you wrote: >The prosumer £2000 models seem to be more 'normal' sized SLRs without >the bulky vertical grip assembly below the lens. The MZ-D had an >integral grip like having the BG-10 permanently attached. I don't think >this makes sense for a cheaper version aimed at non-pros who don't want >a bulky camera. I concur totally with Pal here. The MZ-S is already significantly smaller than many of the prosumer models: MZ-S - 136.5 x 95.0 x 64.0mm (5.4 x 3.7 x 2.5 in) EOS-3 (film) - 161 x 119.2 x 70.8 mm (6.3 x 4.7 x 2.8 in. ) D100 - 144 x 116 x 81 mm (5.7 x 4.6 x 3.2 in) Canon D60 - 150 x 107 x 75 mm (5.9 x 4.2 x 3.0 in) Sigma SD9 - 152 x 120 x 79 mm (6 x 4.7 x 3.1 in) Adding the built-in grip/battery pack to the bottom of the MZ-S adds some to the height of the MZ-D, and maybe something to the depth (but the right hand grip on the MZ-S already sticks out pretty far), but I don't think it would be significantly bigger than any of the models listed above. The Nikon D100 takes a big battery pack, same for the D60. (Don't know if the Sigma has an external battery grip). Maybe the battery grip on the MZ-D will be optional, but I don't see them using a chassis that is smaller than the current MZ-S. --Mike
For sale must go...
This is the last chance for anyone who wants this stuff to get it, cause tomorrow it's gone. If you want any of this I need to know by the end of the day, or first thing in the morning. fa 28-70/4- $75 f 35-135/3.5-4.5 macro- $75 af500ftz- $100 af330ftz- $50 fa* 300/4.5 $250 Again, everything works, but it is used. For detailed descriptions, see my original post or email me privately. Thanks -- Nick Wright http://www.wrightfoto.com/
Vs: Vs: Ok, the most stupid question from someone who should know better (ie HELPNEEDED)
Might be - I don´t use much flash and my memory is not the most dependable. My Z-20 did not do it however, I always chose the slowest handholdable speed manually. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 27. lokakuuta 2002 23:30 Aihe: Re: Vs: Ok, the most stupid question from someone who should know better (ie HELPNEEDED) >Raimo, > >My ZX-10 does this also. I would be mildly suprised if the ZX-5n >doesn't. I think it is the standard way all Pentax (and most other >brands) handle program TTL. > > >Bruce > > > >Sunday, October 27, 2002, 1:35:55 PM, you wrote: > >RK> IIRC only MZ-S does this and my MZ-5n did not. This takes into account as much >available light as possible - IMO a Good Thing because it results in flash pictures >with available light feeling. If >RK> you do not like it, select your favourite aperture/shutter speed manually.. >RK> All the best! >RK> Raimo >RK> Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho >
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
This danged brotherhood stuff is ticking me off. I decided long ago to stick with Pentax 35mm, and you 6x7 folks just keep hurling up the "big neg" arguement, and I want a 6x7 but I want a 300 f4 for K mount even more. Damn, this group is expensive. Grin. -Lon Paul Stenquist wrote: > > Someone wrote: > > > Pentax isn't in the business of professional anything. They sell to > > whoever buys it. There's a common misconception that MF is Pentax > > professional line. It isn't. > > Someone should tell all those big dollar pros who shot automotive > location photos for the car companies. Many of them, perhaps the > majority, are using the Pentax 6x7. But I guess it's not professional > until the people who talk about cameras on the internet decide that it qualifies. > Paul Stenquist
Re: Re[2]: DSLR, and other things...
On Monday, Oct 28, 2002, at 12:30 America/New_York, Steve Desjardins wrote: I know the sensor itself is senstive, but it's behind a few things. When a fim camera gets splashed, does a lot of water get on the film? I have to profess my ignorance here. I do know that the first time I picked up a digital back, I felt a little nervous to come face to face with the CCD array itself. I mean --- psychologically I expected it to be protected in some way because of the huge price tag. I certainly wasn't going to let *anything* fall onto that chip! The comforting thing is that it is apparently more rugged than you'd think. The dealer told me a story of how someone dropped it and the chip survived, but the anti-moire filter broke and had to be replaced. The filter wasn't cheap, but it's still only a fraction of the cost of the chip. So who knows? Maybe it is ok with a little bit of moisture (although I'm sure it degrades the images and how do you clean the water marks off the surface after that?), but nobody is taking any chances. --jc
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:11 PM, Lon Williamson wrote: Brad, in the field I clean my glasses a LOT more than I clean my lenses. In fact, my lenses tend to get a bit of breath before mounting, mebbe a swipe with once a month, and a careful sit-down cleaning about once a year or whenever the heck I feel like it. But the glasses get cleaned OFTEN in the field. -Lon Fortunately, I can still shoot with my glasses off as long as the diopter switch is all the way to the right. The backsides of my lenses get checked for dust when I swap 'em. Haven't had to clean my son's fingerprints or cake * frosting off the front element since I showed him how to focus and hold the camera properly. Dan Scott *77/1.8, imagine the look of surprise on my face.
Re: Favorite Poll
My personal favorite is the null poll. Len --- From: Norm Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Favorite Poll Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:07:35 -0800 I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... Norm _ Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
Re: A good argument for buying a film scanner
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:08 PM, Dr E D F Williams wrote: I use negative film too, because my scanner doesn't like dense film either. In fact its impossible to scan a slide with dense areas. Incidentally - I processed a twelfth roll in chemicals (Tetenal C-41) that should have been discarded after eight this morning and it looks great. Its also 9 weeks old. The colours are fine. I took some shots of one of Aino's cacti that is flowering extravagantly yesterday and holding up an actual flower, against the image on the monitor, shows very faithful colour reproduction. If anyone is interested I'll post an image or two. I used the P30t, the Sigma 50/2.8 Macro and that flash contraption. I too am a mean old fart. Dr E D F Williams Interested. Dan Scott
Re: Digital SLR
Cotty, This makes me wonder. You have started to stray from the Pentax fold, not only lusting in your heart for harlot DSLRs, but actually purchasing one, as I recall. Will you repent? Buy the new Pentax, insert your Nikanonlta into a garbage disposal and turn the knob to "Heavy Shred"? Grin. -Lon Cotty wrote: > > >1. I am VERY excited about the announcement reagarding the upcoming > >announcement of Pentax having a DSLR. (Note, they only stated that they > >would announce a DSLR in Spring of 2003, not that they'd release one then). > > Hi Bill, > > I, too, queried this exact point with Pentax.It is my understanding that > the camera will be announced 'in the spring' [northern hem.] (read: PMA), > and on the shelves 'a few months later'. I would expect the first trickle > into the shops June-ish, with most retailers having decent stock > July/August-ish. This assumes no delays. > > HTH > > Cotty > > > Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at > http://www.macads.co.uk/ > > Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ >
Re: A good argument for buying a film scanner
I use negative film too, because my scanner doesn't like dense film either. In fact its impossible to scan a slide with dense areas. Incidentally - I processed a twelfth roll in chemicals (Tetenal C-41) that should have been discarded after eight this morning and it looks great. Its also 9 weeks old. The colours are fine. I took some shots of one of Aino's cacti that is flowering extravagantly yesterday and holding up an actual flower, against the image on the monitor, shows very faithful colour reproduction. If anyone is interested I'll post an image or two. I used the P30t, the Sigma 50/2.8 Macro and that flash contraption. I too am a mean old fart. Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: Re: A good argument for buying a film scanner > I'd love to be able to agree. I think this probably depends on the scanner. > My Pacific Image Primefilm 3600 "Pro" does a decent job on slides provided > there is not dark detail to wring out. It poops all over dark slides, but > then I got it for about $500. Its limitations have turned me into a die-hard > negative film shooter, which I purty much was before I bought it. I mean, > used Pentaxes are _cheap_, Gold 100 is _cheap_, and I'm a _cheap_ ole fart... > > -Lon > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I hear you Paul. This summer I did a lot of work for a client and used print > > exclusively for many of the same reasons you mention. I don't find scanning > > negs any easier than slides though. In fact, I think I like my scanned slides > > better than the negs, but the nice thing about having a film scanner is it no > > longer really matters if its slide or negs. The end result (digital image or > > print) is more or less the same. > > Vic >
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
Brad, in the field I clean my glasses a LOT more than I clean my lenses. In fact, my lenses tend to get a bit of breath before mounting, mebbe a swipe with once a month, and a careful sit-down cleaning about once a year or whenever the heck I feel like it. But the glasses get cleaned OFTEN in the field. -Lon Brad Dobo wrote: > snip > > Now, viewfinder again. I also wear glasses, just normal, not bi-focals or > such. It has the same diopter range as the MZ-5n, and it does not allow me > to use the viewfinder without my glasses. So it's no better there, and > while they provide the eyecup for these cameras, I tend to get streaks and > what not on my glasses, which are at any time, annoying, and have to > constantly clean my glasses. I don't know if I've help you a lot. I find > it far better than the MZ-5n, but as to the questions you specifically > asked, I'm not sure it's much of an improvement. > > Brad Dobo
Re: Favorite Poll
- Original Message - From: Norm Baugher Subject: Favorite Poll > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... > Norm Mine would be Anna Marek WW
Re: Poll: Normal Zooms
I really appreciate Arnold's polls. I am trying to get a decent kit together, and the polls are very useful for me. Thanks Arnold! Michael Cross Arnold Stark wrote: This is not the last poll that I will start here, but it is the last before the last one. The last one will be on telephoto zooms. After that there will have been 12 polls on all kinds of lenses available in k-mount. Those who think these polls are boring or who even consider them a nuisance, please remember that these polls can help everybody who wants to buy a lens for his k-mount camera. I received several emails who appriciated this. BTW: My favourite poles are the north and south ones (especially if magnetic) Now. Please answer the following 3 questions: 1.) Imagine that you urgently need a zoom for your k-mount camera which covers at least the focal lengths 40 to 70mm. Imagine further, that you have more than enough money to spend on such a zoom. Now imagine, that you enter a shop which has plenty of new and used Pentax glass. What are the 3 SMC Pentax zooms (1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice) that you would like to pick most? FA24-90/f3.5-4.5 IF&AL FA*28-70/f2.8 AL FA28-70/f4 AL A28-80/f3.5-4.5 F28-80/f3.5-4.5 FA28-80/f3.5-4.7 FA28-80/f3.5-5.6 AL FA28-105/f3.2-4.5 IF&AL FA28-105/f4-5.6 FA28-105/f4-5.6 IF A28-135/f4 FA28-200/f3.8-5.6 IF&AL AF35-70/f2.8 (for ME-F) M35-70/f2.8-3.5 A35-70/f3.5-4.5 F35-70/f3.5-4.5 A35-70/f4 A35-80/f4-5.6 F35-80/f4-5.6 FA35-80/f4-5.6 A35-105/f3.5 F35-105/f4-5.6 A35-135/f3.5-4.5 F35-135/f3.5-4.5 A35-210/f3.5-4.5 M40-80/f2.8-4 2.) What 3rd party zoom lenses covering at least the 40-70mm range would you consider good alternatives? Please name up to 3 3rd party zooms. 3.) If you were dreaming, what would be your ideal (but realistic) SMC Pentax Zoom lens for k-mount, covering the at least the 40-70mm range? Have fun with these polls, and thanks in advance for contributing! Arnold
Re: DSLR and existing lenses at 1.5x
I don't see photoshop's Noise filters simulating grain except for very low resolution scans. Have you a magic filter I don't know about? Herb Chong wrote: > > Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >That is a nice shot, I like the color, sharpness, but I can't seem to > find a way to like that smoothness. I've seen a lot of people praise > that aspect of digital. But it bothers me and it frustrates me that I > can't articulate why. > > Could this be one of those "vinyl vs. cd" issues? > > Dan Scott< > > i don't want grain unless i want it. you can add it in with Photoshop > easily, and as much as you like. i'd rather not have it unless i want to be > retro. there are special computer video filters that age the images to look > like old film. > > Herb
Re: DSLR and existing lenses at 1.5x
Dan Scott wrote: > That is a nice shot, I like the color, sharpness, but I can't seem to > find a way to like that smoothness. I've seen a lot of people praise > that aspect of digital. But it bothers me and it frustrates me that I > can't articulate why. > > Could this be one of those "vinyl vs. cd" issues? > > Dan Scott Yup, I like grain and grit myself, Dan. JUST WHEN they git all the danged kinks worked out of Wonderful Film, some danged upstart Digital WonderBoy has to try and change the playing field rules. Makes ya want to start drinking lots of cheap wine, or (even better) collecting "worthless" old film cameras. -Lon
RE: Favorite Poll
You see, the French claim she was... (surprise, surprise) French :) Lukasz (a "poll" himself ;) -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 7:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Favorite Poll Norm Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... >Norm Marie Curie. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Re: DSLR, and other things...
Doesn't one of the Optios have a two hunnered some dollah option for an underwater housing? When I read that, I actually lusted for an Optio for an hour, but then pulling out a few KXen and MXen and stroking their pointy little prism housing heads made me feel better. -Lon Dan Scott wrote: > > On Sunday, October 27, 2002, at 05:48 PM, Len Paris wrote: > > > Was it salt water? Circuit boards in electronic equipment don't like > > to > > get wet, or even damp, and if it was salt water that's the worst kind. > > I'll bet the owners manual specifically says to avoid getting the > > camera > > wet. When I am shooting under conditions like that, I use a Yashica T4 > > Super. Not that it's waterproof, just a lot cheaper to replace. - snip > Of course, $600 would probably buy one of those waterproof housings, > wouldn't it? - snip > > Dan Scott
Re: Poll: Normal Zooms
on 28.10.02 19:32, Arnold Stark at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Arnold, my choices: > 1.) FA24-90/f3.5-4.5 IF&AL FA*28-70/f2.8 AL FA28-105/f3.2-4.5 IF&AL > 2.) What 3rd party zoom lenses covering at least the 40-70mm range would > you consider good alternatives? Please name up to 3 3rd party zooms. Tokina ATX-PRO 28-70/2.8 SV Sigma 24-70/2.8 EX DF Sigma 28-135/3.8-5.6 Macro Aspherical IF > 3.) If you were dreaming, what would be your ideal (but realistic) SMC > Pentax Zoom lens for k-mount, covering the at least the 40-70mm range? FA*28-70/f2.8 AL & IF & USM FA 24-105/4 (or 3.5-4.5) AL & IF & USM > Have fun with these polls, and thanks in advance for contributing! Thanks for all your heavy efforts to manage all these polls! -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: A good argument for buying a film scanner
I'd love to be able to agree. I think this probably depends on the scanner. My Pacific Image Primefilm 3600 "Pro" does a decent job on slides provided there is not dark detail to wring out. It poops all over dark slides, but then I got it for about $500. Its limitations have turned me into a die-hard negative film shooter, which I purty much was before I bought it. I mean, used Pentaxes are _cheap_, Gold 100 is _cheap_, and I'm a _cheap_ ole fart... -Lon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I hear you Paul. This summer I did a lot of work for a client and used print > exclusively for many of the same reasons you mention. I don't find scanning > negs any easier than slides though. In fact, I think I like my scanned slides > better than the negs, but the nice thing about having a film scanner is it no > longer really matters if its slide or negs. The end result (digital image or > print) is more or less the same. > Vic
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen Subject: Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR > William wrote: > > > Absolutely. Whoever wrote that needs to give their head a shake. > > Nonsense. Pentax doesn't do any marketing towards professional use (or amateur for that matter). They sell to whomever buys it. I suppose Nikon and Canon are more cliqueey about whom they sell F5s, EOS1s and what ever the heck they are calling their digital flavour of the month? Get real, if you have the cash, they aren't checking for pro credentials at the camera counter. > > > As much as I disparage Pentax service, their medium format > > service to me has always been top drawer. > > Totally professional. > > The fact is that Pentax doesn't have "professional" MF service at all. They have service and they make no distinction between MF or 35mm gear. Professionals, however, get speeded service whether its the Z-1p or 67. All a pro really wants is expedited service in the event the equipment goes into the shop. If they are doing that for the pro, then they are giving pro service, whether they call it a pro division or not doesn't really matter. You are right about the marketing, but admit it, they are consistent across the board with it. I can't believe I just defended Pentax service, William Robb > > Pål > > >
RE: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
At 05:09 PM 10/28/02 +, you wrote: The prosumer £2000 models seem to be more 'normal' sized SLRs without the bulky vertical grip assembly below the lens. The MZ-D had an integral grip like having the BG-10 permanently attached. I don't think this makes sense for a cheaper version aimed at non-pros who don't want a bulky camera. I concur totally with Pal here. The MZ-S is already significantly smaller than many of the prosumer models: MZ-S - 136.5 x 95.0 x 64.0mm (5.4 x 3.7 x 2.5 in) EOS-3 (film) - 161 x 119.2 x 70.8 mm (6.3 x 4.7 x 2.8 in. ) D100 - 144 x 116 x 81 mm (5.7 x 4.6 x 3.2 in) Canon D60 - 150 x 107 x 75 mm (5.9 x 4.2 x 3.0 in) Sigma SD9 - 152 x 120 x 79 mm (6 x 4.7 x 3.1 in) Adding the built-in grip/battery pack to the bottom of the MZ-S adds some to the height of the MZ-D, and maybe something to the depth (but the right hand grip on the MZ-S already sticks out pretty far), but I don't think it would be significantly bigger than any of the models listed above. The Nikon D100 takes a big battery pack, same for the D60. (Don't know if the Sigma has an external battery grip). Maybe the battery grip on the MZ-D will be optional, but I don't see them using a chassis that is smaller than the current MZ-S. --Mike
Re: Favorite Poll
Norm Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... >Norm Marie Curie. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Poll: Normal Zooms
This is not the last poll that I will start here, but it is the last before the last one. The last one will be on telephoto zooms. After that there will have been 12 polls on all kinds of lenses available in k-mount. Those who think these polls are boring or who even consider them a nuisance, please remember that these polls can help everybody who wants to buy a lens for his k-mount camera. I received several emails who appriciated this. BTW: My favourite poles are the north and south ones (especially if magnetic) Now. Please answer the following 3 questions: 1.) Imagine that you urgently need a zoom for your k-mount camera which covers at least the focal lengths 40 to 70mm. Imagine further, that you have more than enough money to spend on such a zoom. Now imagine, that you enter a shop which has plenty of new and used Pentax glass. What are the 3 SMC Pentax zooms (1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice) that you would like to pick most? FA24-90/f3.5-4.5 IF&AL FA*28-70/f2.8 AL FA28-70/f4 AL A28-80/f3.5-4.5 F28-80/f3.5-4.5 FA28-80/f3.5-4.7 FA28-80/f3.5-5.6 AL FA28-105/f3.2-4.5 IF&AL FA28-105/f4-5.6 FA28-105/f4-5.6 IF A28-135/f4 FA28-200/f3.8-5.6 IF&AL AF35-70/f2.8 (for ME-F) M35-70/f2.8-3.5 A35-70/f3.5-4.5 F35-70/f3.5-4.5 A35-70/f4 A35-80/f4-5.6 F35-80/f4-5.6 FA35-80/f4-5.6 A35-105/f3.5 F35-105/f4-5.6 A35-135/f3.5-4.5 F35-135/f3.5-4.5 A35-210/f3.5-4.5 M40-80/f2.8-4 2.) What 3rd party zoom lenses covering at least the 40-70mm range would you consider good alternatives? Please name up to 3 3rd party zooms. 3.) If you were dreaming, what would be your ideal (but realistic) SMC Pentax Zoom lens for k-mount, covering the at least the 40-70mm range? Have fun with these polls, and thanks in advance for contributing! Arnold
Re: Travel Kit
Thanks to all for your responses. Wow! If a little question like mine can stir up emotions imagine what a bigger question or a statement claiming something or another can do? Anyway, the lenses I mentioned are exactly what I own and what I will be bringing. I will be home-based for my trip so I can leave extra lenses at home and just bring what I need for day trips. Don't have time to get bigger glass and the funds aren't exactly kicking in either so I'll have to make do with what I have and just try to add faster glass in the future. I am bringing a tripod though so that will help. As far as film is concerned for slides I am only bringing 100 speed film (Provia 100F) and will probably push it one more stop if I need to (more likely I would have to). I do have Superia Xtra in ISO 400 and 800 for grab shots and P&S camera shots. I am also bringing B&W film (ISO 100 & 400) just in case I want to photograph in black & white. Filters (warming, polarizer, orange, red) are in the bag. Again, thank you for your tips. Francis M. Alviar Irvine, CA Paul Stenquist wrote: Okay it's just nonsense. The writer of the original message had asked if we thought his lens selection was correct FOR HIM. Like most of us, he probably can't afford the ultra fast glass. Those are the lenses he owns. His choice was correct. They are not too slow to produce great pictures. Bob Walkden wrote: > > Hi, > > >> The primes other than the 50 are too slow, although the focal lengths aregood. > > > Pretentious nonsense. For the majority of situations, these lenses are > > fast enough. > > You can call it nonsense if you like, but you've no right to call it > pretentious, which is a gratuitous insult and a good way to get > another flame war started. I have quite a lot of experience of travel > photography. I made it explicit in my post that I was speaking for > myself, and everything I wrote is based on my personal experience of > travel photography during the last 25 years. If you don't like it then > fine, but don't call it pretentious. > > --- > > Bob > > Friday, October 25, 2002, 9:26:30 PM, you wrote: > > > In reference to a travel kit that includes: > >> > 28mm f/3.5 > >> > 50mm f/1.4 > >> > 105mm f/2.8 macro > >> > 200mm f/4 > > > Bob Walkden wrote: > >> > >> The primes other than the 50 are too slow, although the focal lengths aregood. > > > Pretentious nonsense. For the majority of situations, these lenses are > > fast enough. Most of us can't afford ultra-fast glass. In any case, how > > often does one shoot in extremely low light with a 200? And the SMC > > 200/4 is an excellent lens. When shooting with the 28, a shutter speed > > of 1/15 or 1/30 is quite manageable. And that's easy to achieve at 3.5 > > with most films and lighting conditions. No, they're not premium lenses, > > but they'll take fine pictures. Hell, I've even shot in the dead of > > night with my M 200/4. See >http://www.portfolios.com/zoom.wga?User_number=stenquist&imagecount=15 > > They're not as fast as the big money, big glass. But they're not "too slow." __ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
Re: Favorite Poll
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 12:07 PM, Norm Baugher wrote: I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... Norm I've always liked totem poles. Dan Scott
RE: Favorite Poll
10 ft. > -Original Message- > From: Norm Baugher [mailto:nbaugher@;earthlink.net] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:08 PM > To: Pentax > Subject: Favorite Poll > > > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... > Norm > >
RE: Favorite Poll
And a poll to see what poll you would like done next? > -Original Message- > From: Arnold Stark [mailto:pdml@;arnoldstark.de] > Sent: 28 October 2002 18:18 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Favorite Poll > > > Norm Baugher schrieb: > > > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll > is...Norm > > Two more polls from me (one starting tonight), and then I > will stop. Promise! > > Arnold > >
Re: Favorite Poll
Norm Baugher schrieb: > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is...Norm Two more polls from me (one starting tonight), and then I will stop. Promise! Arnold
RE: Digital SLR
Great anecdote BTW, no wonder Pentax DSLR's do not sell well in Canada. As far as I know, there was never made *any*! Regards Jens PS: None was sold in Europe either... -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Michael Nosal [mailto:mike.nosal@;divine.com] Sendt: 28. oktober 2002 17:24 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Digital SLR At 09:13 AM 10/28/02 -0600, Dan Scott wrote: >Well, c'mon Brad. Current sales of Pentax DSLRs have been extremely poor. >You don't expect Pentax Cananda to import products that don't sell well, >do you? ;-) > >Dan Scott This reminds me of an anecdote, told by Harvey Mackay in one of his books, which goes something like this: There was a shoe company, and they wanted to expand their sales. They send a salesman to the heart of Africa. After a couple of weeks, he writes back to the head office: "Business is terrible. Send me home. No luck at all. The people here don't even wear shoes!" Well, the company decides to give it one more try, so they send their top salesman to Africa. After a couple of weeks, he writes back to the head office : "Business is great! Send me more shoes. *No* competition at all! Nobody here owns *any* shoes!" --Mike
Re: Favorite Poll
On 28 Oct 2002 at 10:07, Norm Baugher wrote: > I'd just like to take a poll to see what your favorite poll is... Norm Definitely this one! Gabor
