FS: SMC-FA* 80-200f2,8 (PZ)

[Jermann Dieter]

mind, with lens hood, protection filter, original box and lens case (soft bag)

USD (or Euro) 1150.- plus shipping

cheers Dieter

__
Hinni AG
Dieter Jermann
Gewerbestrasse 18
4105 Biel-Benken
Tel: 061 726 6600
Fax: 061 726 6611
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Gary J Sibio]

At 07:46 PM 11/11/2002 -0600, you wrote:

William,

   As with all PUG themes, a bit of 'artistic creativity' may be 
necessary to participate.  For instance, if I didn't have a pet, I might 
decide to take a photo of a friends pet, a family members pet, or just go 
to a pet store and take a picture of an animal that I WISH I had as a pet 
. . . now all I need to do is find a petstore that sells Bison . . .


So you want a home where the buffalo roam.


Gary J Sibio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/

What if squirrels are really the first line in an attack by
extraterrestrials and our dogs are trying to warn us???

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Gary J Sibio]

At 08:16 PM 11/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:



(I went out and purcahsed her a 180g tank for that fish after the 55g
split its bottom seam into my living room, oooh, memories)


Wow. And I thought it was a mess when my daughters' snapping turtle knocked 
over a rock and took out the bottom of a 20 gallon tank.


Gary J Sibio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/

What if squirrels are really the first line in an attack by
extraterrestrials and our dogs are trying to warn us???

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Gary J Sibio]

At 05:08 PM 11/11/2002 -0600, you wrote:

We don't all have a pet.


William Robb


Two solutions come to mind:

1) Photograph someone else's pet.

2) Go outside and get a pet rock.


Gary J Sibio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/

What if squirrels are really the first line in an attack by
extraterrestrials and our dogs are trying to warn us???

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[William Robb]

- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams
Subject: Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?


> Nor do we all have a digital camera. What about 'Digital'.
Does a scanned
> film that has been manipulated digitally count as 'digital'?

Think of the "Digital" them as my little joke on all of you.
HAR!!!

William (the former PUG Guy) Robb

DIY: MZ-S / ZX-L cable switch

[Simon King]

Hi All,
Some time ago I posted about a MZ-6 / ZX-L cable release "Cable Switch
CS-205". They changed the socket on the MZ-6 (Why? Anyone know?) from the
rest of the MZ range.

Anyway, because I couldn't bring myself to shell out $80AU for a plug and a
switch I've ended up making my own. I've wrote some instructions at;
http://members.iinet.net.au/~celsim/mz6/cablerelease.htm 

But they really should live somewhere along with other cable release
information and/or FAQ. Any suggestions for a permanent residence?
Cheers,
Simon

PS
All voltages are shown in Australian Volts. This may vary from countries
where your voltages are not metric. Please check with your electrical
supplier for clarification. Also, note that electrons move counter clockwise
in the southern hemisphere - this may reverse the polarities, depending on
where you live.

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: Dr E D F Williams 
Subject: Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro


> Mafud was intelligent and still is - I think.

He sure was fun for a session of bear baiting.
WW

Re: Christmas cards

[Dr E D F Williams]

I do the whole thing using Photoshop. Before I lost faith in that disgusting
Epson Photo 750 I printed them, six to an A4 sheet, and mounted them on
card. Now only those folk who have who have email connections, and can
handle HTML, get cards from us. That's everyone (221) in my address book.

Some of the cards turned out rather well.

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: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 2:24 AM
Subject: Re: Christmas cards


> Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Hi All,
> >I noticed that Don mentioned taking pictures for a Christmas card. I've
been
> >thinking of making some this year.
> >Do other PDMLer do this? If so, any hints or tips?
>
> I've done it. Used one of the pre-packages card kits. Actually, the cards
> were for some friends of my S.O. who did a Sierra Club trip out West a
> couple of years ago and made friends with some Navaho people on the
> reservation. They're pretty strapped for money (to put it mildly) so we
made
> Christmas cards for them. They emailed me photos and I tweaked them in
> Photoshop and blew up a bit with Genuine Fractals (they were pretty small
> files). Came out quite nice.
>
> --
> Mark Roberts
> www.robertstech.com
> Photography and writing
>

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Dr E D F Williams]

Nor do we all have a digital camera. What about 'Digital'. Does a scanned
film that has been manipulated digitally count as 'digital'?

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: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 1:08 AM
Subject: Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?


>
> - Original Message -
> From: Vic
>
>
> Subject: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?
>
>
> > Might be an idea to do a whole month of our pets
>
> This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but
> The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,
> within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.
> I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
> of inclusivity.
> A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
> We don't all have a pet.
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

[Dr E D F Williams]

Mafud was intelligent and still is - I think.

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: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 12:38 AM
Subject: Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro


> I sort of miss Mafud, but Kirkland Ramsey is another story. Much more
> belligerent I'd say. I'm still not sure they were one and the same,
> although some evidence seemed to suggest that.
> Paul
> 
> Bob Walkden wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > Anybody who has two email accounts subscribed to the pdml,
> > > and uses one to respond to his comments from the other
> > > is way over the top for me.
> > 
snipped.

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[eactivist]

In a message dated 11/12/2002 12:36:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> my fish shots at http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/Random/Fish.htm 

[snip]

> basically, patience and a little knowledge of how to push 
> digital film made
> the difference.
> 
> Herb

Well, they are beautiful. But, boy, the patience required. Whew.

Doe aka Marnie

Re: Christmas cards

[Jim Apilado]

I look for something interesting to use for a Christmas card.  The picture
for this season's card was taken last May when "Kows for Kids" was in town.
I slapped a Santa cap on the head of a blue face "kow"  and took a close up
of it. When I had the card made up on couple of weeks ago I had this printed
on it: "Moo" ry Christmas and Happy "Moo" Year.
Another season I had a large stuffed frog wearing a Santa cap and gazing up
at a computer screen.  On the screen it said "Happy Holidays!  Kiss me
quick?"

Jim A.

> From: Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 08:08:10 +0800
> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Christmas cards
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:08:21 -0500
> 
> Hi All,
> I noticed that Don mentioned taking pictures for a Christmas card. I've been
> thinking of making some this year.
> Do other PDMLer do this? If so, any hints or tips?
> 
> Cheers,
> Simon
> 
> Dr E D F Williams wrote:
>> in time for new pictures for this year's Christmas card.
> 
> 
> 

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Herb Chong]

my fish shots at http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/Random/Fish.htm are the
result of a lot of patience more than anything else. most of these fish
were at one time or another in my 50 gallon tank. i guess that is about
180l for those who are not in the US. only dscn0436.jpg is not from that
tank. all these pictures were taken with my Nikon Coolpix 950 digital
camera, a 2 megapixel model. i no longer own the camera.

first problem to solve was getting a lot of even light. i have two
twin-tube florescent light fixtures on top of the tank with a total of 4
30W high output bulbs installed. i think that there was about 1000 lux
worth of light going into the tank. all other light was turned off so i
would not get any reflections from the glass. the next problem was CCD
sensitivity. the 950 allows setting to a maximum of ISO 400 and that is
what i did. that's not enough. i set exposure compensation to -2 stops.
basically, that gave me ISO 1600 digital film to shoot with.

after that, it was lots and lots of patience. these 15 pictures represent
about 600 pictures worth of shooting, probably about 10 hours total time
sitting in front of the tank. lots of times, the fish moved enough to
hopelessly blur the picture. very few of the shots were taken with shutter
speeds as fast as 1/30s. i had to shoot in macro mode to get large enough
pictures. also, i had to sit very still because too much movement scares
the fish. i never was able to get any decent pictures of my clown loaches
because they are too skittish. the fish in the pictures on the site are
basically pretty calm about things that don't move quickly near them.

after loading them on the computer, i had to apply Photoshop's auto
contrast to stretch the brightness range back to something reasonable. this
is much the same as push processing without some of the nonlinearity
headaches of film. yes, there is a noise problem, but as you can see, it is
less than people might imagine. i didn't have to do much to the color
because the lamps i use are designed to simulate a 6700K light source.
next, because even in the cleanest aquarium with real fish and plants in
it, there is a lot of debris and air bubbles that catch the light. i had to
edit them out by cloning over them.  there are a couple of hot pixels in
the CCD that had to be cloned over too.

basically, patience and a little knowledge of how to push digital film made
the difference.

Herb

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Treena Harp]

Cool. :) Thanks.

- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?


> On Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:22:00 -0600
> "Treena Harp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > And here I was, hoping for lots and lots of beautiful kitties ...
(sniff,
> > sniff)
>
> http://ratemykitten.com
>
> Kevin
>
>
> --
> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
> See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> Kevin Waterson
> Byron Bay, Australia
>

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Treena Harp]

I could be wrong, but I think that would be another mailing list, entirely.

- Original Message - 
From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM
Subject: RE: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?


> > -Original Message-
> > From: Norm Baugher [mailto:nbaugher@;earthlink.net]
> > 
> > 
> > I personally have never done anyone's pet.
> 
> Livestock?
> 
> tv
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [OT] I'm back :)

[Jeff]

In a few months, that puppy will have the cat for breakfast.

Jeff.

- Original Message - 
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)


> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: William Robb 
> Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)
> 
> Bill, you big old dork. That link won't get anyone anywhere.
> Idiot.
> Fool.
> 
> http://www.reginakennelclub.ca/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html
> 
> 
> William Robb
> 
> > 
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: Lon Williamson 
> > Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)
> > 
> > 
> > > Does this mean you slam any cute lil' kitty pix posted
> > > on PUG?  Grin.
> > 
> > Find me a kitty picture cuter than this..
> > 
> > file:///J:/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html
> > 
> > Pentax content:
> > Shot on a Zoom 105 Super
> > 
> > 
> > William Robb
> > 
> > 
> 

RE: AF140c

[Shaun Canning]

They wouldn't mail to Australia Thierry. The person I spoke too was rude and
very unhelpful.

Cheers

Shaun Canning
Archaeology Department
La Trobe University, Bundoora,
Victoria, 3086.

Phone: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: titides [mailto:titides@;wanadoo.fr]
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2002 2:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: AF140c

I've got it, but I was doing photos in the nigth (for frogs)

you know my web site :)
(in french : ce sont les crapauds fait en pleine nuit donc Z1 + FA 100
macro + AF 140 C)

and photo.lu ? too expensive ?

thierry


Shaun Canning a écrit:

>Has anybody used an AF140c ring flash recently? I am interested to see some
>results from the ring flash and an FA 100mm f2.8 macro.
>
>Cheers
>
>Shaun Canning
>Archaeology Department
>La Trobe University, Bundoora,
>Victoria, 3086.
>
>Phone: 0414-967 644
>e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>

Re: AF140c

[titides]

I've got it, but I was doing photos in the nigth (for frogs)

you know my web site :)
(in french : ce sont les crapauds fait en pleine nuit donc Z1 + FA 100 
macro + AF 140 C)

and photo.lu ? too expensive ?

thierry


Shaun Canning a écrit:

Has anybody used an AF140c ring flash recently? I am interested to see some
results from the ring flash and an FA 100mm f2.8 macro.

Cheers

Shaun Canning
Archaeology Department
La Trobe University, Bundoora,
Victoria, 3086.

Phone: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



 

RE: Christmas cards

[Amita Guha]

I haven't done Xmas cards, but I did the cover of my wedding invitations
by applying a filter to a photo in Photoshop to make it look like a
painting. It came out great. I know a couple of people who make all
their cards at home. You can get great results with a standard inkjet
printer and some decent paper or cardstock. Good luck!

--Amita

RE: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Norm Baugher [mailto:nbaugher@;earthlink.net]
> 
> tom wrote:
> 
> >>-Original Message-
> >>From: Norm Baugher [mailto:nbaugher@;earthlink.net]
> >>
> >>
> >>I personally have never done anyone's pet.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Livestock?
> >  
> >
> No, but are you going to share something with us Tom?

Just checking.

tv

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Keith Whaley]

Dan Scott wrote:
> 
> On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 08:19  PM, Alan Chan wrote:
> 
> >> I can tolerate the "whirring" feel on the F* 300/4.5, but I really
> >> don't like it on most of the other "clutchless" autofocus lenses
> >> I've tried.
> >
> > Since you brought up this issue, my Limited lenses have been becoming
> > noiser, so to my F*300/4.5. This is entirely you fault.  ;-)
> >
> > regards,
> > Alan Chan

 
> I've been thinking about my 77/1.8 and it feels less whirry to me than
> it used to when it was new. Still has that "ball bearings in a race"
> feel to it, buy not as whirry.
> 
> Is it possible for these things to get better as they age?
> 
> Dan Scott

< Big smile...? I'm seventy two, and my wife thinks so...What more do
you want? >

keith whaley ~ Pentaxian

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Alan Chan]

Is it possible for these things to get better as they age?


Certainly, everything wears out eventually, only if you live long enough to 
see that day.  8-)

regards,
Alan Chan

_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Fred]

> Since you brought up this issue, my Limited lenses have been
> becoming noiser, so to my F*300/4.5. This is entirely you fault.
> ;-)

Sorry, Alan.  ;-)

Fred

RE: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Alan Chan]

I don't suppose it would be shared on a dish... sorry can't resist.

PS: I am not a dog butcher.

regards,
Alan Chan


I'm happy to share my dog with anyone who wants himanywhere, anytime,
anyplace for any reason... all 125 pounds of him



_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Dan Scott]

On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 08:19  PM, Alan Chan wrote:


I can tolerate the "whirring" feel on the F* 300/4.5, but I really
don't like it on most of the other "clutchless" autofocus lenses
I've tried.


Since you brought up this issue, my Limited lenses have been becoming 
noiser, so to my F*300/4.5. This is entirely you fault.  ;-)

regards,
Alan Chan



I've been thinking about my 77/1.8 and it feels less whirry to me than 
it used to when it was new. Still has that "ball bearings in a race" 
feel to it, buy not as whirry.

Is it possible for these things to get better as they age?

Dan Scott

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Alan Chan]

I could train a cockroach for a few days, would he qualify :-)


May I assume you will have a few cockroach flying shots too?  :)

regards,
Alan Chan

_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Norm Baugher]

tom wrote:


-Original Message-
From: Norm Baugher [mailto:nbaugher@;earthlink.net]


I personally have never done anyone's pet.
   


Livestock?
 

No, but are you going to share something with us Tom?

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Alan Chan]

Interesting. I wasn't aware of any lack of sharpness in Provia 100F, but 
I've only recently tried it to any great extent. I've been an Ektachrome 
user for many years, but in my reply I was trying to be even handed and 
mentioned both Ektachme and Fuji variants. Which transparency film provides 
the most apparent sharpness?


I wouldn't use any 100ISO film (for lens testing). Particuarly not Provia 
100F; a film that trade sharpness for fine grain.

My limited experience with Provia 100F is similar to Pal too. Very very fine 
grain, but not as sharp as other slides like Velvia 50 or Sensia 100 when 
viewed under a loupe or scanned them at 2820dpi. Perhaps the difference is 
contrast?

regards,
Alan Chan

_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Alan Chan]

Something like the discontinued Ektar 25 I think?

regards,
Alan Chan


Perhaps "outside the mainstream" is a poor choice of words. But I would
think that for lens testing, one would want a film of average contrast
and saturation, so that differences are more readily apparent.
Paul



_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Dan Scott]

On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 06:13  PM, Herb Chong wrote:


here are some of mine.

http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/Random/Fish.htm

Herb...



Nice shots Herb. What's your setup for shooting fish?

Dan Scott

AF140c

[Shaun Canning]

Has anybody used an AF140c ring flash recently? I am interested to see some
results from the ring flash and an FA 100mm f2.8 macro.

Cheers

Shaun Canning
Archaeology Department
La Trobe University, Bundoora,
Victoria, 3086.

Phone: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Norm Baugher [mailto:nbaugher@;earthlink.net]
> 
> 
> I personally have never done anyone's pet.

Livestock?

tv

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Dan Scott]

On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 06:18  PM, Rob Studdert wrote:


On 11 Nov 2002 at 17:08, William Robb wrote:


I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
of inclusivity.
A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
We don't all have a pet.


I could train a cockroach for a few days, would he qualify :-)

Rob Studdert



You'd have to cuddle. Pets and pet owners cuddle. What would you train 
him to do?

Dan Scott

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Alan Chan]

I can tolerate the "whirring" feel on the F* 300/4.5, but I really
don't like it on most of the other "clutchless" autofocus lenses
I've tried.


Since you brought up this issue, my Limited lenses have been becoming 
noiser, so to my F*300/4.5. This is entirely you fault.  ;-)

regards,
Alan Chan

_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Christian Skofteland]

On Monday 11 November 2002 19:13, Herb Chong wrote:
> here are some of mine.
>
> http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/Random/Fish.htm
>
> Herb...

Those are nice shots!  What technique do you use.  My Oscars are a bit bigger 
than your fish and I've had issues (lots of issues) trying to photograph them.

Christian

Re: DC PDML Outing #4 (was RE: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro)

[Christian Skofteland]

> So, for those anti-socialites who failed to show up, you missed a good
> time.
>
> tv

OUCH!

I did see Geoff and Wendy this afternoon at ACE dropping off a truckload of 
film.  Tom, I'm surprised you didn't scare him away from there! ;-)

Christian

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Herb Chong]

here are some of mine.

http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/Random/Fish.htm

Herb...

FS: 135/1.8 & 85/1.4

[JTodd19261]

135/1.8 A*   near mint$1200
85/1.4  A*Ex+ $850
200/2.8 A*   near mint$600

Please contact me off list for more info.  Thanks.

Jay

Christmas cards

[Simon King]

Hi All,
I noticed that Don mentioned taking pictures for a Christmas card. I've been
thinking of making some this year.
Do other PDMLer do this? If so, any hints or tips?

Cheers,
Simon

Dr E D F Williams wrote:
> in time for new pictures for this year's Christmas card.

DC PDML Outing #4 (was RE: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro)

[tom]

 -Original Message-
> From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:pnstenquist@;comcast.net]
>
>
> I sort of miss Mafud, but Kirkland Ramsey is another story.
> Much more
> belligerent I'd say.

Just a little note supporting the argument that the *vast* majority of
PDMLers are decent folks...yesterday the DC chapter of the PDML got
together down at the Smithsonian for Kennerly's "Photo du Jour"
exhibit. Geoff Moes, Wendy, Mark Lindamood and myself showed up. I've
already stated that Geoff and Wendy are pretty good folks (I really
meant it in Wendy's case, HAR!), and it turns out, not surprisingly,
that Mark's a good guy too. I had a good time hanging out with them.

While some of us weren't blown away by the Kennerly photos, everyone
seemed to enjoy the L.A. shots, and agreed that the print quality was
outstanding.

All the prints (except maybe the giant 60x70's) were printed on warm
toned fiber. They weren't dry-mounted, so some were a bit wavy, which
bothers me.

Afterwards we walked to Chinatown, took a few pics here and there and
found some dim sum.

So, for those anti-socialites who failed to show up, you missed a good
time.

tv

Re: Way OT (MPG video capture)

[Steve Larson]

Hi Len,
 Thanks for the info, will check it out now. 
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message - 
From: "Len Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 3:50 PM
Subject: RE: Way OT (MPG video capture)


> Yes you can. That subject was covered fairly thoroughly on TechTV very
> recently.  Check their web site at:
> 
>   http://www.techtv.com
> 
> Look in the archives of the "Screensavers" or "Call For Help" programs.
> 
> Involves having a video capture card and a program that will convert the
> capture to MPEG format.
> 
> Len
> ---
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steve Larson [mailto:stevenlarson@;adelphia.net] 
> > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 5:20 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Way OT (MPG video capture)
> > 
> > 
> > Hi All,
> >  Sorry for the "off topic", but I can`t seem to get a real 
> > answer from anyone, and the PDML has some pretty smart 
> > cookies onboard.  Anyone know if I can take a video camera 
> > tape and convert it to an MPeg? Also, from that MPeg can you 
> > save a still photo from it? Are there programs out there that 
> > can do these things? Reply to stevenlarson@adelphia,net  so 
> > the list doesn`t get clogged up. Many thanks, Steve Larson 
> > Redondo Beach, California
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

Re: OT: sliding away?

[Herb Chong]

Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Guys if you have limited experience with photoshop, I highly recommend 
photodeluxe which is also made by adobe and comes free with many decent
Epson 
printers and various scanners. It really is simple to use and guides you 
through most steps with ease. It can do most of what photoshop can do 
(including layers) and generally do it easier (at least for beginners) Once

you get good at it, set it on advanced mode and it's even closer to
photoshop.

Vic 
<

although not discontinued yet, Photodeluxe is pretty close to being.
Photoshop Elements is the replacement.

Herb

Re: OT: sliding away?

[Herb Chong]

Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>You really should do yourself a favour and learn to do more with
photoshop. 
It is an incredible tool. In fact, I would say it is one of my most
valuable 
pieces of photographic equipment I have.I spend a lot of time just playing 
with it and learning various techniques etc. If you are lucky enough to
have 
a version you may as well get the most out of it...
Vic <

look online at Amazon. there are at least two books only on photo
retouching using Photoshop and almost all of the rest have something to say
about it.

Herb

RE: Way OT (MPG video capture)

[Len Paris]

Yes you can. That subject was covered fairly thoroughly on TechTV very
recently.  Check their web site at:

  http://www.techtv.com

Look in the archives of the "Screensavers" or "Call For Help" programs.

Involves having a video capture card and a program that will convert the
capture to MPEG format.

Len
---

> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Larson [mailto:stevenlarson@;adelphia.net] 
> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 5:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Way OT (MPG video capture)
> 
> 
> Hi All,
>  Sorry for the "off topic", but I can`t seem to get a real 
> answer from anyone, and the PDML has some pretty smart 
> cookies onboard.  Anyone know if I can take a video camera 
> tape and convert it to an MPeg? Also, from that MPeg can you 
> save a still photo from it? Are there programs out there that 
> can do these things? Reply to stevenlarson@adelphia,net  so 
> the list doesn`t get clogged up. Many thanks, Steve Larson 
> Redondo Beach, California
> 
> 

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Ken Archer]

Well let's see.  There are four-legged pets and two-legged (bird-like) 
pets.  There are two-legged human pets and don't forget pet rocks 
and  Everybody has to have some kind of pet even if it's just a pet 
peeve.

On Monday 11 November 2002 11:08 pm, William Robb wrote:
> This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but
> The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,
> within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.
> I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
> of inclusivity.
> A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
> We don't all have a pet.
>
> William Robb

-- 
Kenneth Archer, San Antonio, Texas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re[2]: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Bob Walkden]

Hi,

like this, you mean?

http://www.peterfetterman.com/artists/hopkins/hopkins_pic02.html

---

 Bob  

Monday, November 11, 2002, 11:14:28 PM, you wrote:

> We have allowed everyone to "interpret" the theme for themselves in the
> past.  If one truely doesn't have a pet, a little imagination might lead
> them to a more interesting subject than a lot of beautiful dogs and vile
> cats.

> Dan

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[frank theriault]

Or legless, if ya likes fishies or snakes...

Len Paris wrote:

> How about two-legged pets?
>

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Christian Skofteland]

> "Daniel J. Matyola" wrote:
> > We have allowed everyone to "interpret" the theme for themselves in the
> > past.  If one truely doesn't have a pet, a little imagination might lead
> > them to a more interesting subject than a lot of beautiful dogs and vile
> > cats.


My imagination leads me into some interesting ideas for the term "pet"

Christian

RE: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Len Paris]

How about two-legged pets?

Len
---

> -Original Message-
> From: frank theriault [mailto:knarf.theriault@;sympatico.ca] 
> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 5:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?
> 
> 
> I hear ya, but it doesn't have to be the photographer's pet.  
> I don't know about other places, but around here, you can't 
> walk down the street without seeing someone walking a dog, 
> cat (really!), ferret, parrot or whatever.  Surely that would 
> give rise to plenty of photo ops for those who don't wait 
> hand and foot on an animal in their home.  You could do your 
> pet (how bad does that sound? ) or someone else's...
> 
> regards,
> frank
> 
> William Robb wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but 
> The PUG, as 
> > I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible, within 
> the scope of 
> > it being a Pentax equipment website. I recall a few ideas 
> being shot 
> > down for the PUG due to the lack of inclusivity.
> > A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
> > We don't all have a pet.
> >
> > William Robb
> 
> --
> "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. 
> The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
> 
> 
> 

RE: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Shaun Canning]

I'm happy to share my dog with anyone who wants himanywhere, anytime,
anyplace for any reason... all 125 pounds of him

Cheers

Shaun Canning
Archaeology Department
La Trobe University, Bundoora,
Victoria, 3086.

Phone: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Pentxuser@;aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2002 10:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?


In a message dated 11/11/02 6:05:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but

The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,

within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.

I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack

of inclusivity.

A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.

We don't all have a pet.


William Robb

 >>

Yes this is true...sad but true...
Vic

RE: Help! M42 to K adapter-get it off my ZX-5n, please

[Shaun Canning]

If all else fails, hit everything within arms reach with said
pipe-wrench

:):):):)

Cheers

Shaun Canning
Archaeology Department
La Trobe University, Bundoora,
Victoria, 3086.

Phone: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Debra Wilborn [mailto:mechadebzilla@;yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2002 10:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help! M42 to K adapter-get it off my ZX-5n, please

Well, dude, since yer in Texas, I can give you my
ultra-hick solutions.  Pitch the little tool and find
a pipe wrench.  Return the adapter and tell the shop
it's too tight.  Or, take a steel file to the adapter
until it does fit.

Deb in TX (booger-free)


--- Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My screwmount to kmount adapter just came from B&H.
>
> Screwed it on to the Jupiter-9, no problem. Put that
> on the ZX-5n,
> pretty iffy, can't tell if it's on all the way or
> not cause the focus
> scale isn't really lined up where it should be.
>
> Go to take the lens off and try again, the lens
> comes off alright, but
> the adapter is fast on the ZX-5n. The tool that
> comes with the adpater
> turns it a little, but not enough.
>
> Anyone have this happen before? Tell me you didn't
> have to take it to a
> service center to get it off, please...
>
> Dan Scott (boogered in Texas)
>


__
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2

Way OT (MPG video capture)

[Steve Larson]

Hi All,
 Sorry for the "off topic", but I can`t seem to get a real answer from
anyone, and the PDML has some pretty smart cookies onboard.
 Anyone know if I can take a video camera tape and convert it to
an MPeg? Also, from that MPeg can you save a still photo from it?
Are there programs out there that can do these things?
Reply to stevenlarson@adelphia,net  so the list doesn`t get
clogged up.
Many thanks,
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[frank theriault]

Hey, Dan,

Didn't you mean "interPET"?

Sorry, I know that was a bad one...  

-frank

"Daniel J. Matyola" wrote:

> We have allowed everyone to "interpret" the theme for themselves in the
> past.  If one truely doesn't have a pet, a little imagination might lead
> them to a more interesting subject than a lot of beautiful dogs and vile
> cats.
>

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Rob Studdert]

On 11 Nov 2002 at 17:08, William Robb wrote:

> I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
> of inclusivity.
> A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
> We don't all have a pet.

I could train a cockroach for a few days, would he qualify :-)

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html

RE: [OT] I'm back :)

[Len Paris]

Erm, how do we get to your J: drive?

Len
---

> -Original Message-
> From: William Robb [mailto:w_robb@;accesscomm.ca] 
> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 4:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: Lon Williamson 
> Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)
> 
> 
> > Does this mean you slam any cute lil' kitty pix posted
> > on PUG?  Grin.
> 
> Find me a kitty picture cuter than this..
> 
file:///J:/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html

Pentax content:
Shot on a Zoom 105 Super


William Robb

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[frank theriault]

I hear ya, but it doesn't have to be the photographer's pet.  I don't
know about other places, but around here, you can't walk down the street
without seeing someone walking a dog, cat (really!), ferret, parrot or
whatever.  Surely that would give rise to plenty of photo ops for those
who don't wait hand and foot on an animal in their home.  You could do
your pet (how bad does that sound? ) or someone else's...

regards,
frank

William Robb wrote:

>
>
> This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but
> The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,
> within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.
> I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
> of inclusivity.
> A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
> We don't all have a pet.
>
> William Robb

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Daniel J. Matyola]

We have allowed everyone to "interpret" the theme for themselves in the
past.  If one truely doesn't have a pet, a little imagination might lead
them to a more interesting subject than a lot of beautiful dogs and vile
cats.

Dan

William Robb wrote:

> This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but
> The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,
> within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.
> I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
> of inclusivity.
> A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
> We don't all have a pet.
>
> William Robb

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Pentxuser]

In a message dated 11/11/02 6:05:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but

The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,

within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.

I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack

of inclusivity.

A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.

We don't all have a pet.


William Robb

 >>

Yes this is true...sad but true...
Vic 

Hey Mishka!

[frank theriault]

I got your e-mail re:  wanting to contribute something towards Tom.  I
just sent a couple of e-mails out to the list of those interested, but
yours keeps getting bounced.

Could you send me another e-mail off-list so I can update my address
book?

thanks,
frank

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: Help! M42 to K adapter-get it off my ZX-5n, please

[Debra Wilborn]

Well, dude, since yer in Texas, I can give you my
ultra-hick solutions.  Pitch the little tool and find
a pipe wrench.  Return the adapter and tell the shop
it's too tight.  Or, take a steel file to the adapter
until it does fit.

Deb in TX (booger-free)


--- Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My screwmount to kmount adapter just came from B&H.
> 
> Screwed it on to the Jupiter-9, no problem. Put that
> on the ZX-5n, 
> pretty iffy, can't tell if it's on all the way or
> not cause the focus 
> scale isn't really lined up where it should be.
> 
> Go to take the lens off and try again, the lens
> comes off alright, but 
> the adapter is fast on the ZX-5n. The tool that
> comes with the adpater 
> turns it a little, but not enough.
> 
> Anyone have this happen before? Tell me you didn't
> have to take it to a 
> service center to get it off, please...
> 
> Dan Scott (boogered in Texas)
> 


__
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

[Norm Baugher]

William Robb wrote:
Matt Grene. Publisher of Bio-Agrinetics, or some such. 

Re: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[William Robb]

- Original Message -
From: Vic


Subject: Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?


> Might be an idea to do a whole month of our pets

This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but
The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,
within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.
I recall a few ideas being shot down for the PUG due to the lack
of inclusivity.
A pets gallery may fall under that umbrella.
We don't all have a pet.

William Robb

Re: What do you carry with you

[Dan Scott]

On Thursday, November 7, 2002, at 01:21  AM, Brad Dobo wrote:


Is this directed to me or the person that typee the > > I keep a 
tripod in
the trunk.?



It was directed at Eleanor.

Dan Scott

Re: VS1 35-85/2.8 Lens Images

[John Mustarde]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2002 10:42:21 -0500, you wrote:

>Prompted by a recent thread involving the Vivitar Series 1 35-85/2.8
>lens and its modification for newer K-mount bodies, I'm providing
>some images involving this lens:
>
>Here are two VS1 35-85/2.8's, the left one of which shows the extra
>baffle, while the right one has been modified:
>

I modified the baffle on my Vivitar Series 1 90-180/4.5 macro much the
same way you did the VS1 35-85. I used a thin file as the cutting
tool, and also left the hump at the aperture lever.

--
John Mustarde
www.photolin.com

Re: [OT] I'm back :)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: Shaun Canning 
Subject: RE: [OT] I'm back :)


> URL no good William. 

Ya, I know...
http://www.reginakennelclub.ca/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html

DOH!!

William Robb

Re: [OT] I'm back :)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: William Kane 
Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)


> Hmmm,
> 
>My computer doesn't appear to HAVE a J drive . ..

HAR!!

http://www.reginakennelclub.ca/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html

Teach me to send a URL out from a website I am working on.

William Robb

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

[Feroze Kistan]

Maybe more. I have a catalogue dated 2000
that lists a SMC FA* Macro 200mm f/4.0 ED(IF)
and a SMC A* Macro 200mm f/4.0 but no 24-90
or 31mm limited and thats the most recent one
I have

Feroze
- Original Message -
From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 4:37 AM
Subject: Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*


> Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >I actually do remember us having this conversation.  What a mind!
Anyhow,
> I'm just looking now and I don't see a date at all.  Since it's missing a
> Macro and the FA 24-90mm we know it isn't up to date.  Nice to have one
> that
> was though eh?
>
> Brad.<
>
> sounds like it is the same as the one i have. there is no 31mm Limited
> either, right? it's close to 2 years out of date.
>
> Herb...
>
>

Have we ever done people's pets on PUG?

[Pentxuser]

Might be an idea to do a whole month of our pets
Vic 

Re: OT: sliding away?

[Pentxuser]

In a message dated 11/11/02 10:05:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last
few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels
to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned
how to correctly resize images and DPI for printing.

Is there more to photoshop? Oh yeah.
Do I need to learn it? Nope. I can do everything I need to, and it was
actually pretty easy to learn. >>

You really should do yourself a favour and learn to do more with photoshop. 
It is an incredible tool. In fact, I would say it is one of my most valuable 
pieces of photographic equipment I have.I spend a lot of time just playing 
with it and learning various techniques etc. If you are lucky enough to have 
a version you may as well get the most out of it...
Vic 

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Pål Jensen]

Paul wrote:

> Interesting. I wasn't aware of any lack of sharpness in Provia 100F, but
> I've only recently tried it to any great extent.


Its a controversial issue but many apart from me also find the film somewhat fuzzy. 
Like someone has been applying a softening filter. It has high resolution though. I 
suspect the film has low accutance and thats whats makes it "soft".


 I've been an Ektachrome
> user for many years, but in my reply I was trying to be even handed and
> mentioned both Ektachme and Fuji variants. Which transparency film
> provides the most apparent sharpness? 

Kodachrome offer the most apparent sharpness follwed by Velvia.

Pål

Greywolf Update II

[frank theriault]

Hi,

I just sent out an e-mail to everyone who contacted me on or off-list,
who's interested in contributing a few dollars to send to Tom.  If you
didn't get an off-list e-mail from me with the subject line "Greywolf
Test e-Mail", and you want to contribute, please contact me so I can add
your name.

If you've already contacted me, and didn't get the above-mentioned
e-mail, then I've missed you, so definitely contact me!

So far (including me), there are 19 potential contributors, so that
should be a tidy little sum to help out Tom, but I hope more people come
on board.  If you do contact me off-list, please put the word "Greywolf"
in the subject line, as I'm filtering this stuff into a separate folder,
to keep things straight.

BTW, a full accounting will be provided, of course...

cheers,
frank

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: OT: sliding away?

[Pentxuser]

Guys if you have limited experience with photoshop, I highly recommend 
photodeluxe which is also made by adobe and comes free with many decent Epson 
printers and various scanners. It really is simple to use and guides you 
through most steps with ease. It can do most of what photoshop can do 
(including layers) and generally do it easier (at least for beginners) Once 
you get good at it, set it on advanced mode and it's even closer to photoshop.

Vic 


In a message dated 11/11/02 11:39:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< gfen wrote, re Photoshop:



= snipped =

> Seriously, its pretty easy to do the basics.. I'm still figuring out the
> in depth parts of curves and levels, but cloning to spot is a godsend.

Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate!

keith whaley >>

RE: [OT] I'm back :)

[Shaun Canning]

URL no good William. 

Shaun Canning
Archaeology Department
La Trobe University, Bundoora, 
Victoria, 3086.

Phone: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:w_robb@;accesscomm.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2002 9:37 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)


- Original Message -
From: Lon Williamson
Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)


> Does this mean you slam any cute lil' kitty pix posted
> on PUG?  Grin.

Find me a kitty picture cuter than this..

file:///J:/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html

Pentax content:
Shot on a Zoom 105 Super


William Robb

Re[2]: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

[Bob Walkden]

Hi,

> I sort of miss Mafud, but Kirkland Ramsey is another story. Much more
> belligerent I'd say. I'm still not sure they were one and the same,
> although some evidence seemed to suggest that.

we could put some of their emails through a stylistic analyzer - the
type of thing they use to decide that Shakespeare was really Queen
Elizabeth I. That should sort it out. Or perhaps it would tell us that
Mafud wrote Shakespeare - that seems to be the usual result of these
things.

---

 Bob  

Re: [OT] I'm back :)

[William Kane]

Hmmm,

  My computer doesn't appear to HAVE a J drive . ..

Bill

William Robb wrote:


- Original Message - 
From: Lon Williamson 
Subject: Re: [OT] I'm back :)


 

Does this mean you slam any cute lil' kitty pix posted
on PUG?  Grin.
   


Find me a kitty picture cuter than this..

file:///J:/photo/puppies/leica_tmax.html

Pentax content:
Shot on a Zoom 105 Super


William Robb



 


--
William Kane
  http://www.KaneScience.com
IABT Advisory Board Member
  http://www.iabt.net
Tinley Park High School
  6111 W. 175th Street
  Tinley Park, IL  60477
  V: 708/532-1900 ext 3909
  http://www.bhsd228.com

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens. . .

[Rob Studdert]

On 11 Nov 2002 at 17:08, gfen wrote:

> Is it too much to ask that Vivitar buys Leitz just so I can hear the
> collective howl of a million leicaphiles?

It's Leica Camera AG now, there was a little yelp when the French Hermes 
International bought a great chunk a year or so back.

http://www.leica-camera.com/unternehmen/presse/data/01907/index_e.html
"Not for distribution in the United States of America, Canada, Australia or 
Japan." :-)

The current boss of Cosina has apparently taken a very personal interest in the 
Voigtlander name and product range development and photographers feedback. He 
has allowed a lot of development and production to occur that a less involved 
boss may not have, fortunately it's all been of great benefit to the company. 
Great foresight, not like Pentax.

Cheers,

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

[Paul Stenquist]

I sort of miss Mafud, but Kirkland Ramsey is another story. Much more
belligerent I'd say. I'm still not sure they were one and the same,
although some evidence seemed to suggest that.
Paul

Bob Walkden wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > Anybody who has two email accounts subscribed to the pdml,
> > and uses one to respond to his comments from the other
> > is way over the top for me.
> 
> young Brad has a long way to go before he can be elevated to the
> Pantheon. Suda Mafud, you may recall, had more avatars than Vishnu and
> would use them all to support his outlandish arguments. So Mafud would
> get involved in an argument, then Kirkland Ramsey III (Presbyterian)
> would join in support but - presumably to fool everybody - would
> disagree on some minor point, then a 3rd incarnation - whose name I've
> forgotten, unfortunately - would chastise Kirkland for joining in the
> Mafud bashing. It was magnificent at times. Imagine, to steal an image
> from P.G. Wodehouse, an ancient mastodon bellowing at its own
> reflection across the primordial swamp, and you get the general drift.
> 
> Mafud was a force of nature.
> 
> ---
> 
>  Bob

Odp: LX for sale in UK AP

[£ukasz Kacperczyk]

You sure about the price? That's about $225 and that would make it a steal.
Now, if only I had tese $225 in my pocket... 

Lukasz

- Original Message -
From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Pentax List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:27 PM
Subject: LX for sale in UK AP


> Spotted for sale in AP
>
> 'Pentax LX plus FA/1W prism finder, grip, perfect working order, used
> regularly. 150 GBP 01429 422058 (UK phone number)
>

Re: Vs: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick onelens. . .

[gfen]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Raimo Korhonen wrote:
> Because they are not made the same way - Cosina lenses are cheap,
> Voigtländer lenses are expensive, although cheaper than Leica glass.

Someday I'd like to own a rangefinder, although truthfully, I don't think
I'd find much advantage in one...

-- 
http://www.infotainment.org   <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.

Vs: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens. . .

[Raimo Korhonen]

Because they are not made the same way - Cosina lenses are cheap, Voigtländer lenses 
are expensive, although cheaper than Leica glass.
All the best!
Raimo
Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho

-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: gfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 11. marraskuuta 2002 16:06
Aihe: Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens. . .


>

>I thought the new Voightlanders were respected cameras and quality lenses?
>If this is the case, then why-oh-why can't all Cosina lenses be as respected?
>
>

Re: LX for sale in UK AP

[Jostein]

Welcome back, Cotty. :-)
Wish I could have grabbed that one...
Jostein
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:27 PM
Subject: LX for sale in UK AP


> Spotted for sale in AP
>
> 'Pentax LX plus FA/1W prism finder, grip, perfect working order,
used
> regularly. 150 GBP 01429 422058 (UK phone number)
>
>

Re: LX for sale in UK AP

[titides]

how much in euro ?

thierry

Cotty a écrit:


Spotted for sale in AP

'Pentax LX plus FA/1W prism finder, grip, perfect working order, used 
regularly. 150 GBP 01429 422058 (UK phone number)


 

Re: OT: sliding away?

[Keith Whaley]

Aha! I'd like that, I just intuit! 

Thanks for the explanation.

keith

gfen wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote:
> > Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate!
> 
> Using the clone tool to spot your "prints" for dust, hair, fingerprints,
> etc. To say nothing of the ability to use the clone tool to remove power
> lines, facial blemishes, your ex-girlfriend, etc.
> 
> :)

LX for sale in UK AP

[Cotty]

Spotted for sale in AP

'Pentax LX plus FA/1W prism finder, grip, perfect working order, used 
regularly. 150 GBP 01429 422058 (UK phone number)

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Pål Jensen]

Paul wrote:


> Any film of normal saturation and contrast is fine for lens testing. I
> would probably use Fuji Provia 100F or Kodak Ektachrome 100S.
> Paul Stenquist


I wouldn't use any 100ISO film. Particuarly not Provia 100F; a film that trade 
sharpness for fine grain.

Pål

Re: Agfa Portrait 160 XPS

[Bruce Dayton]

Albano,

I shot some a while back and was not that happy with it.  I shot it at
160.  More recently, I was talking to an Agfa rep (complaining) and he
told me to rate it at 125.  I did so and was much more pleased with
it.  So based on my test and the Agfa rep, you should rate it at 125.

My PUG entry this month was one of those test shots at 125:
http://pug.komkon.org/02nov/bkd0211a.html


Bruce



Monday, November 11, 2002, 6:37:05 AM, you wrote:

AG> I know we have some Agfa fans in the list (I'm between
AG> them).
AG> I've bought two rolls of this film in 120 format to
AG> try it.
AG> I wanted to know what EI do you suggest, 160, 125 or
AG> 100? Comments on film grain, colors, etc?
AG> All experiences welcome
AG> Regards



AG> =
AG> Albano Garcia
AG> "El Pibe Asahi"

AG> __
AG> Do you Yahoo!?
AG> U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
AG> http://launch.yahoo.com/u2

Re: VS1 35-85/2.8 Lens Images

[Fred]

Dan:

> What tool did you use to modify your baffles?

Well, the best way to do it would be with a bench grinder.  However,
due to the tools available to me (or lack thereof), my mods were
made using just a hacksaw and a fine-toothed file (to finish it
off).

> It looks pretty clean.

...due to the "beauty" of a low-res scan - .  Seriously, both
mods came out OK, considering the "skill" () of the modifier.

> Did you repaint the newly exposed metal?

I just went over the bare metal (from the cut itself, and from any
"nicks" in the black paint that I made with the hacksaw or file)
with a black "magic marker". (Touching it up with flat black paint
would have been the proper way to go, but using a black "magic
marker" worked OK for me.)

By the way, I did not remove 100% of the "extra generous" baffle
that the Vivitar engineers provided back in 1975 - I did leave a
short length near the aperture coupling lever.  This is similar to
the way there is a short "baffle" (I think it's really a mechanical
protection for the aperture coupling lever) on jen-you-wine Pentax
K-mounts.  Doing this also simplified the cutting, since I didn't
have to hacksaw so close to the aperture coupling lever - .

Fred

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Paul Stenquist]

Perhaps "outside the mainstream" is a poor choice of words. But I would
think that for lens testing, one would want a film of average contrast
and saturation, so that differences are more readily apparent. 
Paul

Rob Brigham wrote:
> 
> I would never accuse Velvia of being 'outside the mainstream', nor would
> just about most people who take landscapes IMHO.  It may be an extreme,
> but its one of the most used slide films in the world and is pretty much
> the definition of mainstream to me.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Keith Whaley [mailto:keith_w@;dslextreme.com]
> >
> > Paul Stenquist wrote:
> > >
> > > I would think that Velvia is not a good test for any lens.
> > It has it's
> > > applications, and it is a worthy film in that it serves certain
> > > purposes very well. But it is so outside the mainstream in terms of
> > > contrast and saturation that it should not be used to
> > benchmark lens
> > > performance. Paul Stenquist
> >
> > Be part of the solution, Paul, and recommend a film (or
> > films) you feel WOULD be more suitable for lens quality
> > testing, please.
> >
> > keith whaley

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

[Paul Stenquist]

Any film of normal saturation and contrast is fine for lens testing. I
would probably use Fuji Provia 100F or Kodak Ektachrome 100S.
Paul Stenquist

Keith Whaley wrote:
> 
> Paul Stenquist wrote:
> >
> > I would think that Velvia is not a good test for any lens. It has it's
> > applications, and it is a worthy film in that it serves certain purposes
> > very well. But it is so outside the mainstream in terms of contrast and
> > saturation that it should not be used to benchmark lens performance.
> > Paul Stenquist
> 
> Be part of the solution, Paul, and recommend a film (or films) you
> feel WOULD be more suitable for lens quality testing, please.
> 
> keith whaley
> 
> > Dario Bonazza 2 wrote:
> > >
> > > According to comparative tests made by AOHC member Carlo Lastrucci, the 77
> > > Limited is not as good as FA* 85/1.4, since contrast is excessive, at least
> > > for Velvia film (shades are almost always deep blacks) and color rendition
> > > is cold, too much different from all other Pentax glass, including other
> > > Limited lenses. Resolution of the 77mm is rather close to that of the
> > > 85/1.4, but the 85mm is better at most apertures. The only true advantage of
> > > the 77mm vs. the 85/1.4 FA* is its size.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Dario Bonazza
> > > 
> > > http://www.dariobonazza.com
> > >
> > > > Wayne wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > for general portaiture and landscapes
> > > > > which of these is the better lens
> > > > > which is better optically
> > > > > what is a good used price
> > > > > just curious cos they are both on ebay at the moment

Re: OT - Photography Tour -- Ever Gone?

[eactivist]

Thanks everyone for your replies (wish there'd been a few more even). I've read them 
all with a great deal of interest.

Certainly sounds like if I can find the right workshop/tour (in my price range) I 
would definitely get something out of it.

Thanks again, Doe aka Marnie Parker

FS: MZ-5n body w/ box, manual, etc.

[Chris Brogden]

I'm considering selling this body because I find I use my manual focus
stuff all the time.  If anyone is interested, make me an offer off-list
for an MZ-5n body with the AA Battery Grip Fg, the original strap,
eyepiece cover, body cover, manual and box.  Condition is EXC+.  There are
a couple very small marks on it that prevent it from being LNIB, but it's
functionally perfect and a very clean body.  Anyway, I'll consider the
offers and decide then if I'm going to sell it.

Thanks,

chris

Re: Six feet under? (US TV)

[Dan Scott]

On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 10:18  AM, Steve Desjardins wrote:


Yeah.  It's on either HBO or Showtime (I don't get either).  It's some
ensemble cast type drama about a family that owns a funeral home.  
Never
seen it, but the critics have been kind ;-)


Steven Desjardins


They really dig it.

Dan Scott

Re: OT: sliding away?

[Dan Scott]

On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 10:42  AM, gfen wrote:


On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote:

Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please 
elucidate!

Using the clone tool to spot your "prints" for dust, hair, 
fingerprints,
etc. To say nothing of the ability to use the clone tool to remove 
power
lines, facial blemishes, your ex-girlfriend, etc.

:)


Try the new bandaid brush in v.7, delightful. Doesn't do everything of 
course, but it goes to town on dust spots, fine scratches and loose 
fibers. Takes care of most of what I used the cloning stamp for.

Dan Scott

Re: VS1 35-85/2.8 Lens Images

[Dan Scott]

On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 10:39  AM, Fred wrote:


I think my browser hates your slashes.


Oops - Sorry, Dan (and I also apologize to anyone else who tried
those links - ).  I've posted a pretty good mixture of forward
slashes and backslashes (the result of not totally transposing some
hard disk locations to the corresponding www URL's - ).  The
corrected URL's are appended below.  

Fred



S'ok. I needed to practice my typing anyway. :-)

What tool did you use to modify your baffles? It looks pretty clean. 
Did you repaint the newly exposed metal?

Dan Scott

Re: OT: sliding away?

[gfen]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote:
> Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate!

Using the clone tool to spot your "prints" for dust, hair, fingerprints,
etc. To say nothing of the ability to use the clone tool to remove power
lines, facial blemishes, your ex-girlfriend, etc.

:)

-- 
http://www.infotainment.org   <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.

Re: VS1 35-85/2.8 Lens Images

[Fred]

> I think my browser hates your slashes.

Oops - Sorry, Dan (and I also apologize to anyone else who tried
those links - ).  I've posted a pretty good mixture of forward
slashes and backslashes (the result of not totally transposing some
hard disk locations to the corresponding www URL's - ).  The
corrected URL's are appended below.  

Fred

+

Prompted by a recent thread involving the Vivitar Series 1 35-85/2.8
lens and its modification for newer K-mount bodies, I'm providing
some images involving this lens:

Here are two VS1 35-85/2.8's, the left one of which shows the extra
baffle, while the right one has been modified:


It is important, of course, to mask off completely the rest of the
lens when the extra baffle is being removed:


It is also possible to remove the K-mount flange and then remove the
extra baffle after masking off only the flange:


A description of the VS1 35-85/2.8 in a 1976 Vivitar Series 1
brochure:


Specifications for and a photo of the VS1 35-85/2.8 in the same
Vivitar Series 1 brochure::


An ad for the VS1 35-85/2.8 from 1975:


An ad for the VS1 35-85/2.8 from 1976:


An ad for the VS1 35-85/2.8 from 1979:


Another ad for the VS1 35-85/2.8 from 1979:


+

RE: AP (16/11) - Pentax UK Confirms digital SLR launch plan

[Rob Brigham]

Did we?  I know there are often rumours, but was one actually confirmed
by Pentax themselves?  I realise the MZ-D/MD-S/MR-52 was confirmed and
vanished, but that was 2 years ago, wasn't it?  Was there another one?

> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel J. Matyola [mailto:djm@;stanleypmlaw.com] 
> Sent: 11 November 2002 16:15
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: AP (16/11) - Pentax UK Confirms digital SLR launch plan
> 
> 
> Before we get our hopes up again, let's remember that we had 
> a "confirmed" plan to release a DSLR last year, which never 
> escaped from the vapor.
> 
> zoomshot wrote:
> 
> > Straight from this weeks Amateur Photographer 'THISWEEK' section;
> >
> > PENTAX UK HAS CONFIRMED plans for the launch of a new 
> flagship digital 
> > SLR next spring.
> 
> 

Re: VS1 35-85/2.8 Lens Images

[Dan Scott]

Hi Fred,

I think my browser hates your slashes.

Best,
Dan Scott

Re: Six feet under? (US TV)

[Steve Desjardins]

Yeah.  It's on either HBO or Showtime (I don't get either).  It's some
ensemble cast type drama about a family that owns a funeral home.  Never
seen it, but the critics have been kind ;-)


Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/11/02 09:03AM >>>
"Six feet under?" Is that a new commercial TV program? -- keith whaley

"Ryan K. Brooks" wrote:
> 
> So was that a K1000 on screen this evening when whatshername quipped
> about buying a camera on ebay?
> 
> R

Re: AP (16/11) - Pentax UK Confirms digital SLR launch plan

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Before we get our hopes up again, let's remember that we had a "confirmed"
plan to release a DSLR last year, which never escaped from the vapor.

zoomshot wrote:

> Straight from this weeks Amateur Photographer 'THISWEEK' section;
>
> PENTAX UK HAS CONFIRMED plans for the launch of a new flagship digital
> SLR next spring.