Re: My LX is back from Colorado.
- Original Message - From: "Cesar Matamoros II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Admit it Christian, I caught you sneaking peeks at them. I think you were > drawn to the brassed white cobra one. > > Anyway, women tend to like them just fine... > > César > Panama City, Florida > RIIGHT Christian
Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
Strange. I posted this item five hours ago, and it still doesn't appear on my screen, although there have been five replies, and they appear on the screen. Does it look like my ISP is really slow, or is this typical? It seems odd to me. Any idea what might cause this? Pat White
Re: Hypothetical Question
That's nice, I'm in North America, If I bore a hole straight down I'll only have to travel about 7900 miles or so to see and hold an MZ-S. I'm sure that I could find one in Mew York City, but I think I'd rather bore that hole. At 04:41 PM 12/19/2002 +1100, Bob Rap wrote: Hi Peter, I saw and held one in Sydney at a camera store near Martin Place on George street. Bob - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 4:17 AM Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question > The fact that the LX was only available in Japan made it rather difficult > for most of us to buy. Hell I can't see a MZ-S in the proverbial flesh despite > having two relatively well stocked camera stores which both carry Pentax > within easy driving distance. > > At 09:19 AM 12/18/2002 -0600, you wrote: > > > My question is this: Could Pentax actually use this list for advice > > > and stay in business? We may be too eclectic a group to be a good > > > source of market research. We still argue over the PZ-1p vs the MZ-S. > > > Many here don't even want autofocus. > > > > > >This is pretty much what I was wondering about when I wrote the original > >"Hypothetical Question." People here wonder whether Pentax monitors this > >list (they do), and whether they listen to our advice when advising Japan > >about product development...I don't know whether they do that or not, but I > >have to wonder if it would be productive if they did. > > > >I know that one Pentax person has told me privately that despite all the > >gushing and lauding of the LX on this list, even diehards weren't buying new > >LX's at the end of its lifespan. Most were buying used, or were using LXen > >purchased many years previously. > > > >Some of the comments about a digital SLR would probably be of value to them, > >especially from the perspective of not alienating longtime Pentax > >aficionados. But of course that's only going to be one consideration out of > >many in the design and concept of the new camera. > > > >We're only a few months away now...the Pentax DSLR is coming, > > > >--Mike > > Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. > Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx > Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
Barbie Cam Pink, but that would be disgusting. At 12:24 AM 12/19/2002 -0500, you wrote: Hmmm, How many different finishes can we come up with? César Panama City, Florida -- -Original Message- -- From: T Rittenhouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:10 PM -- -- Definitely, platinum is the way to go. -- -- Ciao, -- Graywolf -- http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto -- -- -- - Original Message - -- From: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- -- > Gold plate? Aaack. Too, too tacky. -- -- Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital The worst is, their beady little eyes glaze over when you try to explain it to them. I don't think the option of "web resolution" should be open to them. The choices should be: Insert digital media here. Take pictures. William Robb > David, > > I've watched the lab try to do so. Most of the people they are trying > to explain things to have no clue. They don't know what a file is or > what file size means. All they know is when they used film, they > could get any size prints they wanted. I think it is going to take > quite some time before this sorts out. The camera manufacturers > really should change their standards. Instead of picking the size of > image by pixels in the camera settings, they should have you pick it > by reasonable size of print. Use terms that people actually > understand. Compression could be "poor quality, mediocre quality, > pretty good quality and good quality" or something like that. Also, > all cameras should use the same interface and terminology so people > could understand better. Digital cameras should not just be for > computer geeks.
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
-- -Original Message- -- From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 7:40 PM -- -- On Wednesday 18 December 2002 12:12, Dan Scott wrote: -- -- > -- > Gold plate? Aaack. Too, too tacky. -- > -- > Dan Scott -- -- What? The snakeskin isn't? Have you seen Cesar's pimped-out -- LXen? I had to -- turn away to avoid seeing my lunch for the second time! ;-) -- -- Christian -- Admit it Christian, I caught you sneaking peeks at them. I think you were drawn to the brassed white cobra one. Anyway, women tend to like them just fine... César Panama City, Florida
RE: Whew....
-- -Original Message- -- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:58 PM -- -- "Cesar Matamoros II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -- -- >Not hot here. But I did just get back from a three-mile -- run at lunch. It -- >got so I had to remove my shirt :-) It is only 21C/70F. -- It actually felt -- >warmer. -- -- I ran about 9 miles last night - mostly tough hill repeats - -- in 30 degree -- (F) weather, which seemed plenty warm enough under the circumstances! -- -- -- -- Mark Roberts -- Photography and writing -- www.robertstech.com -- Show off! See you on Grandfather Mountain... Cesar Panama City, Florida
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
Hmmm, How many different finishes can we come up with? César Panama City, Florida -- -Original Message- -- From: T Rittenhouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:10 PM -- -- Definitely, platinum is the way to go. -- -- Ciao, -- Graywolf -- http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto -- -- -- - Original Message - -- From: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- -- > Gold plate? Aaack. Too, too tacky. -- --
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
-- -Original Message- -- From: Dan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 12:12 PM -- -- On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 08:49 AM, Christian Skofteland -- wrote: -- -- > - Original Message - -- > From: "Cesar Matamoros II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- > -- > -- > -- > -- >> P.S. H, should #5 be reskinned -- >> -- > -- > Definitely. And gold-plate it while you are at it. ;-) -- > -- > Christian -- > -- -- Gold plate? Aaack. Too, too tacky. -- -- Have it repainted to go with the new leathers. A nice white -- pearlescent -- finish would be very cool, and you'd probably have the only -- one in the -- world. -- -- Dan Scott -- >From what I can tell, I may have the only white cobra or grey sea snake ones around :-) Maybe this one will be a little more tame, I don't want to scare too many people away... Cesar Panama City, Florida
Re: Hypothetical Question
Hi Peter, I saw and held one in Sydney at a camera store near Martin Place on George street. Bob - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 4:17 AM Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question > The fact that the LX was only available in Japan made it rather difficult > for most of us to buy. Hell I can't see a MZ-S in the proverbial flesh despite > having two relatively well stocked camera stores which both carry Pentax > within easy driving distance. > > At 09:19 AM 12/18/2002 -0600, you wrote: > > > My question is this: Could Pentax actually use this list for advice > > > and stay in business? We may be too eclectic a group to be a good > > > source of market research. We still argue over the PZ-1p vs the MZ-S. > > > Many here don't even want autofocus. > > > > > >This is pretty much what I was wondering about when I wrote the original > >"Hypothetical Question." People here wonder whether Pentax monitors this > >list (they do), and whether they listen to our advice when advising Japan > >about product development...I don't know whether they do that or not, but I > >have to wonder if it would be productive if they did. > > > >I know that one Pentax person has told me privately that despite all the > >gushing and lauding of the LX on this list, even diehards weren't buying new > >LX's at the end of its lifespan. Most were buying used, or were using LXen > >purchased many years previously. > > > >Some of the comments about a digital SLR would probably be of value to them, > >especially from the perspective of not alienating longtime Pentax > >aficionados. But of course that's only going to be one consideration out of > >many in the design and concept of the new camera. > > > >We're only a few months away now...the Pentax DSLR is coming, > > > >--Mike > > Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. > Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx >
Digital Stuff
Similar to Pentax, there are still many Nikon fans supporting the Nikon manual gear. The following is some discussion from a egroup for the possible impact of Nikon digital development on manual users. Any opinion from you?? Message: 3 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:31:03 -0500 Subject: OT: DX Lenses and other Digital Stuff There's been a lot of "digital traffic" on the list lately, and some of it needs comment. > Well, I heard an opinion worth to consider (the guy used to be a member of the list, I don't know if he's around). As CMOS's are not, and might not ever will be, up (or down) to the resolution of photographic film, it would be a waste of money, time and effort for any manufacturer to design a lens with improved resolution compared to old designs. I guess Nikon is wasting money, then. Nikon is claiming that the new DX lenses are actually designed to a higher resolution standard (200 lppm) than the 35mm lenses. As for the rest of the "guy's" statements, well, let's just be friendly and say that they are naive. CCD resolution would top out at about the 1 micron level under current designs, but any smaller would have diffraction issues to deal with. CCD resolution will likely always be a little bit different than film resolution due to the overlap vs non-overlap designs, but I think you need to define "resolution." Digital camera/printer already exceeds what I was able to achieve with slides and wet process darkroom printing, and it's fast approaching slides scanned with drum scan and printed digitally. Curiously, the "Bible" of photographic information, The Manual of Photography 9th Edition, has an interesting aside in it where it is stated that digital has already equaled film in terms of the amount of "information" that can be stored. > Is the DX lens development bad news to film photographers? Probably. At least at the wide angle end. Nikon has limited development and production capability. The development of DX wide angles comes at the expense of potential new 35mm wide angle lenses. Moreover, as digital production heats up, we'll see more discontinuance of current "marginal" lenses, and the MF lineup is certainly one of the possibilities to stop production on. > On the other hand, it says nothing about whether Nikon is developing a full-frame DSLR. Perhaps Nikon is covering all it's bases. Perhaps, but I made a written prediction back in September that Nikon would likely continue with APS-sized sensors on digital SLRs. The DX lens line seems to support this, especially when you consider that the statement tells us that the DX lens is designed for at least 3x the line pair resolution the current digital bodies are capable of. > The sensor in the D1X is really 4018 X 1312, a very odd shape. Not anywhere near the typical 3/2 format of the 35mm frame. Just to be clear, the 4018x1312 doesn't define the shape, as the photosites are not square. Moreover, there's "space" between photosites, so knowing the size, number and orientation of the photosites doesn't tell you much about the aspect ratio of the frame. > I don't think it's fair to claim the D1X is a 10MP camera just because you can use digital manipulation...but the final resolution that the image from the camera contains is a maximum of 3008 x 1960 pixels in any format...You can't honestly claim you can increase the ultimate resolution by changing the decoding algorithms in an outboard program to interpolate to a bigger image by adding pixels that weren't in the original image as the camera would have decoded it. Actually, the camera "manipulates" data in ANY format it's capable of saving in. With a D1x there simply is no one-to-one correspondence between photosite and pixel, period. Thus, the 10MP interpretation pioneered by Bibble and QImage is just as valid as the downsize/upsize JPG interpretation the camera does. Short of the Foveon-based Sigma SD9, no current digital SLR can be said to have a "native" RGB resolution (well, okay, technically the small JPEG out of the S2 Pro has a one-to-one correspondence between four photosites and a pixel). Rather than continue to polluting the MF list with digital talk, I suggest that, if you're interested in continuing the digital side of this discussion you visit the NikonSLR forum at dpreview.com, where these topics and more have been discussed to death. I do think the original query was quite on the mark for this list, though, and I'll repeat my answer: yes, the DX lens introduction probably has implications on 35mm lenses. Reading both between the lines of the press release and Nikon's recent patent activity, wide angle activity at Nikon is centered on DX designs. That's a shame, as there are several 35mm WA lenses that could use a redesign (18mm f/2.8 is one of them). Message: 5 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:26:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: OT: DX Lenses and other Digital Stuff Hi Thom, Yet again i find myself drawn into this digital di
Re: American Beer
Yes, no kids have access. I think I still have a clever video clip "the frog and princess add" Bob - Original Message - From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:12 PM Subject: Re: American Beer > Bob...Do you open your own email at BigPond? > No kids have access to it? > If so, I'll send you a Fosters ad I just got... > > keith whaley > > Bob Rapp wrote: > > > > Oh, no not Fosters > > > > Toohey Old, Gold > > > > VB > > Hann > > Carlton > > West End > > Coopers > > Emu > > Cascade > > the list goes on and on > > > > Bob > > - Original Message - > > From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:25 PM > > Subject: Re: American Beer > > > > > On Wednesday 18 December 2002 22:14, Bob Rapp wrote: > > > > For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an > > > > American in paradise!! > > > > > > > > Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) > > > > > > > > > Whatcha drinkin in oz? Better not be Fosters. My wife's family tells me > > > that Fosters is not drunk by "Real" aussies. It's only Americans that > > > drink it. Further more, they claim that Americans paid for the 2000 Olympics > > > because it was so heavily sponsored by Fosters. > > > > > > When I was there I was only allowed to dring VB. > > > > > > Christian >
Re: Hypothetical Question
The fact that the LX was only available in Japan made it rather difficult for most of us to buy. Hell I can't see a MZ-S in the proverbial flesh despite having two relatively well stocked camera stores which both carry Pentax within easy driving distance. At 09:19 AM 12/18/2002 -0600, you wrote: > My question is this: Could Pentax actually use this list for advice > and stay in business? We may be too eclectic a group to be a good > source of market research. We still argue over the PZ-1p vs the MZ-S. > Many here don't even want autofocus. This is pretty much what I was wondering about when I wrote the original "Hypothetical Question." People here wonder whether Pentax monitors this list (they do), and whether they listen to our advice when advising Japan about product development...I don't know whether they do that or not, but I have to wonder if it would be productive if they did. I know that one Pentax person has told me privately that despite all the gushing and lauding of the LX on this list, even diehards weren't buying new LX's at the end of its lifespan. Most were buying used, or were using LXen purchased many years previously. Some of the comments about a digital SLR would probably be of value to them, especially from the perspective of not alienating longtime Pentax aficionados. But of course that's only going to be one consideration out of many in the design and concept of the new camera. We're only a few months away now...the Pentax DSLR is coming, --Mike Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: American Beer
The best beer I have drank was in the USA. I feel a story coming on, so sit back, pop a cool one and enjoy. This was also my introduction to camping. This took place in 1990. I decided that a pilgramage of photographic proportions to the American Southwest was in the cards. My wife reluctantly agreed, and the car was packed for a month of travel, and off we went. It was an interesting month. But, on to the beer part. We traveled from Regina, Canada, south through Montana and over the Beartooth Pass (11,000 feet?) and into the Grand Tetons. >From there, we travelled south, through Wyoming, and into north east Utah. Near the town of Dutch John, our car calved on us, nearly self destructing in the process. It had to be towed off the side of a mountain, into the town of Vernal. Vernal, Utah is as misnamed as Greenland. Of course, we didn't know this, as it was after 9:00 at night, and I hadn't eaten since noon. The tow truck driver dropped us off at a Diefenbunker Motel on his way to dropping our car off at the Pontiac dealership. We walked into the motel, and checked in. Asked if there was anywhere around where a person could get a meal (it was 9:37 pm, and I was well over 9 hours from my ) The poor sot told me that the motel restaraunt had just closed. I replied, something like: "Watch my lips, I asked if there was someplace where I could get something to eat." He directed us to a 7-11 Yesterdays submarine sandwiches and Coor's beer on the balcony of the blockhouse motel. And that my friends, was the best beer I have ever had. William Robb
Re: American Beer
Frank wrote: > I must admit, I love Guinness, but I'd love to try your Rogue > Shakespeare Stout - sounds wonderful! Is it widely available > in the US? Rogue Brewery is right here where I live in Newport. On the bay on the south end of the bridge. That Shakespeare Stout was one of the most potent brews (and quite tasty!) and was one of my favorites when I indulged in those things. They make all sorts of "strange brews". You might find it in some specialty shops - perhaps they'd send off for some? Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: American Beer
People do of course drink VB and Fosters, but they are the equivalent of the Molson's or Bud of the US/Canada and about as good. Some of the best beer on the planet comes from either South Australia (Coopers) or Tasmania (Cascade and Boags). There are also dozens upon dozens of pub breweries, not to mention home brewers. My father-in-law and I brew up some wild ales and stouts from time too time...we have a beer almost every Sunday arvo, and believe me some are more memorable than others. Sometimes the alcohol content gets out of whack if you vary the sugar content at all (which we try to avoid). We had a few bottles a month ago that hit us like a freight train...must have been 9% or 10%. Two 750 ml bottles each and we were singing sea shanties on the verandah. Ah well, the things you can get away with when it's your own beer, and your out in the bush where no one can hear you I don't mind some of the English beers of course. But some of them have gone the mass-produced way of Guinness. I used to be partial to the odd 'Newkie Brunn'every now and again, and didn't mind McPhersons or Boddingtons either. The rest of the mainstream beer isn't that much chop. Beer is a wonderful thing really, pity it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with cameras. Here is a list of all the reason why beer is better than women http://members.iinet.net.au/~sprat/jokes/bloke007.html For all those gals reading this here is a list of 86 reasons why beer is better than men http://members.iinet.net.au/~sprat/jokes/gals004.html For anybody else, bad luck you miss out. Just go and have a beer. Cheers Shaun Christian Skofteland wrote: On Wednesday 18 December 2002 22:14, Bob Rapp wrote: For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an American in paradise!! Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) Whatcha drinkin in oz? Better not be Fosters. My wife's family tells me that Fosters is not drunk by "Real" aussies. It's only Americans that drink it. Further more, they claim that Americans paid for the 2000 Olympics because it was so heavily sponsored by Fosters. When I was there I was only allowed to dring VB. Christian . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: American Beer
That's not fair. At 08:12 PM 12/18/2002 -0800, you wrote: Bob...Do you open your own email at BigPond? No kids have access to it? If so, I'll send you a Fosters ad I just got... keith whaley Bob Rapp wrote: > > Oh, no not Fosters > > Toohey Old, Gold > > VB > Hann > Carlton > West End > Coopers > Emu > Cascade > the list goes on and on > > Bob > - Original Message - > From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:25 PM > Subject: Re: American Beer > > > On Wednesday 18 December 2002 22:14, Bob Rapp wrote: > > > For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an > > > American in paradise!! > > > > > > Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) > > > > > > Whatcha drinkin in oz? Better not be Fosters. My wife's family tells me > > that Fosters is not drunk by "Real" aussies. It's only Americans that > > drink it. Further more, they claim that Americans paid for the 2000 Olympics > > because it was so heavily sponsored by Fosters. > > > > When I was there I was only allowed to dring VB. > > > > Christian
Re: Hypothetical Question
But the important thing to remember is that we wouldn't like the brand if they didn't meed our needs, at least as some time weather today or in the past. At 07:20 PM 12/18/2002 -0600, you wrote: > But the people on this is are not a couple hundred users, they are a couple > of hundred flag wavers. Bingo! Excellent point. We're the people who LIKE Pentax, so we support the brand and proselytize for it, defend it, publicize it. For instance, I've written several web columns about Pentax equipment, and when I was Editor of _PT_ I published a cover about a Pentax feature (trap focus). So, supposedly, I have more influence that "just" as a consumer of the company's products. --Mike
Re: American Beer
Bob...Do you open your own email at BigPond? No kids have access to it? If so, I'll send you a Fosters ad I just got... keith whaley Bob Rapp wrote: > > Oh, no not Fosters > > Toohey Old, Gold > > VB > Hann > Carlton > West End > Coopers > Emu > Cascade > the list goes on and on > > Bob > - Original Message - > From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:25 PM > Subject: Re: American Beer > > > On Wednesday 18 December 2002 22:14, Bob Rapp wrote: > > > For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an > > > American in paradise!! > > > > > > Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) > > > > > > Whatcha drinkin in oz? Better not be Fosters. My wife's family tells me > > that Fosters is not drunk by "Real" aussies. It's only Americans that > > drink it. Further more, they claim that Americans paid for the 2000 Olympics > > because it was so heavily sponsored by Fosters. > > > > When I was there I was only allowed to dring VB. > > > > Christian
Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
David, I've watched the lab try to do so. Most of the people they are trying to explain things to have no clue. They don't know what a file is or what file size means. All they know is when they used film, they could get any size prints they wanted. I think it is going to take quite some time before this sorts out. The camera manufacturers really should change their standards. Instead of picking the size of image by pixels in the camera settings, they should have you pick it by reasonable size of print. Use terms that people actually understand. Compression could be "poor quality, mediocre quality, pretty good quality and good quality" or something like that. Also, all cameras should use the same interface and terminology so people could understand better. Digital cameras should not just be for computer geeks. Bruce Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 5:49:18 PM, you wrote: DCS> The mere fact that it is digital would suggest that there is no real DCS> "standards" to follow - that's the nature of the beast currently. DCS> Mind you, you could look at the scenario this way: DCS> Take 120 film into any local WalMart and they'll look at you funny. DCS> "What's this ??" they'll ask. DCS> "A different style of film" you'd say DCS> "I thought only 35mm was the standard, what's with this film stuff, seems DCS> like there is no real 'standard'." would be their reply. DCS> Having to support different memory cards is, unfortunately, part of dealing DCS> with digital - Compact Flash (types I and II), SD cards, maybe SmartMedia, DCS> and god forbid you have to deal with Memory Stick as well - but this is the DCS> way it is currently - just as it is with PC vs Mac - only within the last DCS> few years has Mac stuff been a bit more flexible and vice versa. DCS> With respect to maximum file sizes, you would think that if the lab has DCS> digital to photo paper printing that someone in that lab would be a "digital DCS> expert" (per se) and create a little sign explaining minimum file sizes for DCS> minimum sized prints. DCS> In the end, if the lab wants the business (and my guess would be that they DCS> do since they invested in the capability to do so) that they should be the DCS> ones to "set the standards" for the customers. Let the Lab tell the DCS> customers what they need in order to get the prints that the customers DCS> desire. Probably would make things a lot easier if a set of simple DCS> "guidelines" were laid out for the P&S digital neophyte. DCS> Cheers, DCS> Dave DCS> -Original Message- DCS> From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] DCS> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:32 PM DCS> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DCS> Subject: Behind the counter with digital DCS> I'm spending this week working in a lab that has digital to DCS> photo paper printing capability. DCS> What a gong show. DCS> First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we DCS> are being asked to support 3 different memory card styles, plus DCS> microdrives, plus floppies and CDs. DCS> The people don't seem to have a sniff that they have to have DCS> minimum file sizes to make prints or that it would be nice to DCS> have the work in a common format. DCS> One clever sot actually asked us to make prints from a bunch of DCS> GIF images today. I guess thats how photodeluxe saves them DCS> The there was the moron that buried the files he wanted printed DCS> about 6 levels down from the root directory of his full CD, and DCS> didn't know the exact filenames for a search. DCS> Anyway, the people who make this stuff need to do some more DCS> market research. Maybe try to make digital photography easy. DCS> Film users can literally aim and shoot, and expect reasonable DCS> results, with no knowledge base. DCS> Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get DCS> pictures. DCS> William Robb
Re: DOF question
i like to think about it this way: diffraction effects aside, when focused at infinity, the lens would resolve *at any distance* size "focal lens/aperture" of objects. so, stopped down to , say f/11 22.8 lens will resolve enything up to 2.3mm. Regardless of format. mishka.
Re: Behind the counter with digital
William, I have to laugh. I am seeing similar problems anytime I go into the lab. They have the Agfa D-Labs and people bring in digital work for them. I can't begin to count the number of times that someone has emailed a small image (600X400) and then asked for an 8X10 print. It goes on and on. Most of them are pretty clueless. The most common problem is to set their camera to greatest compression and sometimes smallest image size so they can fit more on the card. Then they wonder why the pictures look so poor. The biggest problem I see with this is the lab who is doing the service is seen as the bad guy rather than the real culprits (user and manufacturer of the camera. Bruce Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 5:31:47 PM, you wrote: WR> I'm spending this week working in a lab that has digital to WR> photo paper printing capability. WR> What a gong show. WR> First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we WR> are being asked to support 3 different memory card styles, plus WR> microdrives, plus floppies and CDs. WR> The people don't seem to have a sniff that they have to have WR> minimum file sizes to make prints or that it would be nice to WR> have the work in a common format. WR> One clever sot actually asked us to make prints from a bunch of WR> GIF images today. I guess thats how photodeluxe saves them WR> The there was the moron that buried the files he wanted printed WR> about 6 levels down from the root directory of his full CD, and WR> didn't know the exact filenames for a search. WR> Anyway, the people who make this stuff need to do some more WR> market research. Maybe try to make digital photography easy. WR> Film users can literally aim and shoot, and expect reasonable WR> results, with no knowledge base. WR> Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get WR> pictures. WR> William Robb
Re: Hypothetical Question
I remember those... At 08:20 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, you wrote: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Mark wrote: > >> It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX was introduced. It would have >> been interesting to read the inevitable complaints. > > >I remember the compaints: it was too big and bulky, used batteries, and had useless features like automatic mode. It was essentially a tool for family snapshooters. Sounds familiar? And I assume there were complaints that it wasn't automated *enough* also? (Only aperture-preferred autoexposure) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >I just got back 1 roll of Kodak Portra 160NC prints, & 1 roll of Fuji Astia pro. slides. Both rolls had numerous portraits/candids of my family. Both were shot with the same camera & lens. The slides seem to be much more consistent with the flash. Some of the prints show a little more "white out" on the faces. < that's a bad printing system setup for the prints. they should reprint for you. Herb
Re: American Beer
Oh, no not Fosters Toohey Old, Gold VB Hann Carlton West End Coopers Emu Cascade the list goes on and on Bob - Original Message - From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: Re: American Beer > On Wednesday 18 December 2002 22:14, Bob Rapp wrote: > > For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an American > > in paradise!! > > > > Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) > > > Whatcha drinkin in oz? Better not be Fosters. My wife's family tells me > that Fosters is not drunk by "Real" aussies. It's only Americans that drink > it. Further more, they claim that Americans paid for the 2000 Olympics > because it was so heavily sponsored by Fosters. > > When I was there I was only allowed to dring VB. > > Christian >
RE: Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
-Original Message- From: Steve Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: December 18, 2002 2:11 PM Last question-does anyone know if Costco's services offer the ability to scan slides onto a CD? Or another store that can do it reasonably-priced? Costco locally does indeed scan to a CD but locally they process only negative film, not slides and their file size is low. OK for web or e-mailing, but wont produce good prints. I know Wal-Mart also do this but London Drugs (don't know if you have that in your area; believe they are in Western Canada only) offer consumer and pro grade scans on CD and I have had some good quality 8 X 10's done from the pro grade scans. Cheers, Mike.
Re: American Beer
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 22:14, Bob Rapp wrote: > For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an American > in paradise!! > > Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) Whatcha drinkin in oz? Better not be Fosters. My wife's family tells me that Fosters is not drunk by "Real" aussies. It's only Americans that drink it. Further more, they claim that Americans paid for the 2000 Olympics because it was so heavily sponsored by Fosters. When I was there I was only allowed to dring VB. Christian
RE: DOF question
nope. DOF will be that of a 22.8mm lens JCO -Original Message-From: Michael Perham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 9:07 PMTo: Pentax-DiscussSubject: DOF question Now I know that if I was to shoot an image with a 35 mm SLR using a 28 mm lens and cropped it to the same image (angle of view) that would have been seen with a 100mm lens, the DOF would be the same for both images. However, my Optio 430RS has a 7.6mm to 22.8mm lens which is equivalent to a 37mm to 112mm in 35mm format. So is the DOF at 112mm the same as it would be if I used a 112mm lens on my 35mm? Thanks, Mike.
Re: American Beer or Canadian/Japanese
Anybody try Asahi Beer ("The Number 1 Beer in Japan")?
I was having sushi the other day and Asahi Beer was on the menu. Naturally I
had to have a bottle. Not bad. However I was reading the label and was
somewhat surprised that it was brewed by Molson in Canada ("Under STRICT
supervision" of course).
Christian
Re: American Beer
For REAL beer, you need to travel to Australia!! For me, I am an American in paradise!! Bob (I'll have another pint) Rapp (in Queensland on holiday) - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:58 PM Subject: Re: American Beer > Years ago, we Canadians made fun of American beer, because it's alcohol > content and taste weren't as strong as ours. That was back when ales were > our beer of choice, before light beer and before Canadian brewers brewed > Coors, Bud and Miller under license. And, before Canadian brewers started > marketing our beer down there, with ads featuring snowy forests and moose. > > Truth is, Canadian beer is like American beer. From the mainstream > manufacturers, it's bland homogenous crap! I defy anyone to tell the > difference between Labatt's Blue and Molson Export in a blindfold test - and > one's a so-called lager, the other a so-called ale! > > Most good Canadian beer, like American beer, comes from smaller independant > breweries like Amsterdam, Steam Whistle, Cremore, to name a few. > > In some cases, what's even better is pub-brewed beer. A local bar, C'Est > What, has a wonderful micro-brewery, featuring a rye ale, a wonderful coffee > porter, and a rasberry wheat beer (not my taste, but Dave Chang-Sang likes it > ). > > I must admit, I love Guinness, but I'd love to try your Rogue Shakespeare > stout - sounds wonderful! Is it widely available in the US? I might try the > liqour store, as they often have better imported selection than the beer > store. > > I raise a pint to the list! > -frank > > "Gregory L. Hansen" wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > > > Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe > > > > Man, you are drinking the wrong American beer! I'm very much enjoying a > > Rogue Shakespeare stout now, made in Oregon, and I'd take this creamy > > chocolate nectar over that burnt-toast Guinness any day! Everything made > > by Rogue Ales is first rate. Americans make a lot of good beers. Sierra > > Nevada is another one to go out of your way to find, I especially like > > their IPA. Magic Hat if you want that diacetyl kick, I enjoy the more > > local (to Maryland) Wild Goose beers, and I wish I could remember the > > name of that wonderful chocolate stout with the wood engraving of a choo > > choo train on the label. Summit, a Minnesota brew, is so heavily hopped > > I need to be in the mood for it, but it's certainly not watery. And > > sure, Sam Adams if that's all you can find. > > > > The larger American population has always preferred lighter beers, ever > > since brewers came here 400 years ago. But there's a blooming industry > > in craft beers now that hasn't been equalled since before Prohibition, > > and some of them are GOOD! I've gone years at a time without touching a > > Bud or a Miller. > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist > fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > >
Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
- Original Message - From: frank theriault Subject: Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar > There's a joke about Prairie Women in there somewhere, but this is a family > list! We don't want to go there Frank. Even were it not a family list, some things are best not discussed. > > Maybe with cameras, it's true that size is important after all... Size is merely impressive. William Robb
Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
There's a joke about Prairie Women in there somewhere, but this is a family list! Maybe with cameras, it's true that size is important after all... -frank Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > Does this mean that having a 67 is a great way to meet Chicks? > Is that how WW meets those fine models? :) > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: American Beer
Years ago, we Canadians made fun of American beer, because it's alcohol content and taste weren't as strong as ours. That was back when ales were our beer of choice, before light beer and before Canadian brewers brewed Coors, Bud and Miller under license. And, before Canadian brewers started marketing our beer down there, with ads featuring snowy forests and moose. Truth is, Canadian beer is like American beer. From the mainstream manufacturers, it's bland homogenous crap! I defy anyone to tell the difference between Labatt's Blue and Molson Export in a blindfold test - and one's a so-called lager, the other a so-called ale! Most good Canadian beer, like American beer, comes from smaller independant breweries like Amsterdam, Steam Whistle, Cremore, to name a few. In some cases, what's even better is pub-brewed beer. A local bar, C'Est What, has a wonderful micro-brewery, featuring a rye ale, a wonderful coffee porter, and a rasberry wheat beer (not my taste, but Dave Chang-Sang likes it ). I must admit, I love Guinness, but I'd love to try your Rogue Shakespeare stout - sounds wonderful! Is it widely available in the US? I might try the liqour store, as they often have better imported selection than the beer store. I raise a pint to the list! -frank "Gregory L. Hansen" wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe > > Man, you are drinking the wrong American beer! I'm very much enjoying a > Rogue Shakespeare stout now, made in Oregon, and I'd take this creamy > chocolate nectar over that burnt-toast Guinness any day! Everything made > by Rogue Ales is first rate. Americans make a lot of good beers. Sierra > Nevada is another one to go out of your way to find, I especially like > their IPA. Magic Hat if you want that diacetyl kick, I enjoy the more > local (to Maryland) Wild Goose beers, and I wish I could remember the > name of that wonderful chocolate stout with the wood engraving of a choo > choo train on the label. Summit, a Minnesota brew, is so heavily hopped > I need to be in the mood for it, but it's certainly not watery. And > sure, Sam Adams if that's all you can find. > > The larger American population has always preferred lighter beers, ever > since brewers came here 400 years ago. But there's a blooming industry > in craft beers now that hasn't been equalled since before Prohibition, > and some of them are GOOD! I've gone years at a time without touching a > Bud or a Miller. -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: American Beer
My favorite beer is brewed at a restaurant in Ann Arbor, Michigan. It's called Bear Paw Porter, and it's deep and rich and dark. It has more flavor than any beer I've ever had in America, the UK or Germany. And I've had a lot of them. Paul Stenquist "Gregory L. Hansen" wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe > > Man, you are drinking the wrong American beer! I'm very much enjoying a > Rogue Shakespeare stout now, made in Oregon, and I'd take this creamy > chocolate nectar over that burnt-toast Guinness any day! Everything made > by Rogue Ales is first rate. Americans make a lot of good beers. Sierra > Nevada is another one to go out of your way to find, I especially like > their IPA. Magic Hat if you want that diacetyl kick, I enjoy the more > local (to Maryland) Wild Goose beers, and I wish I could remember the > name of that wonderful chocolate stout with the wood engraving of a choo > choo train on the label. Summit, a Minnesota brew, is so heavily hopped > I need to be in the mood for it, but it's certainly not watery. And > sure, Sam Adams if that's all you can find. > > The larger American population has always preferred lighter beers, ever > since brewers came here 400 years ago. But there's a blooming industry > in craft beers now that hasn't been equalled since before Prohibition, > and some of them are GOOD! I've gone years at a time without touching a > Bud or a Miller.
Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 07:38 PM, Pat White wrote: It goes on to say that he has 40 assistants, stylists, and so on, at the shoot, and brings twenty 67s with him, using five each day. He must have a strong winding thumb, since he goes through 200 rolls of 120 film a day. Interesting glimpse into big-time shooting. Pat White Maybe five of those 40 people are designated winders for the 5 67s. Dan Scott
Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
Here's an OT Pirelli calendar story. Some time around 10 years ago I went over to see a friend who runs a motorcycle repair shop out of his home. It was/is the hang out for the motorcycle road racers in Rochester. He had a Pirelli calendar hanging in his shop. I don't remember what year it was or even if it was the calendar for that year (he was the type who'd use an old calendar for decoration if the pictures were good enough). Anyway I had to do a double take on the calendar because the babe in the photo was renting one of the apartments I owned at that time. Small world, huh? -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Advice for a microscope for photog. purpose?
- Original Message - From: Dr E D F Williams Subject: Re: Advice for a microscope for photog. purpose? The ocular tubes of stereo > microscopes are 33 mm in diameter so the K adaptor would be useless. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/LX_K_Bino.jpg Seems to work. William Robb
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
"Pal Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I think you mix it up with the Z-1p. My Z-1p didn't have any >stop half way. It had one mm throw and you really need precision >in operating it. However, both my MZ-S has market stops before >the shutter goes off. Perhaps they changed something mid-way through the production run; I just checked and my PZ-1p has a distinct mechanical detent half way through the shutter switch movement. You can feel and hear it even with the camera turned off. My MZ-S, on the other hand, doesn't have the tactile mechanical detent at the half way point of its shutter switch movement but I agree it's very easy to use. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Canon 1Ds (little pentax content)
Hi All, I've been shooting with a 1Ds for one week now, while I wait to see what Pentax comes up with in spring. Here are some quick impressions: - Incredible image quality. Resolution, Dynamic range, shadow detail are all amazing and exceed my film gear. - Completely linear response across the sensor- no edge falloff as predicted by some folks. - I've done some of the same local shots with my 1Ds as I have with the MZ-S, 5n, LX and 67ii and there's really no comparison. The 35mm stuff is a joke (based on a wide variety of FA, A*, SMC and Tak glass and APX 25, E100 , Provia 100F and Velvia- my main films). The 67ii is close, closest with Velvia (but w/o the crazy saturation) but just isn't as good on large prints. Grain noise and less shadow detail make the film output "murky" in comparison. Looking at 1200% mag, there's more usable info in the 1Ds picture than I can get out of a 6x7 chrome, IMHO- YMMV- insert argument here. - Autofocus on the 1Ds is a bit better than the MZ-S, but not a whole lot. Either one is fine. - The 1Ds body is too damn big. I already found myself thinking about taking the MZ-S/BG10 out at sunset tonight just due to size and weight- but I just couldn't do it, I wanted the results from the 1Ds. - I wish I could put the 43 on the 1Ds. Oh well, I may get a screw to EOS adapter and try out some Taks. - I wish the 1Ds had a flash- oh well, it's "pro". - On the 1Ds, ISO 100-400 are nearly indistinguishable. - The AF point selection on the 1Ds is better, but I have no need for that many selection points. I like the big array for focus confirmation, but I prefer the T layout of the MZ-S. - The quiet (USM) focus is nice, I can get more candid AF shots compared to the Pentaxes- where I would change to manual to avoid tipping people off. - Battery life is amazing. I only have the original battery and never think about it dying while out in the field. If folks have questions about the 1Ds, I can answer them in private email so we don't get the list off-topic. -Ryan
Re: Hypothetical Question
>> 1. A 98% or 100% viewfinder with good "snap" for easy manual focusing > > I really wanted #1 (or part of) for the MZ-S, but I was told that to get > 100% it was expensive, like doubling the cost. I can see why Pentax didn't > bother with it given their market. Too bad. Not sure what you mean by snap > with manual focus. Well, some viewfinders with coarser groundglass make it easier to see when the image is in focus and when it isn't. The new super-bright focusing screens made it very difficult to see when the image is in focus and when it isn't. It isn't an issue on most AF cameras, since the AF does the focusing, but if you like to focus manually, it makes a difference. Take a look at the screen in the Contax Aria sometime for an example of an acceptably bright frame that "snaps" into focus well. >> 7. Non-resetting ISO > > Can you explain this further and why it's a problem? I don't use the ISO rating for films, so I dislike cameras that default to the ISO / DX speed rating whenever the camera is turned off and on again. I like to be able to set the camera for E.I. 200 with Tri-X, for instance, and then leave it there, confident that it will remain on 200 until I reset it. --Mike
Re: American Beer, was Re: Hypothetical Question
A wire canoe at that! Pål Jensen wrote: Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: bargains and questions
It appears that the brand of your 28mm is Focal. I've seen the name before, and I think it's a store brand, like Quantaray for Ritz Camera Centers. Perhaps it's made by Cosina, or one of the other often-behind-the-scene manufacturers. Pat White
Re: Hypothetical Question
It also helps that around here at least, you can't find Pentax SLR's in any of the large discount retailers. Local Wal-Mart's for example carry a couple of Canon Models a Nikon model and a Minolta Model, Pentax is represented by IQZooms. Pentax probably won't put up with Wal-Mart's extortion demands, I mean marketing requirements. But once again you can't buy what's not available. At 06:57 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, you wrote: Nah, I think he bought it because some camera freak buddy said Canon's are the best camera made. Of course, all those TV ads meant that he had already heard of Canon. All I am saying is that the people in Pentaxes marketing department seem to be pretty good engineers . Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > My bet is that the vast majority of Rebel users have no idea that all those big > white lenses on the sidelines of NFL football games are C lenses. They > probably bought their Rebels because Andre Agassi's mug is on the tube, trying > to tell us that he uses one (yeah, right!). That's ~real~ marketing! > > And, of hundreds of thousands of Rebels that are sold, do you really think that > many are bought because some neophyte was chatting with a member of CDML (if > such a thing exists), who enthusiastically told him to buy one? I have my > doubts. > > Nah, TV ads, magazine ads, promotional deals in the local paper selling the > ubiquitous starter kit with a 28-70 (or whatever) plus strap and camera bag for > $200 - that's what does it, imho. > > But, as always, I could be wrong.
Re: American Beer, was Re: Hypothetical Question
Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe
Re: OT: Beer -- re: Hypothetical Question
Struthwater in the beer! That would cause a general strike and riots where I live. You don't mess with a blokes wife, cars, sheds, dogs or beer, although the first one is optional. Cheers Shaun T Rittenhouse wrote: Also, I resent the implication, I drink that stuff they make over here. Grolsh, Pilsner Urquel, and occassionally some of your english ale are my usual choices. Though I have heard that that stuff is only for export because you guys only drink Bud & Coors nowadays. A related anecdote: I was sitting in the bar next to L. L. Bean's in Freeport Maine several years back when the gentleman next to me, apparently a Canadian, said, "I didn't realize our export was quite this bad", refering to the Labatt's he was drinking. I explained to him about Town laws in Maine, and 3.2 beer, therein. He sputtered, "You mean they water the beer?" Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'll bet you a bottle of Wychwood's Hobgoblin against a tin of that sudsy bathwater you Americans call beer that you will not see a full frame DSLR from Pentax before Jan 1st 2005 :-) http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: Hypothetical Question
Mark wrote: > It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX was introduced. It would have > been interesting to read the inevitable complaints. I remember the compaints: it was too big and bulky, used batteries, and had useless features like automatic mode. It was essentially a tool for family snapshooters. Sounds familiar? Pål
Film vs. Digital (WAS: Re: RE: Hypothetical Question)
Glen wrote: > For a very impressive review including image comparisons of the EOS D1s and > 35mm and 645 (buy the way he uses the Pentax 645) see this page below. > > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml He isn't. He is comparing his digital camera with another digital camera; the latter take pictures of film. For judging these two digital cameras he create a copy. Then he make conclusion about the original. Or in other words: He is comparing a second generation copy with a third generation copy. Both copying processes has a resolution below even the most rotten third party lens. Then he make conclusions about the original. He could just as well be comparing apple and oranges. Pål
Re: Hypothetical Question
Alexander wrote: > Interestingly, a majority here confesses how they > prefer manual focus and even all-manual bodies over > the new AF-bodies. In the real world however, exactly > the contrary has happened: Obviously because of a lack > of demand, most manual focus and all all-manual 35mm > SLRs disappeared from the market. It's not only the equipment in itself that matters, but the fact that it is "old" and not longer available brand new. It is also about the "thrill" of finding an elusive item at a great price. > I think at the end of it's life time the LX was 3x as > expensive as it initially was. > Too expensive. > The desire for ultimate quality vanishes as prices > increase. Yes, but also the fact that there are limits on how long you can sell the same product. At a certain point the market becomes saturated and the used price is so much lower than new price that few are willing to pay for a brand new one. When a product get old enough initial buyers can sell the thing for the same they gave for it 10-15 years earlier, something they are happy to do, maintaining a "low" used priced compared to new price. This happened also with the 67; the used market was so full of it that few bought new ones anymore as good second-hand samples were plentiful at significant savings. Pål
OT: American Beer, was Re: Hypothetical Question
You must be thinking about the big manufacturers, Bud, Coors, Miller, stuff not fit to swill for pigs. There's lots of good Beer made in America, just not these. At 03:26 PM 12/18/2002 -0800, you wrote: Cotty wrote: > > >If God loves me there is a full-frame digital SLR with fast imaged stablized > >lenses in my future. I am betting Pentax won't have one out by then. Anyone > >want to wager a beer or two on that. I like free beer! > > I'll bet you a bottle of Wychwood's Hobgoblin against a tin of that sudsy > bathwater you Americans call beer that you will not see a full frame DSLR > from Pentax before Jan 1st 2005 :-) > > You in? > > Cotty > > ref: > > http://www.wychwood.co.uk/ Hell no! But... I'd love to join you for making that case of Wychwood become smaller! I'm ALWAYS up for that, Cotty! I'll even bring my magic MX to see you! keith whaley P.S. Americans don't MAKE beer! IMMHO...
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
> I often took accidental shots before the lock, because > of lack of the clear stop in the half way down of the release button. My MZ-S had a clear stop.
Re: Re[2]: MZ-S Focus Lock
- Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re[2]: MZ-S Focus Lock > Perhaps > the one you tried had been abused on the shutter button (easy to do > with a demo) and was damaged? Yes, I think this could've been possible. I'll try to check it out once again soon.. Regards Artur
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
- Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: MZ-S Focus Lock > Not true. Both my MZ-S has a soft release that stops distinctly at a certain point and then you have to use significantly more pressure to release the shutter. It is virtually impossible to accidentally release the shutter, In fact, right now I tap the shutter release quite heavily with my finger but the shutter doesn't go off. If so, then I had missed it. I will no argue on that as I don't have the camera and can't verify this. > I mean if you touch the shutter release it goes off. I has almost zero throw. I learned here at PDML that in order to avoid accidental releases one should approach the release sideways with your finger. Hmm, this is something I can't agree with. I have never, repeat, never accidentally released the shutter on any AF camera, including my Z-1p, except for the MZ-S. Maybe I'm too clumsy to use the MZ-S... > > And a different issue - allow me, Pal, to ask you a question: do you > > consider the MZ-S to be the ultimate Pentax AF film camera? > > It is. Hmmm, OK. Regards Artur
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
Artur wrote: > Perhaps I made myself unclear, sorry for that. > Of course it locks focus in the AF.S mode. What I wanted to say is that when > I tried to lock it, I often took accidental shots before the lock, because > of lack of the clear stop in the half way down of the release button. Of > course it happened because I wasn't used to this (as for an AF camera of > course) and everything is the matter of habit anyway. > Regards > Artur I think you mix it up with the Z-1p. My Z-1p didn't have any stop half way. It had one mm throw and you really need precision in operating it. However, both my MZ-S has market stops before the shutter goes off. Pal
Re[2]: MZ-S Focus Lock
Artur, Hmmm... For AF cameras I went from ZX-10 to PZ-1p to MZ-S and haven't noticed any significant difference between any of them for halfway pressing down to get focus lock. That is the standard way that I use AF. I know that on my MZ-S it doesn't behave as you describe. Perhaps the one you tried had been abused on the shutter button (easy to do with a demo) and was damaged? Any MZ-S owners out there that have noticed this kind of behavior? Bruce Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 4:16:08 PM, you wrote: AL> - Original Message - AL> From: "Pat White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> AL> Subject: Re: MZ-S Focus Lock >> Artur, the MZ-S does lock focus when you depress the shutter button >> half-way, unless the AF slider switch is set to AF.C (continuous), rather >> than AF.S (single). AL> Perhaps I made myself unclear, sorry for that. AL> Of course it locks focus in the AF.S mode. What I wanted to say is that when AL> I tried to lock it, I often took accidental shots before the lock, because AL> of lack of the clear stop in the half way down of the release button. Of AL> course it happened because I wasn't used to this (as for an AF camera of AL> course) and everything is the matter of habit anyway. AL> Regards AL> Artur AL> ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** AL> Masz dosc placenia prowizji bankowi ? AL> mBank - zaloz konto AL> http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
Artur wrote: > But I've said that it's the manual style, haven't I?:0 What I mean is that > when pressing the button slightly the camera starts the AF and metering. > Continue with the pressing and you'll release the shutter. There's no "stop" > in the middle of the way. Not true. Both my MZ-S has a soft release that stops distinctly at a certain point and then you have to use significantly more pressure to release the shutter. It is virtually impossible to accidentally release the shutter, In fact, right now I tap the shutter release quite heavily with my finger but the shutter doesn't go off. > > The Z-1p does not. It has touch control release with no feedback. > > I don't really understand the above statement - could you please explain > what you mean? I mean if you touch the shutter release it goes off. I has almost zero throw. I learned here at PDML that in order to avoid accidental releases one should approach the release sideways with your finger. > And a different issue - allow me, Pal, to ask you a question: do you > consider the MZ-S to be the ultimate Pentax AF film camera? It is. Pål
Re[2]: Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
Steve, One big thing to look for when doing negatives is the ability to batch scan. Saves alot of time. Use Vuescan, lock in the settings and scan a whole strip or roll unattended. Some of the Minolta scanners do that. I'm not sure on the Nikons or Canons. Bruce Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 3:59:27 PM, you wrote: SP> Good advice Mishka, SP> Now, how about a scanner for the negatives? Any SP> suggestions out there for a good scanner in the $500 SP> range, that produces good results for prints up to SP> 8x10, from negatives? SP> Thanks again SP> --- Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It is quite normal to have prints completely screwed >> up by the lab. Even a >> pretty good (read: expensive) lab. OTOH, it's much >> more difficult to screw >> up the film, since it's mostly automated. The "white >> out" on the faces is >> much more likely to show up on slides than on >> negative film, since the >> latter has much more lattitude, so if your slides >> are OK, I wouldn't worry >> about the negs. Scan them and adjust the >> colors/contrast/etc yourself -- >> that seems to one sure way to guarantee consistent >> results. >> As far as scanning goes, if you are going to do it >> in the same lab that made >> your prints, what makes you think they are going to >> do a better job there? >> Best, >> Mishka >> SP> __ SP> Do you Yahoo!? SP> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. SP> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
- Original Message - From: "Pat White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: MZ-S Focus Lock > Artur, the MZ-S does lock focus when you depress the shutter button > half-way, unless the AF slider switch is set to AF.C (continuous), rather > than AF.S (single). Perhaps I made myself unclear, sorry for that. Of course it locks focus in the AF.S mode. What I wanted to say is that when I tried to lock it, I often took accidental shots before the lock, because of lack of the clear stop in the half way down of the release button. Of course it happened because I wasn't used to this (as for an AF camera of course) and everything is the matter of habit anyway. Regards Artur ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz dosc placenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - zaloz konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Is this a good deal on a 6x7?
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 05:31 PM, Steve Pearson wrote: Nope, I passed also, waiting for more input. I knew it would be gone by morning. Thanks for not buying it out from under me. It's nice to know the pact is strong! Sorry you did not get it... I wouldn't exactly call it a pactmore like a big stupid soft spot in my head. Probably won't happen again. I'm sorry I didn't get it too. Dan Scott
Re: Hypothetical Question
Hee-hee! It's because of these sorts of posts that we're all so glad you're back, Tom! cheers, frank T Rittenhouse wrote: > All I am saying is that the people in Pentaxes marketing > department seem to be pretty good engineers . > > Ciao, > Graywolf > http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
- Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: MZ-S Focus Lock > It does. Mine (both) have distinct plateau half way and it is virtually impossible to shoot accidentally. In fact, it has the same release as the 67II; the good old manual focus style. But I've said that it's the manual style, haven't I?:0 What I mean is that when pressing the button slightly the camera starts the AF and metering. Continue with the pressing and you'll release the shutter. There's no "stop" in the middle of the way. While this kind of operating is good for manual focus bodies, for AF bodies it is not... IMHO of course. Even the MZ-5/5n/3, which are designed in an "old" way, feature that "stop". Of course, I could miss this stop when playing with the MZ-S. As I don't have this camera, I can't verify my statement right now. I'm just saying what I found out and remembered - but I remembered it well as when I discovered it, I was pretty shocked:) Or maybe there are different kinds of MZ-S release buttons - with and without the stop. Could it be possible? > The Z-1p does not. It has touch control release with no feedback. I don't really understand the above statement - could you please explain what you mean? Anyway, the release button of the Z-1p works in no different way than those of the SFX, Z-50p, MZ-50, MZ-7, MZ-5, MZ-5n, MZ-3 (the AF cameras I either owned or intensively played with). And a different issue - allow me, Pal, to ask you a question: do you consider the MZ-S to be the ultimate Pentax AF film camera? There's no catch in this question:) Regards Artur ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz dosc placenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - zaloz konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
Good advice Mishka, Now, how about a scanner for the negatives? Any suggestions out there for a good scanner in the $500 range, that produces good results for prints up to 8x10, from negatives? Thanks again --- Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is quite normal to have prints completely screwed > up by the lab. Even a > pretty good (read: expensive) lab. OTOH, it's much > more difficult to screw > up the film, since it's mostly automated. The "white > out" on the faces is > much more likely to show up on slides than on > negative film, since the > latter has much more lattitude, so if your slides > are OK, I wouldn't worry > about the negs. Scan them and adjust the > colors/contrast/etc yourself -- > that seems to one sure way to guarantee consistent > results. > As far as scanning goes, if you are going to do it > in the same lab that made > your prints, what makes you think they are going to > do a better job there? > Best, > Mishka > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: my kit
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 05:30 PM, Cotty wrote: Look what my son got me for Christmas :-) http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1925376538 Bless his little cotton socks. It's a wise child that knows its father. You're obligated to make a little bitty teeny tiny Cotty in full ST:TROG regalia to go along with that kit. :-) Dan Scott
Re: Hypothetical Question
Nah, I think he bought it because some camera freak buddy said Canon's are the best camera made. Of course, all those TV ads meant that he had already heard of Canon. All I am saying is that the people in Pentaxes marketing department seem to be pretty good engineers . Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > My bet is that the vast majority of Rebel users have no idea that all those big > white lenses on the sidelines of NFL football games are C lenses. They > probably bought their Rebels because Andre Agassi's mug is on the tube, trying > to tell us that he uses one (yeah, right!). That's ~real~ marketing! > > And, of hundreds of thousands of Rebels that are sold, do you really think that > many are bought because some neophyte was chatting with a member of CDML (if > such a thing exists), who enthusiastically told him to buy one? I have my > doubts. > > Nah, TV ads, magazine ads, promotional deals in the local paper selling the > ubiquitous starter kit with a 28-70 (or whatever) plus strap and camera bag for > $200 - that's what does it, imho. > > But, as always, I could be wrong.
Re: Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
It is quite normal to have prints completely screwed up by the lab. Even a pretty good (read: expensive) lab. OTOH, it's much more difficult to screw up the film, since it's mostly automated. The "white out" on the faces is much more likely to show up on slides than on negative film, since the latter has much more lattitude, so if your slides are OK, I wouldn't worry about the negs. Scan them and adjust the colors/contrast/etc yourself -- that seems to one sure way to guarantee consistent results. As far as scanning goes, if you are going to do it in the same lab that made your prints, what makes you think they are going to do a better job there? Best, Mishka
Re: My LX is back from Colorado.
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 06:40 PM, Christian Skofteland wrote: Have you seen Cesar's pimped-out LXen? I had to turn away to avoid seeing my lunch for the second time! ;-) Christian You bet. I guess we have stronger stomachs in Texas. ;-) Dan Scott
OT: Beer -- re: Hypothetical Question
Also, I resent the implication, I drink that stuff they make over here. Grolsh, Pilsner Urquel, and occassionally some of your english ale are my usual choices. Though I have heard that that stuff is only for export because you guys only drink Bud & Coors nowadays. A related anecdote: I was sitting in the bar next to L. L. Bean's in Freeport Maine several years back when the gentleman next to me, apparently a Canadian, said, "I didn't realize our export was quite this bad", refering to the Labatt's he was drinking. I explained to him about Town laws in Maine, and 3.2 beer, therein. He sputtered, "You mean they water the beer?" Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I'll bet you a bottle of Wychwood's Hobgoblin against a tin of that sudsy > bathwater you Americans call beer that you will not see a full frame DSLR > from Pentax before Jan 1st 2005 :-) > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ > >
Re: Hypothetical Question
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 04:40 PM, frank theriault wrote: Even if they do "monitor" us once in a while, or even all the time, I can't believe that they put much stock in our opinions. We're what, a couple of hundred enthusiasts? That's a pretty small sample, and hardly representative of the market as a whole. We don't have much influence beyond our group (or even within it ). They may watch us once in a while, but I can't believe that too many decisions are made based on what we think. BUT, just in case Big Brother Pentax is watching, how about a Pentax equivalent to the N FM3 (but way cheaper)? I guess it could hurt to try, eh? cheers, frank How about a ZX-5n dslr equivalent to whatever that Canon thing is Cotty's got? Bet they'd sell a bazillion more of those than a cheap FM3 knock off. Anyway, as previously mentioned, the demand for new, mechanical Pentax slrs is next to non-existent. The people buying Pentax mechanicals now have a huge supply of high quality mechanicals already available to them at prices that Pentax would find impossible to beat. Dan Scott
RE: my kit
Thanks. I think, some times more lenses provide more options thus more confusion. I do hangout in eBay but buy only if its must:-) Ramesh -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:09 PM To: Pentax List Subject: RE: my kit >I have only one camera. My kit is like this >MZ-5n, FA 50mm/2.8 Macro, FA 100mm/2.8 Macro, A 24mm/2.8. >LowePro Nova 4 bag. >Two 52mm Polarizers and one 58mm Polarizers. >One Cokin Square Nuetral Graduated Filter(must for landscape), >one Cokin Square Tobacco filter(overcast landscapes), one Cokin Square >81B filter. > >Slik700DX tripod. > >Ramesh Ramesh, I have to congratulate you, for that is one of the most sensible kit inventories I have seen in ages. What else does a person need?! Lovely - I bet you have a great time with that. I admire the simplicity - clears the mind for taking some great shots, I trust ;-) 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: Is this a good deal on a 6x7?
> -Original Message- > From: Steve Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Nope, I passed also, waiting for more input. I knew > it would be gone by morning. > > Thanks for not buying it out from under me. It's nice > to know the pact is strong! > > Sorry you did not get it... Me too, but I got a 645 FA 150/2.8 for $550. Woo Hoo!! tv
Re: my kit
A typical day in the woods for me would include: LX MX 24/2.8 Vivitar 50/1.7 SMC-M 105/2.5 Macro Vivitar S1 200/4 SMC-M 300/4 Sigma AF APO Macro Set of extension tubes Various filters, rings, etc. Gosen Luna Pro F AF280T with bracket and TTL cord Several rolls of Provia 100F and Velveta I can do landscapes, closeups (up to 4x), and wildlife shots. All this fits into one (large, heavy) bag. I carry the tripod over my shoulder. If I feel the need I'll split the load into a backpack and shoulder bag and carry the Auto Bellows A and maybe even the Super Program so I can shoot 3 types of film including B&W. The other day I played tourist in Washington DC and carried the LX, MX, 24, 50, 135 and 200 in my coat pockets. It worked out very well. Christian
Re: Hypothetical Question
Hey, I am the one who was trying to find a sucker to bet me. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:14 PM Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question > >If God loves me there is a full-frame digital SLR with fast imaged stablized > >lenses in my future. I am betting Pentax won't have one out by then. Anyone > >want to wager a beer or two on that. I like free beer! > > I'll bet you a bottle of Wychwood's Hobgoblin against a tin of that sudsy > bathwater you Americans call beer that you will not see a full frame DSLR > from Pentax before Jan 1st 2005 :-) > > You in? > > Cotty > > ref: > > http://www.wychwood.co.uk/ > > > 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: bargains and questions
In the US "Focal" is K-Mart's brandname for photo gear. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:28 PM Subject: bargains and questions > I just picked up a few lenses from a sale.. > Sigma Zoom Auto Focus 75-300 f4.5-5.6 Multi Coated > PK mount 28mm F2.8 > Pentax-F 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 Zoom Macro > > Total price $AUD100.00 > > The 28mm has no manufacturer but merely states 'LENS MADE IN JAPAN' > and a date sticker 20-06-47 (could this be right?) It does have a > number No.88315315 and also says FOCAL MC AUTO, it is a 52mm thread. > Any ideas who the maker of this lense may be? > > Secondly, Where might I find more info on the Pentax-F 35-70 Lens? > > Kind regards > 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: My LX is back from Colorado.
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 12:12, Dan Scott wrote: > > Gold plate? Aaack. Too, too tacky. > > Dan Scott What? The snakeskin isn't? Have you seen Cesar's pimped-out LXen? I had to turn away to avoid seeing my lunch for the second time! ;-) Christian
Re: Is this a good deal on a 6x7?
Nope, I passed also, waiting for more input. I knew it would be gone by morning. Thanks for not buying it out from under me. It's nice to know the pact is strong! Sorry you did not get it... --- Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 04:02 PM, Steve > Pearson wrote: > > > Dan- > > Did you get it? > > > > > > Nope. Figured I'd look like a jerk if I bought it > after you posted. I > take it you didn't either? > > Dan Scott > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
RE: Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
> -Original Message- > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Generally, here are the issues with slides for weddings: > Slides have narrower latitude for exposure so "Must Get" > shots are at > greater risk. >Slides are inherently costly and frustrating to get good > prints from. >Nobody looks at wedding albums from a Kodak carousel. > So your final > cost of prints ends up being higher when shooting > slides because you > must make prints of all of them. For me, that would > be between > 200-300 prints per wedding. >Slides are usually a bit too contrasty to handle black > tuxes and white > wedding dresses together especially when prints are > made from them. Also, you don't haver many high speed options. > > I personally know of no pros shooting slides for paid wedding work. > They may be out there, but so might APS wedding photographers. I know a guy who was hired by a film student to shoot his wedding. The catch was that the client *insisted* he shoot the whole thing on Kodachrome 25. Unbelievable. tv
Re: my kit
Look what my son got me for Christmas :-) http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1925376538 Bless his little cotton socks. 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[2]: Hypothetical Question
Hi, Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 11:02:59 PM, you wrote: [...] > I wouldn't place too high a priority on this as a hotline to the top > Pentax brass though :-) it's not brass anymore, it's plastic... --- Bob "Our heads are round so that our thoughts can fly in any direction" Francis Picabia
Re: RE: Hypothetical Question
>Just not sure how the CMOS works vs the CCD.I always associated CMOS >as start up computer programing.I have seen the Canon 1D and it looks >nice and its cheaper than the Dxx series from Nikon. >Any CMOS commentsCotty? >From what I gather, the CMOS uses vastly less power than a comparable CCD. This seems to bear out in practice. I have the grip with provision for 2 Liithium Ion battery packs, and the 2 packs. Charged up, with occasional snapping and say a good couple of hours shooting on a Saturday, so say about 400 exposures, maybe 450 in all, I can go a good 2 WEEKS before they're exhausted. I have disabled auto-shut-off. The camera stays on all the time when shooting unless I switch it off manually. The packs are amazing. Personally I wouldn't dally with AA-anything. .02pixels :-) Cot 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[3]: Hypothetical Question taken further...
Hi, Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 11:05:39 PM, you wrote: > I think one of Brad's points is that *many* on this list don't buy new > stuff no matter what Pentax makes. Even if they made the kind of > stuff you want, at the prices it would cost to make it, would you buy > new? Probably not. [...] When I had nearly $20K worth of retail spending power from my insurance claim to spend on new equipment, I'd have been happy to put it into Pentax-san's pockets, but he didn't have anything I wanted, so I bought Contax. Even when I was buying mostly used Pentax stuff I did buy a fair amount of new equipment. Somebody who has 4 or 5 cameras and a dozen or so lenses all bought used is still quite likely to spend more on new equipment, I'd have thought, than somebody who buys a low-end body and lens kit and sticks with that forever. --- Bob "Our heads are round so that our thoughts can fly in any direction" Francis Picabia
Re: Hypothetical Question
Cotty wrote: > > >If God loves me there is a full-frame digital SLR with fast imaged stablized > >lenses in my future. I am betting Pentax won't have one out by then. Anyone > >want to wager a beer or two on that. I like free beer! > > I'll bet you a bottle of Wychwood's Hobgoblin against a tin of that sudsy > bathwater you Americans call beer that you will not see a full frame DSLR > from Pentax before Jan 1st 2005 :-) > > You in? > > Cotty > > ref: > > http://www.wychwood.co.uk/ Hell no! But... I'd love to join you for making that case of Wychwood become smaller! I'm ALWAYS up for that, Cotty! I'll even bring my magic MX to see you! keith whaley P.S. Americans don't MAKE beer! IMMHO...
Re: Hypothetical Question
Hi, Tom, My bet is that the vast majority of Rebel users have no idea that all those big white lenses on the sidelines of NFL football games are C lenses. They probably bought their Rebels because Andre Agassi's mug is on the tube, trying to tell us that he uses one (yeah, right!). That's ~real~ marketing! And, of hundreds of thousands of Rebels that are sold, do you really think that many are bought because some neophyte was chatting with a member of CDML (if such a thing exists), who enthusiastically told him to buy one? I have my doubts. Nah, TV ads, magazine ads, promotional deals in the local paper selling the ubiquitous starter kit with a 28-70 (or whatever) plus strap and camera bag for $200 - that's what does it, imho. But, as always, I could be wrong. cheers, frank T Rittenhouse wrote: > But the people on this is are not a couple hundred users, they are a couple > of hundred flag wavers. If word of mouth is worth anything, they would be > trying to please these people. Canon & Nikon have thousands of flag wavers, > simply because they do try to please that segment of their market. The Rebel > is the best selling SLR in the world because of all the white lenses that > are seen at sporting events. Canon does not sell a heck of a lot of white > lenses, but giving them away sells a heck of a lot of Rebels cameras. That > is called marketing. > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Hypothetical Question
An interesting aside: of the current crop of $2K DSLRs the Nikon seems to produce the cleanest image. I is, I think, the only one using a CCD. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:07 PM Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question > "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >CMOS is a far better option than CCD however it has only recently been > >developed to a point where it would be suitable for professional photographic > >applications. CCD sensors will displaced completely in the not to distant > >future. > > > >See: > > > >http://kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/cameras/dcsPro14n/cmos.jht ml?id > >=0.3.6.30.5.8.3.18.3&lc=en > > Kodak is currently pushing their CMOS stuff heavily (their new 14 megapixel > camera is CMOS). For a bit less biased opinion (they do *both* CMOS and CCD > technology), see http://www.dalsa.com/markets/ccd_vs_cmos.asp > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com >
Re: my kit
>BTW, wifey is now in possession of a new ZX-L to complement >her ZX-M and ZX-30. Unlike _most_ of you cheapskate boogers >here, our family SUPPORTS Pentax. grin. At least for _her_ >purchases. She'll see the new AF360 under the tree come >Christmas, too. As far as I'm aware, I haven't booged in years :-) 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: Hypothetical Question
"Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >CMOS is a far better option than CCD however it has only recently been >developed to a point where it would be suitable for professional photographic >applications. CCD sensors will displaced completely in the not to distant >future. > >See: > >http://kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/cameras/dcsPro14n/cmos.jhtml?id >=0.3.6.30.5.8.3.18.3&lc=en Kodak is currently pushing their CMOS stuff heavily (their new 14 megapixel camera is CMOS). For a bit less biased opinion (they do *both* CMOS and CCD technology), see http://www.dalsa.com/markets/ccd_vs_cmos.asp -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Hypothetical Question
>The do not "officially" monitor this list. Therefore, what you are asking is >silly. Some of us on the list know people who work for Pentax. We know what >they say. However, I can almost guaranty they if you post a question to >Pentax on this list, it will not be answered. All companies that have press and public relations departments ensure that press clippings and relevant reaction is catalogued and filtered for use by market research and others within. Of course, it depends on the size and disposition of said PR Dept as to how far they go in gaining reaction and from what source, and how far they take it. I know for a fact that various personnel working for Pentax in various parts of the world have been known to monitor the list, whether through choice or instruction, and whether through their own research or through being provided with the relevant info. I won't back up my claim (for obvious reasons) with any hard evidence, you'll just have to trust me on that, or not. It should not be any great surprise. After all, knowledge is power, huh? I wouldn't place too high a priority on this as a hotline to the top Pentax brass though :-) Regards, 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: Is this a good deal on a 6x7?
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 04:02 PM, Steve Pearson wrote: Dan- Did you get it? Nope. Figured I'd look like a jerk if I bought it after you posted. I take it you didn't either? Dan Scott
Re: RE: Hypothetical Question
On 18 Dec 2002 at 16:27, David Brooks wrote: > Just not sure how the CMOS works vs the CCD.I always associated CMOS > as start up computer programing.I have seen the Canon 1D and it looks > nice and its cheaper than the Dxx series from Nikon. > Any CMOS commentsCotty? CMOS is a far better option than CCD however it has only recently been developed to a point where it would be suitable for professional photographic applications. CCD sensors will displaced completely in the not to distant future. See: http://kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/cameras/dcsPro14n/cmos.jhtml?id =0.3.6.30.5.8.3.18.3&lc=en 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: Hypothetical Question
On 18 Dec 2002 at 14:45, Len Paris wrote: > I hope they listen now. I would buy a 6MP CCD or CMOS DSLR and would > not mind if the chip is APS sized. If they could manage a CMOS chip like > the Foveon, with some enhancements over the one used in the Sigma SD-9, > I'd be very happy. I don't need anything a lot larger than that. Keep > the price $2200 or less and they've got me hooked. Yay, I'd be in it to and my second body would be the later full frame 14mpix. Pentax have extracted plenty on money out of me in new lenses very recently and mostly bases on the premise that they would soon deliver a DSLR, thank god (or your favourite deity) for K-mount backwards compatibility. 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: Hypothetical Question
On 18 Dec 2002 at 14:27, Brad Dobo wrote: > So it looks to me like most won't be happy unless they release a DSLR on the > traditional LX body, make it steel and heavy, and use as much mechanical parts > as possible. A mechanical analog digital...interesting :) A rigid chassis is just as important for a DSLR as a film SLR so a metal body would be desirable bear in mid too that modern cast alloys are near as light as polycarbonate for the same strength. Also the sensors in top end DSLRs require shutters and mirrors just like conventional SLRs therefore the mechanical requirements of the systems are similar. 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: my kit
Pentax ZX-5n, FA 43/1.9, A100/2.8 Canon G-III QL17 Olympus Infinity Mini (weatherproof) Mamiya C330 w/ 105/3.5 Busch Pressman 'D' with Schneider Symmar 150/5.6 Sunpak 611 flash
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
Artur, the MZ-S does lock focus when you depress the shutter button half-way, unless the AF slider switch is set to AF.C (continuous), rather than AF.S (single). Pat White
Re: Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
Steve, Where did you get them processed? Have you looked at the negatives to determine if they were corrected - at least the ones that look poor? Having shot tons of slides and a ton or two of prints, I find that print film usually is more forgiving provided you use a decent lab. That is one of the tricks that most Pro wedding/portrait photog's do - use a good lab. It makes quite a difference. For instance, my lab makes sure that all pictures are color matched and about the same brightness for the entire wedding. Costs a bit more and takes a bit longer, but consistency is much higher. Generally, here are the issues with slides for weddings: Slides have narrower latitude for exposure so "Must Get" shots are at greater risk. Slides are inherently costly and frustrating to get good prints from. Nobody looks at wedding albums from a Kodak carousel. So your final cost of prints ends up being higher when shooting slides because you must make prints of all of them. For me, that would be between 200-300 prints per wedding. Slides are usually a bit too contrasty to handle black tuxes and white wedding dresses together especially when prints are made from them. I personally know of no pros shooting slides for paid wedding work. They may be out there, but so might APS wedding photographers. Slides can be gorgeous when viewed on a light table, but translating them to nice prints is slow and costly. Seems the best approach these days is to scan and correct them yourself. Be aware of archivability as the wedding album is a treasure that is kept for many, many years. It would be bad to have it color shift and fade. >From what I have seen, to get the quality of scan that you are looking for, you should invest in a film scanner. If slides are to be your main film choice, make sure the scanner handles them well. My Minolta Scan Dual II is so-so for slide scanning. HTH, Bruce Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 2:10:43 PM, you wrote: SP> I just got back 1 roll of Kodak Portra 160NC prints, & SP> 1 roll of Fuji Astia pro. slides. Both rolls had SP> numerous portraits/candids of my family. Both were SP> shot with the same camera & lens. The slides seem to SP> be much more consistent with the flash. Some of the SP> prints show a little more "white out" on the faces. SP> Is this normal? If so, I'm giving serious thought to SP> shooting nothing but slides. It's cheaper, etc. Does SP> anyone out there shoot slides for weddings? SP> Last question-does anyone know if Costco's services SP> offer the ability to scan slides onto a CD? Or SP> another store that can do it reasonably-priced? I SP> have yet to buy a dedicated scanner, but the Minolta SP> III might be my next purchase. The shops that I talk SP> to all want big bucks just to scan one slide! SP> Thanks again all for your input... SP> __ SP> Do you Yahoo!? SP> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. SP> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Hypothetical Question
Even if they do "monitor" us once in a while, or even all the time, I can't believe that they put much stock in our opinions. We're what, a couple of hundred enthusiasts? That's a pretty small sample, and hardly representative of the market as a whole. We don't have much influence beyond our group (or even within it ). They may watch us once in a while, but I can't believe that too many decisions are made based on what we think. BUT, just in case Big Brother Pentax is watching, how about a Pentax equivalent to the N FM3 (but way cheaper)? I guess it could hurt to try, eh? cheers, frank Paul Stenquist wrote: > I work in advertising and have had a lot of contact with the marketing > departments of various companies for the last quarter century. They all > monitor every bit of information they can find. Why not? It's a no > brainer. More information is always a good thing. > Paul > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Hypothetical Question taken further...
Sorry, Brad, But, I think you've got the whole marketing thing backwards (I'm saying this from the viewpoint of someone who knows ~nothing~ about marketing, btw). I shouldn't have to buy the "latest and greatest" equipment, to support my favourite company, so they can bring out something that I don't really care about right now (ie: a dslr), so the company can stay solvent. I'm the consumer, dammit! They (Pentax or anyone else) should cater to ~me~! If they don't, I don't buy new stuff from them. Simple as that. Pentax doesn't make the type of camera that I prefer, being an affordable, nicely featured mechanical metal-bodied camera. But, who does? No one, at least not a 35mm slr - and I don't count the N FM3, since it ain't exactly affordable. Mind you, I'm not saying that Pentax ~should~ make what I want. They stuck with the K1000 for almost 25 years, and made it as cheaply as they could, eventually making it in 3rd world countries, and substituting much plastic for what was once metal, both inside and out. They obviously weren't making money off it, so they stopped making it - and that's fine. The only camera I can think of offhand that fits the bill right now is the Voigtlander Bessa R (the top plate isn't metal, but the chassis is, so I'll forgive them for that). I might have bought one, but Dave Chang-Sang sold me his Leica CL for about 1/2 the price of a new Bessa and lens. So, I'll keep buying used, until Pentax comes up with something new that I want, and I ain't holding my breath. Of course, I'm now invested in k mount and m42 gear, so I can't afford to change systems - not that I want to, 'cause I like what I have. But I certainly will make no apologies for sticking with the used market, nor should I have to. cheers, frank Brad Dobo wrote: > Just a thought. Many here (but not all) like and use the older gear, to get > additional items, or replacements, they buy used equipment (not all the > time, but most I assume). What do I think? To each his own. More power to > you if you can really 'work' the older equipment. Now, I'm not a perfect > example, since I've now bought 2 items used, including a manual focus lens. > However, we all talk about Pentax and their position, rank and financial, > and what they will be in the future, and really..what about that darned > DSLR? What I'm thinking is, we as a whole group are the serious amateurs, > or professionals using Pentax. We are somewhat representative. If we don't > buy all the latest and greatest from Pentax, how can we expect them to > develop for us, a DSLR. We'd be the ones with the want and money to buy > one. But Pentax needs money and a reason to develop and manufacture and > sell worldwide a DSLR. Are we, in general terms, helping them do that? If > they know their real fans like the old over the new, and buy used, why put > the effort into a DSLR? Or a better new 35mm flagship for that matter? > Just something to toss about. > > [The opinions represented in this email are by no means that of the > originator of the email. ] > > Happy Holidays! > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: MZ-S Focus Lock
Artur, the MZ-S does have the ability to focus with a light pressure on the shutter release: the amount of travel is, however, very small. You can lock focus only in AF.S mode. Focus on the desired subject by pressing lightly on the shutter button, or by using the AF button: hold, then recompose and continue releasing the shutter. In AF.C mode, by definition, the camera will continuously focus, using predictive focussing when detecting a moving subject. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: Re: MZ-S Focus Lock > Well, if you're using AFS, you need to keep pressure on the shutter release > and recompose. As far as I know, the only way, other than focusing manually > (or after AF, turning it to MF) and recomposing. I don't think there is any > more to it. Could be wrong. > > Brad > > - Original Message - > From: "Robert Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:51 PM > Subject: MZ-S Focus Lock > > > > I feel like a dummy asking this question, but: > > > > I just bought a MZ-S and I'll be damned if I can get > > the focus lock to work when recomposing the frame. > > > > Has anyone experienced the same problem, and if so, > > any tips? > > > > Thanks much. > > > > Robert > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > > > > > >
Re: Hypothetical Question
I work in advertising and have had a lot of contact with the marketing departments of various companies for the last quarter century. They all monitor every bit of information they can find. Why not? It's a no brainer. More information is always a good thing. Paul Brad Dobo wrote: > > I'm not saying it's impossible. Far from it. Just not likely. I doubt > Pentax Japan does. Perhaps someone from Pentax USA? They don't carry much > weight in Japan however. I do know that no one at Pentax Canada watches > this list, if some are members, they are just like most of us, they don't > write reports to anyone. > > Anyhow, silly topic that no one will change opinions on, not quite but > getting up there with Big Brother, CIA, etc. If anything, we just confuse > the hell out of them! > > So it looks to me like most won't be happy unless they release a DSLR on the > traditional LX body, make it steel and heavy, and use as much mechanical > parts as possible. A mechanical analog digital...interesting :) > > Brad (who loves the MZ-S, the 360 flash, the FA lenses, and autofocus! No > need for a new 35mm flagship when when we have a wonderful one now!) > > Brad (who also loves his A 400mm 5.6 MF lens and A1.4x-L converter that's in > the mail!) > > Brad (who won't buy a DSLR for a long long time!) > > (There, that's got 'em confused! ) > > - Original Message - > From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 1:56 PM > Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question > > > The do not "officially" monitor this list. Therefore, what you are asking > is > > silly. Some of us on the list know people who work for Pentax. We know > what > > they say. However, I can almost guaranty they if you post a question to > > Pentax on this list, it will not be answered. > > > > Ciao, > > Graywolf > > http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Of course, that is assuming they watch the list. Just who is? This was > > > originally a Pentax USA thing, right? Well, Japan doesn't think much of > > > North America. So who is looking? Why? Have we looked at the content > > > lately? I'm sure they left after all the insults, swearing and gun > talk. > > > Can someone give me concrete proof that Pentax monitors this? (again, > what > > > is Pentax?) Realistically, you cannot expect me to take someones word > for > > > it. If you cannot prove it, it's immediately suspect. Fishy, > > screwyya > > > know! > > > > > >
Re: PUB submission form problem
I don't think that the Javascript being used by the PUG auto subscription form is properly supported by Opera. You'll probably have to use Internet exploder or Netscape. At 01:15 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, you wrote: I tried yesterday and again this morning to submit my Jan PUG entry on-line using Opera. Each time the submission failed, giving me an error message that said my file was only 1K in size, when I knew it was 75K. I has used Opera previously, with no problems. Yes, I did remove the quotation marks, as instructed. I can't use Netscape, because i have Netscape 7, and reverted to Netscape 4,77, which doesn't work at all on the PUG form. I was thus forced to use IE, and I absolutely hate to use that microsoft monstrosity. I did, however, complete the submission and get a confirmation by email. Any ideas as to what the problem might be?
Slide for Portraits (& Scanning?)
I just got back 1 roll of Kodak Portra 160NC prints, & 1 roll of Fuji Astia pro. slides. Both rolls had numerous portraits/candids of my family. Both were shot with the same camera & lens. The slides seem to be much more consistent with the flash. Some of the prints show a little more "white out" on the faces. Is this normal? If so, I'm giving serious thought to shooting nothing but slides. It's cheaper, etc. Does anyone out there shoot slides for weddings? Last question-does anyone know if Costco's services offer the ability to scan slides onto a CD? Or another store that can do it reasonably-priced? I have yet to buy a dedicated scanner, but the Minolta III might be my next purchase. The shops that I talk to all want big bucks just to scan one slide! Thanks again all for your input... __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Hypothetical question
Hi, Ronald, I keep hearing that bayonet mount is so much faster to change lenses than screwmount, but my experience doesn't agree. I just now walked over to my cameras, and timed a lens exchange with both bayonet and screwmount. Under 5 seconds for each. Even if I'm off by a second or two, the difference is truly inconsequential, imho. cheers, frank Ronald Arvidsson wrote: > Sorry: I wouldn't use screw mount simply because I use single focal > lengths and they are too slow to exchnage on the camera. > > Cheers, > > Ronald -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: SMC Takumar 135/2.5
My understanding of the formal way to measure aperture is that it is the ratio of the diameter of the _perceived_ aperture at the film plane to the focal length of the lens in use*, and is thus at least as dependent upon the effects of post-aperture elements on the bundle of rays which form the image, as upon the diameter of the front element. This is not to say that the diameter of the front element is irrelevant, just that you cannot expect to measure it to support arguments that a lens has an effective maximum aperture <4% smaller than it is rated. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia *Source: M. J. Langford, Basic Photography, Focal Press 1973 - Original Message - From: "Scott Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:19 AM Subject: Re: SMC Takumar 135/2.5 > On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 12:20, Fred wrote: > > > Fred wrote: > > F>> [The SMC K 135/2.5 is on the left, while the Takumar Bayonet > > F>> 135/"2.5" is on the right.] > > > > > Fred, Unfortunately I was referring to the SMC K 135/2.5 . :o( The > > > front lens diameter as it appeared to my limited measuring > > > capabilities is around 52mm, that translates to an aperture of 2.6 > > > or so. Worse even - the meter agrees. > > > > Hi, Alin. I see. You know, before sending my post (that you > > quoted), I tried to find an older post of mine, where I had stated > > my measurements, but I couldn't find it, so I'll have to measure > > again. I do remember that the SMC K seemed a little smaller than > > f/2.5 (by measuring and calculating), and that the Tak Bayonet was > > smaller still. Hmmm... OK, where are those lenses... > > > > Well, here's what I just measured and calculated: > > > > SMC K 135/2.5 : 52mm front element diameter -> f/2.6 > > > > Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5 : 49mm front element diameter -> f/2.8 > > > > Of course, I would probably come up with slightly different > > measurements each time I tried to measure them (since I don't have a > > measuring caliper), and I'm also assuming that both lenses truly > > have 135mm FL's. > > > > On the theoretical side, it has been pointed out here before that > > the entrance pupil of a lens is not necessarily equal to the clear > > diameter of its front element, but I myself just can't see how a > > 135/2.5 lens could ever have a front element diameter less than 54mm > > and still be an f/2.5 lens. > > The FL is probably a bit shorter than 135mm, giving a boost to the > relative aperture. According to photodo, the real FL of the new FA > 135/2.8 is 130mm, and coincidentally 130mm / 52mm = exactly 2.5. > > -Scott > >
