Re: Digital theme? Was PUG reminder
Hi! Frank Theriault wrote: Well, not to take the wind out of anyone's sails, but you ~know~ someone will take a picture of some fingers and submit that! vbg (at least I was going to) (but not anymore, I have something much wittier - ha!) Well, if we're talking semantics here :), how about dig it all interpretation? You see, I've just finished laughing on the parking ticket joke, so I couldn't quite resist, even though English is not my native tongue... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: Large format starting kit
Hi Kevin, Perhaps a Speedgraphic with a 135 (usual lens found on them) and a 90mm for the wide stuff. This would be cheap and portable. Alternately a Calumet C400 with roughly the same lenses if you want a monorail for the tilts and swings and the things you want to photograph don't move much and are close to a road. A monorail is heavy and cumbersome in comparison to the SpeedGraphic which was designed to be handheld. Of course the graphic works better on atripod, but so does everything Figure AUD$400 to $500 for either camera in reasonable nick and AUD$200 - 400 for an older 90/f8 like a Schneider Angulon (a Super Angulon will cost more for the extra stop). Dark Slides will be around AUD$20 -$30 second hand. A grafmatic back (six shots per unit) is fantastic if you can find them in reasonable condition. They will be from $30 (if you are lucky) to $100 (in nice condition). These fit the grafloc style back found on most SpeedGraphics, but not all 4x5 cameras can use them (the Calumet can't) An older Pentax spotmeter would be nice, maybe AUD$200 on eBay, less if you are lucky, but you could always use your SLR for metering. After you've played for a while you'll know if you want to spend money on specialist filters for LF. If you are looking at BW then a Yankee tank will develop up to 12 sheets of film relatively easily and quite cheaply. For colour it gets a lot more expensive. Getting someone else to do it is very expensive. BW costs around AUD$1.25 a sheet to buy, and $5 -$6 a sheet for colour. Will cost another $5 a sheet to get it developed. Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia I wish to experiment a little with some large format landscapes and portraits. What would a beginners kit include? eg 135mm lens, 28mm lens What body, lenses, filters etc would get me started? Kind regards Kevin
Re: Hypothetical Question
And, gathering from what I read here: Flash will not fire if the LX thinks it can do the exposure without flash. Sticky mirror would not have been a complaint when the LX was released, at least, I hope not. -Lon Pål Jensen 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? Pål
Re: Hypothetical Question
If I had to guess, I'd say the average USA Pentax enthusiast got the camera and lens as a gift and uses it 3 times a year. I don't think that fits this group. Lon 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 g). 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? vbg 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: 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 binocular head that camera is attached to belongs to a transmission light microscope not a stereo instrument. And to get a decent picture with that arrangement would be very difficult. I seriously doubt it would work very well. That was the set-up I used for my film granularity tests. It worked well enough for that purpose. Here is a sample from that set-up. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Superia100/ Also, could you explain the difference between a transmission light instrument and a stereo instrument. I was under the impression that because the instrument has 2 eyepieces, it would be considered a binocular. William Robb
Re: bargains and questions
Focal was a re-marketer back then. I remember this brand, as until recently I has a Focal table top tripod. The ballhead finally disintegrated on it. -Lon Kevin Waterson wrote: 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: Large format starting kit
This one time, at band camp, Paul Ewins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Kevin, Perhaps a Speedgraphic with a 135 (usual lens found on them) and a 90mm for the wide stuff. This would be cheap and portable. someone mention to me why not use a 645 MF and it got me thinking a little What are the major differences between a 645 and 67? 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: Slide for Portraits ( Scanning?)
I've had good luck with the Pacific Image 36000Pro, but I have not used any other scanner. Apparently much that's in my scanner was used in the Kodak 36000. The Pacific Image is typically below $500 mail order. One plus: The SilverFast folks make a driver for the PIE unit, but I've not purchased that driver yet. From what I hear, SilverFast does negative orange-mask stripping better than just about anyone else. Steve Pearson wrote, in part: 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?
Re: Slide for Portraits ( Scanning?)
The Pacific Image models do whole strip scanning, and I do NOT recommend this option, at least on PIE units, for two reasons: a) dust collects on that large part of the roll left dangling out of the unit for a long time while the scans are made. b) I've not seen my unit deal with a roll keeping the images centered. It inevitably drifts so that after about 10 scans you're seeing a third of one frame and two-thirds of the next. Bruce Dayton wrote: 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: Advice for a microscope for photog. purpose?
A binocular stereo microscope has two separate objectives. A transmission light microscope a 'compound microscope' has one objective, but may have a binocular head, or even a head with a binocular and a vertical photo tube. The beam is split and 50% goes to each ocular. But both eyes see the same view. In a stereo microscope the eyes are seeing a true stereo picture through two separate objectives spaced some centimetres apart and focussed (angled) at the same spot in the centre of the stage. The magnifications obtainable with a good compound microscope approach the theoretical limit of about 1250X for visible light. Stereo microscopes work between 5X and 200X although some go higher. Anything about 150X is impractical. By putting a camera on one of the oculars (eyepieces) of your microscope you got 50% of the available light, but also added noise to your picture from reflections inside the unused side of the optical system and the beam splitter and prism. There are at least ten glass surfaces that would have been bouncing light up and down the tube. The only way to take decent pictures with a compound microscope is through a vertical phototube without any extra glass surfaces to degrade the image. I've just had a look at Microscopes from Nightingales in Florida. They have a number of beautiful instruments for sale. Many have solid stands that would support a camera perfectly well. There is even one, a Leitz Ortholux, with an automatic camera included. I think it was about $3500 and quite reasonable at that. Perfect for an amateur who is really serious about the job. The objectives and eyepieces included were Planachromats, specially made for photomicrography. There were a few others like the fine Zeiss GFL ( I had two of those) but they don't support cameras very well, an external stand is always needed. Quite a few of the instruments offered are modern enough so that it would be possible to buy a vertical phototube to which the Pentax K adaptor could be fitted. An LX would be the ideal camera for the job. Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:12 PM Subject: 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 binocular head that camera is attached to belongs to a transmission light microscope not a stereo instrument. And to get a decent picture with that arrangement would be very difficult. I seriously doubt it would work very well. That was the set-up I used for my film granularity tests. It worked well enough for that purpose. Here is a sample from that set-up. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Superia100/ Also, could you explain the difference between a transmission light instrument and a stereo instrument. I was under the impression that because the instrument has 2 eyepieces, it would be considered a binocular. William Robb
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission
Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure how this works but, the only time you see the f Stop displayed in the finder with A lenses is when you use the A setting on the lens. Weather the value displayed comes from the lens or is the setting the camera will attempt I don't know. Tha answer is to be found (of course) on Boz's web page: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/extras/K-mount/Ka.html Displaying Aperture in the viewfinder In the Tv and P operating modes the body decides how many f-stops the lens will be closed down during the exposure. Consequently, knowing the narrowest aperture and the number of f-stops allows the higher-end bodies to calculate and display the selected f-stop. But why does this not happen in the M and Av modes? After all, knowing the positions of its stop-down coupler, the body should be able to calculate how many f-stops the lens is closed down. Knowing the narrowest aperture and the number of f-stops, the body could calculate the widest aperture, and then the manually-selected f-stop. Yes, but only for prime lenses! Variable-aperture zooms have fixed contact patterns, and can therefore only indicate a fixed aperture range. In this case, the incorrect f-stop may be displayed in the viewfinder, and I guess that because of this, Pentax left the feature completely out. Note that due to the TTL exposure metering, the film will be exposed properly regardless of the fact that the f-stop's numerical value may be calculated incorrectly. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission
Yes, that works (Program Mode), but it's just a mechanism on the camera and on the lens, to close down the aperture for a shot. This lens has one contact. I don't know what it does. But it will not display the f-stop in the viewfinder or LCD screen while in Av or Tv mode. I looked at the negs (data imprinting does come in handy!!), and in program it tells you, but in Tv or Av it does not. Just an F--. I talked to another member off-list who has this lens, and has used it with the MZ-S and the PZ-1p, and they get the same result. So, it works, but doesn't display the information I would have thought, and others thought, it should. It doesn't cripple the lens or camera, but it's nice to see that information. Brad. - Original Message - From: Shaun Canning [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 5:35 AM Subject: Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission Brad, All 'A' series lenses feature the contacts to transmit lens information to the body of suitable cameras (basically anything from a Program A onwards, including your mz-s). You can set your lens to 'A' on the diaphragm and the camera will control it via the input dials. Cheers Shaun Brad Dobo wrote: Hey all, As ya may know, I bought (used...) a Pentax SMCP-A 400mm f/5.6. I was told by one knowledgeable person that the 'A' lenses did not transmit the fstop to the camera (in my case the MZ-S, nothing in the viewfinder or LCD screen), but told from another knowledgeable person that it should. So, what's the deal? Are there variances in the 'A' series? Anyone have this combo that can try? I just want to make sure I'm getting a lens in proper working order. Thanks, Brad. ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658 . -- 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: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
Pat, I have noted many double posts and such on this list the last couple of days. So it may not be you. Finally caught up, César Panama City, Florida -- -Original Message- -- From: Pat White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:25 AM -- -- 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: Behind the counter with digital
I think this is the machine that my local shop just got in. I will check in the next couple of days. I have an open invitation to see it in action. I have been meaning to ask if they will give guidlines on submissions or will they just deal with everything as it comes in. Cesar Panama City, Florida -- -Original Message- -- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 11:07 PM -- -- 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: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission
Sorry Peter, didn't see your post! Yes, it seems that is the general consensus. In Av it will not show, but I think I made an error in my last post, I looked at the data, and I didn't take any Tv shots, so I don't know (but I would think) if the f-stop is displayed. It's now wrapped as a gift, so I can't try it out until the 25th! Brad - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:56 PM Subject: Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission I'm not sure how this works but, the only time you see the f Stop displayed in the finder with A lenses is when you use the A setting on the lens. Weather the value displayed comes from the lens or is the setting the camera will attempt I don't know. At 01:46 AM 12/19/2002 -0500, you wrote: Hey all, As ya may know, I bought (used...) a Pentax SMCP-A 400mm f/5.6. I was told by one knowledgeable person that the 'A' lenses did not transmit the fstop to the camera (in my case the MZ-S, nothing in the viewfinder or LCD screen), but told from another knowledgeable person that it should. So, what's the deal? Are there variances in the 'A' series? Anyone have this combo that can try? I just want to make sure I'm getting a lens in proper working order. Thanks, Brad. ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658 Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera datatransmission
Variable-aperture zooms have fixed contact patterns, and can therefore only indicate a fixed aperture range. In this case, the incorrect f-stop may be displayed in the viewfinder, and I guess that because of this, Pentax left the feature completely out. Note that due to the TTL exposure metering, the film will be exposed properly regardless of the fact that the f-stop's numerical value may be calculated incorrectly. I think this is one thing the Nikon system works better. When the lens was zoomed, or macro lens focuses to very close distance, the aperture readout would be compensated automatically. Pentax AF system doesn't do that. regards, Alan Chan _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lensto camera data transmission
And, Brad, these contacts can sometimes fail to work. Cleaning them by rubbing briskly with a clean cloth, therefore doing a gentle burnish, might help. Shaun Canning wrote: Brad, All 'A' series lenses feature the contacts to transmit lens information to the body of suitable cameras (basically anything from a Program A onwards, including your mz-s). You can set your lens to 'A' on the diaphragm and the camera will control it via the input dials. Cheers Shaun Brad Dobo wrote: Hey all, As ya may know, I bought (used...) a Pentax SMCP-A 400mm f/5.6. I was told by one knowledgeable person that the 'A' lenses did not transmit the fstop to the camera (in my case the MZ-S, nothing in the viewfinder or LCD screen), but told from another knowledgeable person that it should. So, what's the deal? Are there variances in the 'A' series? Anyone have this combo that can try? I just want to make sure I'm getting a lens in proper working order. Thanks, Brad. ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658 . -- 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: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission
Tha answer is to be found (of course) on Boz's web page: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/extras/K-mount/Ka.html Displaying Aperture in the viewfinder In the Tv and P operating modes the body decides how many f-stops the lens will be closed down during the exposure. Consequently, knowing the narrowest aperture and the number of f-stops allows the higher-end bodies to calculate and display the selected f-stop. But why does this not happen in the M and Av modes? After all, knowing the positions of its stop-down coupler, the body should be able to calculate how many f-stops the lens is closed down. Knowing the narrowest aperture and the number of f-stops, the body could calculate the widest aperture, and then the manually-selected f-stop. Yes, but only for prime lenses! Variable-aperture zooms have fixed contact patterns, and can therefore only indicate a fixed aperture range. In this case, the incorrect f-stop may be displayed in the viewfinder, and I guess that because of this, Pentax left the feature completely out. Note that due to the TTL exposure metering, the film will be exposed properly regardless of the fact that the f-stop's numerical value may be calculated incorrectly. Hmm...I'm almost asleep, but the 'Yes, but only for prime lenses!' Jumps out at me. Does that mean I should get a display, and only the 'A' Zooms don't? I'm not reading it well enough, feel free to correct me. I'm just wondering why there is an electrical contact on the lens. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera datatransmission
It's just the way 'A' lenses were designed. When the lens was set to 'A', the circuit will be closed and the camera will determine the maximum and minimum aperture based on the arrangement of the contacts on the lens mount. F FA lenses have chips inside to tell the camera what apertures they are so they work even when the lens was set to other than 'A'. But then again, even with F or FA lenses, the displayed aperture might not be accurate (could be 1/2 stop off when the lens was set to non-A). It has to do with the QC tolerance. regards, Alan Chan Yes, that works (Program Mode), but it's just a mechanism on the camera and on the lens, to close down the aperture for a shot. This lens has one contact. I don't know what it does. But it will not display the f-stop in the viewfinder or LCD screen while in Av or Tv mode. I looked at the negs (data imprinting does come in handy!!), and in program it tells you, but in Tv or Av it does not. Just an F--. I talked to another member off-list who has this lens, and has used it with the MZ-S and the PZ-1p, and they get the same result. So, it works, but doesn't display the information I would have thought, and others thought, it should. It doesn't cripple the lens or camera, but it's nice to see that information. _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
Mike, In terms of using this group for Market Research, we would be more of an Expert Panel than a typical focus group. Sometimes consumer products companies recruit groups of 8-10 people for a 2 hour discussion of some issues. Product management/marketing folks sit behind the one way mirror and watch the discussion. This list would not be an average group of users, but a special group of very experienced, knowledgeable product users. Sometimes consumer products companies will recruit these kinds of groups. Your hypothetical questions/conclusions regarding too many of us liking old, manual focus cameras and lenses seems incorrect to me. Cameras are a lifetime purchase for most consumers, maybe twice or three times a lifetime, but not more often. People bought a 'good' 35mm camera, and then treated it carefully. Pentax is in a difficult business. In the last 40 years, it has gone from producing high quality instruments to quality cameras for the mass market (think ME, ME Super), to Point-n-shoot stuff for Walmart or Boots the Chemist. The high end of this business is full of folks who expect top quality optical and mechanical products as the minimum. Old Spotmatic or Super Program or LX users if you will. Meanwhile, the profits on new sales are being made on the large, mass market cheap zoom cameras. How to revive the high end business?... it's not easy. Look at what we like. High quality optics with a quality feel when handling. Oh, and the task is complicated by the fact that you have 30 years of old lenses exported to the world when the Yen was cheap. These old, high quality lenses are available at a significant discount to their cost to reproduce today. Much the same is true for camera bodies. Japan has responded to the cost pressures by going from 100's of parts in a K1000 to 10's of parts in a point-n-shoot zoom. And we yearn for the good old cameras... If I put on my Marketing/Product Manager hat, I'd say this. If you want to sell some more high end Pentax camera gear, you've got to give the consumer something they haven't got now. Autofocus is a potential benefit/feature which will get some of these folks to switch. (But don't introduce a fine camera like the PZ-1 combined with a poor optical/mechanical 28-80 power zoom!) Image stabilization lenses and digital are two more potential hooks to draw the customer in. Medium format is another. So yes, I do like old gear but I could be made to switch. Just remember, we are a price conscious group of users. If you want me to buy something new, you've got to give me the kind of price/performance I can get in the used market. ...and I do own 2 limited lenses, a PZ-1 and PZ-p, and 4-5 more FA lenses. Regards, Bob S. In a message dated 12/18/02 9:22:55 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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.
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
Hi, Do you think PZ1p is much better than PZ1? I has the latter and sometimes wonder whether to look for another the same body ( I like ergonomics of PZ1 very much) or spend extra money for p version.Angle of built-in flash is not important for me 3pictures per 1s. I take mostly slides and own some K and M lenses apart from A50/1.7 and Tamron SP 90/2.8 manual version so for me metering is important and build quality. Alek [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Mike, In terms of using this group for Market Research, we would be more of an Expert Panel than a typical focus group. Sometimes consumer products companies recruit groups of 8-10 people for a 2 hour discussion of some issues. Product management/marketing folks sit behind the one way mirror and watch the discussion. This list would not be an average group of users, but a special group of very experienced, knowledgeable product users. Sometimes consumer products companies will recruit these kinds of groups. Your hypothetical questions/conclusions regarding too many of us liking old, manual focus cameras and lenses seems incorrect to me. Cameras are a lifetime purchase for most consumers, maybe twice or three times a lifetime, but not more often. People bought a 'good' 35mm camera, and then treated it carefully. Pentax is in a difficult business. In the last 40 years, it has gone from producing high quality instruments to quality cameras for the mass market (think ME, ME Super), to Point-n-shoot stuff for Walmart or Boots the Chemist. The high end of this business is full of folks who expect top quality optical and mechanical products as the minimum. Old Spotmatic or Super Program or LX users if you will. Meanwhile, the profits on new sales are being made on the large, mass market cheap zoom cameras. How to revive the high end business?... it's not easy. Look at what we like. High quality optics with a quality feel when handling. Oh, and the task is complicated by the fact that you have 30 years of old lenses exported to the world when the Yen was cheap. These old, high quality lenses are available at a significant discount to their cost to reproduce today. Much the same is true for camera bodies. Japan has responded to the cost pressures by going from 100's of parts in a K1000 to 10's of parts in a point-n-shoot zoom. And we yearn for the good old cameras... If I put on my Marketing/Product Manager hat, I'd say this. If you want to sell some more high end Pentax camera gear, you've got to give the consumer something they haven't got now. Autofocus is a potential benefit/feature which will get some of these folks to switch. (But don't introduce a fine camera like the PZ-1 combined with a poor optical/mechanical 28-80 power zoom!) Image stabilization lenses and digital are two more potential hooks to draw the customer in. Medium format is another. So yes, I do like old gear but I could be made to switch. Just remember, we are a price conscious group of users. If you want me to buy something new, you've got to give me the kind of price/performance I can get in the used market. ...and I do own 2 limited lenses, a PZ-1 and PZ-p, and 4-5 more FA lenses. Regards, Bob S. In a message dated 12/18/02 9:22:55 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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.
American Beer (was Hypothetical Question)
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:52:33 -0500, T Rittenhouse wrote: [...] 3.2 beer [...] We used to call that near beer. Apparently because it gets to sit near beer on the loading dock. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Unidentified subject!
If I'm shooting in low light conditions and I have a longer lens at f/4 and a shorter lens at f/2.8, is there ever an advantage to using the shorter lens for the wider aperture, but a slower film speed, and then cropping and zooming on a portion of the picture? I do I pretty much always want to make the picture as big as I can and use a film appropriate to the lighting (which is probably 1600 speed)?
Re: P67 does 2003 Pirelli calendar
Merely the vagracies of the internet. It probably routed the long way to you. There are e-mail test programs that bounce mail of of test sites around the world. I have had replies from Australia in a minute, from the next large town in three days. Internet is not a big old pool that some folks seem to thing. It is a relay system. Short route may be from your computer to your ISP modem server, to your ISP mail server to PDML mail server and back along the same route. But just as likely it goes from your ISP mail server to some relay server, to some relay server 1/2 way around the world to some other relay server to PDML server and back some other equally complicated but different route. Seems strange, I know, but it is set up that way so the internet can not be blocked by a simple outage, even a mass outage in some area. Unfortunately your ISP does not have multiple routes to your computer. That is the weak link in the chain. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: Pat White [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:24 AM Subject: 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: Party pics, Russian-style,
If you start with the political comments again, we will all live to regret it. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Lon Williamson Subject: Re: Party pics, Russian-style, I do wish, though, that any leader who wants to start a war would be required to lead the troups, on the ground, out front, riding a horse and waving a big bright flag. I think the world would applaud if you all sent GW off to lead the charge into Iraq. But please, not on a horse. Horses are too nice to waste that way. William Robb -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://geocities.com/dmatyola/ Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399
AC Adapter II for AF400T- Beg,borrow, or steal
Hi all, Anyone have one of these that you would like to sell? It lets you use the AF400T with a plug in to wall outlet. I`ve been nominated to be the photographer at my daughters school fashion show. I was thinking of using the LX with winder, SMCA 35-105/3.5, AF400T reversed into rented umbrella on a tripod with a AC adapter so I don`t have to worry about batteries. I was thinking of using Supra 400 so the colors pop. I have till March to prepare for this. Any help or suggestions will be very much appreciated. Thanks, Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California
Re: Luminous Landscape...
Hi Boris, On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:06:14 +0200, Boris Liberman wrote: [...] I haven't grown up enough as a photographer to carry with me some kind of tripod or monopod all the time. [...] Don't forget all of the natural 'pods out there: fence posts, street signs, picnic tables, trees, etc. Almost anything you can lean against or put the camera on can be a 'pod. Just be careful using automobiles or trucks ... their suspensions mean they sway under you and the camera if you're not careful. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Large format starting kit
The Pentax 67 units are very mechanical. The 67II give you some automation. The Pentax 645 gives you a lot of automation and convenience features. Then, there's the negative size. 35mm is 3.6 cm x 2.4 cm= 8.64 sq cm 645 is 6 cm x 4.5 cm= 24sq cm 67 is 7 cm x 6 cm= 42sq cm 4x5 is12 cm x 10 cm= 120 sq cm Obviously, the bigger the neg the sharper the print. In results, you'll be hard-pressed to differentiate between a 6x7 neg enlarged to 16x20 and a 4x5 enlarged to 16x20. A 4x5 can give you something fun to work with -- lens movements. A 4x5 allows you to treat each frame differently. Over expose, underexpose, process accordingly. Can't do that with roll film, at least not without great expense. A 4x5 can also be cheaper than a medium format. Busch 'D' Pentax 67 Body $200$400 Wide Angle90mm $200 75mm $400 Normal 150mm $200 90mm $400 Portrait 210mm $250 150mm $300 = = $ 850 $1,500 (Lenses chosen for 4x5 would be Schneider: 90mm Angulon, 150mm Symmar, 210 Symmar-S @ Ebay prices.) You'll spend another $150 on film holders and a changing bag. Film tends to run $1-$4 per shot, and that will add up quickly. A 4x5 is a LOT more work. You can pick up a 67 or 645 and just start shooting. Can't do that with a 4x5, at least not very easily. There are cheap lenses for 4x5 as well. Avoid them if you want to justify the expenditure. You might was well stay with 35mm as shoot with an Optar. (imnsho) You can move the lens on a 4x5 for improving or manipulating DOF. Just one movement (shift) on a Pentax 67 will cost you about $1000. A little tilt on a 4x5 can enhance landscapes, allowing you to shoot with a larger aperture, thus a higher shutter speed. The cost of a good enlarger for either is about the same. Expect to spend $300 for something nice, no matter the format. Have fun, Collin (the hobbyist with not enough tiem to shoot)
PZ-1 vs PZ-1p ... (was Market Research and Hypothetical Questions)
Alek, I like the slides shot on my PZ-1 better than the ones on the PZ-1p. The PZ-1p exposures metering seems more tuned to taking print films. I don't care about the built-in flash coverage. I like the 3.5 frames per second motor on the PZ-1p. Fill flash is also easy with the PZ-1p, but I don't flash often. Otherwise, these cameras are identical - same body, same electronics. It sounds like you should stick with the PZ-1 and buy/try some FA lenses. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, Do you think PZ1p is much better than PZ1? I has the latter and sometimes wonder whether to look for another the same body ( I like ergonomics of PZ1 very much) or spend extra money for p version.Angle of built-in flash is not important for me 3pictures per 1s. I take mostly slides and own some K and M lenses apart from A50/1.7 and Tamron SP 90/2.8 manual version so for me metering is important and build quality. Alek
Re: PUB submission form problem
Actually, it's 4.72. My finger hit the 7 too hard. I never was able to post my phot at the website with 4.72. For several months, I sent emails after several failed attempts. Then I got an early version of Opera, and that worked fine. I recently upgraded to the newest version of Opera, and actually paid for it, and now I can't post PUG entries through the website again. Otherwise, the new Opera works very well. I also downloaded the most recent version of Netscape, but I really hated it, and reverted to 4.72. I only used IE when I absolutely, positively have no other recourse. What really puzzles me is the error message I get: It says my file is only 1K, when I know it's 75K, and the confirmation I received after using IE also said it was 75K. I know there must be other Opera users in this group who post to the PUIG. Any suggestions? Ann Sanfedele wrote: Dan, Netscape 4.6 gave me no submission problems using the PUG form... did you mean, btw, Netscape 4.7 ? annsan -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://geocities.com/dmatyola/ Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399
Re: Large format starting kit
What are the major differences between a 645 and 67? 1400 sq. mm. --Mike
Pentax M85/2 , replacement elements
hi all I saw a minty Pentax M85/2 in my local shop for US$110... unfortunately, the rear element was exhibiting seperation. This seems to be a common problem because this is the 2nd 85/2 I've seen with that problem. Are replacement elements still available as parts? Does anyone know? If I can buy the element, I can swap it myself.
Re: PZ-1 vs PZ-1p ... (was Market Research and Hypothetical Questions)
Hi, Firstly I would like to buy another body. I have SMC K105/2.8, SMC K135/2.5, M35/2.8, A50/1.7 and A1.4 and K28/3.5 and Tamron SP 90/2.8 macro +Super A and Metz 40MZ and extension tubes. I start buying AF lenses if Pentax introduce dslr which will be compatible with FA and manual lenses. If not I shall think about changing system, since starting with AF world it is better to choose C I think:) USM, IS, more lenses.But I would like to use more gear since I have collected very good lenses so far, to buy them in different system I shall spend plenty of money. It would be better to buy MZS or PZ1 once more.Are you pleased with PZ cameras? Alek [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek, I like the slides shot on my PZ-1 better than the ones on the PZ-1p. The PZ-1p exposures metering seems more tuned to taking print films. I don't care about the built-in flash coverage. I like the 3.5 frames per second motor on the PZ-1p. Fill flash is also easy with the PZ-1p, but I don't flash often. Otherwise, these cameras are identical - same body, same electronics. It sounds like you should stick with the PZ-1 and buy/try some FA lenses. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, Do you think PZ1p is much better than PZ1? I has the latter and sometimes wonder whether to look for another the same body ( I like ergonomics of PZ1 very much) or spend extra money for p version.Angle of built-in flash is not important for me 3pictures per 1s. I take mostly slides and own some K and M lenses apart from A50/1.7 and Tamron SP 90/2.8 manual version so for me metering is important and build quality. Alek ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - za konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Hypothetical Question
That probably describes the average photographer in any developed country. At 07:06 AM 12/19/2002 -0500, you wrote: If I had to guess, I'd say the average USA Pentax enthusiast got the camera and lens as a gift and uses it 3 times a year. I don't think that fits this group. Lon 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 g). 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? vbg 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 Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: Behind the counter with digital
William Robb wrote: Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get pictures. Well, maybe they just need a COURSE, period. Who's educating the public about how to use digital? The old paradigm is that the camera stores have knowledgeable salespeople who can serve as the front line for educating the consumer. That hardly works now that mail order and mass-market stores are #1 and #2 in terms of disseminating the devices. Plus, there are literally thousands of schools that teach photography, and about a zillion books that cover the basics (again, and again, and again...). There's no sort of infrastructure for teaching digital. Everybody uses different cameras, everybody uses different image-management programs, everybody uses different computers and picture formats and transportation media. Where are consumers supposed to go to learn this stuff? My local community college doesn't even teach a course in Photoshop because anyone who's enough of an expert in Photoshop to teach it can get a better job than being a teacher. The few books that are out are basically out of date before they see the inside of a bookstore, and because of the lack of standardization they assume an equipment set that few specific readers actually have. True, we have the internet, but that's like educating a sixth grader by dumping a set of encyclopaedias on his head. My Mom owns a digital camera and a six-year-old Macintosh, and she can no more find her way to a digital print than I can find my way to the Powerball jackpot. I've got more than a little sympathy for the digital neophyte. It wasn't all that easy for _me_, and I have just a tad more knowledge about making still pictures than the average bear. --Mike
Re: Behind the counter with digital
I'm spending this week working in a lab that has digital to photo paper printing capability. What a gong show. First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we are being asked to support 3 different memory card styles, plus microdrives, plus floppies and CDs. [slight snip] Anyway, the people who make this stuff need to do some more market research. Maybe try to make digital photography easy. Film users can literally aim and shoot, and expect reasonable results, with no knowledge base. Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get pictures. If I were in charge at Kodak, I'd settle on a method of digital storage, whether it be CF card or whatever, I'd re-launch my digital hardware (cameras and storage cards) in a humongous blitz, calling it Digital Film, and force it into the family snapshot users' minds. All previous digital standards are old and defunct! Digital Film is *the* replacement for that old favourite 'film'. Now you can truly enter the digital age with an exciting new range of digital cameras from Kodak, and they all use just one way of keeping those cherished photos: Digital Film. Buy a Kodak camera, or any of the following cameras (x, y, z), and use Kodak Digital Film: an easy solution to all the complexity of taking digital pictures. Simply drop it into your favourite high street lab and you'll get back what you've always had in the past - beautiful prints on Kodak paper, a CD of your photos so Uncle Ernie and Aunti Flo can have some reprints later, and a freshly wiped Kodak Digital Film ready to take some more super pictures. Digital memories with Digital Film, only from Kodak. This achieves several things. Importantly, it clarifies the process for the average family snapper beyond simplicity itself. It's even easier than film, because you don't need to thread the stuff from the old outdated cassettes into the camera, you simply pop in the DF card and away you go. Pics taken, you drop in the DF card to the supermarket minilab, and for 3.99 you get back 2 or 3 dozen prints, a CD of all the shots for any later reprints, and your DF card, wiped, ready to go again. After it takes off, which it would ( 'Henry - which kinda camera shall we get, it's all so confusing - look at all these cards and things - oh - there's this Digital Film thing from Kodak, that sounds really easy...') then other makers could get in on the act - Fuji Digital Film, Agfa Digital Film, and so on. Sure they would be either a CF card or a memory stick or whatever the standard was, but in the public conscioussness, it would effectively be *the* replacement for film. The real fly in the ointment is getting them to standardize the format :-) .02 Cheers, Cotty PS- I'll bet that Wychwood's Hobgoblin that Kodak already hold the trademark on 'Digital Film'.. Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Yellow scourge
Does the K 50mm/f:1.4 suffer the yellow scourge of its screw mount brothers? -- Ken Archer Canine Photography San Antonio, Texas Business Is Going To The Dogs
OT: Photographers' Bios
Hi Mike et al, I have received my used copy of 'Seeing the Light: Wilderness and Salvation: a Photographer's Tale' from Powell's this morning. It's in great condition with cellophane dust jacket and an insert on the frontispiece stating that it was originally a review copy from Random House from October 30th 1995 with the remark that 'Random House would appreciate two copies of your review' Had a quick flick through and the repro is excellent. Great tonal range in the photos and what fabulous photos they are! I'm looking forward to reading it, just in time for Christmas. I devoured Robert Capa's 'Soft Focus' in well under a week, usually too late at night when I knew I would regret ot the next morning. And I did. Very interesting read - more like a novel than non-fiction. It made me realise I know so little about the liberation of France and the rest of Europe, and so I will now bone up a bit on that subject. I notice a Larry Burrows bio on sale in AP. All good stuff, I'm sure. Thanks for the recommendation, Mike. 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/
In praise of vuescan and other digital meanderings
I'd sort of half been following Ann's thread about making calendars, not really paying attention. Suddenly, this weekend, the light went on in my brain and I thought wouldn't it be a great idea to make a calendar for my friends. Remembered that Staples had been mentioned, so went along to check the price and turnaround. $19.95 (CDN) printed on white cardstock and bound and it would take a couple of days. Told me to bring the prints in and they'd make it up. Great I thought and trotted off home to sort out some nice photos. Picked up a couple of packets of HP everyday semi-gloss photo paper and a new cartridge so I could do a trial to see how it would look. Back home, I picked out the photos I wanted to use. Discovered that I'd given away all the prints to my friends so I had to scan all the negatives. No big deal, I thought. Staples will only be scanning the prints and I had to scan anyway to make up my trial calendar. All went well until I hit a strip of 160VC negatives. I just couldn't get a decent scan from the Minolta Scan dual at all. Another lightbulb went on. Hmm, Bruce had mentioned vuescan with the minolta (I think). Downloaded a trial version and re-scanned. Apart from the $40 watermark on the image, it was perfect! Purchased it straight away. (already this calendar is becoming expensive!) Brilliant! I wish I'd bought this software earlier. Scanned away happily, nice and large to fit letter sized paper, put the images in order, named them january, february etc. and wrote them all to CD ready to deliver to Staples. Meanwhile, I printed off the calendar using a standard template from Word on the HP semi-gloss. It looked good. I was pretty damn pleased with myself, I can tell you! Then the dog came in from outside, wet paws and all, ran upstairs and bounced off the bed where I had placed the completed sheets. I now had a dented and smudged calendar. Never mind I thought to myself, This is only for practice and I'm keeping it for myself anyway. Off I went to Staples with my CD of 13 images - one for each month plus the front cover. Lady at Staples takes the details and informs me that they charge $3 for opening EACH image on the CD whereas if I'd brought the print it would cost nothing. HUH? I've done all the work and they want to charge me for it? An extra $39 on top of a calendar that costs $19?? Insanity! Quick mental calculation tells me that it's probably still cheaper for me to have them print up three calendars than do it myself bearing in mind that a colour cartridge costs $60CDN (ex tax) and paper is about $20-30 a box so I leave it with them and sulk off. One of the reasons I wasn't going to do it myself was because the printer I have is not particularly new and I was worried about fading. Then Paul (hubby) pointed out that each page only has to last a month! Well, that convinced me to do it myself. Found a nice double sided semi-gloss/matte paper from HP and off I went. Rankled by the charge for pulling my files off a CD I went back to Staples and cancelled the order. I reckon mine are nicer anyway (though I say so myself...) And that's my story. --- Wendy Beard Mosaid Technologies Inc 11 Hines Rd, Kanata, Ontario K2K 2X1, Canada
Re: Behind the counter with digital
I've been working on a theory the last few years that digital technology has only 3 widespread effects: a) slowing things down for the consumer or hands-on worker b) making things unnecessarily complicated for the consumer or hands-on worker c) saving corporations money And mind you, I programmed micros for a living between 1978 and 2000. I'm not sure I was in the right field. -Lon Mike Johnston wrote: William Robb wrote: Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get pictures. Well, maybe they just need a COURSE, period. Who's educating the public about how to use digital? The old paradigm is that the camera stores have knowledgeable salespeople who can serve as the front line for educating the consumer. That hardly works now that mail order and mass-market stores are #1 and #2 in terms of disseminating the devices. Plus, there are literally thousands of schools that teach photography, and about a zillion books that cover the basics (again, and again, and again...). There's no sort of infrastructure for teaching digital. Everybody uses different cameras, everybody uses different image-management programs, everybody uses different computers and picture formats and transportation media. Where are consumers supposed to go to learn this stuff? My local community college doesn't even teach a course in Photoshop because anyone who's enough of an expert in Photoshop to teach it can get a better job than being a teacher. The few books that are out are basically out of date before they see the inside of a bookstore, and because of the lack of standardization they assume an equipment set that few specific readers actually have. True, we have the internet, but that's like educating a sixth grader by dumping a set of encyclopaedias on his head. My Mom owns a digital camera and a six-year-old Macintosh, and she can no more find her way to a digital print than I can find my way to the Powerball jackpot. I've got more than a little sympathy for the digital neophyte. It wasn't all that easy for _me_, and I have just a tad more knowledge about making still pictures than the average bear. --Mike
Cmos was: Hypothetical Question
So is the CMOS gathering data in a similar fashion as a CCD,but with out the CCD?One BIG digital problem with the CCD is dust on the filter.Is this now eliminated or greatly reduced with CMOS. I know i will eventually have to or want to upo grade from the 2.74 megapixel to a higher unit.Just not sure what is better or more stable,CMOS or CCD. Cotty, i beleive you mentioned shooting soccer was not a problem with the Canon correct,and shutter lag was up there with SLR types. Dave Begin Original Message From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/ End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Behind the counter with digital
I _like_ it, but that fly is about as big as a turkey buzzard. -Lon Cotty wrote: I'm spending this week working in a lab that has digital to photo paper printing capability. What a gong show. First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we are being asked to support 3 different memory card styles, plus microdrives, plus floppies and CDs. [slight snip] Anyway, the people who make this stuff need to do some more market research. Maybe try to make digital photography easy. Film users can literally aim and shoot, and expect reasonable results, with no knowledge base. Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get pictures. If I were in charge at Kodak, I'd settle on a method of digital storage, whether it be CF card or whatever, I'd re-launch my digital hardware (cameras and storage cards) in a humongous blitz, calling it Digital Film, and force it into the family snapshot users' minds. All previous digital standards are old and defunct! Digital Film is *the* replacement for that old favourite 'film'. Now you can truly enter the digital age with an exciting new range of digital cameras from Kodak, and they all use just one way of keeping those cherished photos: Digital Film. Buy a Kodak camera, or any of the following cameras (x, y, z), and use Kodak Digital Film: an easy solution to all the complexity of taking digital pictures. Simply drop it into your favourite high street lab and you'll get back what you've always had in the past - beautiful prints on Kodak paper, a CD of your photos so Uncle Ernie and Aunti Flo can have some reprints later, and a freshly wiped Kodak Digital Film ready to take some more super pictures. Digital memories with Digital Film, only from Kodak. This achieves several things. Importantly, it clarifies the process for the average family snapper beyond simplicity itself. It's even easier than film, because you don't need to thread the stuff from the old outdated cassettes into the camera, you simply pop in the DF card and away you go. Pics taken, you drop in the DF card to the supermarket minilab, and for 3.99 you get back 2 or 3 dozen prints, a CD of all the shots for any later reprints, and your DF card, wiped, ready to go again. After it takes off, which it would ( 'Henry - which kinda camera shall we get, it's all so confusing - look at all these cards and things - oh - there's this Digital Film thing from Kodak, that sounds really easy...') then other makers could get in on the act - Fuji Digital Film, Agfa Digital Film, and so on. Sure they would be either a CF card or a memory stick or whatever the standard was, but in the public conscioussness, it would effectively be *the* replacement for film. The real fly in the ointment is getting them to standardize the format :-) .02 Cheers, Cotty PS- I'll bet that Wychwood's Hobgoblin that Kodak already hold the trademark on 'Digital Film'.. 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: Yellow scourge
Does the K 50mm/f:1.4 suffer the yellow scourge of its screw mount brothers? Gee, I've never heard of ~any~ K-mount lens that had the yellow scourge. I'm assuming that it only occurred only in lenses produced during certain years of the screwmount era. (I'm just making an assumption here, though, and perhaps someone who really knows what they're talking about can jump in...) Fred
Re: Re: Yellow scourge
Hi Fred, Did you like my Christmas card? Alek Uytkownik Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Does the K 50mm/f:1.4 suffer the yellow scourge of its screw mount brothers? Gee, I've never heard of ~any~ K-mount lens that had the yellow scourge. I'm assuming that it only occurred only in lenses produced during certain years of the screwmount era. (I'm just making an assumption here, though, and perhaps someone who really knows what they're talking about can jump in...) Fred ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - za konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Yellow scourge
Fred, The reason I ask is because the SMC Takumar 1:1.4/50 does suffer from the yellow curse. Since it is basically the same lens as the SMC Pentax (K) 1:1.4/50, the only difference being the mount, I assumed it might have the same problem. I have two copies of the Takumar, but I haven't seen a copy of the SMC Pentax (K) model. On Thursday 19 December 2002 04:09 pm, Fred wrote: Does the K 50mm/f:1.4 suffer the yellow scourge of its screw mount brothers? Gee, I've never heard of ~any~ K-mount lens that had the yellow scourge. I'm assuming that it only occurred only in lenses produced during certain years of the screwmount era. (I'm just making an assumption here, though, and perhaps someone who really knows what they're talking about can jump in...) Fred -- Ken Archer Canine Photography San Antonio, Texas Business Is Going To The Dogs
Re: My LX is back from Colorado.
On Thursday 19 December 2002 02:51, Dan Scott wrote: Picture the grey sea snake with the white pearl finish...gives you goose bumps, eh? Do it. Dan Scott :-) And don't forget to buy your clear lucite platform shoes with live goldfish and a big floppy hat.. and mabe a long white fur coat. and a zebra striped shirt and a cane. ;-) Christian
Re: Behind the counter with digital
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:45:38 +1300, David A. Mann wrote: William Robb wrote: First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we are being asked to support 3 different memory card styles, plus microdrives, plus floppies and CDs. From the other side of the counter, its a bit frustrating when the format you want to use is not supported. The lab I go to has the Agfa e-box hooked into their D-lab 3 (they just took delivery of a D-lab 2 as well but thats another story). Well that e-box contraption takes every kind of memory card you can throw at it plus CD and floppy and something called XD which I've never heard of. But the CD drive won't read a CD-RW disc (I am not willing to use a CD-R for a temporary file). There's a USB port on the front of the box but the software doesn't support it. I was thinking about those little USB keychain memory cards as a perfect way to transfer files. At least they accept files by email. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ xD memory is the newest player on the block. eXtreme Digital is designed with a capacity of up to 8GB. So far Canon and Fuji seem to be the only users. Given its small size, approximately the dimensions of a U.S. penny, squared off, I suspect it will be popular with other manufacturers soon. jm
Re: Hi, I am back!
In your absence we have established new criteria to actually qualify as grumpy. Please refer to the archives for details 8^) Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/18/02 05:43PM For the last 5-6 weeks I have been to Estonia once a week (and once to Ventspils, Latvia) so I unsubscribed. Now I am back, with my grumpy self relatively unchanged. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
RE: American Beer
It is really much better these days. No matter where you are in the US there are usually some excellent local microbrews. One of these (Sam Adams) went national, but many are just little two batch a day places. The real treat is if these local beers are available in draft as well as bottles. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypothetical Question
See interspersed comments below Pål wrote:-- 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 Yes this is true. But Pentax did not decide to keep LX sales going over a longer time by releasing upgrades of the LX or a successor model to the LX. OTOH they did this with the 67 system by introducing the 67II. My point is that (sure I am only guessing here) that an AF LX with modern electronics would be too expensive to find enough customers. This would be, although such a camera would probably not be much more expensive than the old LX would cost today (basically the mechanics are the more expensive parts). Camera reviewers have even complained about the MZ-S being too expensive though it is actually moderately priced for what it is. This is basically because you can buy cheaper, but less well-made bodies that are laden with more features. Mike wrote: If there was a modern Af camera that was built according to the same quality level as the LX and that was accordingly priced (hint: where I live the 31mm/1.8 ltd. lens is almost 4x as expensive as was the K-series 28mm/2), and if your only option was to buy new, what would you choose: this one or a cheap ZX/MZ-something plastic body? I think the market has already given the answer. Alexander, I don't think the market has given the answer because the market has not been given the actual choice. Yes, Pentax would rather build ZX-5's and ZX-7's, and this probably means that it thinks it can do so more profitably than it could build a camera such as you describe. But that doesn't mean that the market wouldn't support an AF LX if one were available. After all, Nikon sells plenty of F100s. Yes, but I assume Pentax made their choice not releasing a LX successor based on marketing research. And it's market is not comparable to Nikon's. Nikon's present share on the 35mm SLR world market is about 35% (if I am not wrong) while that of Pentax is only 10%. So there are much more potiential customers who will likely upgrade to a F5-like camera (only few beginners will start with a F5). When the LX was introduced Pentax' market share was about 20%. Now speaking just for myself, I'd say that my tastes and requirements are so highly evolved that I probably wouldn't be interested in such a camera unless it had all the main features I'm personally looking for. This perfectly shows how much more difficult it is to sell high end gear. Regardles how such a hypothetical AF-LX will look like, they will convice only a fraction of Pentax useres to buy one. (BTW I would like to see a AF-LX) Enjoy, Alexander Those are: 1. A 98% or 100% viewfinder with good snap for easy manual focusing 2. Quiet operation 3. Short shutter lag (i.e., good responsiveness) 4. Ability to use manual focus as well as AF lenses 5. Aperture-priority AE 6. AE lock 7. Non-resetting ISO 8. Diopter adjustment or add-on diopters 9. Moderate size and light to medium weight (say, up to 26 oz. or so) for decent portability 10. General straightforwardness of controls and ease of operation, and not too many extra controls and features confusing everything. I'd *certainly* be using an LX if only it had #2, and I'd probably be using an MZ-S if it had #1. The problem for a camera designer would be that in order to satisfy the top ten features lists of a LARGE number of photographers, they have to have a great deal of capability and it has to be very see-through, i.e., it couldn't be very confusing or feature-laden and it couldn't dictate the way it had to be used, but it would have to be able to satisfy ALL of any particular advanced photographer's wants. This is a very large order, and it's got to be damnably tough for a camera designer to accommodate. For instance, one thing I didn't list is flash capability or high sync speed, because I don't use flash and I don't give a damn about it. But it's very easy to anticipate that many, if not most, photographers would demand excellent flash capability. I haven't specified mirror lock-up or low vibration because I don't do closeup work or astrophotography. But for someone who did either of those things, those features would be mandatory.
Re: AC Adapter II for AF400T- Beg,borrow, or steal
Steve, I haven't got the adaptor, but there is a 9 volt battery pack that is really useful. It holds 6 'C' size batteries and whines like is generating high voltage for the flash to use. I thought it was very handy and easily hangs on your belt. The primary weight is the 6 batteries and it is difficult to run out of juice. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyone have one of these that you would like to sell? It lets you use the AF400T with a plug in to wall outlet. I`ve been nominated to be the photographer at my daughters school fashion show. I was thinking of using the LX with winder, SMCA 35-105/3.5, AF400T reversed into rented umbrella on a tripod with a AC adapter so I don`t have to worry about batteries. I was thinking of using Supra 400 so the colors pop. I have till March to prepare for this. Any help or suggestions will be very much appreciated.
Re: Turkey
I know, I know. I'll stop. --Mike Thank you. Ed _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: PZ-1 vs PZ-1p ... (was Market Research and Hypothetical Questions)
Alek, I'm very pleased with the PZ cameras. I went directly from a SuperA/Super Program to the PZ-1 and skipped the SF-1 series of autofocus. When the MZS was introduced, I picked up a slightly used PZ-1p. I like them both. Autofocus is pretty good. One sensor is just fine with me. Handling and egronomics are very convenient. Someday, I'll probably buy an MZS, but I'm waiting for the next generation of camera (MZSp??). Pentax has a bad habit of upgrading the bugs out after a year or two on the market. The 645nII is the latest example! Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Firstly I would like to buy another body. I have SMC K105/2.8, SMC K135/2.5, M35/2.8, A50/1.7 and A1.4 and K28/3.5 and Tamron SP 90/2.8 macro +Super A and Metz 40MZ and extension tubes. I start buying AF lenses if Pentax introduce dslr which will be compatible with FA and manual lenses. If not I shall think about changing system, since starting with AF world it is better to choose C I think:) USM, IS, more lenses.But I would like to use more gear since I have collected very good lenses so far, to buy them in different system I shall spend plenty of money. It would be better to buy MZS or PZ1 once more.Are you pleased with PZ cameras?
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
-- -Original Message- -- From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:04 PM -- -- On Thursday 19 December 2002 02:51, Dan Scott wrote: -- -- Picture the grey sea snake with the white pearl finish...gives you -- goose bumps, eh? -- -- Do it. -- -- Dan Scott :-) -- -- And don't forget to buy your clear lucite platform shoes with live -- goldfish and a big floppy hat.. and mabe a long -- white fur coat. -- and a zebra striped shirt and a cane. -- -- ;-) -- -- Christian -- So Christian, Can you tell me the best places to get these :-) César Panama City, Florida
RE: Whew....
-- -Original Message- -- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:27 PM -- -- Cesar Matamoros II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- -- -- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- -- 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! -- -- Show off! -- -- Hey, when you come up with 70 degrees and sunshine, I'll -- fight back with -- whatever I've got! (But today, 2 days later than my 20 -- degree workout, it's -- forcast to get up to 62 degrees!) -- -- See you on Grandfather Mountain... -- -- They have a 5-mile race up the mountian during the summer, -- don't they... -- -- -- -- -- Mark Roberts -- Photography and writing -- www.robertstech.com -- That I was not aware of. But then again, I don't recall the last time I ran over three miles... Cesar Panama City, Florida
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
-- -Original Message- -- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:34 PM -- -- Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- -- On Thursday 19 December 2002 02:51, Dan Scott wrote: -- -- Picture the grey sea snake with the white pearl finish...gives you -- goose bumps, eh? -- -- Do it. -- -- Dan Scott :-) -- -- And don't forget to buy your clear lucite platform shoes with live -- goldfish and a big floppy hat.. and mabe a long -- white fur coat. -- and a zebra striped shirt and a cane. -- -- Whaddya mean *buy* that stuff??? -- -- Doesn't everyone have those items in their wardrobe already?! -- -- -- -- Mark Roberts -- Photography and writing -- www.robertstech.com -- Mark, This reinforces why you are great to hang out with... Cesar Panama City, Florida
AF280T off-camera (LX)
Quick question: Besides the Hot Shoe Grip is there anyway to use the AF280T flash off-camera and still retain TTL control by the LX? I'm trying to construct a bracket for macro photography and the hotshoe grip is so big and bulky that my bracket is getting too big and complicated. In the past I've used the standard AF400T bracket and hot shoe grip but even with the bracket and grip tilted forward and flash head angled towards the point of focus it only gives me lighting from one side. I'd like to get it mounted ABOVE the lens for better lighting. The only solution I can think of is to cut down the hot shoe grip to make it a more manageable size. Thanks Christian
Re: My LX is back from Colorado.
On Thursday 19 December 2002 15:11, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: So Christian, Can you tell me the best places to get these :-) César Panama City, Florida I know a couple of places But apparently Mark Roberts can loan them to you. And don't forget, Cesar, to install fur on the dashboard of your ElDorado low-rider. Snakeskin and white-pearlesent LXen SHEESH! What's wrong with black leather? ;-) Christian
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A thoughtful analysis, Bob. I especially take your point about the expert panel. But is the upshot of what you're saying that we'll only buy something new if it's better, yet it had better still be cheap? If so, then Pentax has got a serious problem on its hands Yeah, but fortunately it's the same problem all the other manufacturers have: People want top dollar quality at a bottom dollar price. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: American Beer
Never trust any beer you can see a 100-watt light bulb through. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: DOF question
Unfortunately, image magnification has to do with the viewing image, not the negative image. But everybody talks about DOF on the film (or sensor now-a-days). Ratio of object size to viewing image size (magnification), and aperture diameter (not f-stop) determine DOF. An 8x10 from a 35mm camera with a 50mm lens and a 1 inch aperture has exactly the same DOF as a 4x5 camera with a 200mm lens and a 1 inch aperture does from a 4x5 camera. The smart ones out there will realize that a one inch aperture is f2 on a 50mm and f8 on a 200mm, but that is actually irrelevant when calculating DOF. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: Raimo Korhonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] No. DOF is a function of image magnification and obviously a 112 mm lens gives more magnification than a 22.8 mm lens.
Re: Whew....
Cesar Matamoros II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- They have a 5-mile race up the mountian during the summer, -- don't they... That I was not aware of. But then again, I don't recall the last time I ran over three miles... Yep. July 10. Mark your calendar. http://www.gmhg.org/wwwcgi/gmhgbuild.cgi?page=eventsevent=bear -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: AC Adapter II for AF400T- Beg,borrow, or steal
There is @ KEH right now :-) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AC Adapter II for AF400T- Beg,borrow, or steal Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:58:07 -0500 Steve, I haven't got the adaptor, but there is a 9 volt battery pack that is really useful. It holds 6 'C' size batteries and whines like is generating high voltage for the flash to use. I thought it was very handy and easily hangs on your belt. The primary weight is the 6 batteries and it is difficult to run out of juice. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyone have one of these that you would like to sell? It lets you use the AF400T with a plug in to wall outlet. I`ve been nominated to be the photographer at my daughters school fashion show. I was thinking of using the LX with winder, SMCA 35-105/3.5, AF400T reversed into rented umbrella on a tripod with a AC adapter so I don`t have to worry about batteries. I was thinking of using Supra 400 so the colors pop. I have till March to prepare for this. Any help or suggestions will be very much appreciated. _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
-- -Original Message- -- From: Dan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:41 PM -- -- On Thursday, December 19, 2002, at 12:04 PM, Christian Skofteland -- wrote: -- -- On Thursday 19 December 2002 02:51, Dan Scott wrote: -- -- Picture the grey sea snake with the white pearl finish...gives you -- goose bumps, eh? -- -- Do it. -- -- Dan Scott :-) -- -- And don't forget to buy your clear lucite platform shoes with live -- goldfish and a big floppy hat.. and mabe a long -- white fur -- coat. -- and a zebra striped shirt and a cane. -- -- ;-) -- -- Christian -- -- -- Christian, -- -- Once Cesar has that Pimp Daddy LX ready to go he won't need flash -- clotheslthe LX will say everything that needs to be said. :-) -- -- Go Cesar, Go Cesar, Go Cesar -- -- Dan Scott -- A, a cheering section :-) César Panama City, Florida
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But is the upshot of what you're saying that we'll only buy something new if it's better, yet it had better still be cheap? If so, then Pentax has got a serious problem on its hands Mike, I think price is a big part of the problem. A bunch of us got ME's when the prices for Japanese goods were dirt cheap. They were sending us VCR's and Cameras and ultimately Autos, and we were sending them paper money! It was a great time for the US Consumer, but that time is past! Now that we have to pay the fair value for these products, they are much less attractive. This is expecially true since we have lots of very good old stuff around. The camera/lens manufacturers have to give us some new, compelling features to buy. Big time innovations like the following... Small 35mm cameras -- Leica Interchangible lenses -- Leica, Asahiflex The SLR with WYSIWYG -- Asahiflex, K series, SV's H3's, etc. Thru the lens metering -- Spotmatic thru KX Automation linking Aperture/Shutter Speed -- ME at a great $$$ Autofocus ??? what is the next step??? Regards, Bob S.
Re: In praise of vuescan and other digital meanderings
Those of you with large families, wouldn't a family calendar with a different branch of the family in each photo, and everybody's birthday, and anniversary on the calendar make a great gift? Since my extended family consists of me, the idea won't do me much good grin, but the list is welcome to it. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd sort of half been following Ann's thread about making calendars, not really paying attention. Suddenly, this weekend, the light went on in my brain and I thought wouldn't it be a great idea to make a calendar for my friends.
Re[2]: American Beer
Hi, Thursday, December 19, 2002, 6:48:17 PM, you wrote: It is really much better these days. No matter where you are in the US there are usually some excellent local microbrews. One of these (Sam Adams) went national, but many are just little two batch a day places. The real treat is if these local beers are available in draft as well as bottles. the micro-brewery movement is great. It means pubs get some genuine individual character, and you get to try lots of different types of beers. Best of all, all the micro-breweries around here offer samples of each brew, just as real ale pubs used to with their guest beers, so you get to drink quite a lot for nothing! --- Bob Our heads are round so that our thoughts can fly in any direction Francis Picabia
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
Hi Alek, I have had both the z-1 and the z-1p. I like the z-1p better simply because it is a more 'complete' camera package. The added extras are nice. Things such as faster motor drive, flash compensation, mirror lock up (prefire), different body texture etc. All in all a better camera than the z-1. Ergonomics are identical. The extra features are really nice, but unless you specifically want them, keep your z-1 until the next generation SLR's hit the market. I upgraded to a z-1p primarily for the flash exposure compensation alone. Cheers Shaun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Do you think PZ1p is much better than PZ1? I has the latter and sometimes wonder whether to look for another the same body ( I like ergonomics of PZ1 very much) or spend extra money for p version.Angle of built-in flash is not important for me 3pictures per 1s. I take mostly slides and own some K and M lenses apart from A50/1.7 and Tamron SP 90/2.8 manual version so for me metering is important and build quality. Alek [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Mike, In terms of using this group for Market Research, we would be more of an Expert Panel than a typical focus group. Sometimes consumer products companies recruit groups of 8-10 people for a 2 hour discussion of some issues. Product management/marketing folks sit behind the one way mirror and watch the discussion. This list would not be an average group of users, but a special group of very experienced, knowledgeable product users. Sometimes consumer products companies will recruit these kinds of groups. Your hypothetical questions/conclusions regarding too many of us liking old, manual focus cameras and lenses seems incorrect to me. Cameras are a lifetime purchase for most consumers, maybe twice or three times a lifetime, but not more often. People bought a 'good' 35mm camera, and then treated it carefully. Pentax is in a difficult business. In the last 40 years, it has gone from producing high quality instruments to quality cameras for the mass market (think ME, ME Super), to Point-n-shoot stuff for Walmart or Boots the Chemist. The high end of this business is full of folks who expect top quality optical and mechanical products as the minimum. Old Spotmatic or Super Program or LX users if you will. Meanwhile, the profits on new sales are being made on the large, mass market cheap zoom cameras. How to revive the high end business?... it's not easy. Look at what we like. High quality optics with a quality feel when handling. Oh, and the task is complicated by the fact that you have 30 years of old lenses exported to the world when the Yen was cheap. These old, high quality lenses are available at a significant discount to their cost to reproduce today. Much the same is true for camera bodies. Japan has responded to the cost pressures by going from 100's of parts in a K1000 to 10's of parts in a point-n-shoot zoom. And we yearn for the good old cameras... If I put on my Marketing/Product Manager hat, I'd say this. If you want to sell some more high end Pentax camera gear, you've got to give the consumer something they haven't got now. Autofocus is a potential benefit/feature which will get some of these folks to switch. (But don't introduce a fine camera like the PZ-1 combined with a poor optical/mechanical 28-80 power zoom!) Image stabilization lenses and digital are two more potential hooks to draw the customer in. Medium format is another. So yes, I do like old gear but I could be made to switch. Just remember, we are a price conscious group of users. If you want me to buy something new, you've got to give me the kind of price/performance I can get in the used market. ...and I do own 2 limited lenses, a PZ-1 and PZ-p, and 4-5 more FA lenses. Regards, Bob S. In a message dated 12/18/02 9:22:55 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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. . -- 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: AF280T off-camera (LX)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Besides the Hot Shoe Grip is there anyway to use the AF280T flash off-camera and still retain TTL control by the LX? Altex made a off camera flash synch cord. One cube with 3 contacts goes in the camera hotshoe. One cube attaches with 3 contacts goes on the flash shoe. A curly cord connects the two, like a US phone's handset cord. Regards, Bob S.
Re: My LX is back from Colorado.
Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 December 2002 15:11, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: So Christian, Can you tell me the best places to get these :-) I know a couple of places But apparently Mark Roberts can loan them to you. Cesar's not my size. But he *does* have a convertible, so he's on the right track as far as accessorizing goes ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: AF280T off-camera (LX)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Besides the Hot Shoe Grip is there anyway to use the AF280T flash off-camera and still retain TTL control by the LX? Altex made a off camera flash synch cord. One cube with 3 contacts goes in the camera hotshoe. One cube attaches with 3 contacts goes on the flash shoe. A curly cord connects the two, like a US phone's handset cord. I have one of those cords (don't know if it's made by Altex but i fits your description. I use it mostly with the AF280T and 645. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: In praise of vuescan and other digital meanderings
Great story Wendy! So Vuescan works well? I've been thinking about getting it for my Minolta Scan Multi. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: My LX is back from Colorado.
-- -Original Message- -- From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:32 PM -- -- On Thursday 19 December 2002 15:11, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: -- So Christian, -- -- Can you tell me the best places to get these :-) -- -- César -- Panama City, Florida -- -- I know a couple of places But apparently Mark Roberts -- can loan them to -- you. -- -- And don't forget, Cesar, to install fur on the dashboard of -- your ElDorado -- low-rider. -- -- Snakeskin and white-pearlesent LXen SHEESH! What's -- wrong with black -- leather? ;-) -- -- Christian -- Easier to tell my LXen apart. Can you imagine if I ever take all five out with me??? [Decadent!!!]Though I only have one winder... César Panama City, Florida
Re: Re[2]: MZ-S Focus Lock
I went K1000 - Z70 - MZS, it is softer and takes a bit of adjusting but I only miss shot a few on the very first spool. Use the AF button on the back instead Feroze - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Artur Ledchowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:12 AM Subject: 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[2]: Behind the counter with digital
One other big fly in the ointment...cost. At least around here, one of the BIG selling points of digital is that it saves on cost of film and processing. Having a lab produce prints and a cd is no cheaper than the current film solution. So where would the advantage be? The advantage is that it's the latest thing. The advantage is that you don't have to know diddly squat about digital manipulation/printing/computers/anything - you take the snaps (!) just like you did before, you drop them into the lab just like you did before, and you collect the prints. Just like you did before. Sure, the enthusiasts will take things further. They'll settle down with a computer and a printer and they will manipulate and they will print. They already do. When chemical photography first started anyone doing it was an enthusiast - they had to be. Later when someone offered to develop and print as a service, well-to-do families could take their own pics and let that someone do all the technical stuff. Later still a few tried the technical stuff themselves, some took to it, some didn't and went back to leaving it to the enthusiasts and professionals. Digital is no different IMO. Relatively speaking, early traditional photography cost an arm and a leg in the beginning. Those that can, and wanted to, did. Those that didn't, didn't. Here consumer, spend 2X-3X more on your digital camera that uses more batteries so you can get pictures on par with what you currently get... I don't think so. It's happening - I see it a lot. Right now, those that I see happy with digital (not advanced hobbyists) are those who are quite computer literate and capable of off loading the images to disk and burn a CD. My wife loves our Coolpix 990. We have about 4000 shots on it. I can tell you emphatically, that if I wasn't around to do all the *dirty work*, that she would be back shooting film right now. I see a lot of people happy with digital P and S, and they know nothing about image manipulation, and frankly they don't want to. They *do* know how to resize and send a pic over email, but really they just want good prints to put in their albums, just like they always have done. Image handling (time, knowledge, cost) is perhaps the biggest stumbling block to widespread use of digital cameras. Agreed. Just like it was back in the 18th century (without the digital bit ;-) 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: OT: Photographers' Bios
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Mike et al, I have received my used copy of 'Seeing the Light: Wilderness and Salvation: a Photographer's Tale' from Powell's this morning. It's in great condition with cellophane dust jacket and an insert on the frontispiece stating that it was originally a review copy from Random House from October 30th 1995 with the remark that 'Random House would appreciate two copies of your review' Had a quick flick through and the repro is excellent. Great tonal range in the photos and what fabulous photos they are! I'm looking forward to reading it, just in time for Christmas. Well send the PDML *one* copy of your review when you've read it Cotty. I'm anxious to get your impression. The photos are good, aren't they? The thing is, the repros in the book hardly do them justice. I've seen 4-foot by 5-foot prints of his stuff. Amazing. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Cmos was: Hypothetical Question
So is the CMOS gathering data in a similar fashion as a CCD,but with out the CCD?One BIG digital problem with the CCD is dust on the filter.Is this now eliminated or greatly reduced with CMOS. I know i will eventually have to or want to upo grade from the 2.74 megapixel to a higher unit.Just not sure what is better or more stable,CMOS or CCD. Cotty, i beleive you mentioned shooting soccer was not a problem with the Canon correct,and shutter lag was up there with SLR types. Correct. I believe the Pentax will have a CMOS sensor. Costs will simply not allow it to be equipped with a CCD. Cheers. 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: My LX is back from Colorado.
On Thursday 19 December 2002 16:09, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: Easier to tell my LXen apart. Can you imagine if I ever take all five out with me??? [Decadent!!!]Though I only have one winder... César Panama City, Florida Wouldn't the dents, dings and brassing on each body act as fingerprints? Kinda like tail flukes on humpbacked whales... ;-) Christian
Re: Hypothetical Question taken further...
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 05:05 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: I can assure you, that as each product is contemplated, careful consideration is given to it's ability to make money. Consumer demand comes from people who buy new things. So if we list all the stuff we bought new, how many would actually be Pentax consumers? I'll be a danmed good customer Bought new: Pentax K2 Pentax ME (black) Pentax ME winder Pentax LX (three) Pentax LX finders (most of them) Pentax LX winder Pentax Z-1p Pentax MZ-S Pentax 280T flash Pentax 400T Flash Pentax 500FTZ(?) flash Pentax 18/3.5 Pentax A 24/2.8 Pentax FA Limited 31/1.8 Pentax A 35/2.8 Pentax FA Limited 43/1.9 Pentax M 50/1.7 Pentax A 50/1.2 Pentax FA Limited 77/1.8 Pentax FA* 85/1.4 Pentax A* 200/4 Macro Pentax FA* 200/4 Macro Pentax A* 300/2.8 Pentax A 400/5.6 Pentax FA* 600/4 Pentax 1000/11 Reflex Pentax M 28-50/3.5 Pentax M 80-200/4.5 Pentax A 35-135/4.5 Pentax FA* 28-70/2.8 Pentax 645N Pentax FA645 33-55/4.5 Pentax FA645 45/2.8 Pentax FA 75/2.8 Pentax FA 120/4 Macro
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
Mike wrote: But is the upshot of what you're saying that we'll only buy something new if it's better, yet it had better still be cheap? If so, then Pentax has got a serious problem on its hands Judging from some of the posts here over the years it seems like Pentax attracted a lot of customers on price with the Z-1p. Particularly in its latter days. A common coment is that they bought it because it was cheap and had it costed the same as a similarly specified Nikon or Canon they wouldn't have bought it. Pål
Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Here consumer, spend 2X-3X more on your digital camera that uses more batteries so you can get pictures on par with what you currently get... I don't think so. It's happening - I see it a lot. very significant advantage of digital is that you don't have to wait until the end of the roll to get some pictures out, and if you need more than a roll offers, you can buy and use a bigger memory card. the first is highly attractive to the PS crowd given how often you hear people say that they haven't got any pictures from X because the roll isn't done yet. Herb
Re[3]: Behind the counter with digital
Cotty, Replies to your replies in the body... Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 1:17:54 PM, you wrote: One other big fly in the ointment...cost. At least around here, one of the BIG selling points of digital is that it saves on cost of film and processing. Having a lab produce prints and a cd is no cheaper than the current film solution. So where would the advantage be? C The advantage is that it's the latest thing. The advantage is that you C don't have to know diddly squat about digital C manipulation/printing/computers/anything - you take the snaps (!) just C like you did before, you drop them into the lab just like you did before, C and you collect the prints. Just like you did before. The point that didn't come across very well is that around here (Sacramento, CA) the potential buyer is being told that digital is in fact cheaper because they don't have to go to the lab anymore. That is one of two main selling points. The second point is that digital will give them better quality prints. This is really where the education part comes in. If properly instructed, that can be true. In too many stores I hear the salesman just quote the numbers. In normal mode you can get xxx pictures on the card... C Sure, the enthusiasts will take things further. They'll settle down with C a computer and a printer and they will manipulate and they will print. C They already do. C When chemical photography first started anyone doing it was an enthusiast C - they had to be. Later when someone offered to develop and print as a C service, well-to-do families could take their own pics and let that C someone do all the technical stuff. Later still a few tried the technical C stuff themselves, some took to it, some didn't and went back to leaving C it to the enthusiasts and professionals. I think the difference here is that I am not talking about enthusiasts, but the average Joe who is just trying to capture some family memories. C Digital is no different IMO. Relatively speaking, early traditional C photography cost an arm and a leg in the beginning. Those that can, and C wanted to, did. Those that didn't, didn't. Here consumer, spend 2X-3X more on your digital camera that uses more batteries so you can get pictures on par with what you currently get... I don't think so. C It's happening - I see it a lot. My comment here was sarcastic. They are not being told that it will be more expensive, but rather, cheaper. For those who can handle OS's and files and CD and such, it is a great way to go. But for those who struggle with computers the lab is the best place to take it and then it is not cheaper - not around here anyway. Right now, those that I see happy with digital (not advanced hobbyists) are those who are quite computer literate and capable of off loading the images to disk and burn a CD. My wife loves our Coolpix 990. We have about 4000 shots on it. I can tell you emphatically, that if I wasn't around to do all the *dirty work*, that she would be back shooting film right now. C I see a lot of people happy with digital P and S, and they know nothing C about image manipulation, and frankly they don't want to. They *do* know C how to resize and send a pic over email, but really they just want good C prints to put in their albums, just like they always have done. I wasn't saying image manipulation, just the ability to download to computer and archive to CD. The ones I am talking about don't even know what a photo editor is, let alone resizing something and don't know how to make an attachment for email. There are probably three broad groups in relationship to digital cameras - very computer competent including image manipulation, comfortable with basic file operations (download, archive, email, etc) and those who are clueless (large group). Image handling (time, knowledge, cost) is perhaps the biggest stumbling block to widespread use of digital cameras. C Agreed. Just like it was back in the 18th century (without the digital C bit ;-) C Cheers, C Cotty C C Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at C http://www.macads.co.uk/ C C Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! C http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ C
Re: Advice for a microscope for photog. purpose?
Conversation interspersed. - Original Message - From: Dr E D F Williams Subject: Re: Advice for a microscope for photog. purpose? A binocular stereo microscope has two separate objectives. A transmission light microscope a 'compound microscope' has one objective, but may have a binocular head, or even a head with a binocular and a vertical photo tube. The beam is split and 50% goes to each ocular. But both eyes see the same view. In a stereo microscope the eyes are seeing a true stereo picture through two separate objectives spaced some centimetres apart and focussed (angled) at the same spot in the centre of the stage. I figured that out, even as I hit send. The magnifications obtainable with a good compound microscope approach the theoretical limit of about 1250X for visible light. Stereo microscopes work between 5X and 200X although some go higher. Anything about 150X is impractical. This is a very good instrument, I think. My father in law used it at the cancer lab he managed, and when he retired, they gave it to him as a going away present. It is called a Leitz Wetzlar, and would have been produced in the late 1970's, or thereabouts, possibly into the 1980s. By putting a camera on one of the oculars (eyepieces) of your microscope you got 50% of the available light, but also added noise to your picture from reflections inside the unused side of the optical system and the beam splitter and prism. There are at least ten glass surfaces that would have been bouncing light up and down the tube. The only way to take decent pictures with a compound microscope is through a vertical phototube without any extra glass surfaces to degrade the image. This makes me question the usability of any microscope of this type for any purpose at all. The act of putting the camera onto the instrument isn't going to have any effect, either good or bad, on the quality of the image, or the degree of flare from stray light. I can only presume that what you are telling me is that this type of microscope is fatally flawed. I have been seeking a phototube for it, but alas, with no luck as of yet. If as you say, the design is flawed to the point of being unusable, I will stop looking. It does surprise me that a company with Leitz Wetzlar's reputation would put crap onto the market, especially the medical research lab market. I've just had a look at Microscopes from Nightingales in Florida. They have a number of beautiful instruments for sale. Many have solid stands that would support a camera perfectly well. There is even one, a Leitz Ortholux, with an automatic camera included. I think it was about $3500 and quite reasonable at that. Perfect for an amateur who is really serious about the job. The objectives and eyepieces included were Planachromats, specially made for photomicrography. There were a few others like the fine Zeiss GFL ( I had two of those) but they don't support cameras very well, an external stand is always needed. For that kind of money, I would forgo anything that would be a 35mm accessory, in favour of a bigger format. Quite a few of the instruments offered are modern enough so that it would be possible to buy a vertical phototube to which the Pentax K adaptor could be fitted. An LX would be the ideal camera for the job. That it is. William Robb
Re: American Beer
What about talking politics instead? William Robb - Original Message - From: Peter Alling Subject: RE: American Beer What about that mass produced Craft Brewed beer Samuel Adams a bit hoppy for some tastes but you can't say it lacks character or flavor. At 12:16 PM 12/19/2002 -0600, Len wrote: I'd guess Pål has never had a bottle of Anchor Steam, either, and it's been around a long time. Len ---
Re[3]: Behind the counter with digital
Herb, You bring up a very good point. One that I like very much myself. The funny thing is, I have never heard a salesman bring that point up. Perhaps the sales people don't actually use these things in their daily lives. Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 1:51:21 PM, you wrote: snip HC very significant advantage of digital is that you don't have to wait until HC the end of the roll to get some pictures out, and if you need more than a HC roll offers, you can buy and use a bigger memory card. the first is highly HC attractive to the PS crowd given how often you hear people say that they HC haven't got any pictures from X because the roll isn't done yet. HC Herb
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lens to camera data transmission
Alan, Umm...still lost. What does that one contact do? I wish I had that lens out so I could see if everything was displayed on 'P' or 'Tv, all my test shots with it were in Av...I should have known better. I don't like the QC tolerance, on shaky ground they should be very attentive to quality control at least. Brad It's just the way 'A' lenses were designed. When the lens was set to 'A', the circuit will be closed and the camera will determine the maximum and minimum aperture based on the arrangement of the contacts on the lens mount. F FA lenses have chips inside to tell the camera what apertures they are so they work even when the lens was set to other than 'A'. But then again, even with F or FA lenses, the displayed aperture might not be accurate (could be 1/2 stop off when the lens was set to non-A). It has to do with the QC tolerance. regards, Alan Chan Yes, that works (Program Mode), but it's just a mechanism on the camera and on the lens, to close down the aperture for a shot. This lens has one contact. I don't know what it does. But it will not display the f-stop in the viewfinder or LCD screen while in Av or Tv mode. I looked at the negs (data imprinting does come in handy!!), and in program it tells you, but in Tv or Av it does not. Just an F--. I talked to another member off-list who has this lens, and has used it with the MZ-S and the PZ-1p, and they get the same result. So, it works, but doesn't display the information I would have thought, and others thought, it should. It doesn't cripple the lens or camera, but it's nice to see that information. _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lensto camera data transmission
Lon, When I get my hands on the lens, I shall do just that, clean the contacts. May as well do the camera too while I'm at it, but it probably donesn't need it. Brad. - Original Message - From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:25 AM Subject: Re: Need help with new lens -- getting conflicting views on lensto camera data transmission And, Brad, these contacts can sometimes fail to work. Cleaning them by rubbing briskly with a clean cloth, therefore doing a gentle burnish, might help. Shaun Canning wrote: Brad, All 'A' series lenses feature the contacts to transmit lens information to the body of suitable cameras (basically anything from a Program A onwards, including your mz-s). You can set your lens to 'A' on the diaphragm and the camera will control it via the input dials. Cheers Shaun Brad Dobo wrote: Hey all, As ya may know, I bought (used...) a Pentax SMCP-A 400mm f/5.6. I was told by one knowledgeable person that the 'A' lenses did not transmit the fstop to the camera (in my case the MZ-S, nothing in the viewfinder or LCD screen), but told from another knowledgeable person that it should. So, what's the deal? Are there variances in the 'A' series? Anyone have this combo that can try? I just want to make sure I'm getting a lens in proper working order. Thanks, Brad. ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658 . -- 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: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital William, You were far more plain and lucid in your description of what I am seeing also. That has been my point to Cotty, that the crowds and masses are not having good luck with digital and that labs are taking part of the rap when they are really victims. I just had the day from hell over this very issue. It's easy to be lucid when the unpleasant memories are so fresh. My lab owner told me of a lady that faithfully brought in her memory cards to get prints back. One time he asked her how she backed up and saved the images. She replied that she threw the card away because it was full and would buy another to replace it. He asked her why she used the camera and she said that her husband had bought it for her and wanted her to use it. So instead of about $10.00 per roll equivalent she was spending closer to $50.00 per roll. Bruce, If this story had come from anyone other than you, I would be questioning the veracity of it. All I can say is BUUWAAAHAAAHAAAHAAA!!! William Robb
Re: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There isn't that cost advantage in reality, because the cost per print of digital (at least in my market) is enough higher that a film can be half used, taken in and processed, and will likely cost less than getting the digital equivalent printed. William Robb people aren't thinking about cost. they are thinking it's not the end of the roll. that's waste of film. Herb
Film vs. Digital (WAS: Re: RE: HypotheticalQuestion)
Pål has an interesting comment on the use of digital. There is still not a single digital camera that will give you a better wuality picture in terms of resolution, color separation, etc. They have however other virtues as being fast for publishing stuff digitally. You can work with them digitally and refine colorbalance, highlights v.s. darker parts of picture and so on. Be aware that this is time consuming and that for best results printed this should go to a professional printer with due respect to all our inkjets.. Improvement of the medium follows roughly computers, i.e., a doubling of capacity roughly every 18 months or so (take with a grain of salt). SOLUTION: Pentax starts with digital backs for our cameras. Ronald
Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
William, The story is true. The couple is very well to do and her husband wanted her to use the best PS. How he determined that, I don't know. The lab owner said that she was afraid to tell him how much per roll they were spending. Even after explaining that she could reuse the cards, she really had no clue how or what to do. I suspect that now she is just erasing the card after getting the prints. Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 3:14:40 PM, you wrote: WR - Original Message - WR From: Bruce Dayton WR Subject: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital William, You were far more plain and lucid in your description of what WR I am seeing also. That has been my point to Cotty, that the crowds WR and masses are not having good luck with digital and that labs are WR taking part of the rap when they are really victims. WR I just had the day from hell over this very issue. It's easy to WR be lucid when the unpleasant memories are so fresh. My lab owner told me of a lady that faithfully brought in her WR memory cards to get prints back. One time he asked her how she WR backed up and saved the images. She replied that she threw the card away WR because it was full and would buy another to replace it. He asked her WR why she used the camera and she said that her husband had bought it WR for her and wanted her to use it. So instead of about $10.00 per roll equivalent she was spending closer to $50.00 per roll. WR Bruce, WR If this story had come from anyone other than you, I would be WR questioning the veracity of it. WR All I can say is WR BUUWAAAHAAAHAAAHAAA!!! WR William Robb
Re: Hypothetical question
Hi, Ronald, Well, the lens changing thing is a matter of practise, maybe! The Spotmatics are very sturdy cameras, as evidenced by the number of people on this list who still use them! The meters tend to go on them (I doubt that they were designed to last 30 or 40 years), but they can be replaced from parts cameras, or with slight modification, with K1000 meters, by a competent repair shop (one of my Spots has a K1000 meter in it, and it works just fine). I still use my Spotmatics on a regular basis, and other than the odd CLA and replacement of seals, I don't see any reason why they won't go on for another 30 or 40 years (assuming parts can be gotten, but I'm lucky in that my repair shop is pretty good at scrounging used parts). The K1000 is basically a Spotmatic F, without self-timer and with a bayonet mount, so I'd say yes, Spotmatics are as eternal as the early k-mounts. cheers, frank Ronald Arvidsson wrote: Hi Frank, Maybe I made a mistake. Good to hear that your old gear is adequate. It is true that one seldom need the one or two extra seconds. For me it would only arise in photographing wildlife or birds when my two bodies I would bring don't have the lens I want. Then, due to the very fast changing distances angle and thus motif it might might be needed otherwise not. Granted that there is a significant time difference of a second or so in the change of lenses when comparing screwmount to K mount. One can actually loose a lot of time by not being properly prepared - thus mount doesnt matter. I have a question about the cameras though, I used a lot old Konica gear but found that the cameras didn't last as well as the lenses, are Pentax screwmount bodies as eternal as the somewhat younger first generation K mount cameras? Cheers, Ronald -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
- Original Message - From: Herb Chong Subject: Re: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital people aren't thinking about cost. they are thinking it's not the end of the roll. that's waste of film. This is very true. What is even truer (and I do find this to be rather sad), is that in this case, you only needed to type the first three words of your reply to be equally accurate. William Robb
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
innovations like the following... Small 35mm cameras -- Leica Interchangible lenses -- Leica, Asahiflex The SLR with WYSIWYG -- Asahiflex, K series, SV's H3's, etc. Thru the lens metering -- Spotmatic thru KX Automation linking Aperture/Shutter Speed -- ME at a great $$$ Autofocus ??? what is the next step??? Digital, without a doubt. It's literally and obviously the next Big Thing. --Mike
Re: Film vs. Digital (WAS: Re: RE: HypotheticalQuestion)
- Original Message - From: Ronald Arvidsson Subject: Film vs. Digital (WAS: Re: RE: HypotheticalQuestion) Improvement of the medium follows roughly computers, i.e., a doubling of capacity roughly every 18 months or so (take with a grain of salt). HUH??? Prove it William Robb
Re: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When chemical photography first started anyone doing it was an enthusiast - they had to be. Later when someone offered to develop and print as a service, well-to-do families could take their own pics and let that someone do all the technical stuff. Later still a few tried the technical stuff themselves, some took to it, some didn't and went back to leaving it to the enthusiasts and professionals. Digital is no different IMO. Relatively speaking, early traditional photography cost an arm and a leg in the beginning. Those that can, and wanted to, did. Those that didn't, didn't. I think Cotty's onto something here. Right now, digital is, to a large extent, complicated, expensive and inconvenient. It's where photography was in the mid/late 19th century. It's going to get cheaper, easier and less expensive but it's going to take time, money and trial and error. My approach has been to let the early adopters finance the R D, take the time, deal with the headaches and work out the incompatibilities. *Before* I buy in. I'm almost ready :-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
I have to agree with Herb on this. I personally have no problem turning in a partially shot roll, but my wife would have fits. She doesn't want to waste a single shot on film. She'll hold that roll until the next occasion even if it will be awhile and there are only a couple of shots left. Penny wise and pound foolish. One of her biggest attractions to the digital camera is that she doesn't care how many shots she takes. When using the film camera she might as well be opening the cash register for each shutter release. On digital, she doesn't even think about it. Since I am there to weed out all the duds, she is very happy. She'll shoot 50-100 shots of an event on the digital where she would have shot only 5-10 on film. We may only get 5-10 keepers from the digital, but she has more fun taking them. Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 3:09:05 PM, you wrote: HC Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There isn't that cost advantage in reality, because the cost per HC print of digital (at least in my market) is enough higher that a HC film can be half used, taken in and processed, and will likely HC cost less than getting the digital equivalent printed. HC William Robb HC people aren't thinking about cost. they are thinking it's not the end of HC the roll. that's waste of film. HC Herb
Re: Market Research and Hypothetical Questions
Yeah, but fortunately it's the same problem all the other manufacturers have: People want top dollar quality at a bottom dollar price. I'm really not so sure about that, Mark. So far we equate quality with sensor size and that's a shibboleth as far as I'm concerned. The Sony F-717 is a great camera for about a grand. I don't see why Pentax can't come out with a nice 5-mp digital SLR that takes interchangeable lenses for about $1200 and mop up with it. As long as it has good sensitivity, decent range and good color. Let's face it, most users don't want to deal with the file sizes inherent in 11-mp sensors and they don't need pictures that big anyway. I know I don't. Maybe it's just as simple as offering a good-value digital product that gives people enough of what they want and not a lot more. That's still eminently do-able in today's market, I'd say. --Mike
Re: Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital William, The story is true. The couple is very well to do and her husband wanted her to use the best PS. How he determined that, I don't know. The lab owner said that she was afraid to tell him how much per roll they were spending. Even after explaining that she could reuse the cards, she really had no clue how or what to do. I suspect that now she is just erasing the card after getting the prints. Perhaps my lucidity is wearing off. I wasn't actually disputing the truth of what you say. It is a rather sad story though. William Robb
Re: OT: American Beer
the micro-brewery movement is great. It means pubs get some genuine individual character, and you get to try lots of different types of beers. Best of all, all the micro-breweries around here offer samples of each brew, just as real ale pubs used to with their guest beers, so you get to drink quite a lot for nothing! If you're ever anywhere north of Milwaukee, try Leinenkugel's. It's a local microbrewery that's recently expanded dramaticallyand gone nearly state-wide! I remember when you had to start in Milwaukee and drive north for hours before you could buy any. Those were the days. --Mike
