Re: *ist D revisited

[alexanderkrohe]

Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 17:41:50 -0600
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

- Original Message -
From: alexanderkrohe
Subject: Re: *ist D revisited


> > But it is true, it does not make much sense buying
a
> > new body (e.g. PZ-1 , MZ-S etc.) and then using it
> > with K/M lenses. With these K/M lenses all the new
> > bodies will basically work like a ME-super.

> Do you really think it makes more sense to purchase
a new fleet of
> lenses just to have the ability to take pictures at
all?

No. The point that I was trying to make is that when
you have a fleet of K/M lenses and you are happy with
it, it simply does not make sense to buy the new
bodies at all.  


> I was looking at my lens fleet with the news that
the Asterist D will
> have a hobbled mount. Suddenly, my longest lens is
100mm, my 150, 200,
> 300, 400 and 500mm optics would need to be replaced
to use these focal
> lengths on the new camera.

I have 14 lenses and 10 of them will work. I can live
with that (the expensive ones will work). I mostly
regret that my 18mm/3.5 won't work. However, this lens
seems to be rare even among die hard Pentaxists. I
guess there are really very few people who are
exclusively equipped with high class K/M lenses and
who want to use them with the *istD. So obviously this
is not a factor of any interest for the marketing
guys. Most of the K/M lenses on the used market are
just that: cheap. It is not a big financial loss if
you throw them away after 20 years of use. 

I agree however it would have been not a big deal to
activate stop down metering with K/M lenses on the
*istD  

Speaking about stop down metering: Your 500mm lens (if
it is the Takumar/Pentax 500/4.5.) will work (the
*istD will meter with stop down lenses). 

> So, rather than buying just a camera body, I would
have to buy several
> thousands of dollars worth of glass as well.
>
> Sorry, Pentax, but you don't get my digital money
until I get full 
> mount
> compatibility. However, I am willing to pay a fair
amount to get it.
> 

I think this comment shows the real reason why most
people are upset. They feel "betrayed" by the company
rather than they are upset about any big loss of money
or of usability of the equipment.  

> William Robb

Enjoy,
Alexaner


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

Re: Bug Hints?

[Christian Skofteland]

- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> Unless you put a female on an arm and quickly focus and take the shots
while
> its feeding, you don't have much hope.

You don't have to be that quick!
http://photography.skofteland.net/insects/insect15.htm

Christian

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Rüdiger Neumann]

Hallo Heiko,
I hope you are right, but I fear, that I'm right.
But now I just put my MZ-S and my limited lenses in a suit case and I start
to a short holyday to dresden.
Best regards
Rüdiger



>Hi Rüdiger,
>
>on 09 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
>
>>> wait some more time to see the rest of the *ist lineup. I'm quite
>>>sure that we will see some positive surprises, too.
>
>>From what is your hope. If they will save 5 Euro on their most
>>expensive body and make the software in a way to prevent using
>>K and M lenses and make the userinterface incompatibly to the MZ-S,
>>why should the work in different way on a coming mid class SLR
>>or high end D-SLR?
>
>The *ist is an entry level camera. The entry level models of the MZ-
>lineup had always a crippled mount (MZ-30/50/60) and nobody cared about
>that. We now have a special situation because the entry level model is
>the first one of the *ist series that has been released. And in addition
>the first DSLR will be released soon - based on similar technology as
>the *ist. The *istD is a special camera as it is the first DSLR of
>Pentax. The most important aims of this camera will be that it works
>competitive and that it can be released soon. I'm quite sure that Pentax
>has borrowed the crippled mount from the *ist as that was necessary to
>realize the release date in late summer. So the crippled mount of the
>*ist/*istD allows neither the conclusion that the future models will not
>nor that they will have a fully compatible mount. We just cannot say!
>
>In addition - there may be more options that we actually don't see. What
>about a whole new strategy with a crippled mount for the entry and maybe
>mid level and a new KAF3 mount with full compatibility and new features
>(IS/USM)? I could imaginge something like that, but keep in mind that
>Pentax is a small company in comparison to Canon. They have made a huge
>development effort this year: Optio 33L, Optio S, Optio 450, Optio 550
>(still some more Optios to come ;-), *ist, *istD, three new lenses and
>maybe more to come. I really wonder how they do that. If you like Pentax
>and want to kep Pentax, then you have to be patient. If you want a
>complete IS/USM/DSLR system _now_, then just sell all Pentax stuff (I'll
>give some of your equipment a good home ;-)) and take a Canon 10D, a
>EOS30 and a pile of new AF lenses (no manual lenses at all...).
>
>I have decided to be patient (especially as this will result in a
>cheaper DSLR) and bought an Optio 550 which offers me lots of features
>to bridge the time...
>
>Cheers, Heiko
>

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Gianfranco Irlanda]

Hi guys and gals,

I tried to stay a bit apart from the current discussions about
the changes, but I guess it is time to share some of my
thoughts.

I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a
aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system...

I cannot understand Rüdiger's statement about his 20 F/FA
lenses... I can only think that he is not so happy with them,
otherwise why decide to throw them away for a bunch of Canon
zooms? Those lenses are already compatible with the incoming
*istD, so what? Are you thinking of buying new lenses that
'probably' will be available in FAJ mount only and you are
afraid of not being able to use them on the older cameras? With
a camera of another brand it'll be the same, but you won't be
able to use your F/FA lenses on it then...

It seems to me that a lot of people is becoming too... frenzy
about digital. If you are in a hurry and need a digital SLR now,
no need to complain. Go out a buy one, of the desired brand.
Even the Sigma SD9 and the Canon cameras can accommodate a 42x1
screwmount lens with the proper adapter, for the joy of the
collectors and screwmount users...

I'm not a luddite (well, maybe a bit...) and don't feel too
brand loyal.
I use Nikon as well as Pentax (not to mention a Canon XL1
camcorder with two lenses), and I have fine af lenses in N mount
too. but I have more money invested in Pentax lenses, cameras
and accessories. With a partial frame digital camera, like the
*istD, I have equivalent lenses from 22mm to 600mm, af and mf
(counting the A, F and FA lenses), while in N mount (ie. on a
D100) I can currently cover from 27mm to 315mm (af, of course;
adding one or two lenses to fill the gaps would be easy,
though).

I do need a digital camera. I would save a lot of money that I
spend on film too many times. But not always.
A Pentax brand camera is what I need for what I do, simply
because that's what I use the most in the situations when I fell
the need for digital.

Ciao,

Gianfranco

PS: Just to add a bit of more confusion: according to various
side by side tests in different Italian magazines
(TuttiFotografi, Fotografia Reflex), wrt image quality
(sharpness, contrast, detail), among the Canon 10D, Nikon D100,
Fuji (S2 pro?) and Sigma SD9 the winner is... the Sigma! I'm not
talking about billion of words, but the published test images.
There's a picture where some banisters are in the center of the
frame. The blown up detail shows colour fringes (if not a total
lack of detail) in all the pictures except in the Sigma's, where
the vertical lines are clearly visible (not to mention some
oblique lines...). All cameras were tested with a 28-70/2.8
Sigma lens in different mounts. My thought is: I don't think I'm
going to spend more for IS, USM etc. if I cannot have fine
detail in a picture, if the added sharpness is not going to show
in a print.


- Original Message - 
From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:49 AM
Subject: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)


> On 9 Jun 2003 at 8:27, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote:
> 
> > That's exactly my opinion too.
> > 
> > > as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s.
> > > I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part
of my equipment to
> > > have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses. Now, I
can understand Boz
> > > (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon.
> 
> OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate
based on what's been 
> reported. So given what is known who of those of us that
envisage moving into 
> digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? 
> 
> Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why?


=


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Christian Skofteland]

I've got my name on the top of the waiting list at the local camera shop.  I
am very impressed with digital as a medium and plan on converting 90%.  I'll
keep the LX and MX for film.  I have only 4 non-"A" lenses (in three focal
lengths) so I'm not concerned about limitations in the mount.

I just wish they'd release the damn thing already!

Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:49 AM
Subject: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)


> On 9 Jun 2003 at 8:27, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote:
>
> > That's exactly my opinion too.
> >
> > > as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s.
> > > I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part of my
equipment to
> > > have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses. Now, I can
understand Boz
> > > (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon.
>
> OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's
been
> reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving
into
> digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why?
>
> Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rob Studdert
> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
> Tel +61-2-9554-4110
> UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
>

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Heiko Hamann]

Hi Rüdiger,

on 09 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>I hope you are right, but I fear, that I'm right.

No, I will be right ;-)

>But now I just put my MZ-S and my limited lenses in a suit case and I start
>to a short holyday to dresden.

That's the best cure. Enjoy your trip and the MZ-S kit.

Cheers, Heiko

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

[Pentxuser]

Yes I believe LX screens will fit the mx and vice versa.

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

[Lon Williamson]

I hate to bring it up, but me don't get this fetching message.
-Lon
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
... But some mistakes made in US
English are extremely annoying. The mixing up of 'bring', 'get' and 'fetch'
the incorrect use of the personal pronoun 'I' and 'me'.

Re: Extending into medium format.

[brooksdj]

> Thanks to a fellow PDMLer I have extended my 
645 outfit beyond just the
F> A
> 75/2.8.
> 
> I have just added an FA-45/2.8, FA Macro 120/4, and an A* 300/4.
> 
> I had some sun today, but domestic chores took priority.  I did take a
fe> w
> shots with the 300 and 120.  I hope to finish the roll of 120 tomorrow
ni> ght
> at an outdoor concert.
> 
> Realizing my repertoire contains 35, 645, and digital,
> 
> César
> 

Re: Late Saturday fun

[Lon Williamson]

Graywolf,

I think tech talk dominates on lists because talking about the
other side of things is harder, and less can be said about it.
On the other hand, winder with 5 fps blah blah blah synch speed
yak yak dof yadayada can provide some real meat.  Grin.
-Lon

T Rittenhouse wrote:
Then there are the lesser demons who sneer at other peoples thing. I am sure
Mr. Rockwell is an "ARTISTE!". Me? I am a moderately high-level snapshooter,
and a lover of well made equipment (not exactly the same thing as his #1
level, but close).
It always seemed to me that the purpose of a hobby is to have fun. If you
are having fun who the heck cares what someone else thinks of your hobby.
By the way, according to Mr. Rockwell, we are all in hell because we
frequent this mailing list.
Rating of his site: Just another Pseudo-Pretentious Jerk.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 1:05 AM
Subject: Late Saturday fun


http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax k-mount

[Lon Williamson]

Without technical documentation, you're going to have to figure
out IO addressing, how interrupts work, etc, all on your own.
I don't think a week is enough time.  Did the same thing myself
once on a breath alcohol tester on which all source code/documentation
had been lost.  Just resolving code from data took me about a week,
and that was with a fairly expensive disassembler as a tool.
T Rittenhouse wrote:
Humm?

Been a long time since I did machine code programing. But since the firmware
for the camera is undoubtedly in CMOS or EEPROM these days. It would just be
a case of copying it out. Mucking around until you found the proper place in
the code, inserting a call to your code (tacked on to the end of the
existing software) and copying the new firmware back to the camera. No need
to mess with the existing code except the place where you put the call. If
you need to keep the code you replaced with the call, you add it to your new
code so the call takes you to it also.
Most of your time will be spent dissassembling the old code to find the jump
point you need. I admit his 15 minutes is optimistic, but a man-week sounds
reasonable, and that would be worthwhile.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 5:57 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax k-mount


Arnold, be careful with that.  Figuring out how to add such a thing
when messing with a binary image is no 15 minute job on _this_ side of
the factory.  Been there, done that, weeks are involved
-Lon

Arnold Stark wrote:

I won't either buy a Nikon or Canon DSLR. If Pentax does not hear us and
does not offer better compatibilty on a DSLR that I can afford, then I
will either buy a better film scanner, or I will wait for Cosina to
bring a DSLR in true k-mount. Or I willpull out the memory chip and
reprogram that *ist D camera myself. It can' take more than 15 minutes
to implement metering in manual mode with DOF preview activated.

Re: Pentax k-mount

[Lon Williamson]

I cracked a game once myself (on a dare from a hardware type
who thought it could not be done).  The NOPs (plural, note)
 needed to be placed in several subroutine overlays that came
into memory XOR-ROTATED, the game repeatedly clobbered all
the interrupt vectors the debugger depended on, etc.  Took me
three days.  This stuff is NOT always easy, folks.
Thomas Haller wrote:
Reminds me of watching a guy at work replacing in turn each JP command 
in a game with a NOP to get around the reg code check. Took hardly any 
time and it was boringly sinple...

On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 09:13  AM, T Rittenhouse wrote:

Mucking around until you found the proper place in
the code, inserting a call to your code (tacked on to the end of the
existing software)

Re: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)

[Lon Williamson]

What's not to like about the A 24-50/4?

Lukasz Kacperczyk wrote:
I have a MX and a MZ-S, and consider the latter to be an "AF MX". Sure the
viewfinder isn't that big, but it's mighty contrasty, and a joy to look
through. It's very well built, easy to operate, compact, has about
everything a MX user would want and more, is fully compatibile (I have 6
lenses now - K 50/1.4, FA 50/1.4, Revuenon 55/1.2, FA 28/2.8, M 100/2.8 and
A 24-50/4 [though I'm planning to sell the last one] and with all of them I
can use centerweighed and spot metering, I don't mind not being able to use
matrix metering with the M and K lenses). I'm sure you wouldn't like neither
the MZ-3 nor MZ-5n, because of their viewfinders and plastic construction,
and I'm scared by the multitude of LX glitches (spelling?). I guess a PZ-1/p
could be a cheaper alternative to the MZ-S, if you don't mind more plastic
and a bigger body.

Re: P30 vs. Super program (Super A)?

[Lon Williamson]

Here's the list of essential features on the Super A:
One screen, horizontal split and microprism surround.
Mechanical DOF, self timer, analogue TTL flash
Program, aperature, shutter, manual modes
LCD shows shutter and (sometimes) aperature
Winder & motor drive available (Winder is MEII)
PC connector for external flash
Small, removable plastic grip on front (must be removed when using winder/drive)
LCD can be backlit in dim light
No exposure lock
15 - 1/2000 shutter speeds, synch is at 1/90 (although specified as 1/125)
Exposure compensation +/- 2 EV, continuous, with detents at full stops
Jose Luis Gonzalez Martin wrote:
Thanks to everybody who answered my message about my old P30 camera. I´m new
in the forum, and I like it a lot. Some of you recommended me to get a
manual old Pentax Super Program (Super A here in Europe). Is the Super
better enough to get it even having the P30? I like manual SLR, so I would
go for one of them if it´s really worthy: there are some Super Program
bodies in eBay to bid for. So, can anybody tell me the differences between
both cameras? Maybe best the MZ-M (ZX-M)?
Thank you!



P.D.- Is the Super ME the same camera than the Super Program?

Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist)

[Pål Jensen]

Rüdiger wrote:

> I do not believe that either. I have the impression, that a lot people on
> the list
> do not see what just happed at Pentax. Pentax means it can maximise
> the selling with incompatiblity. So if not only the MZ-60, *ist, *istD (and
> the
> two comming *ists next year) will not need the aperture ring, all new lense
> will not have it anymore.

This is pure speculation without data points. The limitations is so far only on entry 
level products.

Pål

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Pål Jensen]

Rüdiger wroter:

> Pentax will maybe gain some short time money and it will ruin in the
> end the whole company. A lot of my friends have bought Pentax,
> but I cannot recommend Pentax anymore.


Because you can't use lenses older than 20 years on an entry level camera and a DSLR? 
Surpise! You can't do that on any other brand either!

Pål

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Pål Jensen]

Rüdiger wrote:

> 1. So far the design objective was to reach as much compatibility as
> technically possible But now is the goal: as few compatibility as still
> straight necessarily.

They have designed entry level with limitations for years. Theres no change. 

 
> 2. Change in the camera operation, so far operation by the aperture ring
> (MZ-5n, Mz-s), or by aperture ring and thumb wheel (Z-1p), now only by the
> thumb wheel, since then no aperture ring lenses is anymore necessary.

It wasn't necessary on  the Z-1p either but that didn't make aperture rings on all 
lenses dissapear. 

> 
> To 1:
> From *ist and *istD we see, that we have in the future no more compatibility
> to older lenses, even if this is technically feasible, since it is not not
> wished from Pentax.

Theres no logic in this. We do not know what Pentax wishes for upper end bodies and 
lenses. 


> Only he current reduced compatibility to K and M
> objectives is, in order to use also the F/FA soft lenses. The aperture
> simulator is not a matter of price, a Mz-6 for 300 euro has it in.


It is a matter of price. See what the *ist offers in features at what price. 


> Even an exposure measurement with work stop down aperture with * ist would
> be technically without additional expenditure possible, is however missing.


This isn't true. Pentax have chosen a simple (like competition) electronic metering 
system. Keeping compatibilty would have meen keeping the expensive system used on the 
MZ-S or even more expensive: keeping a double metering system for different lenses. 


> Therefore also all new lenses will be only FAJ lenses (see already 18-35),
> because an aperture ring disturbs only the *ist cameras operation.
> It is intended, that these lenses should no longer work to the MX, LX or
> Mz-s (see 1), because it is supposed that new cameras should to be bought.



> 
> Pentax loses thereby the only selling arguement in relation to the
> competition, the k-mount compatibility.


It never was a selling point. 99% of buyers of new cameras, whether they are Pentax, 
Minolta, Canon or Nikon, couldn't care less about compatibility of more than 20 year 
old lenses. 


> Why should I buy a *istD with the
> pertinent lenses, if I can not use these lenses with my LX and MZ-S?


The vast majority who buy a DSLR, yes even the Canon D10, don't sit on a phletora of 
20+ year old lenses. They don't sit on many lenses at all. The majority are people who 
want the latest digital toy. Most of them don't come from slr owner ship at all. They 
don't know what aperture is and will be confused by an aperture ring.

Pål

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Lon Williamson]

I personally think only a measurebator would have two 35mm SLR
systems.  Think of it:  everything in duplicate.  Twice the cost,
weight, and storage.  I've always thought that when you buy into
a mount and have some bucks invested, you are locked in unless you
have more money than sense.  This is why, I assume, some here
moan and bitch instead of dumping Pentax.
Me?  Hey, I'm not going to jump ship.

Pål Jensen wrote, in part:

Actually, I find multipple systems to be a venue too seldom explored...

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Steve Desjardins]

Most of my lenses are FA so there's no compatibility issue.  From what I
can see, IS lenses are too expensive for what I do, so having those
available is no really an advantage.  Assuming that the Ist*D is
comparable to the 10D, I can't see any good reason to switch.  I do have
my suspicions about the AF quality of Pentax, but I suspect that all AF
technology  will move to the point where brand will make little
difference.   

BTW, I'm not writing off Nikon quite yet, but I am surprised at how
they are letting Canon dominate this really important pro market
segment.  There's this new Canon print ad where Andre Agassi is holding
up a trophy so that all the PJ's can take his picture.  The shot is from
the top, and everyone is using "those white lenses".  Pentax might be
looking on wistfully, but Nikon must be cringing.


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

Re: OT-So What are You? was: Late Saturday fun

[Lon Williamson]

Every list needs its whore, Cotty.  Jump into those
fishnet red tights.  They'll look cool with your C*n*n.
Grin.
Cotty wrote:
Hey Cotty,

You're funny! :-)

- THaller

P.S. I mean funny - haha, not funny - strange...


I've got some news for you buddy...you were right first time ;-)



Cheers,
  Cotty
___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Blivit4]

If you bought your gear used and can deal with ebay, changing systems is a bother, but 
not expensive. It's more a question of motivation than money. If something really 
matters to you you take action instead of whining.

BR


Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 I've always thought that when you buy into
>a mount and have some bucks invested, you are locked in unless you
>have more money than sense.  This is why, I assume, some here
>moan and bitch instead of dumping Pentax.
>

__
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Leon Altoff]

On Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:49:00 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:

>OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been 
>reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into 
>digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? 
>
>Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why?

I plan on buying an *istD when it is released, I have the money in the
bank and all I need is for it to become available.

Why?  Well, I find myself taking pictures which will only ever be used
digitally, on the web or in presentations and so on. I've tried using
various digital cameras and while they are ok for some things all of
them really SUCK when you try do anything close up (I can't even bring
myself to call it macro).  This includes a 5 megapixel Nikon I tried. 
I really HATE the pseudo SLR viewfinder which is only an LCD screen -
give me ground glass any day, at least then I can tell if what I'm
taking a picture of is actually in focus.  And all my lenses will fit
(I only own one pre A lens, an M50f1.7 which came with my MX which I
bought new 22 years ago) and I will have control over my flashes - and
wireless P-TTL at that.

I looked at the *ist in a shop today, and it's too small.  To small
even for my wife.  Put a grip on it and it would be nice though and
that should be the size of the *ist D.  While I agree that the
thumbwheel of the *ist is cheap feeling I'm hoping for more from the
*ist D.  And no I'm not planning on buying an *ist.

I'm also planning on putting my bellows and slide copying setup onto
the *ist D and using it as a 6 megapixel slide scanner.

Would I prefer a full size sensor?  Well, yes, but I don't go that wide
that often and particularly for pictures I want to only use digitally. 
And yes I would prefer to have 24 megapixels rather than 6, but that is
why I will keep my film cameras.  Given a choice between the *ist D or
the MZ-D, I'd probably take the MZ-D for compatibility with my MZ-S,
but the *ist D seems to have what I need and most of what I want and
the price is a lot better than the US$7000 that the MZ-D was talked
about having.


 Leon

http://www.bluering.org.au
http://www.bluering.org.au/leon

Re: Late Saturday fun

[Ed Matthew]

It always seemed to me that the purpose of a hobby is to have fun. If you 
are having fun who the >>heck cares what someone else thinks of your 
hobby.
By the way, according to Mr. Rockwell, we are all in hell because we 
frequent this mailing list.
Rating of his site: Just another Pseudo-Pretentious Jerk.
Ciao,
Graywolf
I thought his site was funny - as in fun being a part of the hobby. I don't 
think that Mr. Rockwell intended to be taken entirely seriously. Note the 
*many* messages here regarding the *ist and the *D ist. Fun to discuss, fun 
to read (well, for a while) and it goes on and on.

My take is that he is laughing at all of us - himself included. When the 
instrument in hand becomes more considered than its purpose, the joke is on 
us.

...and it remains fun.

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

Re: Bug Hints?

[Leon Altoff]

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 02:09:56 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>Some mosquitos got into my house.  Some have fallen to bug spray.
>But a few I managed to trap in plastic containers, thinking they
>might make interesting macro subjects.
>
>Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
>The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
>posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
>there more accessible tricks?

I'm sorry Glenn, but the only good mosquito is a dead mosquito.  


 Leon

http://www.bluering.org.au
http://www.bluering.org.au/leon

Re: Pentax k-mount

[Lon Williamson]

Hell, that ain't even new.  Most microcontrollers
have had a model or two with code protection since
the 80s.
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 8 Jun 2003 at 14:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


And that there are any bytes left over in the address space
to stick the new code into.  (Of the two, recognizing the
JMP instructions is the more easily solvable.  How many
different embedded controllers are in common use these
days?  ID the controller and look it up, or try different
interpretations of the code until you find one that starts
making sense.)


Many late microcontrollers have on-board EEPROMs and code protection security. 
I've just been down this path with a W78E58.

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Pål Jensen]

Gianfranco wrote:

> I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a
> aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system...


That is because they want to use the aperture ring on the Canon lenses :o)
The whole thing is mostly psychological. 

Pål

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Pål Jensen]

Lon wrote:

> I personally think only a measurebator would have two 35mm SLR
> systems.  Think of it:  everything in duplicate.  Twice the cost,
> weight, and storage.  


Really? People who owns 30 lens are going to have dublicate anyway. My point is to use 
different equipment for different usage. For Canon I would zoom and IS lenses. If I 
own a Leica I would use fast primes. Same for Pentax. I never carry all my lenses at 
the same time anyway and certainly not someone who owns 30! The only thing you need 
dbølicate of is bodies, but I guess peoøle who own 30 lenses own more bodies than they 
need anyway. 
I would treat digital as a new format and buy accordingly regardless of lens mount.

Pål 

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Pål Jensen]

Heiko wrote:

> In my eyes all theese products are entry level. Yes - the *istD is entry  
> level as the D100 or 10D are. 2000,- is much money but it is the price  
> to enter the DSLR market. High-end DSLRs are the Nikon D1 and Canon 1D.


Pentax started out with the MD-S prototype that was built on a (semi)pro chassis. 
Meanwhile DSLR have migrated into price sensitive area fighting over amateurs and 
snapshooters (no offenses intended) money. Hence, like the competition, Pentax build 
their DSLR around the camera parts (electronic) of an entry level SLR in order to save 
cost and stay competitive. They have chosen a much simpler metering system that 
actually uses the digital, exact readout from the lenses. This is dirt cheap and more 
accurate. The MZ-S only use this electronic information for dataimprinting and finder 
display. Instead it relies on mechanical coupling in both lenses and bodies that needs 
to extremely accurately calibrated. This is what cost money. Although the mechanical 
transfer could be made extremely accurate, in real life there are variations. If 
you're ever shot test rolls on various apertures you'll experience exposure variations 
due to the nature of this system. These variations are usually trvivial but they are 
there. 

Pål

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Blivit4]

Think about what you wrote here for a minute: Aside from a couple moments Canon has 
had Nikon sucking wind since 1897. What makes you think that Pentax's Ist* D class 
camera will keep up with Canon's 10D class camera?

BR

"Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

... Assuming that the Ist*D is
>comparable to the 10D, I can't see any good reason to switch.  I do have
>my suspicions about the AF quality of Pentax, but I suspect that all AF
>technology  will move to the point where brand will make little
>difference.   
>
>BTW, I'm not writing off Nikon quite yet, but I am surprised at how
>they are letting Canon dominate this really important pro market
>segment.  

__
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Mark Roberts]

Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Rüdiger wroter:
>
>> Pentax will maybe gain some short time money and it will ruin in the
>> end the whole company. A lot of my friends have bought Pentax,
>> but I cannot recommend Pentax anymore.
>
>Because you can't use lenses older than 20 years on an entry level 
>camera and a DSLR? Surpise! You can't do that on any other brand either!

So you're saying now Pentax is no longer different from any other brand?
And this is a good thing, I assume?

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Mark Roberts]

Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Pentax have chosen a simple (like competition) electronic metering 
>system. Keeping compatibilty would have meen keeping the expensive 
>system used on the MZ-S or even more expensive

Permitting *stop-down* metering on K and M lenses would have cost
NOTHING.

Personally, I think when we really get to examine the *ist-D in person
we will find that they have allowed stop-down metering - I expect it may
be hidden in a custom Pentax Function.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

We should be pleased with Pentax

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

#1  The MZ-S is a reasonable pro body.
Maybe not the greatest, but pretty good by what I read here.

#2  The FA-J lenses finally create a clear tier between a pro and amateur
product placements.  The Limiteds are for pro use; the rest, amateur.

They've done a portion of what we've asked.
Let's work with the results and patiently 
look forward to more (slow as it may be).

I wouldn't be surprised to see the *ist body drop in price within a year
and be replaced by a closer-to-MZ-S model in the same price class.
And, although the MZ/ZX bodies are going away, the "M" will probably stay
as the entry-level orphan, as did the K-1000 for so many decades.

Collin


mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Re: Pentax k-mount

[Keith Whaley]

Talk about dumb smart machines, once a fella had reported frequent and
unremitting fax calls that didn't download any faxes. This went on for a
long time before he finally insisted the phone company check it out.
To make a longer story short, it was determined the "phone calls" came
from an unattended public Coke machine, somewhere out in the desert,
trying vainly to tell it's keeper that it was out of product! 
Can you believe it?
Set it up with an autodialer, and ignore whatever it says...

The Coke machine worked okay, the people didn't!

keith whaley

Alan Chan wrote:
> 
> >Since most 30 year old appliances fulfill their purposes more
> >than adequately why would one want a networked refrigerator let
> >alone a wireless one?  On second thought I don't want to know.

> Not to mention you'll need to install firewall, viruscan, and all other
> craps just to keep it from being hacked. Imagine the foods ordered by your
> refrigerator, were delivered to your neighborhood, quietly...  :-)
> 
> regards,
> Alan Chan

A curio

[Camdir]

http://members.aol.com/camdir/hector.jpg


The aperture rings (remember them?), focus, and zoom rings, are linked. The 
body is not dissimilar to a cut & shut Vivitar V2000 (?). Base plate looked all 
original. How odd.

Kind regards

Peter

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Lon Williamson]

Brucie baby, anyone on Ebay ever screw you?
I ain't going _there_ any more.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you bought your gear used and can deal with ebay, changing systems is a bother, but not expensive. It's more a question of motivation than money. If something really matters to you you take action instead of whining.

BR

Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 I've always thought that when you buy into

a mount and have some bucks invested, you are locked in unless you
have more money than sense.  This is why, I assume, some here
moan and bitch instead of dumping Pentax.


__
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397
Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Rob Studdert]

On 9 Jun 2003 at 8:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> If you bought your gear used and can deal with ebay, changing systems is a
> bother, but not expensive. It's more a question of motivation than money. If
> something really matters to you you take action instead of whining.

Obviously you're not including the time and effort required to realize the sale 
and then to purchase equipment. Speak for yourself but for some of us it would 
be a big hassle, we don't all live in NYC you know.

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: OT Tokina Hood Reference required

[Rob Studdert]

On 9 Jun 2003 at 4:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Since I am too lazy/busy (delete where applicable) to find this myself, who
> knows of an online reference source which shows the Tokina hood designations and
> their appropriate lenses? 
>  Any idea what an SH-621 fits?

This hood suites a Tokina ATX 28-85

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Rob Studdert]

On 9 Jun 2003 at 14:40, Pål Jensen wrote:

> Gianfranco wrote:
> 
> > I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a
> > aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system...
> 
> 
> That is because they want to use the aperture ring on the Canon lenses :o)
> The whole thing is mostly psychological. 

I'm just getting real. If I'm going to have to fundamentally change the way I 
shoot I may as well become a sheep and follow the flock. At least Canon is a 
known quantity with a high likelihood of remaining in the business.

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Arnold Stark]

Well, I checked all custum functions that were available on the 
pre-production *ist D, and I can tell you that stop-down metering was 
not there.

Arnold

Personally, I think when we really get to examine the *ist-D in person we will find that they have allowed stop-down metering - I expect it may be hidden in a custom Pentax Function.

 

First photomicrographs with ME Super

[Dr E D F Williams]

For those who might be interested I have posted a batch of pictures at:

http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/hold/micro

The subjects are bacteria and the scales from the wings of a very small
moth. The wing scales show detail down to the limit of resolution of the
light microscope at high magnification (about X1500). These scales are as
good as diatoms for testing optical microscopes. There are phase contrast,
dark field and bright field pictures taken with a 40X and 90X oil objective
and immersed Aplanatic condenser. I am rather pleased with them. I did no
bracketing, but did change the exposure factor to 2X and to 4X for one
picture each -- this ruined them. All the others were taken with the ME
Super set to automatic and the exposures were between 1/8 and 2 seconds. I
used the shutter in the belief that mirror and shutter vibrations wouldn't
matter with this massive frame and the long exposures - they didn't.

Film was Fuji Superia 200 processed this morning in Tetenal Chemicals that
are now very old indeed. Anyone wanting details of the pictures please
contact me off list. Some picture series are taken at different focus
heights and in some the detail is very fine.

Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002

Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist)

[Bojidar Dimitrov]

Paal wrote:

> I've been told that the FA-J lenses are strictly entry level and
> that there will be no higher end FA-J lenses.

Dario Bonazza wrote:
> 
> I won't believe that for one second. When you (Pentax) remove
> diaphragm simulator from top end models (like the *ist D
> undoubtably currently is), removing aperture ring from your
> (Pentax) lens line is just a matter of time.

I am with you Dario.  I am confident that all further Pentax cameras
will lack support for K/M lenses and that all further lenses will be FAJ
(further Limited lenses excluded [or maybe not excluded])...

On the other hand, there is a scenario under which both Paal and Dario
are correct, but I will leave this as an excercise for the reader...

Cheers,
Boz

Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[Bojidar Dimitrov]

Hi Peter,

> Giving the option of stop down metering with K mount lenses would
> have cost nothing in hardware and no more in software development
> than has already be expended.  It to would have made the camera no
> less attractive to beginners with no difference in cost and would
> have kept at least some semblance of K mount compatibility.

I agree fully.

> The decision to kill K mount compatibility is a blindingly stupid
> marketing move.  Nothing more.

I do not think so.  I think that Pentax's future really lies in the
crippled (AKA FAJ-mount, AKA Kaf3), and if they are to do this thing,
then why not now?  For the kinds of customers that Pentax is after, it
really makes sense economically to leave out the aperture ring and the
aperture simulator.  These are complex mechanical shapes that require
lots of machining and complex assembly, and they are a source of
problems due to wear and tear.

The decision to make K and M lenses obsolete (DO YOU ALL BELIEVE ME
NOW?) is an economically sound one, and with it Pentax hopes to cut down
production costs and to limit the amount of explaining that goes into
their operating manuals.

Now, this is all a speculation on my side, but just like the prediction
that the *ist and *ist D will not work with the K/M lenses, it is my
prediction that Pentax will not release another camera or lens that
supports aperture-ring operation.  There might be another limited lens
that has an aperture ring, I don't know.  Or there might be a Limited
lens without an aperture ring, and if it is a good one, you will all buy
it.  This will ease your move towards the crippled mount.

It is also my prediction that if Pentax survives this transition (from
Kaf2 to crippled-mount), there will eventually be a further mount
evolution that will support IS lenses.  I am sure that the *ist and ist
D mount does not support any unknown-to-us features.  At this time
Pentax is barely hanging on, but if they make it, it is clear to them
that they need to follow up with IS.

Good luck to Pentax,
Boz

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Blivit4]

There are no sure things in this world. Price and risk are connected. I've been using 
ebay for buying and selling since 1997. Some buyers/sellers are good and some are bad. 
Nothing bad enough to stop using it.

BR

Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Brucie baby, anyone on Ebay ever screw you?
>I ain't going _there_ any more.
>

__
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455

Re: Extending into medium format.

[gfen]

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Cesar Matamoros II wrote:

> I have just added an FA-45/2.8, FA Macro 120/4, and an A* 300/4.

I actually purchased an A45/2.8 over a month ago.. I have yet to use it
once, its been absolutely miserable weather every day I've had off, I
think. -sigh-


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

Re: OT fridges (was Re: Pentax k-mount

[Cotty]

>   Worse it might not stop with death. You know the stories about people
>who die 
>and nobody notices? 

Nick, I work with some of these people!



Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: Bug Hints?

[gfen]

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
> The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
> posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
> there more accessible tricks?

Put them in the freezer which should slow them down for you.

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

Re: *ist D revisited

[alexanderkrohe]

Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 23:51:45 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?=
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> I can symphatize with those affected. However, I
believe Pentax have 
> done some math: How many K and M mount lenses are
there? I cannot imagine 
> there are many of those who want to use, say, the M
35/2.8 on a DSLR or 
> any of the other numerous, rather pedestrian leses.
Not yo mention the 
> old zooms. Those really good K lenses, apart from
the 50mm lenses which 
> are dirt cheap an numerous anyway, that some
actually migth want to 
> use, like say the 15/3.5, or for that matter, the
35/3.5 or 85/1.8, they 
> are all quite rare. How many of those who own these
rare lenses ar 
> actually going to use them on a DSLR? 
> I believe that however you do the 
> math, you end up with very few potential customers. 
> 
> Pål


I think this is the point. Those lenses are extremely
rare, which means only few potential customers.
However, with the *istD Pentax enters a quickly
growing but highly competitive market with constantly
decreasing prices. Competition will further strengthen
(and prices drop) when Olympus actually introduces
their 4/3 system. I think simplifying the lens mount
particularly on the lens' side (already done by the
major competitors) probably saves them more money than
anticipated. 

Alexander 



__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

Re: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[Pål Jensen]

Bojidar wrote:

> Now, this is all a speculation on my side, but just like the prediction
> that the *ist and *ist D will not work with the K/M lenses, 

No offense, but it wasn't much of a prediction as it well known in Japan at PMA times 
and the same whine war as we have now was raging on japanese mailing lists back in 
February. 


>it is my
> prediction that Pentax will not release another camera or lens that
> supports aperture-ring operation.  

Then people better go out and buy the MZ-S before it is too late as it is then the 
last Pentax that relies on aperture rings. Remember all the whineing about the fact 
that MZ-S cannot set aperture manually from the body? 
It is fun to speculate but I can't see any reasons why not Pentax would make manual 
aperture adjustment from the body available with F and FA lenses with upper end 
bodies. Limiting such use makes no sense from any perspective as it doesn't need 
mechanical transmissions. Not does make any sense since all current upper end lens 
have aperture rings. 

Pål








There might be another limited lens
> that has an aperture ring, I don't know.  Or there might be a Limited
> lens without an aperture ring, and if it is a good one, you will all buy
> it.  This will ease your move towards the crippled mount.
> 
> It is also my prediction that if Pentax survives this transition (from
> Kaf2 to crippled-mount), there will eventually be a further mount
> evolution that will support IS lenses.  I am sure that the *ist and ist
> D mount does not support any unknown-to-us features.  At this time
> Pentax is barely hanging on, but if they make it, it is clear to them
> that they need to follow up with IS.
> 
> Good luck to Pentax,
> Boz
> 
> 

Re: OT Tokina Hood Reference required

[Camdir]

Excellent, Rob , thanks. 

I'll cut you in for a share of the huge profits:)

Peter

Re: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[Pål Jensen]

Corrected message!


Bojidar wrote:

> Now, this is all a speculation on my side, but just like the prediction
> that the *ist and *ist D will not work with the K/M lenses, 

No offense, but it wasn't much of a prediction as it well known in Japan at PMA times 
and the same whine war as we have now was raging on japanese mailing lists back in 
February. 


>it is my
> prediction that Pentax will not release another camera or lens that
> supports aperture-ring operation.  

Then people better go out and buy the MZ-S before it is too late as it is then the 
last Pentax that relies on aperture rings. Remember all the whining about the fact 
that MZ-S cannot set aperture manually from the body? 
It is fun to speculate but I can't see any reasons why not Pentax would make manual 
aperture adjustment from the lens available with F and FA lenses with upper end 
bodies. Limiting such use makes no sense from any perspective as it doesn't need 
mechanical transmissions. Not does make any sense since all current upper end lens 
have aperture rings. 

Pål








There might be another limited lens
> that has an aperture ring, I don't know.  Or there might be a Limited
> lens without an aperture ring, and if it is a good one, you will all buy
> it.  This will ease your move towards the crippled mount.
> 
> It is also my prediction that if Pentax survives this transition (from
> Kaf2 to crippled-mount), there will eventually be a further mount
> evolution that will support IS lenses.  I am sure that the *ist and ist
> D mount does not support any unknown-to-us features.  At this time
> Pentax is barely hanging on, but if they make it, it is clear to them
> that they need to follow up with IS.
> 
> Good luck to Pentax,
> Boz
> 
> 

Re: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[Pål Jensen]

I agree with most cited below except the speculative part. I do think Pentax is about 
to introduce a new lens mount interface but I can't see any reasons to assume that 
they won't make an easy upgrade path. This path will be visible in upper end models; 
not bottom of the line film and digital SLR's. 

Pål




- Original Message - 
From: "Bojidar Dimitrov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 12:08 PM
Subject: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)


> Hi Peter,
> 
> > Giving the option of stop down metering with K mount lenses would
> > have cost nothing in hardware and no more in software development
> > than has already be expended.  It to would have made the camera no
> > less attractive to beginners with no difference in cost and would
> > have kept at least some semblance of K mount compatibility.
> 
> I agree fully.
> 
> > The decision to kill K mount compatibility is a blindingly stupid
> > marketing move.  Nothing more.
> 
> I do not think so.  I think that Pentax's future really lies in the
> crippled (AKA FAJ-mount, AKA Kaf3), and if they are to do this thing,
> then why not now?  For the kinds of customers that Pentax is after, it
> really makes sense economically to leave out the aperture ring and the
> aperture simulator.  These are complex mechanical shapes that require
> lots of machining and complex assembly, and they are a source of
> problems due to wear and tear.
> 
> The decision to make K and M lenses obsolete (DO YOU ALL BELIEVE ME
> NOW?) is an economically sound one, and with it Pentax hopes to cut down
> production costs and to limit the amount of explaining that goes into
> their operating manuals.
> 
> Now, this is all a speculation on my side, but just like the prediction
> that the *ist and *ist D will not work with the K/M lenses, it is my
> prediction that Pentax will not release another camera or lens that
> supports aperture-ring operation.  There might be another limited lens
> that has an aperture ring, I don't know.  Or there might be a Limited
> lens without an aperture ring, and if it is a good one, you will all buy
> it.  This will ease your move towards the crippled mount.
> 
> It is also my prediction that if Pentax survives this transition (from
> Kaf2 to crippled-mount), there will eventually be a further mount
> evolution that will support IS lenses.  I am sure that the *ist and ist
> D mount does not support any unknown-to-us features.  At this time
> Pentax is barely hanging on, but if they make it, it is clear to them
> that they need to follow up with IS.
> 
> Good luck to Pentax,
> Boz
> 
> 

Re: Just tried a *ist (or is it an *ist)...

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

on 09.06.03 2:50, Cameron Hood at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> lensmount. And the depth of field preview from the MZ-S is definitely a
> keeper.
I thought DOF preview works in the same way on *ist like on MZ-S? Am I
somehow wrong?

-- 
Best Regards
Sylwek

Re: OK Survey time

[Caveman]

Rob Studdert wrote:
OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been 
reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into 
digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? 

Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why?
Here's the cave Luddite pov:

I don't have that many lenses nor are they particularly expensive, so I 
don't think in terms like "moving" or "switching". My current gear is 
manual focus only (except one lens), serves me well and has no appealing 
equivalents in the other manufacturers lines. For me, the questions are:
1) if I decide I want AF film gear, would I buy it from Pentax
2) if I decide to buy a digital camera, would I buy it from Pentax

The answers are 1) no and 2) no. Some of my reasoning:

1) in my case there is little point in buying an AF camera just to use 
it with my mf lenses. If I buy one, I'll want to buy some AF lenses to 
go with it too. I find no particular advantage to buy an AF camera + 
lenses from Pentax, their AF lens line looks to me like a mess, and they 
have a proven track of lagging behind the competition (should I mention 
USM IS eye control and all that), not to speak of availability (given 
all the horror stories with QC, mail order is not an option)

2) analysing my digital "needs", I found that a smallish P&S type of 
digital camera would be more useful to me than a DSLR type one, however 
I want some decent performance and range of features from it too, and 
what I've seen so far from the Optios has left me cold.

So your truly Caveman is very likely to hang here indefinitely, because 
of his Pentax manual focus gear, and subscribing to some different lists 
for anything else. Including medium format, but that's a whole different 
story.

cheers,
caveman

Re: Bug Hints?

[Bob Blakely]

Refrigerator.

Regards,
Bob...

"Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying
the object which is abused.  Men can go wrong with wine
and women.  Shall we then prohibit and abolish women?"
-Martin Luther
 
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> Some mosquitos got into my house.  Some have fallen to bug spray.
> But a few I managed to trap in plastic containers, thinking they
> might make interesting macro subjects.
> 
> Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
> The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
> posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
> there more accessible tricks?

Re: Extending into medium format.

[Steve Desjardins]

I'll be curious to hear your reactions.  I'm looking at (maybe) buying
another 645 lens and was trying to decide between a wide (45) or a tele
(150 or 200).


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

PZ-1P Problem with Rewind Mechanism

[Chee Seang Ong]

Hi all, I am new to the list and I have a problem to ask the experts on
the list :)
I was shooting a friend's wedding with my PZ-1P and suddenly it started
to rewind all by itself, and I have just begun the roll with just a few
shots! After a short while of rewinding sound being heard, the display
screen showed the sign of the film fully rewind. I opened up the film
cover and lo and behold the film was not rewinded at all!
I closed the lid and the film forwarded one frame and the display showed
film no. 1!
I changed the battery but the same thing happened again.  After I
switched it off for a while and re activated it again, everything worked
fine.  It is still ok right now but I am sure same thing will happen
again if I'm gonna use it on another critical situation (Murphy's
Law)...
So, if anyone has the same experience I would really appreciate if you
can shed some light on the problem, how to fix it, where to send it for
repair and roughly how much it would cost.
Thank you!
CS

Re: Extending into medium format.

[gfen]

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Steve Desjardins wrote:
> I'll be curious to hear your reactions.  I'm looking at (maybe) buying
> another 645 lens and was trying to decide between a wide (45) or a tele
> (150 or 200).

The key to deciding what lens to buy for your 645 is what you already use
for your 35. Which length do you already tend to prefer?

The focal length changes, but the angle of view is the same. No reason to
not match it.

(maybe we'll get some sun in this weekend so I can actually go out and USE
it)

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

Re: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[alexanderkrohe]

Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 12:08:27 +0200
From: Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Hi Boz,

> ...
> ...  it
> really makes sense economically to leave out the
aperture ring and the
> aperture simulator.  These are complex mechanical
shapes that require
> lots of machining and complex assembly, and they are
a source of
> problems due to wear and tear.

This makes sense to me.

> The decision to make K and M lenses obsolete (DO YOU
ALL BELIEVE ME
> NOW?) is an economically sound one, and with it
Pentax hopes to cut 
> down
production costs and to limit the amount of explaining
> that goes into
> their operating manuals.
> 
> Now, this is all a speculation on my side, but just
like the prediction
> that the *ist and *ist D will not work with the K/M
lenses, it is my
> prediction that Pentax will not release another
camera or lens that
> supports aperture-ring operation.  

What makes you so sure about that? The FAJ lenses are
cheapos. Saving costs is less important for expensive
items. It does not matter if the FA600/4 lens is say
$50 more or less expensive. But it does matter if the
*istD+18-35mm lens kit becomes $50 more expensive. 
It is speculative of course but I don't see a quick
and sudden death of the aperture ring for the more
expensive stuff. Maybe in the long run ...  
Also Nikon didn't let it die so far. They [Nikon] say
they have no plans to let it die.

Alexander



__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

Various and sundry

[Doug Brewer]

Hi Troops...

I appear to be back on the road to recovery from the sinus infection that 
tried to kill my Grandfather Mountain trip, so I thought I'd drop in a few 
thoughts. It's overwhelmingly positive, so those of you who only have time 
for whining and bitching should move along to your next Chicken Little rant.

Two of the three... I've added the 43/1.9 to my lens collection and am 
totally stoked about it. I've shot with it before and was impressed with 
what I saw, so I can now look forward to more in-depth exploration of its 
qualities. I will pair it with my 77/1.8 for a new self-assignment for some 
real fun. The 31/1.8 remains elusive, but in the meantime I'm happy with 
the 35/2 I've had for a while, and since I'm not much of a wide-angle guy, 
it will be fine.

Speaking of Grandfather Mountain... I had another great time, fever and 
inability to breath aside. It was great seeing Mark Roberts, Ed Tyler, and 
the Owenses, as well as some other PDML lurkers who identified themselves 
to me. (Your secret is safe, y'all...) A couple of the programs were a 
little more evangelistic than we've had before, which was fun, and having 
Mark's help with the contest (and the computer support from Ed Tyler) was 
invaluable, not to mention hysterically funny. Those of you who missed the 
trip this time really missed a special weekend. Nyah nyah nyah.

And, tv, the lovely bellydancer was in attendance...

I'd really like to thank Pentax for its official presence at GFM, and for 
providing access to a tremendous amount of equipment. In past years I've 
afforded myself the opportunity to test out some of the gear and enjoyed 
myself. This year I wasn't really up to it, but I truly appreciate the 
chance, and next year I plan to jump in and put some 645 stuff to the test.

Gee, remember when it was okay on the list to enjoy using your Pentax gear? 
I know it's not the popular view, but I like my Pentax stuff. I don't spend 
my time worrying about what might or might not happen in the future. That 
won't help my photos one little bit. What does help is burning a little 
film. Try it. You might like it.

Doug

Re: Various and sundry

[Caveman]

Doug Brewer wrote:

Gee, remember when it was okay on the list to enjoy using your Pentax 
gear? I know it's not the popular view, but I like my Pentax stuff.
It's the digital hysteria. I also enjoy my Pentax stuff. Quite old, but 
very very nice. Unfortunately it's the last of its kind.

cheers,
caveman

Re: Help needed ... again.

[T Rittenhouse]

Tripod threads are SAE (called unified thread in England, I understand)
Coarse. 1/4x20tpi and 3/8x16tpi, I believe.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Antti-Pekka Virjonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:54 AM
Subject: Re: Help needed ... again.


> At 12:21 8.6.2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >Why Whitworth? Why not Metric, considering where you are?
> >
> >Ciao,
> >Graywolf
>
> Sounds like he is making something to screw into the camera/lens
> tripod mounting threads.
>
> I bought Whitworth nuts and bolts (1/4 and 3/8) from my local
> screw specialists when I made my tracking mount for astrophoto.
>
> (Don: you may want to try http://www.metaplan.fi/ or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]fi,
> they have most sizes in stock and can deliver taps too by request if not
in stock)
>
> Antti-Pekka
>
>
>

K on *ist D compatible without metering?

[Andre Langevin]

Will the K, M and M42 lenses work on the new bodies without metering? 
I know this is evident to most but I've not been able to read much 
PDML for weeks and have not followed the recent discussions on the 
new mount.

--

Re: Vivitar series 1 28mm 1.9 VS Pentax SMC K 28mm 3.5 VS PentaxSMC 28mm M 2.0

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

on 08.06.03 5:48, Wayne Willis at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I have a chance to buy only one of these lenses as the wife says only one. I
> have not used any of them but do have the pentax 43mm limited and was
> looking for something similar in terms of image quality, resolution and
> flare control. I would love to here from people in this group who have used
> these lenses

I have had first of them. Acutally it was Kiron 28/2 (Kiron has produced
first Series 1 lenses for Vivitar). Very nice lens, very well built,
provided contrasty pictures, althought flare resistance wasn't its strongest
point...


-- 
Best Regards
Sylwek

RE: Various and sundry

[zoomshot]

-Original Message-
From: Doug Brewer 
Sent: 09 June 2003 16:55
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Various and sundry

SNIP

Gee, remember when it was okay on the list to enjoy using your Pentax gear? 
I know it's not the popular view, but I like my Pentax stuff. I don't spend 
my time worrying about what might or might not happen in the future. That 
won't help my photos one little bit. What does help is burning a little 
film. Try it. You might like it.

Doug



Well said. Whatever will be, will be.. 

So get out there and fire off a few rolls of film

Ziggy

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[T Rittenhouse]

But, then the cameras will probably appeal to their P&S customers of which
they have millions.

The strange thing is hobbies, as hobbies, seem to be dying out. Been in a so
called hobby shop lately? The ones I have been in are more toy stores these
days. Photography seems to be no different. We are a dying breed. Today's
camera buyer wants snapshots of kids to send to grandma, snapshots of their
vacations. Yes, those people have always been around, but the people who are
interested in photography itself are fading out fast.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Rüdiger Neumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 4:35 AM
Subject: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3


> Hallo,
> the last three pentax low and high-end cameras (MZ-60, *ist,
>  *istD) and the last three low and midclass lenses (FAJ 28-80,
> FAJ 70-300, FAJ 18-35) have something in common,
> the new Pentax mount standard KFA3. All new cameras and
> lenses will have this new mount.
>
> Special features:
> No aperture simulator
> No power zoom contacts (we will see no USM or IS, in the
> patents this contacts are always used)
> No measurement with K and M lenses
>
> Purpose:
> Preventing the user from using the aperture ring.
> Preventing from using old K und M lenses
> Preventig from using the new FAJ lenses on a
> LX, MX or even on a MZ-5n or MZ-S.
>
> Costumer benefit:
> None
>
> Benefit of Pentax
> Hope they will sell more lenses and more new bodies.
> They will not care anymore for costumers, who have
> spend a lot of money in Pentax gear.
>
> Future prospects
> Bad, Pentax user will switch to Canon to have
> compabilitty, USM, IS, full frame D-SLR, ...
>
>
>

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Peter Alling]

I have to agree with all but one point, compatibility,
but that shouldn't be an issue with anyone anymore.  If
you're a pro you or your organization can justify the expense
of buying all new equipment. If you're an armature you won't
buy anything expensive since it's more or less disposable and
why waste money on something that will be "obsoleted" tomorrow.
At 10:35 AM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
Hallo,
the last three pentax low and high-end cameras (MZ-60, *ist,


Costumer benefit:
None
Benefit of Pentax
Hope they will sell more lenses and more new bodies.
They will not care anymore for costumers, who have
spend a lot of money in Pentax gear.
Future prospects
Bad, Pentax user will switch to Canon to have
compabilitty, USM, IS, full frame D-SLR, ...
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

*ist on US web site

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Finally!


mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Kites & Rally pictures

[Dario Bonazza 2]

Hi folks,

Maybe it's just a try to relieve after Pentax self-killing mistake of
getting rid of K-mount compatibility, but I added some new pictures to my
website.
BTW, pictures were shot with MZ-S and SMC Pentax FA 24-90 and SMC Pentax-F
300 f/4.5 lenses. Some kite pictures were shot with SMC Pentax-A 15mm f/3.5
and SMC Pentax-FA* 85mm f/1.4.

Anybody interested can see them at: www.dariobonazza.com

Cheers,

Dario Bonazza
www.aohc.it
www.dariobonazza.com

(Afraid Pentax won't survive such a mistake)

Re: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)

[Lukasz Kacperczyk]

> What's not to like about the A 24-50/4?

Nothing really. It's just that I realized that I don't really need 24mm,
and, as I like small lenses and small bodies, this lens is simply to big for
me. What I like about it, though, is the fact that it's very solid - it's
built much better than other A lenses I handled. It would be a perfect match
for the A 70-210/4.

If anyone's interested in purchasing this lens, please contact me off-list.

Regards,
Lukasz

===
www.fotopolis.pl
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
 internetowy magazyn o fotografii

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Peter Alling]

You don't get the point these mounts don't have to be incompatible.  There
are no new features that require these changes. These cameras have been
purposely built to be incompatible, obviously so.
At 12:23 PM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
Hi Rüdiger,

on 09 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>> wait some more time to see the rest of the *ist lineup. I'm quite
>>sure that we will see some positive surprises, too.
>From what is your hope. If they will save 5 Euro on their most
>expensive body and make the software in a way to prevent using
>K and M lenses and make the userinterface incompatibly to the MZ-S,
>why should the work in different way on a coming mid class SLR
>or high end D-SLR?
The *ist is an entry level camera. The entry level models of the MZ-
lineup had always a crippled mount (MZ-30/50/60) and nobody cared about
that. We now have a special situation because the entry level model is
the first one of the *ist series that has been released. And in addition
the first DSLR will be released soon - based on similar technology as
the *ist. The *istD is a special camera as it is the first DSLR of
Pentax. The most important aims of this camera will be that it works
competitive and that it can be released soon. I'm quite sure that Pentax
has borrowed the crippled mount from the *ist as that was necessary to
realize the release date in late summer. So the crippled mount of the
*ist/*istD allows neither the conclusion that the future models will not
nor that they will have a fully compatible mount. We just cannot say!
In addition - there may be more options that we actually don't see. What
about a whole new strategy with a crippled mount for the entry and maybe
mid level and a new KAF3 mount with full compatibility and new features
(IS/USM)? I could imaginge something like that, but keep in mind that
Pentax is a small company in comparison to Canon. They have made a huge
development effort this year: Optio 33L, Optio S, Optio 450, Optio 550
(still some more Optios to come ;-), *ist, *istD, three new lenses and
maybe more to come. I really wonder how they do that. If you like Pentax
and want to kep Pentax, then you have to be patient. If you want a
complete IS/USM/DSLR system _now_, then just sell all Pentax stuff (I'll
give some of your equipment a good home ;-)) and take a Canon 10D, a
EOS30 and a pile of new AF lenses (no manual lenses at all...).
I have decided to be patient (especially as this will result in a
cheaper DSLR) and bought an Optio 550 which offers me lots of features
to bridge the time...
Cheers, Heiko
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Just tried a *ist (or is it an *ist)...

[Matjaz Osojnik]

Hi,
I tried it yesterday as well. Let me start with bad things:
I dont' like the looks, although it is a bit less ugly in flesh as on 
photographs.

The built is the worst af Pentax cameras I've ever tried, but I do own 
MZ-S and MZ-3. I'd say it is somewhere there with MZ-10 or a bit 
above. It seems better than Canon 300V or similiar, but still. Thumb 
wheel indeed looks and feels bad.

I really don't like user interface for selecting aperture, but this is 
common in the price segment where *ist competes.What the heck, it is 
not a camera I intend to buy.

New lens release button feels worse than before.

More less neutral point:
Red imposed AF points are not really rectangulars but more small 
squares. The are not intrusiv. Normally I like small AF points but these 
are really small. It shows that AF area was developed with 1,5x digital 
crop factor in mind. It seems they will be great on *istD.

Good points:
AF seems a lot quiter. I tried *ist with my Fa 80-320 which is a very loud 
AF lens. Together with *ist, it seemed much queiter, but bear in mind it 
was loud around me and I didn't made a direct comparison with MZ-S. 
Take it with a grain of salt.

AF seems to work really well. Better then in MZ-S. Chosen AF point 
pointed into the middle of the persons chick ( no strong lines there), no 
huntig though. Croos sensors work. Just slight whiirr and it is in focus. I 
tried it several times with different sensors and every time it worked 
very well.

AF selecting pad works well. Easy to use or select AF points.

I like the size but I like small cameras.

That's it.

Matjaz



> It is small. Really small. And yes, the lens mount is crippled for no
> other reason than software/greed. I did like the autofocus and the
> selector (apparently) stolen from Nikon (they have good ideas once in
> a while, too). Very, very cheaply built. Terrible feel on the scroll
> wheel, like it was ready to break and /or malfunction at any minute.
> Viewfinder was mediocre at best, even with the mighty FA* 85 1.4 on
> it, which looked ridiculous. It didn't even look like silver plastic,
> more like silver painted plastic. Very cheap feeling camera; didn't
> try it with the grip. I do hope they transplant the autofocus into a
> nice updated MZ-SII with twin scrollwheels and without the crippled
> lensmount. And the depth of field preview from the MZ-S is definitely
> a keeper.
> 
> C.
> 
> 

Re: Vivitar series 1 28mm 1.9 VS Pentax SMC K 28mm 3.5 VS Pentax SMC 28mm M 2.0

[Lukasz Kacperczyk]

>From the three lenses you mention the K 28/3.5 is said to be the best (many
consider it to be the best 28mm Pentax ever made). I guess (and it's nothing
more than a guess) that it would have better flare control than the Vivitar.
Also, the S1 lens focuses "the wrong way". I guess that everything depends
on what you need the most - flare control and picture quality or speed.

regards,
Lukasz

===
www.fotopolis.pl
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
 internetowy magazyn o fotografii

Re: We should be pleased with Pentax

[Peter Alling]

Yes, we should than Pentax.   Thank you sir, give me another! 

At 09:10 AM 6/9/03 -0400, you wrote:
#1  The MZ-S is a reasonable pro body.
Maybe not the greatest, but pretty good by what I read here.
#2  The FA-J lenses finally create a clear tier between a pro and amateur
product placements.  The Limiteds are for pro use; the rest, amateur.
They've done a portion of what we've asked.
Let's work with the results and patiently
look forward to more (slow as it may be).
I wouldn't be surprised to see the *ist body drop in price within a year
and be replaced by a closer-to-MZ-S model in the same price class.
And, although the MZ/ZX bodies are going away, the "M" will probably stay
as the entry-level orphan, as did the K-1000 for so many decades.
Collin


mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

*ist on UK web site

[zoomshot]

 
http://www.pentax.co.uk/cgi-bin/pentax.storefront/3ee499dd0404996e273fc2d886
f006ff/Catalog/1015

Re: First photomicrographs with ME Super

[Peter Alling]

Hate to say this but your page is unreadable using Netscape Communicator 4.8

At 04:36 PM 6/9/03 +0300, you wrote:
For those who might be interested I have posted a batch of pictures at:

http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/hold/micro

The subjects are bacteria and the scales from the wings of a very small
moth. The wing scales show detail down to the limit of resolution of the
light microscope at high magnification (about X1500). These scales are as
good as diatoms for testing optical microscopes. There are phase contrast,
dark field and bright field pictures taken with a 40X and 90X oil objective
and immersed Aplanatic condenser. I am rather pleased with them. I did no
bracketing, but did change the exposure factor to 2X and to 4X for one
picture each -- this ruined them. All the others were taken with the ME
Super set to automatic and the exposures were between 1/8 and 2 seconds. I
used the shutter in the belief that mirror and shutter vibrations wouldn't
matter with this massive frame and the long exposures - they didn't.
Film was Fuji Superia 200 processed this morning in Tetenal Chemicals that
are now very old indeed. Anyone wanting details of the pictures please
contact me off list. Some picture series are taken at different focus
heights and in some the detail is very fine.
Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Heiko Hamann]

Hi Boz,

on 08 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>Why are you so sure that the "next" ist body will have K/M support?

I'm not sure. I wrote:

"So the crippled mount of the *ist/*istD allows neither the conclusion
that the future models will not nor that they will have a fully
compatible mount. We just cannot say!"

>What makes you sure that the "next" ist will be higher positioned than
>the *ist ?

- The MZ-5n/3 have to be replaced.
- The *ist was communicated as entry level.
- The *ist is quite cheap. The bottom will be the MZ-60 for a while, but  
at the moment there is no need for a lower featured *ist.


Cheers, Heiko

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Heiko Hamann]

Hi Bojidar,

on 08 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>> In my eyes all theese products are entry level. Yes - the *istD is
>> entry level as the D100 or 10D are. 2000,- is much money but it is
>> the price to enter the DSLR market. High-end DSLRs are the Nikon D1
>> and Canon 1D.

>To Canon and Nikon EUR 2000 may be entry-level but not to Pentax.

I would define entry-level by the market segment the camera competes in  
and not by the number of cameras a manufacturer offers.

>Why didn't they bring the MZ-S to the market?

Because they were smarter than Contax?

>Probably because they didn't think that anyone will spend EUR 7000 on a
>Pentax DSLR.

Yes. That's a very small pro market that is ruled by Canon and Nikon.  
Why waste power and money in that market segment? It's much easier to  
earn money with cheaper cameras sold in larger numbers.

>I submit that the *ist D will be entry-level, mid-level
>and top-level for a very long time.  In fact, by the time it comes in
>the shops, the Canon 300D might already be out, and chances are that it
>will be just as small and light as the *ist D.

Maybe, maybe not. Who cares? I want to buy an affordable Pentax DSLR,  
but I'm not in a hurry. Let's wait and see.

Cheers, Heiko

RE: *ist on US web site

[Marc J. Osborne]

What's the correct U.S. English pronunciation of *ist?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 12:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: *ist on US web site

Finally!


mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist)

[Peter Alling]

The only way you can make this case is to assume that a camera that costs 
between
$1000.00 and $2000.00 is an entry level product.  A Pentax 67 at B&H goes 
for a little
more than $2000.00 and a Pentax 645N II is a little less than $1900.00 the 
next most expensive
Film camera sold by Pentax is the MZ-S which sells for $800.00.  These cameras
are hardly entry level.  Neither is the *ist D.  The class of cameras it is in,
(digital SRLs based on 35mm bodies), is used mainly by professionals.  I must
therefor conclude it is not an entry level product and draw my conclusions from
that.

At 02:18 PM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
Rüdiger wrote:

> I do not believe that either. I have the impression, that a lot people on
> the list
> do not see what just happed at Pentax. Pentax means it can maximise
> the selling with incompatiblity. So if not only the MZ-60, *ist, *istD (and
> the
> two comming *ists next year) will not need the aperture ring, all new lense
> will not have it anymore.
This is pure speculation without data points. The limitations is so far 
only on entry level products.

Pål
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: K on *ist D compatible without metering?

[Arnold Stark]

The meter works in aperture priority mode for all lenses, including K, M 
and M42, however, in aperture priority mode, K and M lenses will stay 
wide open during exposure no matter what aperture you choose on the 
lens. No metering is available in manual mode.

Arnold

Andre Langevin schrieb:

Will the K, M and M42 lenses work on the new bodies without metering? 
I know this is evident to most but I've not been able to read much 
PDML for weeks and have not followed the recent discussions on the new 
mount.

Re: K on *ist D compatible without metering?

[Arnold Stark]

The meter works in aperture priority mode for all lenses, including K, M 
and M42, however, in aperture priority mode, K and M lenses will stay 
wide open during exposure no matter what aperture you choose on the 
lens. No metering is available in manual mode, however, all aperture 
values can be selected, and the lens really stops down in manual mode 
during exposure or when DOF previewing.

Arnold

Andre Langevin schrieb:

Will the K, M and M42 lenses work on the new bodies without metering? 
I know this is evident to most but I've not been able to read much 
PDML for weeks and have not followed the recent discussions on the new 
mount.

Re: Various and sundry

[Pentxuser]

Amen, amen, amen.
Well said Doug. Now if I can just find some time to burn the film..

Vic 

In a message dated 6/9/03 10:54:27 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>Gee, remember when it was okay on the list to enjoy using your Pentax gear?
>
>I know it's not the popular view, but I like my Pentax stuff. I don't spend
>
>my time worrying about what might or might not happen in the future. That
>
>won't help my photos one little bit. What does help is burning a little
>
>film. Try it. You might like it.
>
>Doug

OT:Twelve Hours in Paris

[Paul Stenquist]

On a recent business trip to Paris I decided to stay over one day and
shoot some film. I had only my 1953 vintage Leica iiif and Summicron
50/2, but that seemed an appropriate choice for a Paris walkaround. I
shot from ten in the morning until ten at night, walking about 20 miles
in the process. Rather than take a lot of tourist photos, I tried to
capture little glimpses of everyday life in the city. I interspersed
these with some shots of the landmarks I passed. You can find them here 
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=311283

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

[Peter Alling]

Mark, you've obviously never dealt with corporate marketers, you have
much more faith than I have.
At 09:02 AM 6/9/03 -0400, you wrote:
Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Pentax have chosen a simple (like competition) electronic metering
>system. Keeping compatibilty would have meen keeping the expensive
>system used on the MZ-S or even more expensive
Permitting *stop-down* metering on K and M lenses would have cost
NOTHING.
Personally, I think when we really get to examine the *ist-D in person
we will find that they have allowed stop-down metering - I expect it may
be hidden in a custom Pentax Function.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax k-mount

[Peter Alling]

Properly done it would be like having a efficient butler for a fraction of
the cost, but without the enjoyment of mistreating the hired help, or the
possibility of extra profits for the help from petty theft.
At 11:59 PM 6/8/03 -0700, you wrote:
Sounds like the machines were controlling the life of human. Scary idea...

regards,
Alan Chan
The common suggestion would be they would keep track of  what was in the 
fridge. Re-ordering from your internet supermarket. Telling you when the 
milk was going bad. They would connect with the microwave and share info. 
Say you made something in the microwave it would tell the fridge to add 
it to the order.
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Pål Jensen]

Bojidar wrote:

> To Canon and Nikon EUR 2000 may be entry-level but not to Pentax. 

This entry level for all. 35mm slr entry level may start at $150. For DSLR it starts 
at whatever the Canon EOS 10D sells for at present. Pentax want to compete where the 
volume for DSLR's are and this is the entry level. With the *ist D they have platform 
for competitive DSLR's. 

>Why
> didn't they bring the MZ-S to the market?  Probably because they didn't
> think that anyone will spend EUR 7000 on a Pentax DSLR.

It was because nobody would pay that kind of money on a full frame 6Mp DSLR from 
anyone as long a small frame 6mp could be had much cheaper. Look at the Contax. 


>  I submit that
> the *ist D will be entry-level, mid-level and top-level for a very long
> time.  In fact, by the time it comes in the shops, the Canon 300D might
> already be out, and chances are that it will be just as small and light
> as the *ist D.

That only stress the fact that the competition is fierce and that Pentax cannot build 
in compatibility with over 20 year old lenses. If Canon had bothered with FD 
compatibility on their DSLR's maybe Pentax would have bothered with K/M 
compatibility...

Pål

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Pål Jensen]

Boz wrote:

> Does this mean that Pentax thought that there is no market for the
> MZ-S?  If yes, why would they ever release a higher-end body than the
> *ist D?


Prices on DSLR's are to large extent dependent on the sensor cost. Sensors cost and 
performance is in constant flux. Theres no lesson to be learned here except that the 
MD-S wasn't competitive enough and that the *ist D is designed to just that.


> Is this not a reason to throw away the K/M compatibility in the trash
> can?  I think, yes, and this is why I am certain that Pentax will do it
> (in fact, they have already done it).  At the same time oyu claim that
> the next camera will be the great one, and that it will support K/M
> lenses.  Something does not fit here...


I don't claim anything as I don't know. What I claim is that I've been told that 
Pentax have no plans to remove the aperture ring from their higher end lenses and that 
the FA-J and *ist's are entry level products. This has been said by Pentax engineers 
and until similar credible sources state otherwise, these are the lines my opinions 
will follow. Of course a might be told bullshit but I don't pretend to know anything 
by first hand knowledge but we can always speculate.
However, to my mind, since all  worthwhile current Pentax lenses have aperture rings 
(close to 60 in number), I seriously
doubt that the function of the said ring will dissapear anytime soon unless they plane 
to discontinue all of them in the next few months. 
Of course they may stop K/M compatibility at a certain point. Maybe even now. They 
have to at some point. However, Pentax have made a host of great cameras that take 
those lenses, the latest the MZ-S, and these owners certainly had their fill. The fact 
that they may not be able to use them on a DSLR isn't the cathastrophe it is made out 
to be. 

Pål

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Peter Alling]

I'd like to agree with you but as a software engineer I spend a lot of time
working with things and making things that were incompatible because marketing
thought they should be that way.
At 07:20 PM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
Hi Peter,

on 09 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>You don't get the point these mounts don't have to be incompatible.

You are right, but you didn't got my point, too: I only want to say that
there is no reason to think, that this new mount will be on all next
Pentax (D)SLRs. We simply don't know. I'm also dissappointed about this
mount and a little bit angry about the poor Pentax communication. But I
don't see any reason to be as pesimistic and fatalistic as many others
around here.
>There are no new features that require these changes. These cameras
>have been purposely built to be incompatible, obviously so.
Right. OTOH - there might be technical reasons that we don't know. Pal
has written some interesting point concerning the communication between
the lens and the mount. It seems, that the digital data trasfer via the
mount contacts is much easier and more exact than using the mechanical
coupling.
Cheers, Heiko
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

manual for 6x7's

[brooksdj]

Just womdering if anyone has a link to 6x7 manuals,or has one for
sale.I just followed one on ebay that sold for $50.00 US.
I like to have manuals for things i own(i actually read them)but $50.00 US is nuts 
as
far
as i'm concerned.

Dave

Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist)

[Peter Alling]

If you want to believe that so be it.

At 07:26 PM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
Peter wrote:

> The only way you can make this case is to assume that a camera that costs
> between
> $1000.00 and $2000.00 is an entry level product.  A Pentax 67 at B&H goes
> for a little
> more than $2000.00 and a Pentax 645N II is a little less than $1900.00 the
> next most expensive
> Film camera sold by Pentax is the MZ-S which sells for $800.00.  These 
cameras
> are hardly entry level.  Neither is the *ist D.  The class of cameras 
it is in,
> (digital SRLs based on 35mm bodies), is used mainly by 
professionals.  I must
> therefor conclude it is not an entry level product and draw my 
conclusions from
> that.

I must therefore concude that the MZ-60 is a high-end body because 
disposable cameras starts at $10.

Pål
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: First photomicrographs with ME Super

[Peter Alling]

I know the tools aren't really compatible with the standards, just what's 
current.

At 08:26 PM 6/9/03 +0300, you wrote:
I've redone the whole thing and its readable now. Sorry -- but I don't have
any old browsers to check the pages. I use Exploder 6 and Navigator 7.01 to
check them.
Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: First photomicrographs with ME Super
> Hate to say this but your page is unreadable using Netscape Communicator
4.8
>
> At 04:36 PM 6/9/03 +0300, you wrote:
> >For those who might be interested I have posted a batch of pictures at:
> >
> >http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/hold/micro
> >
> >The subjects are bacteria and the scales from the wings of a very small
> >moth. The wing scales show detail down to the limit of resolution of the
> >light microscope at high magnification (about X1500). These scales are as
> >good as diatoms for testing optical microscopes. There are phase
contrast,
> >dark field and bright field pictures taken with a 40X and 90X oil
objective
> >and immersed Aplanatic condenser. I am rather pleased with them. I did no
> >bracketing, but did change the exposure factor to 2X and to 4X for one
> >picture each -- this ruined them. All the others were taken with the ME
> >Super set to automatic and the exposures were between 1/8 and 2 seconds.
I
> >used the shutter in the belief that mirror and shutter vibrations
wouldn't
> >matter with this massive frame and the long exposures - they didn't.
> >
> >Film was Fuji Superia 200 processed this morning in Tetenal Chemicals
that
> >are now very old indeed. Anyone wanting details of the pictures please
> >contact me off list. Some picture series are taken at different focus
> >heights and in some the detail is very fine.
> >
> >Don
> >___
> >Dr E D F Williams
> >http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
> >Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
> >Updated: March 30, 2002
>
> Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
>  Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx
>
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax's future (was: *ist D revisited)

[Pål Jensen]

Peter wrote:

> Then they've lost me, and all of the people I would have convinced to
> buy Pentax cameras who would never have considered them.  That includes
> most of the people on this list who discovered Pentax as a place where
> quality and customer loyalty, as well as loyalty to the customer mattered.

I think you're confusing user loyality with customer loyality. Loyal customers have 
bought plenty of new pentax equipment the last 20 years. Those who buy everything used 
aren't customers and cannot really expect to get their wishes granted.


Pål

Re: Bug Hints?

[Treena]

Do you really think it's a good idea to let a mosquito which could give you
a nice case of West Nile encephalitis bite you? We've already got it here in
our state and summer hasn't even begun. Granted, we're overrun by them as it
is,  but I wouldn't advise anyone deliberately letting mosquitoes bite them,
especially if they're older or have a compromised immune system.

- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 5:36 AM
Subject: Re: Bug Hints?


> let one bite you:
> http://photography.skofteland.net/insects/insect15.htm
> (the scans are fuzzy as they were made on the ol' crappy-scan (tm)
>
> Christian Skofteland
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:09 AM
> Subject: Bug Hints?
>
>
> > Some mosquitos got into my house.  Some have fallen to bug spray.
> > But a few I managed to trap in plastic containers, thinking they
> > might make interesting macro subjects.
> >
> > Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
> > The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
> > posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
> > there more accessible tricks?
> >
> > -- Glenn
> >
>

Re: Pentax proudly presents a new lens mount, the KAF3

[Pål Jensen]

Peter wrote:


> You keep missing the point, Pentax has always been different.  If they
> change to be just like everyone else then why be loyal to them.  

I have some sympathy with this view. However, I don't consider compatibility with 20+ 
year old lenses to add to this difference. I think Pentax need to be different in a 
more substantial way in order to attract customers. I'm not convinced any of the *ists 
are the right medicine but that has nothing to do with lens mounts. 99% of those who 
come into a shop to consider the *ists don't own K or M lenses and this probably what 
lies behind all this. The rality that some older equipment is commercially obsolete.

Pål

Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)

[Peter Alling]

I can't speak for anyone else, but my belief is that 3rd Generation electronics
will be better than first.  If I must live without aperture control on the lens
and must buy all new lenses, I'll go with experience, unless Pentax shows clear
superiority in ALL aspects of their product then I'll buy from someone who 
does.
It could happen but that's not the way to bet.

At 02:40 PM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
Gianfranco wrote:

> I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a
> aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system...
That is because they want to use the aperture ring on the Canon lenses :o)
The whole thing is mostly psychological.
Pål
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

RE: manual for 6x7's

[Len Paris]

 www.pentax.com has lots of manuals free in .pdf files.

Len
---

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 9:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: manual for 6x7's
> 
> 
>   Just womdering if anyone has a link to 6x7 
> manuals,or has one for sale.I just followed one on ebay that 
> sold for $50.00 US. I like to have manuals for things i own(i 
> actually read them)but $50.00 US is nuts as far as i'm concerned.
> 
> Dave  
>   
> 
> 

Re: OK Survey time

[Caveman]

LOL. What are you trying to do. Shooting graycards and trying to get the 
corresponding density in the film data sheets. I have bad news for you: 
film and lab processing tolerances.

Pål Jensen wrote:
Caveman wrote:

I find the LX metering to be more than adequate thank you (and yes I 
shoot slide film), so I have no intention to "fix" it with AF.
Maybe adequate for you but anyone who wants 1/3 stop accuracy will think otherwise.

Pål

Re: OK Survey time

[Peter Alling]

Auuu.  Do I have to, I'd much rather just use it.

At 01:52 PM 6/9/03 -0400, you wrote:
Peter Alling wrote:
120mm M
Aha! Now you have to give us a review of that one.

cheers,
caveman
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: OK Survey time

[Caveman]

Well, you could instead just put a couple of photos taken with it on the 
web. And give one of those short review: I love it/ Great /good/ 
adequate /average /poor /sucks /ROFL.

Peter Alling wrote:
Auuu.  Do I have to, I'd much rather just use it.

At 01:52 PM 6/9/03 -0400, you wrote:

Peter Alling wrote:

120mm M


Aha! Now you have to give us a review of that one.

cheers,
caveman


Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: K on *ist D compatible without metering?

[Hans Imglueck]

If one removes the aperture lever of a K or M lens it would
act like the M42 lenses - that's easily done. But afterwards
it would work in no way on a pre-*ist-D-body. So one has to decide.
Perhaps I will do it with some of my K and M lenses, if the *ist D
is really not fully compatible to K and M lenses. Digital
is such a step forward concerning my needs.

Cheers, Hans. 

--- Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It seems that you get stopdown metering with m42, and since there is no 
>mechanical connection you
>can stop down to your hearts content.
>
>K and M lenses get no metering and shooting is wide open only, that last 
>makes them almost useless.
>
>At 12:01 PM 6/9/03 -0400, you wrote:
>>Will the K, M and M42 lenses work on the new bodies without metering? I 
>>know this is evident to most but I've not been able to read much PDML for 
>>weeks and have not followed the recent discussions on the new mount.
>>
>>--
>
>Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
> Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

_
23a mail

_
Select your own custom email address for FREE! Get [EMAIL PROTECTED] w/No Ads, 6MB, 
POP & more! http://www.everyone.net/selectmail?campaign=tag