Re: Problem with A contact on a lens
Basically the camera doesn't recognise the fact that the aperture ring is in the A position, so I can't use shutter priority modes. Do you have other F/FA lenses to test and see if it's the lens or camera problem? Oh, yes. This lens (and only this lens) fails to register as in the A position on my MZ-S, PZ-1p SF-1. I haven't tested it on the Super Program because that would mean digging around in another box. I suggest you try other F/FA lenses before you do anything crazy. The brushes (one for aperture, one for distance info) in these lenses could be destroyed easily if you don't know the proper procedure. I've done that. No other lens exhibits this problem. I'd also like to know what the likelihood is that this could be something I could repair myself, something a typical neighbourhood camera repairer could fix, or something that will have to go back to Pentax. If the brush contact is dirty or coated with grease (and that part of the lens is greasy on purpuse), the fix is easy. Just remove the mount, clean the contacts, and the assemble. But clear threadlock should be applied to the lens mount screws, and the proper one is Threebond 1401 (can be found in Fargo). But the smallest bottle is 200g which is quite big. If the chip is fired, the whole circuit must be replaced (but this must be very rare). I doubt if the main chip on the lens is fried; I'm getting all the electronic aperture display (which comes through the digital contact pin). I'll try and find the multimeter to confirm the hypothesis that the pin isn't being shorted to the lens mount when the ring is in the A position before I go much further. The job is not very difficult if you know how, but not recommend if you haven't done it before. I haven't. I suspect my local camera repair shop has, though. (Apollo Camera in Sunnyvale - they're quite good with Pentax gear)
RE: Which two zooms?
If you would make the one-zoom choice I would recommend the Tokina AT-X 24-200mm zoom. I've got it most of the time on my MZ-5. (and primes on my MX). It's an okay lens. And has got a nice 24mm! Sharpness is beter then tamron's. But it's bigger and heavier, and got a little more distortion than the tamron at the wide-end. It's hard to get in europe (the K-mount version, I think I've got the only one in the netherlands, a german reseller especially imported it at my request!), but in the US it should be no problem. Best regards, Hans. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Verzonden: dinsdag 16 september 2003 2:22 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: RE: Which two zooms? If speed and constant aperture are not required, I would seriously consider the excellent tamron 28-200XR series lens. jco J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Patrick Wunsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 6:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Which two zooms? I am looking for your recommendations for two zoom lenses covering the 28mm to 200mm range approximately. What are the better, yet affordable Pentax zooms in that range? Which ones should I avoid? I will be using them on a ZX-5N primarily so AF would be a plus. Thanks Pat Wunsch - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:24 PM Subject: Re: Four lenses I don't know if it's the identical lens in K mount but there is a SMCP 85mm f1.8, which is exceedingly well thought of. They always seem sell at a premium on e-bay regardless of described condition. At 12:28 PM 9/11/03 -0700, you wrote: Did that get made in a K-mount? I could use it via an adapter, but it would be more convenient if... keith whaley J. C. O'Connell wrote: In M42, the 85mm F1.8 SMCT is the one to get but it sells for about $200-300 used. To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is designed by the post office, even the sleaze. O'Rourke, P.J.
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
Hi! On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:09:38 +0530 Gaurav Aggarwal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I have been reading the posts for around 5-6 months now. I have a Pentax ME Super with M50/1.7 (and a PZ-1 also which I don't use though). I now realize that I would like to have a longish zoom for taking portraits of family, street photography, birds etc. Also, I have never done macro but would want that feature as well. You already have 50/1.7 and ME Super. May I suggest slightly different approach? You could look for Panagor Macro Converter ($20 or so I think). It would turn your 50/1.7 into macro zoom lens with macro factor changing from 1:10 to 1:1 (lifesize). The weight of converter is no more than 200 gr. Adding to that weight of 50 mm lens, I think your weight requirement will be met. The results however are most probably better than any zoom lens with macro setting. Notice that you would be using a 50 mm prime as an optical basis. You can see few photos I made with this combo here: http://www.geocities.com/dunno57/macro-photos.htm. By the way all shots there were made handheld... As a starting kit for Macro Work I think this is very viable option. Good hunting. Boris
Re: Talking of Taxes
During the decade or so I operated a business in Oz, I seem to remember that, amongst other powers held at that time, sales tax agents could arrive without notice and hold corp officers for 24 hours without benefit of counsel. Always tended to make one very careful to keep good records and quite cooperative during the annual visits. A few good war stories on that front. Great memories.As I recall, at that time, income tax agents were not afforded such powers ---. Otis Wright John Coyle wrote: Frank, you'll appreciate this. The Australian tax-man wanting it all his own way: Section 92(2) of the Sales Tax Assessment Bill: For the purposes of cancelling a tax benefit, the Commissioner may, in the assessment, determine any or all of the following: (a) that particular things are to be treated as not having happened; (b) that particular things are to be treated as having been done by a different person or to have happened at a different time; (c) that particular things that did not actually happen are to be treated as having happened and, where appropriate: (i) to have been done by a particular person; (ii) to have happened at a particular time. Fortunately, I don't think it ever got into the Act, which has now been superseded by GST law anyway, but it underlines the way bureaucreats thiink (if that's an apposite word!). John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 6:57 AM Subject: Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #984 Bingo, Tom!! You hit the nail on the head with that one. When you owe taxes on a transaction has nothing to do with when the transaction is actually complete. The IRS, (or in Canada, RevCan) live in their own little world, that has little bearing on reality. Of course, when you write the laws... What a great line, I'll have to remember that: You owe the taxes when the tax people say you owe the taxes. Never have truer words been posted on this list. vbg cheers, frank graywolf wrote: You own the taxes when the tax people say you owe the taxes. -- Honour - that virtue of the unjust! -Albert Camus
Re: First Pano Try
Mark Cassino wrote: I can see doing more of this stuff in the future... I know how you feel... I have a real soft spot for panoramas. Back when I owned an RB67 I was able to modify a film back to take a 35mm roll, adding a mask to hold the film flat and prevent the sprocket area from being exposed. It wasn't ideal but it was lots of fun. Removing the film required a dark-bag, and I had to rewind it manually with a small plastic tool which I made from a broken pen. Unfortunately I sold the RB so no more pans. Maybe I'll have to modify an old Pentax 67 some day (its cheaper than an Xpan or Mamiya 7II, and SLRs suit my kind of work a lot better anyway). A friend at work just purchased the new Minolta 5400ppi film scanner and has offered me his HP S20... which is the only 35mm film scanner I know of which can do my 24x68mm panoramas at full resolution, no stitching required. I'll be trying that out tonight. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Help! Need email recommendation
Chris Brogden wrote: Now that my university email account is expiring, I'm going to need to get a different address through another provider. I'm currently using PINE in a Unix window, and I love it. I love how I have to use the keyboard for everything, and how easy it is to move among hundreds of messages. Can anyone recommend a similar program that works under Windows 98SE? How about the real thing? http://www.washington.edu/pine/getpine/pcpine.html I guess it'll work under Win98. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Should I go Canon digital?
on 16.09.03 1:44, Lasse Karlsson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tell me why I should or should not buy the Canon. Tell me why I still should, or shouldn't, buy the istD, at double the price. For the price of RebelD (plasticky built, little features for advanced photographers, not-so-intuitvie handling as said my friend and his friends Canonians who were with him at Canon's press confernce with 300D aka RebelD in USA) , I would surely buy upcoming Sony F828 - it far more photographic features, it is better built (magnesium-alloy body) and it has great lens made by Carl Zeiss (28-200 f2.0-2.8!) with T* coating - the only one that is as good as Pentax's own SMC... Of course we don't know much about quality of photos, but I am sure it will be far better than current bunch of prosumer digitals - it has new 8MPix RGB+E sensor. I suspect, it could have more noise than APS sized sensors, but thanks to the more pixels it could rival it in terms of resolution. But it is only my speculation - let's wait and see some reviews - it should be available in shops soon... Well at least not only me is impressed with F828 - Mike Johnston seems to be too - he prefers it over RebelD like me:-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
I take this Panagor extension is just a tube, ie no lenses? This would otherwise surely degrade the Pentax lens quality considerably. I must say I'm impressed with your macro photo's. I want one of these! Might even get rid of my 100/4 macro then as I find very little use for it. Might just as well put thise macrozoom converter on my 85/1.8. Where would I end up in terms of image ratio putting it on my 200/4? :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:15:30 +0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Long zoom macro lens? Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:15:37 -0400 Panagor Macro Converter
Re: Blame on me...
On 15/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: for letting this one slip away: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemitem=2951616103category=8307rd=1 Somebody better explain to Paul that it's okay to post tear-jerker links to eBay auctions that have ended so the PDML can spend a few minutes pulling their hair out, wailing, gnashing teeth. D'oh, I just did. I think we could be renamed the Pentax Discussion Masochistic List... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Should I go Canon digital?
On 15/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I want a digital camera. I need it. For a couple of years I have been eagerly waiting for an affordable to me Pentax DSLR. Now we've got the ist D at $1699. I can't afford it, other than by taking some uncomfortable financial chances. Then the Canon 300D appeared at half the price of the istD. (And for the price of the istD I can get an necessary upgrade of my P166 and P133 computers on Win95 too...) Those of you who have been following specs etc. closer than me: Tell me why I should or should not buy the Canon. Tell me why I still should, or shouldn't, buy the istD, at double the price. Hi Lasse, Personally I think you will be disappointed with the 300D. The lower spec of the camera compared with the Canon 10D and the Pentax *ist D (or the pair of Nikon-fit offerings for that matter) will be a real bug bear after the initial honeymoon has worn off. Things like only being able to shoot 4 frames in rapid succession before the camera stops for a few seconds and does its thing before letting you carry on. It's bad enough with 8 frames on the D60. Four would be intolerable for me. The wait is only a matter of a few seconds, but each one of those seconds is how many missed pictures if you need them? Things like the build quality - I must be careful here as I have not seen or touched either camera. I suspect that the build quality of the 300D will not instil a sense of confidence that the build quality of the 10D/ *ist D will. The 300D has more plastic aboard, and will feel like it. It is also nowhere near the Pentax in the beauty contest. The pictures from both cameras will blow you away though. No doubt about that. These 6MP DSLRs are in a league of their own. In your position I would not hesitate - I would wait for the *ist D. It is a few seconds to midnight on the *ist D Delivery Clock. Don't jump as the gate is about to open! If you insist on having one now, and price is a factor, consider a used D60 or 10D. Or how about a Sigma SD-9 and one or two lenses? I wouldn't, but some do ;-) I really think you will kick yourself if you plump for the 300D. Not an easy choice to make when you are really in a position to do it. Much easier for me to make the decision for you, LOL. Good luck Mr Karlsson. This email will self-destruct in 5 seconds. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
What about the set of rings Pentax offered to get macro. What would be better: the Panagor macrozoomring or these Pentax rings? Seems ot me the zoom offers much mnore flexibility and less switching of lenses/rings. :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:15:30 +0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Long zoom macro lens? Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:15:37 -0400 Hi! On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:09:38 +0530 Gaurav Aggarwal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I have been reading the posts for around 5-6 months now. I have a Pentax ME Super with M50/1.7 (and a PZ-1 also which I don't use though). I now realize that I would like to have a longish zoom for taking portraits of family, street photography, birds etc. Also, I have never done macro but would want that feature as well. You already have 50/1.7 and ME Super. May I suggest slightly different approach? You could look for Panagor Macro Converter ($20 or so I think). It would turn your 50/1.7 into macro zoom lens with macro factor changing from 1:10 to 1:1 (lifesize). The weight of converter is no more than 200 gr. Adding to that weight of 50 mm lens, I think your weight requirement will be met. The results however are most probably better than any zoom lens with macro setting. Notice that you would be using a 50 mm prime as an optical basis. You can see few photos I made with this combo here: http://www.geocities.com/dunno57/macro-photos.htm. By the way all shots there were made handheld... As a starting kit for Macro Work I think this is very viable option. Good hunting. Boris
Re: I'm back!
On 15/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Well, I wound up finishing the thesis on Bram Stoker's _Dracula_, so now I have a purty li'l shiny Masters degree. Woo hoo! When I get the printed version of the thesis back, much drinking of beer will ensue. Congratulations Chris, and welcome back. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Should I go Canon digital?
on 16.09.03 7:40, Alan Chan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From what I have read in an asian site, there are concern on the AF and overall quality of the 5400 from the users. AF in 5400 is very slow and noise at isos higher than 100 is worse than from cheaper Sony DSC-V1. Say what you want, but I think with DSC-V1 and DSC-F828 Sony will have this year's best prosumer cameras. It's a pity that Pentax don't want to show us something interesting in this class - more advanced than Optio 550, with bigger, threaded for filters lens, and with hot-shoe for AF360FGZ... *istD is too pricey for me now, but I could buy now smaller-than-dslr (and chepaer) prosumer digicam :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: OT - Getting Chris up to Speed-was:McBain Camera in Alberta
On 15/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: The S wound up selling the second time to a collector in Japan for about $1600 US. Not bad, considering that it cost me $114.00 CAN after taxes, but I still hated to part with it. I didn't cry or anything insert macho grunts here, but it was pretty hard to let go of it. My God, I'm crying like a baby at the thought of you losing that S. Must be a 'new man', har. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Blame on me...
O well, findings bring tears of joy, and missed ones... :-) Paul Delcour From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 07:52:37 +0100 To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Blame on me... Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 03:15:24 -0400 On 15/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: for letting this one slip away: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemitem=2951616103category=8307rd=1 Somebody better explain to Paul that it's okay to post tear-jerker links to eBay auctions that have ended so the PDML can spend a few minutes pulling their hair out, wailing, gnashing teeth. D'oh, I just did. I think we could be renamed the Pentax Discussion Masochistic List... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: OT: Message for Mike Wilson
Hi, Cotty wrote: Well Mike that's no bloody good cos everyone knows you Geordies don't have electricity up there in the har-cladden north! 1. I'm not a Geordie. They live in the Tyne valley; I live in the Wear valley. I won't tell you what the Geordies call us.. 2. I presume you mean haar. Otherwise known as sea-fret. A good Viking word for the mist that rolls in off the sea on nice, warm summer days, thereby causing them to become cool, damp summer days. All the above with a wacking big grin (wbg). WRT electricity, Catherine is visiting the gym three times a week and I am converting an old exercise bike into a rather effective generator. Spouses do have their uses.. Of course, this all assumes that NTL can get off their collective backsides and produce a correct set of paperwork instead of the three sets of defective stuff they have sent so far. I have given up contacting them and am just waiting for the engineers to call. Let them waste some of their time for a change. Off to trim some wicks. m
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
I use a Panagor Macro Converter with a Vivitar 135/3.5 these days and the results are good. I often find it difficult to get near enough to the subject with the Sigma 50/2.8 macro - which would be my choice in most cases. I also miss the 45 degree viewfinder of the earlier Alpa Reflexes. Don ___ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: July 31, 2003 - Original Message - From: Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Long zoom macro lens? What about the set of rings Pentax offered to get macro. What would be better: the Panagor macrozoomring or these Pentax rings? Seems ot me the zoom offers much mnore flexibility and less switching of lenses/rings. :-) Paul Delcour From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:15:30 +0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Long zoom macro lens? Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:15:37 -0400 Hi! On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:09:38 +0530 Gaurav Aggarwal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I have been reading the posts for around 5-6 months now. I have a Pentax ME Super with M50/1.7 (and a PZ-1 also which I don't use though). I now realize that I would like to have a longish zoom for taking portraits of family, street photography, birds etc. Also, I have never done macro but would want that feature as well. You already have 50/1.7 and ME Super. May I suggest slightly different approach? You could look for Panagor Macro Converter ($20 or so I think). It would turn your 50/1.7 into macro zoom lens with macro factor changing from 1:10 to 1:1 (lifesize). The weight of converter is no more than 200 gr. Adding to that weight of 50 mm lens, I think your weight requirement will be met. The results however are most probably better than any zoom lens with macro setting. Notice that you would be using a 50 mm prime as an optical basis. You can see few photos I made with this combo here: http://www.geocities.com/dunno57/macro-photos.htm. By the way all shots there were made handheld... As a starting kit for Macro Work I think this is very viable option. Good hunting. Boris
Re: Help! Need email recommendation
Or you could use Linux instead of W98 or use them both with a dual boot. On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 09:06, David Mann wrote: Chris Brogden wrote: Now that my university email account is expiring, I'm going to need to get a different address through another provider. I'm currently using PINE in a Unix window, and I love it. I love how I have to use the keyboard for everything, and how easy it is to move among hundreds of messages. Can anyone recommend a similar program that works under Windows 98SE? How about the real thing? http://www.washington.edu/pine/getpine/pcpine.html I guess it'll work under Win98. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ -- Frits Wuthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: macro converter or macrolens or ring set
Hi! On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:33:48 + Paul Delcour [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did once put my Petnax K 2x convertor on my 100/4 macro. Gives me 1:1 but at f8 which is pretty dark. But with enough light and a tripod shots looked fine. This Panagor looks fine in your pictures, so how difficult is it to indicate where the quality difference lies? How about the Pentax set of 3 rings to get macro? I have the rings too. But I never used them for macro, at least not yet. One of the rings serves as a necessary buffer for my single element lens. It gives the lens almost full focus throw then. Anyway, I am not sure what would be the quality of ring macro shots versus those made with MC. I suppose MC was made specifically for 50 mm lens in mind. So perhaps it is not too bad anyway. Perhaps I need to try my macro rings. One thin is however certain, rings are way less convenient to deal with. Especially on the field, where in order to change macro factor you would have to dismount and mount your combo which may lead to some dust entering the camera. MC is way more convenient. Just my cents... Boris
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
I only know about two of the lenses you mention. the Tokina ATX 100-300 is a great lens but does not focus close. The Vivitar Series One 90-180 is a true macro and maybe the sharpest zoom ever made. Gaurav Aggarwal wrote: Hi all, I have been reading the posts for around 5-6 months now. I have a Pentax ME Super with M50/1.7 (and a PZ-1 also which I don't use though). I now realize that I would like to have a longish zoom for taking portraits of family, street photography, birds etc. Also, I have never done macro but would want that feature as well. IIRC, from the past posts some good long zoom lenses are: F 70-210 f/4-5.6 A 70-210 f/4 FA 80-320 f/4.5-5.6 Tamron 70-210 f/3.5 (manual focus?) Tokina ATX 100-300 f/4 (manual focus?) Vivitar Series I 90-180 f/4.5 Any other? -- --graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com
OT:Help with file size
A new upstart horse magazine/website is interested in several pictures i took on the labour day weekend(reining show)and they have picked two from the emailed proofs(low res at 72dpi) They have asked for these to be sent at 300 dpi.I just want to make sure i do this right. Pictures are from the Nikon D1 that are displayed in PS at 72dpi and size is roughly 18x27 To do this correctly,i should turn off the bicubic resample boxes at the bottom of the image size screen,change the dpi to 300,which keeps the pixel sixe at the original of 2000x1312,and will give me roughly a 4x6 sized photo.Does this sound correct or should i keep the boxes turned on which makes for a rather large pixel sized picture. Most of the stuff i have sent to other magazines have been film so this is new. Dave
Re: AF 360 FGZ Flash Sigma EX 28-70 2.8
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Boris Liberman wrote: focal length that you set the zoom lens to? You know, at 70 mm the zoom is extended, so it shadows the flash. While at 28 mm the zoom is retracted, so it does not shade. It is not like that. To hint at a link with a different thread running at the mo, both the Pentax F28-80/3.5-4.5 and the FA28-80/3.5-5.6 are at their most retracted at just under 50 (is that 43 then?). The F interferes with the flash[1] at 28-35 on the MZ-50 (the FA doesn't, or I haven't noticed, or the manual just does not list it). The FA interferes with the MZ-5n at *all lengths* depending on the distance of the subject, I did not expect this. As I said, the lists in the manuals are not complete. Pity really. HTH, Kostas [1] And the camera knows it, and flashes the viewfinder flash indicator
Re: Camera size and lens size.
This sounds right to me. One of the reasons I like the K 55mm f1.8 is that, on the KX, the eye in the viewfinder sees things at exactly the same magnification as the other eye. Put a 50mm lens on the KX, and this is no longer true. J. C. O'Connell wrote: Ok, but why then 50mm and not 43mm? My parents sometimes say when we talk about cameras that in their times 45mm was considered normal. .True. The historical reason behind why 35mm film normal lens has .become 50mm instead of staying at 43mm (or 45mm) is out there somewhere, .but I can't retrieve it from my crowded gray cells! .Someone here will know and help us out! .You can still find cameras with 43mm lenses, so the practice is not .dead, just not often followed anymore. I think the reason they went to 58/55/50 was that these focal lengths typically gave a FINDER magnification of 1 (100%). If they used a 43mm lens on an SLR, the image is smaller than %100 on most SLRs. FWIW, Using 43.27mm as normal yeilds a 85mm as very close to 2X and 135 as fairly close to 3X. JCO
Re: OT:Help with file size
If you sent them 72dpi full res images why can't they resize them them selves? If you sent them downsized (resampled) images just resize to 300 dpi (uncheck resampling as you mentioned). If they actually want a bigger file you can use the bicubic, stair-step, or genuine fractals to enlarge it. Probably what you will need to do is resize to 300dpi, then resample to about 8x12 @ 300dpi (2:1) bicubic works pretty well for that. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A new upstart horse magazine/website is interested in several pictures i took on the labour day weekend(reining show)and they have picked two from the emailed proofs(low res at 72dpi) They have asked for these to be sent at 300 dpi.I just want to make sure i do this right. Pictures are from the Nikon D1 that are displayed in PS at 72dpi and size is roughly 18x27 To do this correctly,i should turn off the bicubic resample boxes at the bottom of the image size screen,change the dpi to 300,which keeps the pixel sixe at the original of 2000x1312,and will give me roughly a 4x6 sized photo.Does this sound correct or should i keep the boxes turned on which makes for a rather large pixel sized picture. Most of the stuff i have sent to other magazines have been film so this is new. Dave -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com
Re: OT:Help with file size
yes, turn off resampling and record this as a Photoshop Action so you can apply it in batches to your images. Herb - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 3:53 AM Subject: OT:Help with file size To do this correctly,i should turn off the bicubic resample boxes at the bottom of the image size screen,change the dpi to 300,which keeps the pixel sixe at the original of 2000x1312,and will give me roughly a 4x6 sized photo.Does this sound correct or should i keep the boxes turned on which makes for a rather large pixel sized picture.
Re: Reputable dealer?
Couple of comments... The FA Star is still being made, and the Inner Focusing feature, along with a reputed improvement or tweaking of the lens assembly design (the 'star' feature?) and it's being the latest design from Pentax ought to justify a little greater asking price. Still, a question arises, do the 'Star' lenses in general offer the average shooter any particular advantage over a non-star lens? I mean, aside from the advertising hype, what's the truth... would you or I see a difference in our images? This is purely an academic question for me, as with all the Pentax bodies and lenses I own, I don't use an automatic Pentax body, but I'm still curious. keith Stan Halpin wrote: on 9/15/03 8:07 PM, Keith Whaley at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An FA*? I hope to tell you! I bought a mere SMC-K 85, f/1.8 the other day, for not much less than that! You'll enjoy it! keith whaley * * * * Robert Gonzalez wrote: There are a couple of lenses that kevincameras.com has that I like, but I've never dealt with them before. Has anyone on PDML ever done business with these folks? Is $495 a fair price for a FA* 85mm 1.4 in EX+++ condition? thanks, rg The prices tend to be about the same. The FA* may run $75-100 more, on average, just because more people are looking for the newest AF thingie than are looking for classics. Yes, $495 would be a reasonable price for the FA*. Not super amazingly unusually cheap, but reasonable. However, I do not know the vendor in question... stan
Re: Which two zooms?
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Paul Eriksson wrote: A couple of suggestions: F 24-50mm f/4.0 approx $200 used (if you want 24mm cheap?) FA 28-105mm f/3.2-4.5 $200 new FA 28-105 f/4-5.6 power zoom $200 used (heavy) FA 24-90mm $400 new or $300 used F 70-210mm f/4-5.6 used $100-150 used (not the takumar) I wrote at a different thread about the incompatibility of some lenses with the built-in flash. Check pages 73 and 74 of your manual. This might or might not be a concern for you of course. An interesting best list is coming out of this thread. One missing the 28-70/4 that I thought was good, but perhaps isn't. HTH, Kostas
Re: OT:Help with file size
If you sent them 72dpi full res images why can't they resize them them selves? If you sent them downsized (resampled) images just resize to 300 dpi (uncheck resampling as you mentioned). If they actually want a bigger file you can use the bicubic, stair-step, or genuine fractals to enlarge it. Probably what you will need to do is resize to 300dpi, then resample to about 8x12 @ 300dpi (2:1) bicubic works pretty well for that. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I quess i should have mentioned that,Tom. When i resized them,i had the boxes turned on,resized to 400 pixels wide but stayed at 72dpi.I think if they do anything to the picture,it will look pretty pixelated. Thanks for tyhe tip though Dave
Re: OT:Help with file size
Good,i think i'm doing this correct then. Thanks Herb,Tom Dave yes, turn off resampling and record this as a Photoshop Action so you can apply it in batches to your images. Herb - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 3:53 AM Subject: OT:Help with file size To do this correctly,i should turn off the bicubic resample boxes at the bottom of the image size screen,change the dpi to 300,which keeps the pixel sixe at the original of 2000x1312,and will give me roughly a 4x6 sized photo.Does this sound correct or should i keep the boxes turned on which makes for a rather large pixel sized picture.
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Boris Liberman wrote: On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:09:38 +0530 Gaurav Aggarwal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I now realize that I would like to have a longish zoom for taking portraits of family, street photography, birds etc. Also, I have never done macro but would want that feature as well. You already have 50/1.7 and ME Super. May I suggest slightly different approach? You could look for Panagor Macro Converter ($20 or so I think). May I also suggest yet another option: buy a long zoom that you like (I have the M75-150/4 and the early M80-200/4.5 and I am quite happy with them, and you can follow the other people's suggestions too) and buy a 49mm-K reversing ring (and a step-down ring suitable for the thread of the zoom you like) for $20 or sth. The one downside is that you cannot attach a ring flash (because you don't have a thread at the front any more), but I have taken reasonably useful floral macros that way. The other downside is that the configuration induces step-down metering, but if I can do it with the MZ-50, you probably can do it with the ME Super. HTH, Kostas (not developed the pictures with the step-down ring yet, but I will report, promise :-)
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Alin, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Heiko, some image samples with noise reduction off, at 200 and 1600 ASA, also some raw samples... We made lots of pictures, but we were asked not to publish them as we did use a pre-production modell. All I can say is, that the pictures were very good! The noise at ISO1600 is comparable to or lower of that of the Optio 550 at ISO200! Cheers, Heiko
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Alin, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: MR If you get RAW samples, will you burn a copy of the Pentax RAW MR conversion software to send to all of us so we can view them? g You wouldn't mind a raw sample, would you!? At least to see what other common places are there with N*. I don't have a Nikon RAW, but it would be interesting to compare those file formats. Or even if it is possible to open a Pentax RAW with the Nikon tool. BTW - in the RAW file you can find the name Pentax (probably in the EXIF part), but non of Sony or Nikon...;-) Cheers, Heiko
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Stan, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: I would like to see a photo of the SMC-M 10/2.8! That must be an impressive lens! Unfortunately I had forgotton to bring a saw with me ...;-) But seriously, it will be interesting to see how the system will work when faced with challenging conditions. As when the lens is wide open, the film speed is high, the shutter speed is low... Will we get the same fall-off in quality at wider f-stops? Or about the same as with film? Is there a mirror-slap vibration problem at 1/15 or 1/30 as with some film cameras? As I already have mentioned - we did use a pre-production modell and were asked not to publish any pictures. We did notice some minor problems of this special *istD that I don't want to discuss in detail. But theese problems make it impossible to give a true judgment concerning the questions you have asked. All in all the pictures were very promising. I will make an English report, soon. A German version can already be found here: http://www.digitalfotonetz.de/istD/istD_Erfahrungsbericht/ body_istd_erfahrungsbericht.html We made lots of pictures. I hope that I will find some time to compare them and give you some more information. But I don't think that I will manage this before the weekend. I am also curious about the digital film. If you have old and new CF cards (normal vs. fast, plus, or ultra cards), We had a normal 256MB CF card and an ultra 256MB card. I didn't notice a difference. Cheers, Heiko
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi cbwaters, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Just how larger are files from each of the quality settings? The size did also depend on the motiv (a blank of paper might be compressed more that a landscape). Most pictures were between 1.5 and 2.9 MB. The following figures show a very complex picture - those sizes were very seldom, but it is the only picture where I did a comparison of the quality levels. So don`t look to much at the absolute picture sizes but the relations. L *** 4.4MB ** 2.9MB * 1.2MB M *** 2.1MB ** 1.2MB * 0.9MB S *** 1.1MB ** 0.7MB * 0.5MB TIF ***17.3MB ** 11.0MB * 4.6MB RAW13.0MB Please keep my introduction in mind. We had also pictures Cheers, Heiko
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Alan, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: See if the eyepiece is coated glass. Just rub it when the saleman looked elsewhere. :-) It is glass, but I'm quite sure that it is not coated. As we handled a pre-production modell, this might change in the final version, but I don't think that this is very likely. Cheers, Heiko
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Robert, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: See how many pictures you can take in continous mode. There's a controversy on its real number, there are quotes from as low as five to as high as 8. Also try to get a feel for shutter lag. Five pictures. After that you can take the next picture as soon as one of those five pictures has been transfered from the cameras memory to the CF-Card. This dependes on the chosen picture type: a JPG needs 2-3 seconds, a RAW file 8-9 seconds and a TIF pricture 18-19 seconds (that were no exact measurements but estimates) Cheers, Heiko
Re: McBain Camera in Alberta
Thanks Chris. FWIW i did check Don's website but nothing used listed,that i could find. Oh and welcome back before i forget and glad to here the schoolin worked goodg I'm looking for a 165 or possibly a 200 for the 6x7(its working fine and being loved)Have to sell a few things first though. I was going to email you on something i saw on Dons site and that is the Pentax off camera flash kit.No info yet,can you supply any.Sounds like something i should have for the SP and AF280T.Is it tgoing to be the two modules and cord needed? Dave Haven't bought anything from them, but I've heard good things about them. chris On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any one,from Canada or ., ever purchase any gear from McBain in Edmonton or sub stores.Saw something i might be interested in. Dave
Re: First Pano Try
I found a kit to convert a min MF to a 35mm panoramic, and cut it to fit my old Pentax 6X7. It worked OK, but I discovered it's better just to use the normal 6X7 with 120 film and a wide angle lens and crop the image to create the panorama that you want. David Mann wrote: Mark Cassino wrote: Unfortunately I sold the RB so no more pans. Maybe I'll have to modify an old Pentax 67 some day (its cheaper than an Xpan or Mamiya 7II, and SLRs suit my kind of work a lot better anyway).
Re: Help! Need email recommendation
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:32:18 +0400, Salikh Zakirov wrote: there exists console-based mailer, named mutt, whose interface originally was based on pine interface so it has similar look and feel. http://www.mutt.org You can try it with Cygwin (http://www.cygwin.org) or run windows port: http://www.geocities.com/win32mutt/win32.html You could also try a hosting company like Pair (http://www.pair.com) where you have telnet access to your server and just use mutt, pine, or whatever else you feel like through a Telnet session. I'm not sure if they have ssh access or not. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: First Pano Try
Mark, I've been interested in trying panos as well. A few questions: 1) What focal length? I've heard it said that going below 50mm is not advisable in 35mm because of distortion at the edges. 2) Did you shoot vertically or horizontally? Here again, advise I've read says to shoot vertically (counterintuitive at first, til you think about it) 3) How much overlap from frame to frame? A third? A quarter? 4) Did you worry about the true center of the lens? 5) Did you use a leveling tripod head? How fussy were you about leveling? 6) Did you use only tools available in Photoshop as shipped to do your stitching?
Re: First Pano Try
At 06:52 PM 9/15/2003 -0400, you wrote: Very nice piece of work! I assume it begins with carefull levellling of camera and a pan head... Thanks, Andre' - I actually used a ball head. Leveled everything, locked it in position, and then just rotated the whole head. - MCC - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI - Photography: http://www.markcassino.com
Star lenses (was: Re: Reputable dealer?)
: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Still, a question arises, do the 'Star' lenses in general offer the average shooter any particular advantage over a non-star lens? I mean, aside from the advertising hype, what's the truth... would you or I see a difference in our images? Hi Keith, I read somewhere that the Star in the Pentax lenses stands for APO, so it should apply to the apochromatic lenses. But I may be wrong... Gianfranco = __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: First Pano Try
At 06:38 PM 9/15/2003 -0400, you wrote: you need to try some panorama software to see if they will make life easier enough for you to use them. http://www.panoguide.com/ Thanks Herb - looks like some interesting info there. I just lined things up in the finder after carefully getting the camera level - using a Pz-1p and FA20-35 f4 zoom. It worked OK but there was much more overlapping the frames than I wanted - probably because the coverage of the Pz-1p's finder. An Mz-S or LX would have been much better in that regard. i use PhotoVista, now published by www.iSeeMedia.com. i don't have problems printing panoramas up to about 12000 pixels wide by about 3000 high from Photoshop on my system. i have used the 13 inch panorama paper cut to about 40 inches long, just a bit short of the 44 inch maximum that the Epson 1280 printer driver supports. I was expecting to run into that 44 inch maximum but did not. Under custom paper sizes the 2000p's driver will let me put in a sheet that is 12.9 inches wide by 12 feet long! I don't know if that would work - what I printed out was 3000 x 13928 pixels - just over 46 inches at 300 dpi. I could set up the drive just fine in Photoshop, but when I went to print the print process would crash with an error message. That seemed to kill the print routines - clikcing on print after that did nothing at all until I shut down PS and reloaded it. Corel managed to print it fine, with one exception in that it would not print flush to the top margin. I had to trim off a 1/16th of an inch or so (a bit of a pain since it had to be done manually - I certainly don't have a roto-trimmer big enough for this thing!) No I have to try to mount the dang thing onto foam core... some of my panoramas are at http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/Panoramas/Panoramas.htm. i have converted most of them to QTVRs on the site, so you won't get as high resolution as the originals. i use a Kaidan panoramic head for many of my panorama shots, although i am changing over to a simpler setup to save some bulk and weight. Great stuff! - MCC - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI - Photography: http://www.markcassino.com
Re: Reputable dealer?
Thanks, thats how I got it, he had it for sale on eBay. Used the buy it now feature, since it was only $20 more than his initial starting price of $475. Didn't want to risk getting into a bidding war and this lens usually ends up around $550 on eBay. I've been wanting to get this lens for a long time. He also has a classic 85mm 1.4 A* on his website, or maybe even two, but they are out of my budget right now ($700-$800). Jose R. Rodriguez wrote: Robert, For what its worth, kevincameras has an eBay Positive Feedback of 99.4% (Feedback Rating: 339); so I suspect they are pretty reputable. Regards, Jose R. Rodriguez -Original Message- From: Robert Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 7:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Reputable dealer? There are a couple of lenses that kevincameras.com has that I like, but I've never dealt with them before. Has anyone on PDML ever done business with these folks? Is $495 a fair price for a FA* 85mm 1.4 in EX+++ condition? thanks, rg
Re: Problem with A contact on a lens
John, Your are correct about the A contact hypothesis. It used to be mechanical, now it appears to be electrical in the FA lenses. It just creates an electrical short between the contact pin and the body. So somewhere under the aperture ring or the mechanics behind it, there must be a switch, which when the lens is placed in the A position, shorts out the contact center to ground. I've measured this with my multimeter before. John Francis wrote: [reposted becuase I messed up the subject line the first time] I've got a problem with the A contact on one of my FA lenses, and I was wondering if anyone on the list could help. Basically the camera doesn't recognise the fact that the aperture ring is in the A position, so I can't use shutter priority modes. From perusing Boz's K-mount site it looks as though the problem is simply with the A contact. The description of that contact for the KA-mount describes the lens contact as physically moving when the aperture ring is moved to the A position to make or break contact with the camera body. As far as I can tell this isn't true for later (F and FA) lenses, so I assume the switching is done elsewhere in the lens, rather than by moving the contact. Can any list member confirm or deny this hypothesis? I haven't seen my multimeter for years, so I don't know whether I'll be able to do any further checking myself. I'd also like to know what the likelihood is that this could be something I could repair myself, something a typical neighbourhood camera repairer could fix, or something that will have to go back to Pentax.
Re: UK Street Price of *ist D
So Park camera is GBP1199.99 = $1920.58 = Eur 1703.32 Anyone knows what our Peter from Sunny Brighton charges? Sorry, I haven't a clue. Eh?? Rob can tell you. Cheers Peter CAMERA DIRECT 8 DORSET STREET BRIGHTON EAST SUSSEX BN2 1WA UK http://www.camera-direct.com TEL 44 1273 681129 FAX 44 1273 681135
And here's my little gallery...
http://www.milestone-media.com/main/main/photo_gallery.html Constructive comments are welcome! -- Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hello Heiko, have you checked accidentally if classic flash units like AF500FTZ work with *istD in TTL mode? -- Best Regards Sylwek
OT: Internet woes
Hi, Not content with fouling up my email, whatever deity it is that is peering over my shoulder has just crashed the internet proxy server as I was upgrading my browser with a download. I only seem to have lost my bookmark file but that is bad enough. Not having admin access to this workstation means that I will have to restore each page individually from the backup. Can't ask the network technicians to help as they are having to temporarily reconfigure each individual machine to a new server and conversational responses from them are limited to two words. I wonder if it is because I have precisely 666 messages in my inbox today? mike
*istD works with classic TTL flashes!
Incredible! *istD works in TTL mode with flashes older than P-TTL enabled AF360! I have just read Heiko's test: http://www.digitalfotonetz.de/istD/istD_Erfahrungsbericht/ body_istd_erfahrungsbericht.html Thanks Heiko! So *istD is the only DSLR on the market that is compatible with older TTL-only flashes! Nice touch :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
RE: Any more *istD questions?
You have no idea how helpful this email is! My manual is in Japanese, and I was wondering how to use the different file options. I assume LMS is the file size, and the number of stars indicates the level of compression used? -Original Message- From: Heiko Hamann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 September 2003 13:46 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Any more *istD questions? Hi cbwaters, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Just how larger are files from each of the quality settings? The size did also depend on the motiv (a blank of paper might be compressed more that a landscape). Most pictures were between 1.5 and 2.9 MB. The following figures show a very complex picture - those sizes were very seldom, but it is the only picture where I did a comparison of the quality levels. So don`t look to much at the absolute picture sizes but the relations. L *** 4.4MB ** 2.9MB * 1.2MB M *** 2.1MB ** 1.2MB * 0.9MB S *** 1.1MB ** 0.7MB * 0.5MB TIF ***17.3MB ** 11.0MB * 4.6MB RAW13.0MB Please keep my introduction in mind. We had also pictures Cheers, Heiko
Re: *istD works with classic TTL flashes!
On 16 Sep 2003 at 15:44, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: So *istD is the only DSLR on the market that is compatible with older TTL-only flashes! Nice touch :-) So I can use my old flash with the *istD but I'll have to tote an external meter to use my older lenses, strange priorities? :-( 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
Accounting
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 09:36:01 +0100 From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #984 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit OK, I'm gonna back out of this one too! Sorry Bob - had a migraine after a day of the kids pestering me and couldn't think as clearly as perhaps I should. Headache still there, but thinking a 'little' more clearly now... However, from a tax point of view the invoice is raised prior to or when goods are despatched in any accounting system I have ever worked on, not when money is actually collected, and certainly not when the customer receives the goods. I'm gonna have to leave this one for now because work is pressing and I have yet another mad week which means I wont have time to continue the discussion. This is totally dependent upon the type of accounting you are doing. Apparently, all the accounting systems you've worked with use Accrual Accounting. Accrual Accounting enables you to book (account for) income when you think you should have received it (not necessarily when you did receive it). There is a whole other world called Cash Accounting. Cash Accounting requires that you book the income when you receive the money. I'm not an accountant (and I haven't played one on the tele), but I have created lots of accounting systems for large financial services firms. In the US, insurance companies are mandated to use Cash Accounting. In other countries, they may use Accrual Accounting. The fun part comes when you put them together on the same balance sheet. Larry in Dallas (who still has his very old Arthur Andersen ID, from when the firm required that I read a multi-hundred page book on ethics and sign an oath that I would abide by it, as well as actually resigned audits of firms that it thought were not up to their standard. Times they do change.)
Re: Impressions of a scholar
-- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:44:57 +0400 From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Impressions of a scholar Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi! Let it be a little discourse away from lens resolution and other such topics grin... I finally got my EktaChrome 100 slides and two films of TMAX 100 processed. 1. Proper B/W film is way smoother than T400 CN C-41 film I've been using as a study so far. I definitely am not going to use C-41 B/W stuff any more. The play of tones is amazing. I am getting converted, am I not? grin I will be posting some of the shots, probably to oncoming PUGs too. 2. The colors of E-Chrome 100 were just perfect. Very true, very painting like. Even though I've been shooting mostly faces (my daughter's first day in k-garten, etc), I really liked it. Amazingly enough, the scans were 100% dustless while all colors went for a walk to say the least. I am afraid I am going to leave this lab too. Finally, my friends from not-so-local photo club invited me to do my own dark room work, at least for B/W. So I am buying 5 more TMAX 100s and I keep growing. Though, my both arms are usually left, so it would be fun and challenge to learn how to process film manually. Thought I'd share that with you... Boris -- Ah, so you're ambi-sinestrous. I've been blessed with that all my life. It enables me to do more than my share of assuring that we don't live in a perfect world. Two left hands allows me to make lots of 87 or 92 degree corners. Anyone can make 90 degree corners. Larry
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Sylwester, on 16 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: have you checked accidentally if classic flash units like AF500FTZ work with *istD in TTL mode? Yes. The *istD has a TTL-sensor and worked fine with my AF500FTZ. I couldn't notice any difference in its behaviour compared to my MZ-5n. I really don't where this rumor came from, that the *istD can handle P-TTL flashes, only. Cheers, Heiko
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Rob, on 16 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: You have no idea how helpful this email is! My manual is in Japanese, and I was wondering how to use the different file options. I assume LMS is the file size, and the number of stars indicates the level of compression used? Yes. If you turn the left dial to this strange square symbol between IO and WB, then you can use the two hyper-dials on the right to change size and quality. The S-size can be set in the custom functions. Cheers, Heiko
Re: *istD works with classic TTL flashes!
on 16.09.03 16:03, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I can use my old flash with the *istD but I'll have to tote an external meter to use my older lenses, strange priorities? :-( Even the newest -K and -M lenses are far older than the oldest digital-TTL flashes... Perhaps that's why they have made it that way? -- Best Regards Sylwek
RE: Any more *istD questions?
One of the things I want to do as soon as possible is get some ISO1600 and ISO3200 shots. Hopefully I will work out how to get them on the web in the next day or so. I think I have web space with my ISP. They cant tell me off for publishing because this is a production model. -Original Message- From: Heiko Hamann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 September 2003 13:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Any more *istD questions? Hi Alin, on 10 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Heiko, some image samples with noise reduction off, at 200 and 1600 ASA, also some raw samples... We made lots of pictures, but we were asked not to publish them as we did use a pre-production modell. All I can say is, that the pictures were very good! The noise at ISO1600 is comparable to or lower of that of the Optio 550 at ISO200! Cheers, Heiko
Re: Pairs
-- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 08:16:38 -0700 From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Lens resolution Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Mark, One of anything cannot be a pair. You have lines and spaces to work with. A line pair cannot be construed to be one line one space. It's got to be two lines two spaces. One of each does not constitute a pair; two of each does. So it seems to me. keith Keith, Per your first sentnece, apparently, you've never seen a pair of pants. 8-) Larry
Re: And here's my little gallery...
Link doesn't work for me. Don ___ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: July 31, 2003 - Original Message - From: Steve Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 4:42 PM Subject: And here's my little gallery... http://www.milestone-media.com/main/main/photo_gallery.html Constructive comments are welcome! -- Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Pentax in politics
A 200mm from Åland, that would be foreign politics :-) DagT På tirsdag, 16. september 2003, kl. 18:02, skrev Jostein: Congrats, Lasse. Now be careful with that 200mm. :-) cheers, Jostein - Pictures at: http://oksne.net - - Original Message - From: Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 11:54 PM Subject: Pentax in politics Thought I'd let you know that now Pentax got themselves a representative in politics. Since a couple of weeks back I am running for a seat in the local parliament of Aland (the Aland Islands) as well as for a seat in the city council of my home town Mariehamn. While I'm usually carrying my MZ5 across my shoulder and sometimes am referred to as the man with a camera (for instance in a local radio guest show), Pentax will at least get some exposure on this local scene. This made me wonder if there is/has been any other known connections between Pentax and politics elsewhere in the world and time. Any other PDML:er got or running for a seat in a local or national assembly? This will of course also mean a break up of the established ban on politics as an accepted subject matter. So sorry guys, but from now on politics is a legitimate subject matter on this list too. Free the peoples of the world!! with a Pentax in your hand. Just knock them tyrants on the head with it. :-) Lasse
Re: UK Street Price of *ist D
Oh yes, Rob pointed to your website, so now I know. I wonder why the *ist D would be a Miscellaneous Accessory? British Humour? Cheers. On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 15:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Park camera is GBP1199.99 = $1920.58 = Eur 1703.32 Anyone knows what our Peter from Sunny Brighton charges? Sorry, I haven't a clue. Eh?? Rob can tell you. Cheers Peter CAMERA DIRECT 8 DORSET STREET BRIGHTON EAST SUSSEX BN2 1WA UK http://www.camera-direct.com TEL 44 1273 681129 FAX 44 1273 681135 -- Frits Wuthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: And here's my little gallery...
Very nice. I think the text is way too big. I would prefer a smaller font. On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 15:42, Steve Sharpe wrote: http://www.milestone-media.com/main/main/photo_gallery.html Constructive comments are welcome! -- Frits Wuthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *istD works with classic TTL flashes!
So I can use my old flash with the *istD but I'll have to tote an external meter to use my older lenses, strange priorities? :-( _you_ don't need a meter Rob. C'mon, who are you kidding? Out there now, it's 1/500th at F4 off that bit of the wall - sorry old sports pjs tend to measure everything at 1/500th. Cheers Peter
Re: And here's my little gallery...
http://www.milestone-media.com/main/main/photo_gallery.html Constructive comments are welcome! Some really nice shots there. I particularly liked the first couple (I presume you do too, since you put them up early in the list). I didn't like the way to navigate the gallery - I'd really like to see one page of thumbnail image links, rather than being forced to click on each page in sequence. This is particularly bad since the chain seems to be broken; the link from image12 (the locomotive) goes nowhere. On image12, I personally would crop out some of the foreground. But that's a personal preference - others may well disagree. On the image before that, though (the window box) I found the angles introduced by the camera being tilted down were far too distracting. I kept on wanting to see true verticals in all that brickwork. I've got a very similar shot from Acadia National Park. You might want to tweak your scanning parameters a little, though; you're not getting the full contrast range in the scan. I'm fairly sure Kodachrome 64 gets further into the black than this scan shows. But, overall, some good stuff there. Fix the links and show us more!
agfapan 25 for sale
I emailed him, it all has been cold stored http://www.tbw99.com/messages/3445.html He has 100 rolls of it __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
RE: UK Street Price of *ist D
Some really naff pics here, but they WERE taken with a Production istD at full res best jpg and uploaded at full size. I rotated a couple and I think they got compressed when I saved them, but if anyone want high res pics feel free. I have now worked out how to do TIFFs and change the ISO (all these were at 200) and will post something better soon (along with a better page with thumbnails). http://www.calcot.plus.com/Pentax/Pentax.htm Hopefully the link works... WARNING THEY ARE BIGG! -Original Message- From: Frits Wuthrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 September 2003 17:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: UK Street Price of *ist D Oh yes, Rob pointed to your website, so now I know. I wonder why the *ist D would be a Miscellaneous Accessory? British Humour? Cheers. On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 15:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Park camera is GBP1199.99 = $1920.58 = Eur 1703.32 Anyone knows what our Peter from Sunny Brighton charges? Sorry, I haven't a clue. Eh?? Rob can tell you. Cheers Peter CAMERA DIRECT 8 DORSET STREET BRIGHTON EAST SUSSEX BN2 1WA UK http://www.camera-direct.com TEL 44 1273 681129 FAX 44 1273 681135 -- Frits Wuthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FA* Lenses
Mark, Some may not realize, but with the focus clutch design, you can manually focus the FA * lenses by simply pulling the clutch and focusing - you don't have to disengage the body af switch. Can be very handy for touch up focusing - much more like the Canon USM lenses. Bruce Tuesday, September 16, 2003, 8:37:42 AM, you wrote: ME Keith, ME The FA* lenses have the following properties: ME o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. ME o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). ME o) Their build quality is generally very solid. ME My best 35mm hand-held shots have been with my FA* 85mm F1.4 ME lens. It is a _wonderful_ indoor portrait/action lens. ME Images shot wide-open are very smooth and have a certain ME glow to them that I really like. That said, I haven't had ME a chance to compare this lens to, say, the 85mm F1.8 ME lens. ME --Mark ME keith wrote: Still, a question arises, do the 'Star' lenses in general offer the average shooter any particular advantage over a non-star lens? I mean, aside from the advertising hype, what's the truth... would you or I see a difference in our images? This is purely an academic question for me, as with all the Pentax bodies and lenses I own, I don't use an automatic Pentax body, but I'm still curious. keith
Re-enabled.
Holga's her name. $1.91 + tax was her price. Yes, she was both cheap and easy. But she's all mine. Now to shoot her. -- -- Collin Brendemuehl KC8TKA The problems are so over-rated. -- Petula Clark --
Refreshed
Got my new-to-me 43/1.9 in yesterday. It's going to Pittsburgh this weekend. -- -- Collin Brendemuehl KC8TKA The problems are so over-rated. -- Petula Clark --
Re: OT: Internet woes
Ahh :) Bob Heinlein in his book Number of the Beast said that number is actually 6**6**6. I can guarantee you don't have that many e-mails :) mike wilson wrote: Hi, Not content with fouling up my email, whatever deity it is that is peering over my shoulder has just crashed the internet proxy server as I was upgrading my browser with a download. I only seem to have lost my bookmark file but that is bad enough. Not having admin access to this workstation means that I will have to restore each page individually from the backup. Can't ask the network technicians to help as they are having to temporarily reconfigure each individual machine to a new server and conversational responses from them are limited to two words. I wonder if it is because I have precisely 666 messages in my inbox today? mike -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com
OT: Film Remaining
4 of 120 propacks Velvia 3 of 120 propacks NPC 160 1 of 120 propack Ektachrome 120S 2 of 135 propack Kodak Portra 800 36 1 of 135 propack Kodak Portra 160VC 36 55 of 135/24 Kodak Elitechrome 400 $100 for all, US shipping included. -- -- Collin Brendemuehl KC8TKA The problems are so over-rated. -- Petula Clark --
Re: Long zoom macro lens?
I have been reading the posts for around 5-6 months now. I have a Pentax ME Super with M50/1.7 (and a PZ-1 also which I don't use though). I now realize that I would like to have a longish zoom for taking portraits of family, street photography, birds etc. Also, I have never done macro but would want that feature as well. You could try macro using your 50mm lens with a 49mm Minolta achromatic close-up lens #1 and/or #2 on it. They screw as a filter and permits getteing closer to subject. Achromatic ones (with two lenses in it( are a lot better than regular close-up filters. New, they are 30$ but used they come at $10-15 on eBay, although not regularly in 49mm size. The close-up lens #1 will start where the 50mm left (around half a meter) and will bring you closer to your subject. #2 is still stronger (brings you still closer). You bring the filter with you, and when you fell macro, you screw it on your lens. Not as practical as having a macro function built-in a tele zoom, but the quality will be better. Canon also makes these achromatic close-up lenses, to be put on their zooms. Andre --
Re: Pairs
Can't say I have. Am I missing something? keith Jostein wrote: - Original Message - From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 4:33 PM Subject: Re: Pairs I have also seen a pair of scissors, and a pair of glasses... g keith And dingo's kindneys? (g,d, r) Jostein
Re: OT: Leni Reifenstahl: A giant passes away
Hi, Tuesday, September 16, 2003, 4:19:17 PM, you wrote: I'll add one more comment. Frankly, I don't care if Reifenstahl was a Nazi or not -- her film, like all art work can stand alone, independent of the creator. Her work is so recognisable as being of that time that I don't believe you can separate the 2 and see the work as something isolated, or fail to consider Riefenstahl's position in this. She was perhaps naive when she first became involved. Maybe she thought Nazism was much the same as a great big Busby Berkeley musical, all camera angles and synchronised high-kicking. Somehow I doubt that, and I don't think you can really view them in the same way you'd look at stills from a Busby Berkeley review. And her propaganda did not significantly increase Hitler's power, the events she shot he was doing anyway. He was already a master of propaganda without her. I heard way back when in my film class that the problem was, she did her job too well. I tend to agree with that. Thus it makes it hard to see what her own stand was or might have been independent of what she produced. But like I said previously, no one else gave us a such a powerful visual record -- an insight into the times and the thinking -- as close to insider glimpse of a turbulent and very strange time in history as we are likely to ever have. We'd be poorer, much poorer, without it. It is certainly a powerful record, and I appreciate it as much as anybody, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking it's an inser's view. If she was an insider then she must take her share of the responsibility for events. She claimed she was not an insider. Her pictures and movies are not in any way fly-on-the-wall stuff; they are all rehearsed and cannot possibly be treated as documentary in any modern sense of the word, so I don't see what glimpse we are getting of this time. Where is the insight in her photographs films? They are extremely shallow. She saw only the surface of things. Look at what she has influenced: advertisements for Calvin Klein; James Bond films; Annie Leibovitz's celebrity portraits. Flashy, exciting, emotive, but trivial with no depth. She was ahead of her time. But then I've always tended to think that art can stand and be judged independent of the artist. Good thing, since many famous painters have been real assholes in real life. In my opinion you can gain more from the art by knowing about the artist's life. Knowing that Picasso was Spanish certainly adds to the power of 'Guernica', for instance. -- Cheers, Bobmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Takumar 200/3.5
I, too, have one. Lovely lens, if a bit impractical. Actually, I don't find the pre-set to be that much of a problem in use. Neither me. You learn to count the stops (or half-stops). And, yes, it is not multi-coated, but on a long lens, flare isn't such a problem as on a wider lens - just don't point the lens into the sun. If you do get one, make sure it comes with the lovely leather case, large screw-on hood, and especially, the honking big embossed metal AOC lens cap! frank And the tripod mount, Gasha. There is a version with a tripod mount and one without. I would take the one with tripod mount (you can also take it out). I compared its quality with Pentax-M 200mm f/4, probably at f8 and sun was coming from the back (no flare issue), and I could not see any evident difference out of a 2700 dpi scan. Maybe a very slightly better contrast on the M lens. Andre --
Re: Should I go Canon digital?
Dear Alan, I'd expect any camera not being able to resolve something to give me a fuzzy patch of stuff. If the hair cannot be resolved, I'd expect it to give me back a fuzzy patch of color. But no, I got back a ragged hair, much like on a TV only much worse. The hair has sharp boundaries, but it is not a line, it is ragged. I don't know how to best put this in words, but to me the camera seems to be telling me, I can't render it, so I create it for you. That's why I asked if there are certain settings which would help. -- Bo-Ming Tong - Original Message - From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, September 15, 2003 10:39 pm Subject: Re: Should I go Canon digital? I used the F717 once. I didn't like it at all. I was doing portraits. Hair looked like pixels, not hair. Maybe I am seeing a digital artifact, or the picture was overly sharpened ? But the camera was borrowed and I didn't RTFM. Probably there are settings which would have given me better pictures. You can't blame the camera when the resolving power of your eyes is too high. :-) Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
RE: *istD works with classic TTL flashes!
I'm not suprised: it is so easy technically to make this happen, it would be a shame if it could not!! Backwards compatibility to old TTL flashes is one of the reasons I have a Nikon digital camera and could be a reason to buy a digital Pentax. I'm aware of the fact that good TTL flashes are as expensive as lenses or camera's! Greetz, Jos -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Verzonden: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 3:45 PM Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: *istD works with classic TTL flashes! Incredible! *istD works in TTL mode with flashes older than P-TTL enabled AF360! I have just read Heiko's test: http://www.digitalfotonetz.de/istD/istD_Erfahrungsbericht/ body_istd_erfahrungsbericht.html Thanks Heiko! So *istD is the only DSLR on the market that is compatible with older TTL-only flashes! Nice touch :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: FA* lenses
Keith wrote: Mark Erickson wrote: Keith, The FA* lenses have the following properties: o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Speed of focusing? Pentax autofocus works via a motor in the camera body. Since there aren't equivalent (i.e., same focal length and aperture) non-FA* lenses, this question isn't really answerable. As Bruce Dayton mentioned, the FA* lenses have a clutch system that disengages the manual-focus ring when you use autofocus. o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). High resolution and good contrast? Sure. Better than other similar lenses? I don't know. I haven't done a horse-race between, say, an FA* 80-200 F2.8 and any of the non FA* zooms. --Mark
Re: First Pano Try
i try for a little less than 50% overlap, but that is when using the panorama software that does blending between images. if butting or blending by hand, you will want a lot less overlap, but there is higher risk of alignment mismatches. the 44 inch limit may be a problem that the printer driver doesn't handle. you may want to try to print paper to a file to see if it crashes the printer driver or not after limiting to 44 inches or a bit less. Herb - Original Message - From: Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 9:12 AM Subject: Re: First Pano Try Thanks Herb - looks like some interesting info there. I just lined things up in the finder after carefully getting the camera level - using a Pz-1p and FA20-35 f4 zoom. It worked OK but there was much more overlapping the frames than I wanted - probably because the coverage of the Pz-1p's finder. An Mz-S or LX would have been much better in that regard.
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Heiko, What kind of remote control can the *ist D use? Will it take the cable release F that I have for the PZ-1? On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 08:56, Heiko Hamann wrote: Hi, I will have the possibility to handle a *istD at the weekend. If I shall try soemthing for you, then tell me. I will take some FA-lenses with me, a SMC-M 10/2.8 and my AF500FTZ. Cheers, Heiko -- Frits Wuthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Impressions of a scholar
Hi, Larry, Ever see the movie Best of Show, directed by Christopher Guest? Eugene Levy (a Torontonian!) played a fellow with two left feet. It was funny. Your post reminded me of that. And, not because your surname is Levy - but how weird is that, eh? :-) cheers, frank Larry Levy wrote: Ah, so you're ambi-sinestrous. I've been blessed with that all my life. It enables me to do more than my share of assuring that we don't live in a perfect world. Two left hands allows me to make lots of 87 or 92 degree corners. Anyone can make 90 degree corners. Larry -- Honour - that virtue of the unjust! -Albert Camus
Re: Pairs
I don't know, Keith, Hand me that pair of pliers and we'll rip those kidneys out and take a look! g cheers, frank Keith Whaley wrote: Can't say I have. Am I missing something? -- Hell is others -Jean Paul Sartre
Re: OT: Leni Reifenstahl: A giant passes away
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:47:01 -0400 (EDT) From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Leni Reifenstahl: A giant passes away Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit But then I've always tended to think that art can stand and be judged independent of the artist. Good thing, since many famous painters have been real assholes in real life. Not just painters, either. I can just about understand this when it's a highly competitive field such as intertnational sports - to be the best you have to beat your competition, and nice guys finish last. But in a less competitive atmosphere it still seems that having whatever it takes to set your work ahead of the pack often comes at the cost of social skills. Is this the price of fame? Nah! Great artists are just people with great artistic ability. By all counts (no pun intended), Haydn was this great guy and Bach, other than being truly parsimonious (with all those kids, no wonder) gave freely of his time to help his peers, while Wagner was jealous and totally self-centered. Dickenson was totally reclusive while Whitman seemed to always be out cruising. Django Reinhardt and Picasso remained above the fray during WWII while others fled on moral principles. Reifenstahl was one of the best documentary makers ever. She was excedingly bright and chose to make what she wanted. I can't believe she didn't have the smarts to know just what was going on. I have a friend who was 12 when the war ended. Her father was a Nazi mayor in Germany and there are pictures of her presenting flowers to the Leader. She says that she knew what was going on, so it's difficult to believe that Leni didn't. It was to her benefit, so she did it. People like that don't cause millions to be killed, but they do make it easier for the monsters to ply their trade. This doesn't stop us from enjoying the quality of their work. Larry
Re: Any more *istD questions?
Hi Frits, on 16 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: What kind of remote control can the *ist D use? Will it take the cable release F that I have for the PZ-1? We have used the IR remote controls, only. Which rc does the PZ-1 use? Is it the same as that of the ZX-5? This on cannot be used. Cheers, Heiko
Re: FA* lenses
Mark Erickson wrote: Keith wrote: Mark Erickson wrote: Keith, The FA* lenses have the following properties: o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Speed of focusing? Pentax autofocus works via a motor in the camera body. Since there aren't equivalent (i.e., same focal length and aperture) non-FA* lenses, this question isn't really answerable. As Bruce Dayton mentioned, the FA* lenses have a clutch system that disengages the manual-focus ring when you use autofocus. Then why the statement They are faster than non-FA* lenses? keith
Re: FA* lenses
On Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 05:19 PM, Keith Whaley wrote: Then why the statement They are faster than non-FA* lenses? I think the original poster meant faster in the sense of larger max aperture
RE: Any more *istD questions?
IIRC the *ist D and ZX-L use the same remote cable, which is different from those for the MZ-S and which is different from the other ZX series. IOW, if you have a ZX-5n, MZ-S and *ist series, you will need three different cables. The dumbest move I've seen Pentax make. Bill -Original Message- From: Heiko Hamann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 5:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Any more *istD questions? Hi Frits, on 16 Sep 03 you wrote in pentax.list: What kind of remote control can the *ist D use? Will it take the cable release F that I have for the PZ-1? We have used the IR remote controls, only. Which rc does the PZ-1 use? Is it the same as that of the ZX-5? This on cannot be used. Cheers, Heiko
Re: OT: Politics and Art-was: Leni Reifenstahl: A giant passes away
As usual, Bob, you've managed to express what I'd say much more eloquently than I could have. However, one final note (promise, really): Marnie, I can separate art from the artisit. And, although the artist's personal life or views may affect my view of their art, if it's good art, I'll appreciate it regardless. Wagner was a rabid anti-semite, but that doesn't make me not like his operas - truth is I don't like ~anyone's~ operas, but that's a whole other kettle of fish... vbg OTOH, if one's political views are present in their work, it's hard to ignore. Take Lewis Hine and his photographs of child labourers in cotton mills. They're incredibly powerful images in their own right. Does it add anything to them to know that Hine was a social worker, and that his documenting those children was in part, due to his desire to bring about anti-child-labour legislation? It does for me. I don't know for sure what Reifenstahl was thinking when she made Triumph of the Will. Was it merely a commission as she says? Or, even if she wasn't officially a party member, did some of what I suspect was her enthusiasm for what the party stood for, come through in the film? Whatever the case, the film in and of itself is political. So maybe it's the politics of the film that bother me, not hers. Pretty hard to figure out which politics is which, after a while. And, now that I think of it, the whole it was just a commission thing is a load of crap, isn't it? I'd like to think that if the Aryan Nation, or some other neo-nazi group called me up and said, Hey, frank, we've seen your work on PUG, and we like it. We hear you're a struggling photographer, working at a dead end job, and that you'd like to make a bit more money from your photography. Well, we'll pay you to photograph us at rallies and the like. Hang out at our meetings, document what we're up to - you'll have free access to everything we do. We know you aren't a white supremecist, but that's okay, we're confident that as a Professional Photographer, you'll be able to take our money, and produce the type of photos we want. I think I know what I'd say. And, knowing you a little bit as I do, I think I know what you'd say, Marnie. Problem is, Leni didn't say what we would have... That's it, my last word on this!! All subsequent responses will be off-list, I promise! cheers, frank Bob Walkden wrote: Hi, Tuesday, September 16, 2003, 4:19:17 PM, you wrote: I'll add one more comment. Frankly, I don't care if Reifenstahl was a Nazi or not -- her film, like all art work can stand alone, independent of the creator. Her work is so recognisable as being of that time that I don't believe you can separate the 2 and see the work as something isolated, or fail to consider Riefenstahl's position in this. She was perhaps naive when she first became involved. Maybe she thought Nazism was much the same as a great big Busby Berkeley musical, all camera angles and synchronised high-kicking. Somehow I doubt that, and I don't think you can really view them in the same way you'd look at stills from a Busby Berkeley review. And her propaganda did not significantly increase Hitler's power, the events she shot he was doing anyway. He was already a master of propaganda without her. I heard way back when in my film class that the problem was, she did her job too well. I tend to agree with that. Thus it makes it hard to see what her own stand was or might have been independent of what she produced. But like I said previously, no one else gave us a such a powerful visual record -- an insight into the times and the thinking -- as close to insider glimpse of a turbulent and very strange time in history as we are likely to ever have. We'd be poorer, much poorer, without it. It is certainly a powerful record, and I appreciate it as much as anybody, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking it's an inser's view. If she was an insider then she must take her share of the responsibility for events. She claimed she was not an insider. Her pictures and movies are not in any way fly-on-the-wall stuff; they are all rehearsed and cannot possibly be treated as documentary in any modern sense of the word, so I don't see what glimpse we are getting of this time. Where is the insight in her photographs films? They are extremely shallow. She saw only the surface of things. Look at what she has influenced: advertisements for Calvin Klein; James Bond films; Annie Leibovitz's celebrity portraits. Flashy, exciting, emotive, but trivial with no depth. She was ahead of her time. But then I've always tended to think that art can stand and be judged independent of the artist. Good thing, since many famous painters have been real assholes in real life. In my opinion you can gain more from the art by knowing about the artist's life. Knowing that Picasso was Spanish certainly adds to the power of 'Guernica', for instance. --
Anybody bought or used the Bessaflex TM??
Curious if anyone here has bought or used the new Bessaflex TM SLR which can use the sublime SMC Takumars (Pentax Screwmounts to the uninitiated...). JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com
Re: Re-enabled.
What's next, Collin, a Diana? g cheers, frank Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Holga's her name. $1.91 + tax was her price. Yes, she was both cheap and easy. But she's all mine. Now to shoot her. -- -- Collin Brendemuehl KC8TKA The problems are so over-rated. -- Petula Clark -- -- Hell is others -Jean Paul Sartre
Re: FA* Lenses
o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Not aware of. FA*85/1.4 is no faster than A*85/1.4. FA*300/4.5 is the same as F*300/4.5, and slower than any M/A 300/4. o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). FA*24/2 is not particular sharp, and my 2 samples perform the same. FA*85/1.4 is great at close distance (1-3m), but sucks at near infinity or with extension tubes. o) Their build quality is generally very solid. Basically yes, except the silly window frame which is actually worse than regular FA lenses. My best 35mm hand-held shots have been with my FA* 85mm F1.4 lens. It is a _wonderful_ indoor portrait/action lens. Images shot wide-open are very smooth and have a certain glow to them that I really like. That said, I haven't had a chance to compare this lens to, say, the 85mm F1.8 lens. Ironically, I have never been able to obtain very sharp result when handholding the FA*85/1.4. I guess it has to do with the balance. No such problem with the FA77/1.8. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: Star lenses (was: Re: Reputable dealer?)
I read somewhere that the Star in the Pentax lenses stands for APO, so it should apply to the apochromatic lenses. But I may be wrong... I don't know the exact techanical differences, but Pentax Nikkor use ED, while Sigma use APO. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: FA* lenses
Mark misunderstood your question. the FA* lenses are all faster in terms of larger aperture. the FA* 80-200 is f2.8. compare that with the FA 80-200 f4-5.6. they are, if anything, slower in focusing speed since the moving elements are heavier, but Pentax presumably designed the AF motors to be strong enough to achieve adequate times on lenses with lots of moving elements. i was surprised how fast the AF worked on my Sigma 50-500. doesn't feel any different in speed from my FA 24-90. Herb - Original Message - From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 5:19 PM Subject: Re: FA* lenses Then why the statement They are faster than non-FA* lenses? keith
Re: Any more *istD questions?
the *ist uses the same cable. Herb - Original Message - From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 5:27 PM Subject: RE: Any more *istD questions? IIRC the *ist D and ZX-L use the same remote cable, which is different from those for the MZ-S and which is different from the other ZX series. IOW, if you have a ZX-5n, MZ-S and *ist series, you will need three different cables. The dumbest move I've seen Pentax make.
Re: *istD works with classic TTL flashes!
So I can use my old flash with the *istD but I'll have to tote an external meter to use my older lenses, strange priorities? :-( Damn, we should request Pentax to trade the old-TTL-flash capability for the aperture ring capability. Now is too late. But as I said before, Pentax prefer things to be not too perfect. :-) Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Cable Switches
Bill Owens said: IIRC the *ist D and ZX-L use the same remote cable, which is different from those for the MZ-S and which is different from the other ZX series. IOW, if you have a ZX-5n, MZ-S and *ist series, you will need three different cables. The dumbest move I've seen Pentax make. Speaking of which, what *is* the connector used for the cable switch in the ZX-L? I've toyed with the idea of making one with a very long cable, or maybe on a motion detector or something, but I don't know what connector it uses. Certainly not anything that Radio Shack carries, but if the Newark catalog has it, I don't know what to ask for.
No one picked up this one??? :-)
http://cgi.msn.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2950750094category=3353 _ Fast, faster, fastest: Upgrade to Cable or DSL today! https://broadband.msn.com
Re: And here's my little gallery...
Great photos, Steve! My favorite was the one of Frenchmen's bay, but they were all so lovely it was really difficult to choose. Kathy L. - Original Message - From: Steve Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 9:42 AM Subject: And here's my little gallery... http://www.milestone-media.com/main/main/photo_gallery.html Constructive comments are welcome! -- Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Tele-converter, Pentax, Pentax or Vivitar, at wich price?
you'll have the equivalent of a f16 400mm with any if these converters Well, a 2X TC used with a K 200/4 would give you 400mm at ~f/8~ (but, of course, you would then usually stop down, if possible). Fred
