RE: test
I've got a copy of the answers if you need to see it first - do you a good deal Cotty! > -Original Message- > From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 13 October 2003 22:13 > To: pentax list > Subject: Re: test > > > On 13/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: > > >It was a simple test so I wouldn't make too much out of it. > > > >At 03:29 PM 10/13/03, you wrote: > >>I PASSED A TEST YAY > >> > >> --- Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>If you read this I guess you pass. > > Dammit, I missed it. Any chance of sitting this test again? > > > Cheers, > Cotty > > > ___/\__ > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps > _ > Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk > > >
Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
Hi, Tom, I think that Chrysler (sorry, I just can't call them Daimler-Chrysler, even though I know that's what they are) bought shares of only the motor vehicle division of Mitshibushi, not the entire conglomerate. I do recall that when the deal was announced several years ago, it was mentioned that it was somehow appropriate, as Chrysler was the first American to re-badge Japanese cars (as you mentioned, it was the Colt) some 20 years ago or so. I used to own a Colt. It was the most bland car I ever owned. Bland styling. Bland acceleration. Bland interior. All the damned thing did was carry a family of three and their luggage around the country at about 50 MPG for a couple of years, and then give me a pretty good trade in price when we had a second kid, and needed a Taurus for it's size. That was back when I used to own cars. And houses. Back when I was married. I could go on, but I shan't. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ... Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:30:36 -0400 Daimler-Chrysler holds a majority share, and thus control, of the largest industrial conglomerate in Japan? _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: Has Pentax missed again?
Hi, Rob Brigham wrote: > > I have thought about it, honestly, for many years - but it just seems > like too much of a pain in the a**e. I really like the look of the 645, > didn't really like the 67 (sorry brothers), especially the finder. Its > been a constant should I, shouldn't I situation. I think what has > ultimately stopped me is that I just don't get enough time to engage my > pasisions for landscapes these days due to family commitments and the > fact that I work long hours so every moment with them is precious. In > years to come I can drag the kids over mountains with me - and maybe > they can carry the heavy MF gear! The developing and viewing really > puts me off too - stuck with specialist places at expensive prices, not > being able to view the slides except on a light table under a loupe or > scanning - expensive for a proper film scanner, and lots of work. 35mm > film is 'good enough' for my purposes in that respect. Digital would be > too - at a stretch, if only it could do wide angles. I meant, really, large format. Capes, dark slides and suchlike. It's the way I am leaning to at present. Just bought a Jobo processor from our lovely NHS. They got it for an O.T. unit and never used it. It will do all my 35mm, MF and potential LF needs for the forseeable future. Won't tell you what I paid, you'll just start crying. m
Re: Puzzled over lack of comments
Hi, Vic, I'm sort of in the same boat as Ann. The page loads on my 'puter, but it takes those thumbs forever, and I really don't have the time to wait about 5 minutes for them all to load. But, also having said that, I didn't notice the request for comments or the url being posted when you first asked. Sometimes I just don't have the time to look at every post. For instance, yesterday, after having only been away from the computer since Saturday morning, I got home to about 500 messages (300 from this list, 200 from another). There's gotta be some filtering done with that type of traffic, and sometimes, unforturnately, I'll miss out on some interesting stuff. Like your big cats. Which I've bookmarked, and hopefully will have a chance to check out later. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Puzzled over lack of comments Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:54:12 -0400 > Vic, Ive tried to go there twice and with my browser (or maybe just the time of day I tried) it just wouldn't load. I love cats of all sizes and shapes, too. Maybe others had difficulties as well and then time passed and it is forgotten - we have had a lot of traffic here lately annsan _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
William Johnson: Yeah, GM owns SAAB now, but I know looking at the new models that the key is still between the seats! :-) Yes, but it's electronic, and you don't have to put it in reverse to take the key out! anders - http://anders.hultman.nu/
Re: Henry's Camera very annoying
Vic- Have you ever heard of Spif. It's the extra money the sales person gets for selling that (day's, week's, month's) featured item. I wonder if you were paying the Spif penalty. Many salespeople will over-push whatever is paying them spif in that period. It may help the seller's income, but it won't necessarily help the customer buy what is best for that customer. Larry Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 17:33:55 EDT From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Henry's Camera very annoying Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is a venting exercise for me so I apologize if this is too long. For the second time this month Henry's sales reps have annoyed me to no end. Both times I went into the store asking about the Pentax Digital ist D and both times some arrogant sales person tried to sell me Canon crap instead of Pentax. Both times, two different sales people, said the Pentax wasn't worth the price and that Canon was better. That may or may not be true, but these guys were likely Canon users who didn't know squat about high end Pentax stuff and didn't even have the courtesy to pretend that Pentax had a very competitive digital camera. Both times I gave the sales reps an ear full. The KID today tried to tell me the Rebel D was better than the ist-d. I told him it was plastic crap. He said it had more features than the ist-d. I didn't know enough about the two cameras to argue with him, but I did tell him that my Pentax lenses would not work on the Canon. Besides that, what these people don't get is that the more gadgets or "features" a camera has does not make it better, just more complicated. I want a camera that feels good, that is intuitive to use and has the features I need and use. Pentax scores high marks here. Pentax should not even be dealing with Henry's if this is the crap the sales reps are selling customers. If I wanted a Canon I would have asked about the Canons, I certainly don't need some kid telling me who makes the best cameras. Today, I walked up to the counter, the ist-d was right below the kid, and said "I see you have the Ist-D. (I expected him to say something like, oh yea it just came in it's a nice camera. Pentax has done a great job on their first Digital SLR.) Instead the kid says something like, Oh you want to see the Rebel D. I said no the Ist-D. and off he went trying to tell me the Canon was better than the Pentax. What a moron. He might have made a $3,000 sale if I had been in the market. Now I won't even buy film from Henry's anymore... Vic
Re: Vs: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
- Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > GM does own Isuzu, much like they own Saab and a number of other > companies. But they don't build Isuzu cars or Saab cars. Nor do they > build the transmission Bill is complaining about. They do make GM cars, > which have scored extremely well on both initial satisfaction surveys > and long term durability surveys. Do they make GM food too? ;-) Jostein
FS: Last Chance - PZ-1p and lenses still available
Hi, The following equipment is still available. All lenses have front and rear caps, although they may be generic. Everything comes with a 10-day inspection period. Prices include insured UPS shipping in the US. I will consider overseas offers on a case-by-case basis. Prices are fairly firm, but it doesn't hurt to make a reasonable offer, especially if you want more than one item. I will take PayPal, money orders, and personal checks (must clear before shipping). Anything that is not claimed by Tuesday evening will be put on Ebay. Pictures are available at the following site: http://home.alltel.net/dimaggio/pentax.html PZ-1p body, with strap, body cap, box, extra battery, and manual. Mint-. $350 This camera is in great condition and has seen very little use. I have put about 5 rolls of film through it since purchasing it from a professional photographer who used it as a backup body. The only flaw I can find is the all-too-common hairline crack at the screw near the battery cover. It does not affect the camera's operation in any way. SMC Pentax-FA 28-105/4-5.6 Power Zoom. Excellent. $105 This lens is in great shape. The glass is perfect. The only flaw is a small scratch in the body, which has no affect on lens function. You should be able to see it in the picture SMC Pentax-FA 70-200/4-5.6 Power Zoom, with box. Excellent +. $75 The lens is in great shape. The glass is perfect. No flaws that I can see. Quantaray Tech-10 70-300/4-5.6 AF. Excellent +. $75 This is the same lens as the Sigma DL Macro Super. For a consumer zoom, it takes great pictures when not pushed to its extremes. As a bonus, it is a decent 1:2 macro at its long end. Glass and body in great condition. Promaster 28-200/3.8-5.6 AF with hood and caps. Excellent +. $80 As far as I can tell, this is the same as the original Tamron 28-200 LD IF Super. Glass and body in great condition.
RE: Has Pentax missed again?
Well I've got the cape, and I did feel the force of the dark side (oops sorry, you said dark slide!) for a long while, but then Pentax brought out a DSLR called the Yoda*ist, which saved me from the evil Canon Trade Federation for now! I love the mechanics of some of the LF cameras, from an engineering POV, but nothing in me wants to use one I am afraid. Sounds like exciting times for you though! The film darkroom has a special quality, which the digital darkroom cannot hold a candle too. > -Original Message- > From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I meant, really, large format. Capes, dark slides and > suchlike. It's the way I am leaning to at present. Just > bought a Jobo processor from our lovely NHS. They got it for > an O.T. unit and never used it. It will do all my 35mm, MF > and potential LF needs for the forseeable future. Won't tell > you what I paid, you'll just start crying. > > m > >
RE: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
Alex, I have question about this photo - there are several spines on that flower that are completely blown out for long stretches. I've downloaded it and checked it out with the Curves tool in Photoshop. Have you noticed that this is a problem with the camera? I could imagine a few specular highlights, but this seems excessive. I'm asking because I've ordered one [delivery later this week) and am hoping it was the right decision. Cheers -Original Message- From: alex wetmore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13-Oct-03 12:38 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/pentax-istd/IMGP1331.JPG is a suitable example (shot with the A50/1.4, I think the focus distance was a few inches). I find the center of the flower to be sharp but the depth of field is under an inch so almost nothing else is (even the tips of the flower).
Take this simple test
Regarding RAW shots on the *ist D, Rob wrote: > RAW only gives 70 shots even on 1Gb. [snip] Rob, promise me you'll do one little test: 1. Take a RAW shot of a nice landscape. 2. Now switch to large/fine jpeg mode and take another shot of same. 3. Extract RAW shot later on computer, have it open in one window. 4. Open the jpeg shot of same in another window. 5. Zoom in on both so you're looking at the same group of pixels - compare. 6. Print out the RAW shot and then print out the jpeg - compare. I will bet that you decide to shoot L/F jpeg for most, if not all of your photography. Try it. I would be more than interested in your conclusion either way. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
- Original Message - From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...] > That's not the case with the *ist D: when you apply enough USM to let > pictures look acceptable when smaller than 1:1 on video, when you enalarge > them 1:1 angled lines such as hair or grass are so much saw-toothed. Dario, Why do you apply USM at less than 100% magnification? In my experience, doing sharpening at less than 1:1 is risky business with scans as well. Best, Jostein
Re: Pulling a Cotty-was:Re: FS: Super Takumar 35/3.5
On 13/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >I mean, from Cotty's POV, wanting to put M42's on a digital camera, he'd >have to modify (being a pre-*ist D endeavor for him). But, you're using a >film camera anyway, so is it really necessary to mutilate your Canon for >that purpose? Not that I have a problem with the mutilation of any Canon - >they've got it coming to them, haven't they? Frankie my lad, no modification is necessary to any camera body. A very slight mod may need to be done to an EOS/M42 adapter, that's all. As for just going out and buying a cheap Spottie, well...yes. But when you want to climb a big mountain, you look at Everest. Hey - you've got a nerve! A guy who rides a bike with no gears and no brakes! Sheeesh! ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
RE: Metering reflections
--- josvdh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -Oorspronkelijk bericht- > > Van: Ramesh Kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Here is a scenario. Assume you are shooting a > > reflection of sunlit tree; reflection is occupying > > full frame. Water is dark except for the > reflection. > > > > When I spot meter for dark subject, I do -2 stops > to > > get %18gray. > > > > Going back to above scenario, If I SPOT meter the > > "reflection of sunlit tree", should I have to > > compensate by -2? > > > > Basically, should I have to do anything special > > compensation just beacuse its reflection. or > should I > > treat as any other shot? > > > Thanks > > Ramesh > > > Dear Ramesh, > Some thoughts about your problem: > In general, a "normal" scene would contain "normal" > blacks and "normal" > whites. > Normal black has a reflectivity of let us say: 2% > Normal white has a reflectivity of 100% > This means if you light this scene with a soft box > (clouded sky, the light > is not adding contrast) the contrast ratio of the > scene would be 1:50. > Your film (depending on the type) can handle this > contrast ratio. > To minimize grain, you donot want to overexpose, so > you want the black (of > 2% reflectivity)just on the beginning of sensitivity > curve of the film. If, > for your film with your development process, this > point is 3 stops below the > suppliers ISO rating of the film, you could do a > spot metering of the 2% > black and set your camera to an ISO setting 3 stops > below the film ISO and > you will have the right exposure! > > You might as well measure the light of a gray card > with 18% reflectivity, > and use the suppliers ISO rating. This would give > the same result because > 18% is almost 3 stops above 2%! > > If, in the above example, you want to see details in > black of 1% > reflectivity you have to increase exposure with one > stop. > Your contrast ratio now will be 100:1, the film can > still handle. > > If your scene has abnormal black, for instance a > "black hole" with 0.1% > reflectivity, the contrast ratio becomes 1000:1, > your film will not be able > to handle, and you have the choice: details visible > in the blacks or in the > whites, but not both with this film. > > In case of light reflections on water or on leaves, > they sometimes act like > little mirrors reflecting light sources (sun, lamps > etc)in this case the > light intensity can be 10 times higher than "normal" > whites, no film can > handle the corresponding contrast ratio! > If you try to measure those "extreem whites" you > could underexpose the > blacks and greys far too much. > I guess "extreem whites" mean glare. I was using polarizer and removed the glare. > If I understand your scene well, you donot have the > case of abnormal whites. > You have a normal scene that is reflected in the > water acting as a not very > bright mirror, maybe you loose 1 or two stops in > this mirror. > You should be able to measure the reflected scene > like any other normal > scene. > > If you take too much time to analyse the scene on > forehand, sometimes the > scene is over (sun is gone!), before you are ready > to take the picture. > In your case I would measure a part of the scene > corresponding to 18% grey > and expose according to that. > If I would think that the picture might be a goody, > I would use braketing + > and minus one or two stops depending om the type of > film. How max stops of bracketing is normally used for Velvia 100F and Kodak E200?. I guess 1stop max for Velvia and 2stop max for E200. > I would never base an analysis on a measurement with > matrix metering, as > matrix metering is using algoritms unknown to us, it > is un predictable (but > often very acurate!). > > Just some of my thinking! > Jos > Thanks for informative response Ramesh __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Bucky wrote: > I have question about this photo - there are several spines on that flower > that are completely blown out for long stretches. I've downloaded it and > checked it out with the Curves tool in Photoshop. Have you noticed that > this is a problem with the camera? I could imagine a few specular > highlights, but this seems excessive. The lighting in that picture is tricky, the spines that are blown out were in full sunlight while the rest of the flower was in the shade. This was shot in the late afternoon sun and that is behind a tree so only some light was filtering through the tree. I probably should have under exposed it a little. Since I was using an A lens this was shot with center weighted metering so I don't see how it could be a problem with the camera. alex
Re: Take this simple test
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Cotty wrote: > Regarding RAW shots on the *ist D, Rob wrote: > > > RAW only gives 70 shots even on 1Gb. > > [snip] > > Rob, promise me you'll do one little test: > > 1. Take a RAW shot of a nice landscape. > > 2. Now switch to large/fine jpeg mode and take another shot of same. > > 3. Extract RAW shot later on computer, have it open in one window. > > 4. Open the jpeg shot of same in another window. > > 5. Zoom in on both so you're looking at the same group of pixels - compare. > > 6. Print out the RAW shot and then print out the jpeg - compare. > > I will bet that you decide to shoot L/F jpeg for most, if not all of your > photography. I'm interested in using RAW mode not because I have JPEG compression bothersome, but because RAW gives me additional flexibility. With RAW I have the full 12 bits per pixel (instead of 8) so I can fix exposure (to a small degree) and white balance with less problems in a RAW file than a JPEG file. alex
Re: Fantastic *ist-D and Lenses
I don't believe anybody here thinks you ought to buy an istD. Or any other camera. None are perfect, and obviously you will be unhappy with an imperfect cameras. For the rest of us, we live in the real world where hardly anything is perfect and are glad when something meets most of our desires. As I have said before, I have come to the conclusion that the istD was not designed to work with older lenses. It is just a happy coincidence that they work at all. And I feel that is OK, not many companies care about people who collect their antique equipment even as much as Pentax does. One has to realize that if they cared they would still be providing parts and service for that equipment. Resenting it will not make a bit different, but it will make you very unhappy and the rest of us slightly unhappy because you are a nice guy and we are sad to see you tearing your heart out over a lost cause. Me? I only wish I could afford the camera, but eventually the prices will be down where you don't have to be a member of the upper middle class to afford one like it. Peter Alling wrote: If I'm going to plunk down a couple Thousand dollars for a new body, I want one that works "correctly" by my standards. I don't want a company saying, "We know what you need, here it is, shut up and be happy." If that's what you're willing to put up with so be it. It's not whining to demand what you want, it's consumerism. If you don't complain no one will know you're not satisfied. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Puzzled over lack of comments
>http://hometown.aol.ca/pentxuser/page15.html Hi Vic, Whenever I've gone to have a look, the page had been very slow loading and when I've clicked to get a bigger image then nothing has come up. This time, I just waited and something eventually popped up. Maybe that's the reason people haven't been commenting or maybe it's because they look more like sketches than photographs. Anyway, they are very impressive. The lion looks better when viewed larger. The thumbnail doesn't do it justice. The tiger (2nd row) is the one that strikes me first but I really like what you've done with the wolves (probably beacuse the 2nd one looks like my dog!). How long does it take you to produce an image like that? How much is photoshop and how much is painter? I've only just noticed that on some pages you have a before and after. I must say, the before shots look like paintings too! You wouldn't know that they were taken at the zoo. I'd like to see those jst a tad bigger. Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
Have you changed the sharpness in the camera to maximum from medium? Bill - Original Message - From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 7:16 PM Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! > Jostein, > > I always apply USM at 100% magnification. > However, should you apply USM to *ist D pictures, they can only look sharp > at less than 100% magnification. > If you apply lesser USM, they don't look sharp even at 50% magnification, > while if you apply enough USM for getting sharp pics at 50% magnification > you'll see too edge effect at 100%. That's the problem with the *ist D > pictures I tried to sharpen. > > Dario > > - Original Message - > From: "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 12:13 AM > Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > [...] > > > > > That's not the case with the *ist D: when you apply enough USM to let > > > pictures look acceptable when smaller than 1:1 on video, when you > enalarge > > > them 1:1 angled lines such as hair or grass are so much saw-toothed. > > > > Dario, > > Why do you apply USM at less than 100% magnification? > > > > In my experience, doing sharpening at less than 1:1 is risky business with > > scans as well. > > > > Best, > > Jostein > > > >
Re[2]: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
Hello Dario, I would also be interested in the quality in regards to being printed on both an inkjet and a digital lab (Agfa, Fuji, Noritsu). I have found in my own digital endeavors, that many times, the printed output is better or worse than what I view on screen. Thanks, Bruce Monday, October 13, 2003, 12:29:21 PM, you wrote: DB2> I forgot to say that next Thursday I'll get an *ist D to test by myself, so DB2> eventually I'll have the final response to my stomachache. DB2> Dario DB2> - Original Message - DB2> From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DB2> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DB2> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 9:16 PM DB2> Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! >> Dear Alex, >> >> Thanks for the link, but the pictures fully confirm my impressions. >> >> Commenting on IMGP1412 (f/11) and IMGP1418 (f/4.5), the only two I >> downloaded at full resolution for not being too heavy on your DSL line: >> >> Still you cannot tell for sure where the camera was focused (judging by >> what's in focus and what's out). You should see green leaves at a certain >> distance (focused distance) as one-by-one, not always as a whole green >> regardless of the distance. Did you notice that there's practically no >> different depth-of-field between f/4.5 and f/11, like if pictures were DB2> taken >> through haze or fog? I suspect the low-pass filter in front of the CCD to DB2> be >> responsible for that. >> >> Not to speak of the dynamic range: clouds in direct light should look as >> being 3D, not like painted in watercolor as they look. >> And what about the color balance? Greys of distant rocks must be tones of >> grey (not pinkish as they are in IMGP1412), while the sky looks unnatural >> cyan... >> >> Some days ago I stayed for some time at a pre-press service, where the DB2> boss >> made me see several DSLR pictures (downloaded at their full resolution), DB2> and >> we discussed them in deep. >> When you enlarge pics taken with the 10D/300D or the S2 Pro (and also DB2> those >> taken with the best 4/5 MPixel digital compacts around) you can see good >> detail and little USM (as you dub UnSharp Masking, not to be confused with >> UltraSonicMotor :-) >> Despite that, in-focus and out-of-focus areas in picure are easy to spot DB2> and >> you can always find a sharp area somewhere. That has little if anything to >> do with excessive in-camera unsharp mask, which I agree the lower the >> better. In fact, you can apply unsharp mask on those good pics and they >> still take it well. >> That's not the case with the *ist D: when you apply enough USM to let >> pictures look acceptable when smaller than 1:1 on video, when you enalarge >> them 1:1 angled lines such as hair or grass are so much saw-toothed. >> >> I could go ahead with more details and comments, but I feel so bad in DB2> having >> to admit such things... >> >> Dario >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "alex wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 6:11 PM >> Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! >> >> >> > On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: >> > > Ryan wrote: >> > > > I just got to say I LOVE MY *ist D !!! >> > > > The image quality is sharper than I expected, >> > > >> > > Please forgive me, but maybe you were expecting too little, since all >> *ist D >> > > images I've seen so far look more or less blurred (compared to other >> same >> > > specs DSLR's), with no details in focus, like there's always camera >> shake. >> > > Am I the only one having such an impression? >> > >> > The internal sharpening that the *ist D does is less than any consumer >> > digicam that I've ever seen and less than many digital SLRs. Out of >> > the camera images look much like they are from a scanned slide. I >> > think that this is a good thing -- you can always add sharpness, but >> > you can't always remove it or the noise that it adds at higher ISOs. >> > The camera does have an option to increase sharpness which might make >> > images closer to other D-SLRs. The Canon 300D has the most sharpness >> > of any D-SLR that I've seen. >> > >> > There are some unsharpened full resolution *ist D images at >> > http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/hiking/snow-lake-10-5-03/ from a >> > hiking trip that I went on last week. Please don't go crazy >> > downloading them though, that'll be painful to my DSL line. These >> > were shot using the A 24/2.8 or the A 50/1.4 (most were from the >> > 24/2.8). >> > >> > The resized images do have some USM applied. >> > >> > alex >> > >>
Re: *ist D flash
You would gain P-TTL metering and lose considerable power changing to the 360FGZ. Bill - Original Message - From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Peepl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 8:21 PM Subject: *ist D flash > I gather that the new *ist D also has a new flash that you can buy for it. > However, I have two 550 FTZ flashes which I do not plan on parting with > soon. What functions would the new flash give me that will not be available > with the 550? The 550 has a superior guide number, though it is still a bit > weak in some situations, for my taste. > Thanks in advance. > > >
Re: *istD vs. Digital Rebel
> > OK, now we're getting to the part where my analysis has to be spot on. > Shooting motorsports, I'm not going to have time to review in camera. Not something you want to do, in any case, with large heavy objects whizzing by at 200mph. Not that I haven't seen people doing that; sitting on the Jersey barrier, back to traffic, paying no attention. [Have you heard the term for that activity? It's known as 'chimping'; folks staring at their camera dispay anf going "Oooh! Oooh! Oooh!"] > It sounds like I'm really going to need to have a laptop along for > dumps from the CF (or whatever) cards. > day on film. See below > I can easily do 250+ shots a day on film. [ . . . ] I'll probably > shoot more on digital since the incremental cost is so low . I've shot more than 250 frames during a single on-track session. For the cost of a couple of GB of CF memory you can get this: http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10463894873648587&sku=ICDSDFT That's a 30GB hard drive, 3.5" LCD review screen, built in CF reader. No assistant needed, and a lot easier to carry around the circuit. With that, and a couple of 512Mb CF cards, you'd be able to shoot all you want in raw mode; just change the 'film' every 35 frames, and dump one to the hard drive while you're shooting the next. The only reasons I haven't got one of these myself is that I usually have my laptop with me in the media room for posting the images as soon as I can, and that as I shoot in daylight almost all the time I expect the white balance presets to be good enough. And one other thing - with the laptop I can make sure I've burned the images to CD before I delete them from the CF card - I'm paranoid, but I never like having a single point of failure for something as evanescent as digital images.
Re: Puzzled over lack of comments
Hi, Vic. Images load a bit slowly for those of us w/dial-up connections. I think that's why I gave up on them initially. These are nice, and you've obviously put much work into them. One doesn't often see animals done this way. Except for pet portraits, good animal photos have some actual, or implied, or possible action (e.g., by leaving some space that the animal could move into). This is not a criticism. Yours are just different, but I think that they should appeal to many people. You might even be able to sell some. Not sure how you got such still portraits. I can't even get many decent photos of our dog and cats. Good luck, Joe
Memory cards and batteries for the ist D? (Now a New Query)
"The buffer on the *ist D is pretty big " What is the buffer? Thanks, Joe (whose resistance is cracking)
Re: Memory cards and batteries for the ist D? (Now a New Query)
It's the amount of data the camera can handle before it has to write some of it to the Flash memory. You take one shot at a time and buffer size isn't relevant but take 6 quick ones and you'll see why it's an issue... Cory Waters - Original Message - From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 9:12 PM Subject: Memory cards and batteries for the ist D? (Now a New Query) > "The buffer on the *ist D is pretty big " > > What is the buffer? > > Thanks, > > Joe (whose resistance is cracking) > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10/9/2003
Re: My whine
At 11:44 AM 10/10/03, you wrote: What's going on here. I have a new camera that came with a strap with no pocket to hold the flash shoe cover. Why have they dropped compatibility with previous models of camera straps? For people like tv that don't use straps, its a minor problem. For those that use straps, new ones should be compatible with old ones. Do they expect me to put this cap in my pocket? If I lose it, are they going to charge me an arm and a leg for a replacement? Yes, they are going to charge an arm and a leg. See, I can whine too :-Q I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: ist 35mm
MZ-3 = ZX/MZ-5n (+ 1/4000 - 2s)(on dial). Great camera but then so is the 5n. At 11:51 AM 10/10/03, you wrote: Hi Joe... What's an MZ-3? Must be a European designation? Discontinued now? Never mind. I always do this. Visit Google.com, and find out all I need to know... The MZ-3 is not available in the U.S. - it is essentially ["all the features of"] the MZ-5n, but with shutter speeds of 1/4000 and a flash synch of 1/125 sec. keith whaley Joe Wilensky wrote: > > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program. > > From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is > rarely found in North America, it seems. > [. . .] I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: ist 35mm
and faster flash sync Peter Alling wrote: MZ-3 = ZX/MZ-5n (+ 1/4000 - 2s)(on dial). Great camera but then so is the 5n. At 11:51 AM 10/10/03, you wrote: Hi Joe... What's an MZ-3? Must be a European designation? Discontinued now? Never mind. I always do this. Visit Google.com, and find out all I need to know... The MZ-3 is not available in the U.S. - it is essentially ["all the features of"] the MZ-5n, but with shutter speeds of 1/4000 and a flash synch of 1/125 sec. keith whaley Joe Wilensky wrote: > > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program. > > From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is > rarely found in North America, it seems. > [. . .] I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: ist 35mm
The *ist will give you superior autofocus, and a slightly better light meter if I remember the specifications correctly. It is smaller and lighter and the battery grip has a vertical release, (a nice touch). To get that you get slightly more difficult manual focus, (air prism, not glass so the viewfinder isn't as bright), smaller viewfinder with lower magnification and less coverage on the film. Loss of the use of the aperture ring in metered manual, (you use a multifunction dial on the body). I think you lose the TTL flash during exposure but get P-TTL flash as well but that I'm not sure that about. At 03:02 PM 10/10/03, you wrote: Joe i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist would be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money. arnie - Original Message - From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM Subject: Re: ist 35mm > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program. > > From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is > rarely found in North America, it seems. > > Joe > > > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote: > >> I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera and > >> how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very > >> enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions > > > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year. > > > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and > >a different UI. The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the > >camera. The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter > >speed. The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and > >hyperprogram. Those are two features that I never really thought > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them. Now I pretty much > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot. > > > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably > >don't fetch too much on the used market. I also have an MX and think > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film. > > > >alex > > > -- > > Joe Wilensky > Staff Writer > Communication and Marketing Services > 1150 Comstock Hall > Cornell University > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601 > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > tel: 607-255-1575 > fax: 607-255-9873 > I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: OT photoshop elements question
I've answered two of my questions --- Ann Sanfedele wrote: > > > (1) can't find the tool for adding a boarder. In > photo deluxe it was under the effects > menu. answer (just to share with others -- use the marquee tool then use, of all things, STROKE in the edit menu, now why in the world couldn't the help menu point you to that if you asked about borders > (2) Is there no text window? didnt find that- anyone > > (4) I took the tif and loaded into publisher for a > page on my calendar - it printed > beautifully, but when I am viewing the image in > publisher it looked the way a file > on the web looks when it is dithered and not fully > clear - or how it looks when > one zooms in in an image editing program. This > didn't happen with files I created > in Deluxe 4.0 - ahah! found something in publisher that gives you the option to view the image in a kind of abbreviated form to save loading time. that explains the above look back to baseball... annsan (go sox)
Re: ist 35mm
all i need is a better autofocus and better metering. when shooting a family gatherings, i dont have the time for the camera to hunt for focus, by the time its done i missed the shot. and i dont have the time for doing all the manual settings, or compensation. i need to be able to shoot and get a good image. when i am at the top of the empire state building (as i was tonight) then i have time to make sure the shot is exactly what i want. also the advanced flash capability (p-ttl, wireless, contrast control synch) is very useful for me. - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 10:20 PM Subject: Re: ist 35mm > The *ist will give you superior autofocus, and a slightly better light meter > if I remember the specifications correctly. It is smaller and lighter and the > battery grip has a vertical release, (a nice touch). To get that you get > slightly > more difficult manual focus, (air prism, not glass so the viewfinder isn't > as bright), > smaller viewfinder with lower magnification and less coverage on the > film. Loss of the > use of the aperture ring in metered manual, (you use a multifunction dial > on the body). > I think you lose the TTL flash during exposure but get P-TTL flash as well > but that I'm > not sure that about. > > At 03:02 PM 10/10/03, you wrote: > >Joe > > > >i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me > >because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist would > >be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money. > > > >arnie > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM > >Subject: Re: ist 35mm > > > > > > > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played > > > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages > > > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and > > > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an > > > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program. > > > > > > From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used > > > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series > > > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the > > > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is > > > rarely found in North America, it seems. > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > > > > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote: > > > >> I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera > >and > > > >> how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very > > > >> enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions > > > > > > > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year. > > > > > > > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and > > > >a different UI. The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set > > > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the > > > >camera. The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on > > > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter > > > >speed. The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the > > > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and > > > >hyperprogram. Those are two features that I never really thought > > > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them. Now I pretty much > > > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot. > > > > > > > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably > > > >don't fetch too much on the used market. I also have an MX and think > > > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film. > > > > > > > >alex > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Joe Wilensky > > > Staff Writer > > > Communication and Marketing Services > > > 1150 Comstock Hall > > > Cornell University > > > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601 > > > > > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > tel: 607-255-1575 > > > fax: 607-255-9873 > > > > > I drink to make other people interesting. > -- George Jean Nathan >
Re: (OT) Back from my travels
...and a good thing too. At 08:41 PM 10/10/03, you wrote: Hey, Jerome, I've never claimed that ~I~ was a productive member of society! cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > member of society? Sorta. I was thinking of moving to Toronto and becoming a bike messenger... what do you think, Frank? _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: *istD vs. Digital Rebel
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 17:33:36 -0600, William Robb wrote: > I can't actually verify it with my own little eyes, is that the > fine JPEG save is pretty much indistinguishable from RAW. As long as I can still do the manipulations I can foresee needing to do, without going nuts, or spending more time than I'm spending scanning and cleaning film images on the CanoScan, that's fine by me. > I haven't a clue as to the dump speed. I use a USB2 card reader which > seems quick enough. I bought it after getting tired of how slow my G1 > downloaded. I should have been clearer. I didn't mean dumping them through the camera's USB port, because I expected that to be as slow as molasses in the winter. What I actually meant was doing a big "XCOPY" from the CF into the computer using a card reader (IDE or SCSI, not USB). TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by Grisoft's AVG. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 03-10-10
Re: Take this simple test
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:55:56 +1000, Paul wrote: > I find shooting with my 10D i cant really see any different between > Large Jpeg and RAW, except for the flexability of white balance > correction. So i only shoot raw when i know i'll have make white balance > corrections. I know myself better than to try something like this. The back and forth between two modes would get done a couple of times, but not every time it should, and I'd end up shooting the wrong stuff in the wrong mode. Hey, I even accidentally turned off film data imprinting on my MZ-S without noticing, so how dense, distracted, whatever, must I be? :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by Grisoft's AVG. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 03-10-10
Re: Take this simple test
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:57:50 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: > Will this high speed shooting be out of doors? If so set the white > balance to a fixed value and get it right all the time instead. It will, and if a fixed value or the presets is close enough for this usage, that sounds great (can you tell I don't know jack about the whole digicam operation thing? :-). The main times I would need to do something different would be in the garages and the dusk/night portions of the Petit le Mans. Occasionally some other shots, too, but they'd be under much less stressful circumstances. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by Grisoft's AVG. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 03-10-10
Re: K2 DMD
It accepts a 2 frame per second motor drive, something you better not try on your average K2. At 04:37 AM 10/11/03, you wrote: Not a camera I have ever seen before, until I saw one on sale in eBay - I've waited for the auction to finish before I mentioned it, and I didn't see the final result (£299 opening bid, boxed as new with all documents) although no one had bid with a day to go when I last saw it. It really looked an excellent body, but I have tried with little success to find out why it is so expensive. Does anyone here own one? What is the difference between this and a K2 - is it the ability to take a powered winder (?) or is it a rare low production model? Malcolm I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: *istD vs. Digital Rebel
Hi John, On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 20:36:27 -0400 (EDT), John Francis wrote: > Not that I haven't seen people doing that; sitting on the Jersey > barrier, back to traffic, paying no attention. I don't even stand around with my back to traffic when I'm flagging (unless I'm the yellow flagger). And I'm a lot more protected in the flag station than a lot of the photogs, hanging out at fence openings and fire posts. > [Have you heard the term for that activity? It's known as > 'chimping'; folks staring at their camera dispay anf going > "Oooh! Oooh! Oooh!"] HAR! I see that in Atlanta traffic every day, too ... from people behind the wheel! > I've shot more than 250 frames during a single on-track session. I would, but I'm doing it for myself rather than for pay, so I can't justify the extra cost. Plus, I want to see a _little_ of the race. > http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=details&sid=10463894873648587&sku=ICDSDFT > That's a 30GB hard drive, 3.5" LCD review screen, built in CF reader. Now that sounds excellent. For that money, I couldn't even get a used laptop with 30GB of storage. 20k JPEGs probably means 2k RAWs or more, which would be plenty based on my past usage, and counting the ones that get smacked for focus, composition, etc. Hang that sucker on my web belt and I don't even have to sit down to swap cards and start downloading. I wonder what duration on the battery is like? Especially considering I wouldn't be reviewing too much until the end of the day or event, so the LCD could stay off. > And one other thing - with the laptop I can make sure I've burned > the images to CD before I delete them from the CF card - I'm > paranoid, but I never like having a single point of failure for > something as evanescent as digital images. I'm a bit paranoid, too, but I'd wipe the CF cards as soon as they got into this little device just because going and burning CDs would eat too much of my time. Not having credentials, I do a lot of "camping", waiting for someone to get out of the spot I want, or need, to get my shots. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free by Grisoft's AVG. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 03-10-10
Re: Has Pentax missed again?
Since we don't have a Native SLR industry, (or for that matter camera manufacturers) they can't be accused of dumping. Pentax want's to recapture the US market, it might help if they advertised... At 08:54 AM 10/11/03, you wrote: - Original Message - From: "David Mann" Subject: Re: Has Pentax missed again? > The shop's website lists the *ist-D with FA-J 18-35mm for NZ$4095 > (US$2457). > > The Canon 300D with EF-S 18-55mm is NZ$2250 (US$1350). > > What are the US street prices for these kits? The Canadian street for the 300D with the 18-55 is $1599.00, the ist D with the 18-35 was $2400.00. The Canon 300D is not realistically priced. Can you say "dumping"? Were they selling wheat or softwood, there would be a trade embargo on Pentax going into the US right now. William Robb I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Take this simple test
> The main times I would need to do > something different would be in the garages and the dusk/night portions > of the Petit le Mans. Occasionally some other shots, too, but they'd > be under much less stressful circumstances. > > TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ > Under these circumstances you would PROBABLY get good results using manual white balance. Set the garage shots in, say, program 1, the night shots in program 2. Bill
Re: which focusing screen for PZ-1?
I have the Beattie screen in an LX and PZ1 and notice no difference in exposure.. Vic It's not much; I believe it's around 1/3 stop in centre-weighted (and who knows what using multi-segment metering). If you're using print film you'll never notice the difference. Even on slide film (with far less latitude) you won't usually have a problem, simply because erring on the side of underexposure with slides is a lot better than going in the other direction. These figures are for the PZ-1p screens; I don't know if the PZ-1 differs.
Re: Has Pentax missed again?
I agree to a point. I've seen mass media ads for Canon and Olympus, but few, if any, for Nikon, and very, very few, and then only P&S for Pentax. Bill - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 11:05 PM Subject: Re: Has Pentax missed again? > Since we don't have a Native SLR industry, (or for that matter camera > manufacturers) > they can't be accused of dumping. Pentax want's to recapture the US > market, it might > help if they advertised... > > At 08:54 AM 10/11/03, you wrote: > > >- Original Message - > >From: "David Mann" > >Subject: Re: Has Pentax missed again? > > > > > > > > > The shop's website lists the *ist-D with FA-J 18-35mm for NZ$4095 > > > (US$2457). > > > > > > The Canon 300D with EF-S 18-55mm is NZ$2250 (US$1350). > > > > > > What are the US street prices for these kits? > > > >The Canadian street for the 300D with the 18-55 is $1599.00, the ist D with > >the 18-35 was $2400.00. > >The Canon 300D is not realistically priced. > >Can you say "dumping"? > >Were they selling wheat or softwood, there would be a trade embargo on > >Pentax going into the US right now. > > > >William Robb > > I drink to make other people interesting. > -- George Jean Nathan > >
RE: Henry's Camera very annoying
Commission usually comes from the store, they get more work out of an employee by tying some of their compensation to production. When I was selling cameras the big money was "Prize" money, usually but not necessarily paid by the manufacturer or importer. Even then Pentax didn't offer much extra incentive, of course back then once the ME/MX cameras took off they didn't really need to. By the way, the item with the highest incentive by far was the cheap jack 110 camera that was actually imported by the company I worked for. Fully half of it's purchase price was paid to the sales person on top of the normal commission rate. Most of the people working there tried to sell at least one of those to every customer... At 06:01 PM 10/11/03, you wrote: I used to work in a camera store and I can tell you why the sales person tried to sell you a Canon. Most of you may already know this, but I will say it for those who don't. Reps in retail stores get commissions, obviously, but they don't always get the same amount for selling different brands, i.e. they might get higher commission for selling the Canon. In addition, some stores hold competitions to see who can sell the most of one brand or even one product to the tune of a huge bonus. I tried to exhibit a little more integrity than that, but I have seen sales people sell the completely wrong camera to a customer just to get the bigger commission, even if they had to lie and coerce to do it. I understand your frustration. Dave Madsen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 3:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Henry's Camera very annoying This is a venting exercise for me so I apologize if this is too long. For the second time this month Henry's sales reps have annoyed me to no end. Both times I went into the store asking about the Pentax Digital ist D and both times some arrogant sales person tried to sell me Canon crap instead of Pentax. Both times, two different sales people, said the Pentax wasn't worth the price and that Canon was better. That may or may not be true, but these guys were likely Canon users who didn't know squat about high end Pentax stuff and didn't even have the courtesy to pretend that Pentax had a very competitive digital camera. Both times I gave the sales reps an ear full. The KID today tried to tell me the Rebel D was better than the ist-d. I told him it was plastic crap. He said it had more features than the ist-d. I didn't know enough about the two cameras to argue with him, but I did tell him that my Pentax lenses would not work on the Canon. Besides that, what these people don't get is that the more gadgets or "features" a camera has does not make it better, just more complicated. I want a camera that feels good, that is intuitive to use and has the features I need and use. Pentax scores high marks here. Pentax should not even be dealing with Henry's if this is the crap the sales reps are selling customers. If I wanted a Canon I would have asked about the Canons, I certainly don't need some kid telling me who makes the best cameras. Today, I walked up to the counter, the ist-d was right below the kid, and said "I see you have the Ist-D. (I expected him to say something like, oh yea it just came in it's a nice camera. Pentax has done a great job on their first Digital SLR.) Instead the kid says something like, Oh you want to see the Rebel D. I said no the Ist-D. and off he went trying to tell me the Canon was better than the Pentax. What a moron. He might have made a $3,000 sale if I had been in the market. Now I won't even buy film from Henry's anymore... Vic I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Puzzled over lack of comments
Well that surely explains a few things. It's time to change this darned AOL site. I'm getting ready to do a real web site with Frontpage that will hopefully solve these problems. Anyways thanks for the comments. Wendy... Vic Hi Vic, Whenever I've gone to have a look, the page had been very slow loading and when I've clicked to get a bigger image then nothing has come up. This time, I just waited and something eventually popped up. Maybe that's the reason people haven't been commenting or maybe it's because they look more like sketches than photographs. Anyway, they are very impressive. The lion looks better when viewed larger. The thumbnail doesn't do it justice. The tiger (2nd row) is the one that strikes me first but I really like what you've done with the wolves (probably beacuse the 2nd one looks like my dog!). How long does it take you to produce an image like that? How much is photoshop and how much is painter? I've only just noticed that on some pages you have a before and after. I must say, the before shots look like paintings too! You wouldn't know that they were taken at the zoo. I'd like to see those jst a tad bigger. Wendy
Which zooms for kids?, AF or not?
Tim: just a few emails up from this one is an e-mail from someone selling some zooms for the PZ1. I would grab the 28-105 in a second. I have two and love them. Also the 70-200 for sale is worth considering. Those two lenses woould give you everything you need for a long time and they are good zooms. The 28-105 is a lens you will grow to love... Trust me... Vic
Re: Puzzled over lack of comments
Thanks Ken. I know I'm a little close with the ears. The images were taken in a zoo several years ago and I was trying to get in real close so that the "ugly" backgrounds would not be so noticeable. Little did I know then that I would be scanning the images and literally eliminating the backgrounds altogether. I often wonder how many perfectly good slides I have thrown out because of something distracting in the background. Now it's so easy to clean up a background in photoshop... Vic All the images are very well done - photos & those Photoshopped. The Cougar and one of the Tigers need a little more space around them to avoid touching the edge. I didn't realize in the initial post you were seeking critiques. Kenneth Waller
Re: Puzzled over lack of comments
Hi Joe thanks for your comments. Most of these shots were taken at smaller zoos where you can get a little closer to the animals. I went often, had a lot of patience and would have used the Pentax 400 5.6 for most of these shots. It focuses incredibly close... Vic Not sure how you got such still portraits. I can't even get many decent photos of our dog and cats. Good luck, Joe
RE: Puzzled over lack of comments
Thanks Virgil I appreciate your comments. I really have a good time taking many of my older photos and working with them to make them better. Most of the work in these portraits are really made possible with a program called Painter which has a cloning tool. Painter is to fine artists what photoshop is to photographers. I am no fine artist and use only a fraction of the potential that painter offers but I am working hard to better understand the program and make use of its outstanding potential. A quick look on the web under painter brings up work of some fine artists doing some incredible work with this program that was originally owned by meta tools or something like that and I believe is now owned by Corel Not sure though... Vic
unsubscribe
Is there any way I can unsubscribe from this list? My emails keep being returned. Tony Gieske [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: > > > Good point. The 24mm should become a 36mm, while depth-of field must be > > > conidered one stop less, hence pictures taken with the 24mm f/4.5 are > like > > > those taken at 36mm f/3.5, while 24mm f/11 is like 36mm f/8. > > > However, I was expecting some more sharpness there (not more unsharp > mask!). > > > > Can you explain your logic here? In my experience the DOF is based > > on the lens focal length, not the 35mm equivelent focal length. > > > > The 24mm on the *ist D gives you the field of view of a 36mm lens but > > the depth of field of a 24mm lens (because that is what it is). A > > 36mm lens at f3.5 would have much less depth of field. > > Glad you noticed that. I'll try to explain this concept (all but mine). > > The depth of field is based on the concept of confusion circle: > 1) Your eyes see as pinpoint each spot size below their resolution. > 2) Your eyes can appreciate dimensions of each spot size above their > resolution. > Images look unsharp (out of focus) when the size of dots forming them are > above eye resolution and look sharp (in focus) when dots forming them are > below that limit. > > The confusion circle is a parameter in optical design, and depth of field as > indicated in DOF scales is related to it. > > Since *ist D CCD sensor diagonal is 1.5 times smaller than that of 35mm > film, using a 24mm designed for film on such a sensor not only gives you an > angle of view equivalent to that of a 36mm lens, but in order to do that it > only uses (enlarging it) a central portion of its possible image field. > So, to get a print (or file as seen on PC monitor) the same size of that > taken with a "true" 35mm lens on a 24x36mm sensor, you have to enlarge the > image of such a 1.5 factor. > Think of doing that with film: should you want to get a 35mm perspective > print out from a 24mm slide or negative, you have to enlarge it 1.5 times > more and then crop the print to the same size of that made with a true 35mm > lens. The only difference is that the *ist D crops during shooting. > You'll enlarge the image taken with the 24mm more than that shot with the > true 35mm on a larger sensor (35mm film format), hence you'll push image > resolution of the 24mm to a 1.5x higher extent. In other words, some dots > which would stay below eye resolution when sooting on 35mm format will jump > out, and a lesser part of the image will look in focus. > The 1.5x ratio between the two sizes (35mm film and CCD) roughly correspond > to 1 stop wider. > I dindn't invent such theory. It's explained (not so well) in *ist D > instruction manual (see bottom of page 137). I looked this up in the manual. There is a big difference between what you said and what they said, and to me what they said makes more sense. You computed DOF by taking the focal length of the lens, multiplying it by 1.5, then removing a stop from the f-stop. Pentax only recommends doing the last operation. This results in very different results. Using my depth of field calculator for a 50mm lens at f5.6 I get a DOF of 1.75m to 2.34m. Using your method this would change to 1.91 to 2.10m. Using Pentax's method I get 1.81m to 2.23m. What suggests to me that your method is wrong is that it would give me a narrower depth of field than 35mm (using an equivelent lens). I know from practice (using a prosumer digital camera with a 1 2/3" sensor) that this isn't the case. alex
Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
Auto-tranny, no way, I like to have control over my machines, not the other way around. Ten years and 230,000 miles and the damned thing just came apart. Then don't build them like they used to, and its a good thing too... At 02:00 PM 10/12/03, you wrote: Automatic tranny? I only have 1/10 the miles on my 4 year old SW-2 Saturn wagon, but it's a stick with a 5 speed tranny. I'm still very well pleased with the quality and - so far - durability. I've owned foreign sports cars, and later coupes and sports sedans since 1956, far preferring the handling and performance over U.S. designed and built machines. I'm pleased to say I recognize and appreciate the vast improvement in most American cars in the intervening period... My Saturn handles very like a fine European or Japanese sports sedan. It's appointed like they used to be, not cheap and cheesy like the American iron used to be, years ago. Also, I've noticed the same attention to detail and reliability for other U.S. made cars in the last 4 to 5 years. American-made cars deserve the new attention they're getting. They've made vast strides. I still want to hear about that tranny! keith whaley Peter Alling wrote: > > My Saturn went approximately 230,000 statute miles that's 370,149 KM for > the those impaired by > using the Metric system. My mechanic congratulated me by the way, not the > for extraordinary mileage > but the way the tranny destroyed itself, his exact words were, "I've only > seen BMW's hand-grenade like that!" I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
The sensor could, (I don't know if it does), actually adjust it's sensitivity on the fly to insure a better exposure. I'm not sure I'd like that. At 02:10 PM 10/12/03, you wrote: - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D > Unless the "new" users might just want to try some extreme telephoto's to see > if they might like them on the cheep. (Let's see now, I paid an extra $100 for > a feature I might not use vs. You want how much for that 300mm lens) That would be the same % of users that only watch PBS. Personally, I think Pentax has just decided to move forwards, and stop looking backwards. I am curious, perhaps the more knowedgable people on the list will have an answer to this: What is the exposure accuracy requirement of a digital sensor as compared to film? William Robb I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Peter Alling wrote: > The sensor could, (I don't know if it does), actually adjust it's > sensitivity on the fly to insure a better exposure. I'm not sure > I'd like that. There is a custom function to select that feature. It is called "Sensitivity Correction". The manual says "Automatic sensitivity correction when the exposure is out of range". I haven't used this feature, it defaults to off and I left it there. alex
Re: Take this simple test
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:57:50 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: > > > Will this high speed shooting be out of doors? If so set the white > > balance to a fixed value and get it right all the time instead. > > It will, and if a fixed value or the presets is close enough for this > usage, that sounds great (can you tell I don't know jack about the > whole digicam operation thing? :-). The main times I would need to do > something different would be in the garages and the dusk/night portions > of the Petit le Mans. Occasionally some other shots, too, but they'd > be under much less stressful circumstances. Think of it like this; if you'd shoot daylight-compensated slide film, and reckon that the colours would be close enough, then just leave the white balance set on daylight. That's probably what I'd use for night shots at Road Atlanta, too: you *want* those yellow headlights to look yellow, and the blue/white ones to look blue. Your flash is daylight, too (assuming you'll be using some flash for side shots). For night shots in the garage, though, you might want to use something different if there are a lot of fluorescent lights about.
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
The problem with the *ist D, as far as I know, is that if it doesn't sense that the lens is in A position it locks the lens aperture wide open but leaves the meter on. With Stop down metering lenses, i.e. those without the K stop down lever such as a M42 lens using an adapter the Camera cannot control the aperture. So the camera has stop down metering. It's a software feature. At 04:25 PM 10/12/03, you wrote: On 12/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >No extra code is required for stopdown metering with M42 lenses. If the code >for the camera is properly written, (I'll make no bets on that, I've seen >some awful code, >but assuming they did a good job) then the amount of code used a.) to make >the camera not >fire when a lens isn't set to A, or doesn't have an A setting, (if properly >written that should >be the same code, it's looking at the same sensor), or b.) Overrides that >function to turn off >the meter and allow the shutter to fire, could be re-written to call the >module to stop down the >lens and the module to turn the meter on, thus giving K/M lenses stop down >metering at least. This is interesting. To get the D60 to fire with the M42/EOS adapter aboard, I had to physically grind off a small bit of flange where it contacts a small 'pin' on the camera. Presumably this pin on the camera tells the electronics that there is a lens in place and can it detect the electrical contacts on the lens? If it can (EOS lens) it allows the shutter to work. If it can't (M42/EOS adapter) it won't allow the shutter to fire. Knowing that the camera will fire with no lens, no nothing in the bayonet, I figured that to remove the 'pin' on the camera would be out, cuz I obviously want to use other EOS lenses, or lose the bit of metal that contacts the pin. This I did and hey presto it fires, and allows stop down metering in manual and AV modes. This was the basis of my idea to construct an EOS mount on the back of a Pentax lens. Given the above info, is there any way that the back of a K mount lens could be modified to let the *ist D fire using stop down metering in similar modes? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Which zooms for kids?, AF or not?
My main question is, how important is auto-focus in this situation? I think it's quite important, for me any. And is the auto focus on PZ-1p fast enough to give the benefit? The problem of Z-1p's AF is not speed, but it can focus at the centre only. Just when you need it fast and snap, you have to re-compose first. or some other. Unless you plan to shoot from an distance, 28-70 is a pretty good range. In this case, I would consider the new Tamron SP 28-75/2.8 which is $330 only. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: Has Pentax missed again?
- Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" Subject: Re: Has Pentax missed again? > Since we don't have a Native SLR industry, (or for that matter camera > manufacturers) > they can't be accused of dumping. Well, not quite. Dumping is classified under GATT as selling a good for less than the cost of producing it. It is a problem when there is a native industry in competition. As soon as there is competition, then the accusations of dumping come along, and absurdly punitive duties get imposed. And the WTO paases its rulings, generally against the duties, and then the rulings get ignored, or else yet another set of duties gets imposed. And it goes on and on and on. It's only dumping when it is unhandy for you. William Robb
Re: unsubscribe
- Original Message - From: "Tony Gieske" Subject: unsubscribe > Is there any way I can unsubscribe from this list? My emails keep being > returned. Nope. Yer stuck in this hell forever. Just try to get away. We'll find you. Now suffer. You brought this on yourself. You subscribed to this quagmire of photographic purgatory. This cesspool of reflective silliness. So suck it up and get on with it. But remember this: Every time you turn on your computer, we'll be there, tormenting you. WW
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
- Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D > The sensor could, (I don't know if it does), actually adjust it's > sensitivity on > the fly to insure a better exposure. I'm not sure I'd like that. It does. Or at least it can. It's one of the custom functions. William Robb
Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
They relaxed that a couple of years after the Japanese banking system began to melt down. At 11:40 PM 10/12/03, you wrote: Hummm? The guys working at Hydromatic in Ypsilanti might argue about GM not building automatic transmissions with you, Paul. However, I will note that unless the changed the laws over in Japan GM does not own Isuzu, the Japanese government does not (or at least did not) allow foreign control of Japanese Companies. Paul Stenquist wrote: Uh, Bill, I hate to burst your bubble, but Isuzu isn't an American car, and it isn't a GM car. GM doesn't build transmissions. They buy them from suppliers, same as Isuzu. It might be the same trans that GM uses, but it's not their part. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Keith Whaley" Subject: Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ... I still want to hear about that tranny! Well, the GM built tranny in my Isuzu went south after less than 100,000 km (thats 62,500 miles for the metrically impaired). Cost two and a half grand to fix. I was mighty impressed. Apparently, it's the same unit they put into one of the Cadillacs. When the well fills up again, I am going to buy another made in Japan Nissan. The Nissan Axxess was the best car I have ever owned. William Robb -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway." I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
If it's designed to allow updates it probably loads software through the same port you'd download pictures through. You would need software to to do the uploads from a computer. At 08:43 AM 10/13/03, you wrote: >Well, we may start a plea to Pentax to make open source of *istd code. Then found the Pentax Users Development Group and take over the job of stripping their bugs off. We'll publish free monthly OS updates and use PDML for testing (on real units donated by Pentax of course). Then Pentax can leave the software development to us, its loyal users, and get back to what they know best - making cameras and lenses. According to our specifications of course. No FAJ please. And btw, I'll write the K/M module myself. Just let me know if you need a downloadable MTF database for those darn old lenses. ;o) > Servus, Alin Actually, it seems to me this should be quite doable. Really. It's been done in other arenas. Like DVD players, etc. The Net has a long tradition of hacking and sharing code, too. The only thing I can't figure out (not having seen a *istD) is how can one upload new software to it? Or any DSLR for that matter? Someone on this list must know. Marnie aka Doe I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
GM owned enough of ISUZU to dictate design and production decisions to them in the 70's. GM at one time imported Opel Kadets from Germany and sold them through Buick dealerships of all places. When it became too expensive to get the Opels from Germany they had ISUZU build them and imported them from Japan. At 10:16 AM 10/13/03, you wrote: Maybe GM didn't own Isuzu, but wasn't there a marketing agreement between the two, maybe 10 years back? I can't remember, but I'm sure that GM rebadged some Isuzu product for US sales. Much like they rebadged Toyota Corollas as Novas (that wasn't a flop, was it?). Damn, what was it? They weren't really marketed as a GM car (sort of like a Japanese Saturn, they had their own "division"). Not Geo. Damn, this is going to piss me off. If I think of it later, I'll Google GM/Isuzu, I'm sure something will come up. I recall it was around the time that Isuzu sold something with a "suspension tuned by Lotus" badge on it - I think GM may have had shares of Lotus too? Or not, I don't know. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hummm? The guys working at Hydromatic in Ypsilanti might argue about GM not building automatic transmissions with you, Paul. However, I will note that unless the changed the laws over in Japan GM does not own Isuzu, the Japanese government does not (or at least did not) allow foreign control of Japanese Companies. Paul Stenquist wrote: Uh, Bill, I hate to burst your bubble, but Isuzu isn't an American car, and it isn't a GM car. GM doesn't build transmissions. They buy them from suppliers, same as Isuzu. It might be the same trans that GM uses, but it's not their part. _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
RE: Old lenses and *ist D
What interests me is how the hell you clean the sensor when the inevitable happens and something gets stuck to it - a piece of eyebrow dander, etc. It won't take much residue to seriously screw up your images. I would gather that you can use a mild breeze, but that canned air stuff that's not really air would seem to be a bad idea. This is something that seems to me to have the potential to be a big PITA - with film, you were replacing the medium each frame. With digital, it's the same thing each time, and it's gonna get dirty sooner or later. Is there any way to actually clean it properly aside from taking it in to the service depot? -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13-Oct-03 21:45 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D > The sensor could, (I don't know if it does), actually adjust it's > sensitivity on > the fly to insure a better exposure. I'm not sure I'd like that. It does. Or at least it can. It's one of the custom functions. William Robb
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
It's still a mechanical linkage. It would take statistical measurement of thousands of lenses to make a determination. In a perfect world the electronically controlled system should be more accurate. However it isn't a perfect world. At 01:03 PM 10/13/03, you wrote: - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D > ? > > General consensus appears to be to treat exposure like slide, once saturation > occurs it's a brick wall however generally the harder it saturates the more > nasty aberrations (coloured edges etc.) you'll see around the areas of > saturation. Most digicams have more exposure latitude into the shadow than > slide film however but a couple of stops short of the better print films. Next question, how much more accurately (if at all) is the diaphram controlled on an A lens rather than a K lens. William Robb I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
RE: If Pentax were like an automobile company ...
Asuna? At 10:16 AM 10/13/03, you wrote: >Maybe GM didn't own Isuzu, but wasn't there a marketing agreement between >the two, maybe 10 years back? I can't remember, but I'm sure that GM >rebadged some Isuzu product for US sales. Much like they rebadged Toyota >Corollas as Novas (that wasn't a flop, was it?).
