PAW--FisheyeWaterFall Redux
Having taken a few suggestions I re-photographed my second PAW here it is along with the URL of the first for anyone who might be interested. http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PAW_--_FisheyeWaterfall2.html http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PAW_--_FisheyeWaterfall.html
Re: M42 lens on K mount
No it doesn't work with all M42 lenses some of the lenses have flanges that are too narrow. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Don" Subject: Re: M42 lens on K mount It's fine, mine is the same way. I ended up permanently mounting the adaptor to the lens and cutting a locking notch in the mount so as to make a bayonet lens out of it. Works like a hot damn. William Robb Any advise on how to do this? I wouldn't mind modding my one screw mount for this. Take the spring clip off of an M42-K adaptor. Screw the adaptor onto the lens, and then put the screw that held the spring in place back into it's hole. With the spring gone, the screw will go in far enough to lock the adaptor to the lens. Now, you have a K mount lens that mon't lock. Here's the part that requires some bravery. You have to determine where best to drill a hole in the lens mount to mesh with the locking pin on the camera. Once you have done that, you drill a wee hole into the mount. A machine shop and drill press would be a good place to do this, although I did mine with a Dremel. I don't know if this will work with all M42 lenses or not. I take no responsibility for any damages cause to persons or property from attempting the above described modification. William Robb
Re: Unwilling sitters: Was PAW - Session 1
If someone is unwilling then they're hardly sitting for a portrait in my opinion, but I could be wrong. Simon King wrote: Peter J. Alling asked; Have you had un-willing adult sitters? Haven't we all? My wife and most of my family would rather never be in a photograph, and my kids have no say in it (yet). I thought most people had this problem, that's why God made Models. Cheers, Simon -Original Message- From: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 9 March 2004 1:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW - Session 1 Have you had un-willing adult sitters? That is a nice portrait, I'll bet the sitter approved. Simon King wrote: Hi All, Haven't had a chance to read any of the (1200!) unread messages since Friday, but thought I'd submit my first PAW. This is from the first portrait session I've done with a willing adult sitter; http://members.iinet.net.au/~celsim/Session1/pages/Quarter1.htm The others are http://members.iinet.net.au/~celsim/Session1/index.htm , but that would make it 4paw, which is cheating. :-) Cheers, Simon
Re: Unerase/undelete
Hello mapson, Wednesday, March 10, 2004, 4:01:22 AM, you wrote: m> I just erased the HD drive which had photos. I made a copy of all of them, m> except for about 100 ;-( m> Would anyone know a good (preferably freeware or shareware - so I could get m> it without probs) program that enables to recover erased data. I use XP, I m> have a good one but it worked for W98, not XP. m> (*)o(*) m> Robert m> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Try one of these utilities: http://www.freewareweb.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?ID=1672 http://www.softwarepatch.com/software/filerecovery.html http://www.chemistry.hut.fi/download/freeware/NT4/Emergency%20Undelete/ Unfortunately none of them are perfect. Here in the office we ended up using EasyRecovery Professional from Ontrack, which is a very fine program, but it is not free... In any case, do *not* install anything on the partition from where you want to recover data, nor make any operation that may result in writing in that partition. This may render your deleted pics irrecoverable. Attila
Re: PAW: guitar
That's a very strong composition. I like it. Amita Guha wrote: I'm taking a graphic design course, and last week's homework was to take an object and portray it 50 different ways. Not necessarily a photography assignment, but what else was I going to do? I borrowed Nate's Canon 300d and shot at least 200 exposures of my acoustic guitar. Needless to say, I don't even want to look a the guitar for a while. ;) While I was at it I also my hand at some "studio" photography using a halogen lamp and a flourescent lamp for lighting and no flash. This was one of the better shots: http://www.beyondthepath.com/photos/paw/2004-03-07.html
Polarizer and rotating front element (was: Re[2]: PAW: City Hall Tower)
Hello Boris, BL> Now you tell us ... You make perfect sense to me then. I tried BL> similar things myself but eventually I grew dissatisfied with this BL> kind of shots. Naturally it is me speaking. Here is one example BL> http://boris.isra-shop.com/photos/35/against-the-rules.htm where I got BL> lucky. Except overall correction of contrast and such there is no BL> digital alterations involved. Notice that I did not remove the poles BL> too ... But then I used the polarizer. That is a very fine photo! I don't have a polarizer (yet). My lens has a rotating front element, and as I understand it is a pain to use with a polarizer. If anybody got some experience using a polarizer with such lens, please share yor thoughts/opinions/war stories. Attila
Re: PAW: City Hall Tower
Hi! Well, my lines are between your lines that are between other's lines ... It was taken intentionally on an overcast day. So it is not a snapshot, neither was taken on a trip, it is right here in Oradea;) I wanted to take it on an overcast day to eliminate some very unpleasant shadows. So I had to say bye-bye to the nice looking deep blue sky. It was a compromise, but I thought it is better to sacrifice the sky rather than the nice small arhitectural ornaments. Now you tell us ... You make perfect sense to me then. I tried similar things myself but eventually I grew dissatisfied with this kind of shots. Naturally it is me speaking. Here is one example http://boris.isra-shop.com/photos/35/against-the-rules.htm where I got lucky. Except overall correction of contrast and such there is no digital alterations involved. Notice that I did not remove the poles too ... But then I used the polarizer. BL> I think I would take out the little antenna just on the right to the BL> flag on top of the building. With all respect Boris, I wouldn't do that... it is just part of it, and I don't feel it right to take it out. But I may consider "faking the sky". Let me then explain myself. I accept what you're saying. It was just my understanding that this is rather old building, at least definitely not a modern one. Hence the antenna on the top of it would look a little out of time. But you're of course right. Your vision and original idea is what really matters. Thanks Frank, but as I wrote before it is not a snapshot. Maybe I don't know how to make good arhitectural photos, that is. You and Boris made me think to correct the sky in Photoshop. But I'm still not sure... I am reluctant to digital alterations. I did not say you couldn't make good architectural photos! Actually I did not suggest to correct the sky in PS. I suggested something more minor. I am also rather reluctant to digital alterations. Things such as contrast correction are good, but inserting the sky is something else. Now, let me make myself clear. I am not against it. I just am not good at it and therefore I neither try it nor have my say about it. If eventually I would grow to need it, I'd learn it, I think. It is not rocket science after all. Thank you Graywolf, at last some encouraging words, so I won't give up to shoot architecture:) I am not much into architecture myself, but I think it is an interesting subject, and I want to learn more. I wish I could have some nice old architecture to shoot. I am planning a trip to Jerusalem where I hope to be able to take my K24/2.8 with me. Well, we'd see. Attila, may I humbly suggest that you consider even the most discouraging comment or critique in exactly the opposite sense. If someone is saying your photo is totally bad you can always interpret it as an invitation to shoot whole lots of film and to improve and to enjoy yourself! Just my cents. Boris
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ?
Sigma sell their lenses in all the main mounts, and generally at rather lower prices than Pentax. They are therefore likely to sell far more, and have far greater economies of scale. I suspect that they sell anywhere from twenty to a hundred times as many of any particular lens as the Pentax equivalent. (Counting all the different mounts, of course). This makes a huge difference to the price they can sell at. At the end of the day, if you produce enough of something using modern fully-automated production methods, your cost will be not much more than the cost of the materials. That is why machines have replaced people in manufacturing. If Sigma sold no more lenses than Pentax, they would long ago have shut up shop and retired to the slopes of Mount Fuji to grow lotuses. John On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:31:50 -0500, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: no more economies of scale than Pentax does. which means that it will be no better or no worse than any other pair of new zoom lenses selling for $259 combined. IOW, just above bottom feeder quality. Herb - Original Message - From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:46 PM Subject: Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? I think it is all a matter of economies of scale. Sigma make a lot of lenses, and presumably hope to sell a lot of this particular pair. With automated manufacturing processes the unit cost of producing hundreds of thousands would be very low. -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: XP-2
Hi, Clint wrote: > Shel the reason I might not continue to use XP-2 is the contrast does not > look right. I dont know if the kodak brand film would be better, alot of the > blame might be on me for not using filters. Just a thought the whole folder > is located here: Who did your scans, Clint? At least one of them is back to front. Despite its processing drawbacks, I rather like XP-2 for its smoothness of tone. Makes me think of some older large format pictures - I had a small discussion about this phenomenon with Tom a while back. Because of this quality, I'm not sure it is a suitable film for the documentation you are creating, which is a thoroughly worthwhile exercise. Might be worth trying a film with higher acutance (~edge sharpness) to see if the output is more acceptable to you. Of course, once you get into traditional B&W, you will have to either do your own processing or spend some time finding a body who will process the way you want. mike
Re: Polarizer and rotating front element (was: Re[2]: PAW: City Hall Tower)
Hi! Attila, thanks for your word about my photo. I recently bought an F 70-210/4-5.6 lens that also has rotating front element. I do have 49 mm polarizer but this is my first such lens. I've no idea how would I use polarizer on it. Perhaps pre-focusing, switching to manual focus if necessary and then adjusting the polarizer would do the trick, but it sounds all too involved... At the moment I don't think I will have to use polarizer on that lens. So you can say I give up. Sorry if it does not help much. Boris
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
I would agree that, in practice, the necessity to blow up a *ist D image may not matter if you are using a lens with very high resolution. However, not all lenses, especially zooms, exhibit superb resolution, and in such cases I am sure that the difference will be observable. The only way to resolve this will be to conduct some comparative tests. John On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:28:47 +1000, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10 Mar 2004 at 0:42, John Forbes wrote: I agree that film resolution also comes into play, but you cannot ignore the limits of lens resolution, as your argument suggests. If so, why would we talk about "sharpness" or have lens resolution tests. Having executed resolution tests using most of my lenses I can say that most Pentax primes deliver sufficient resolution to out perform the *ist D, that said most of my lenses are high performance primes. I think, with respect, that you are missing something. I think not :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ?
doesn't make the Sigma lens higher in quality than what Pentax sells at a slightly higher price point. people who own other Sigma lenses can tell you, the prices reflect pretty close to absolute quality differences even between vendors. Herb - Original Message - From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:10 AM Subject: Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? > This makes a huge difference to the price they can sell at. At the end of > the day, if you produce enough of something using modern fully-automated > production methods, your cost will be not much more than the cost of the > materials. That is why machines have replaced people in manufacturing.
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
On 10 Mar 2004 at 10:37, John Forbes wrote: > I would agree that, in practice, the necessity to blow up a *ist D image > may not matter if you are using a lens with very high resolution. > However, not all lenses, especially zooms, exhibit superb resolution, and > in such cases I am sure that the difference will be observable. Fortunately I have no lenses so poor that they exhibit resolution problems when used on the *ist D, I sold all those long ago. My only real complaints with my existing lenses are CA issues. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Teleconverter question
> From: Don Herring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I am planning to get a 1.4-S teleconvertor, mainly to use with my A* 300/4. > > Can this particular converter be used with a 500/4.5 screw mount (with the > screw mount adapter of course)? Yes it can. Also the L-converters (2x-L, 1.4x-L) do work with this lens according to the manual of the 500/4.5 and 1000/8 etc. (bayonet) lenses (screw mount versions are the same design). Alexander __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com
Re: XP2
Hi, I use this film regularly, most of my recent B&W shots (think of 35mm cameras; in MF I pefer more traditional ones like FP4, APX or Fortepan) was XP2s. I'd say that XP2 is a very special film. As others mentioned, it has probably the widest exposure latitude of all films available today, and even the very special "balancing" B&W developing methods (think Dulovits) are just a bit better, at the cost of using some hard to get, expensive and extremely dangerous chemicals and extremely low ISO ratings. The resulting negs are of course of extremely low contrast, but they have all the detail in the highlights and shadows that other films would have already cut. The hard thing is to make decent prints or scans from this, as most of the time you will have to heavily raise contrast (and to make the final decision on what to expose correctly) in the darkroom and/or during digital post-processing. Most "analog" labs or automated digital processors will fail here for sure, but careful handling can achieve exceptional results. Using high contrast and/or multigrade papers is a good point to start. For the scanning people, a "brave" use of a "Levels" tool in PS is absolutely necessary before anything could be published or printed. Gabor
Re: 120 film darkroom q
"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >From: "Mark Cassino" > >> I usually do a 1 minute pre-soak before developing. With 120 film >> the pre-soak water comes out dark indigo blue. I peel the film off >> the paper and cut the end with the adhesive on it - at first I thought >> I must of left some paper in there, but it doesn't look like it What >> puts the blue in the water - and if I were to not rinse, would it cause >> any probelms? > >What you are seeing is sensitizing dye. >There is no anti halation layer on 120 film, thats what the paper >backing does. >Once the film is exposed, the dye has done it's job. >If you don't rinse it off, it comes off in the developer, but is >absorbed by the chemistry. I usually rinse a couple of times to get rid of most of the blue dye, but it's more superstition than anything else ;) I've never noticed any problems when I've forgotten to do it. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ?
That's a different point entirely. How they choose to price their products is up to them; my point was that if they make enough they can afford to produce high quality at low prices. John On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 06:30:24 -0500, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: doesn't make the Sigma lens higher in quality than what Pentax sells at a slightly higher price point. people who own other Sigma lenses can tell you, the prices reflect pretty close to absolute quality differences even between vendors. Herb - Original Message - From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:10 AM Subject: Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? This makes a huge difference to the price they can sell at. At the end of the day, if you produce enough of something using modern fully-automated production methods, your cost will be not much more than the cost of the materials. That is why machines have replaced people in manufacturing. -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
Oh yes, the technical issues are much more important that actually going out and taking photos. Bill > JC, > > Thanks for backing up your assertions with > your modeling approach and assumptions. Now we > can debate the merits of technical issues rather > than point fingers and talk past each other. > > --Mark > > > "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > Usually if not specified otherwise lpmm of a > > lens (Arial) is 50% MTF. > > > > my chart figures: > > > > [cut, snip] > > > > >
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
On 10 Mar 2004 at 7:41, Bill Owens wrote: > Oh yes, the technical issues are much more important that actually going out and > taking photos. If you sort out the technical issue before you go out taking photos you'll be in for less of a surprise/disappointment when you come back :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: 120 film darkroom q
Mark Cassino wrote: > I usually do a 1 minute pre-soak before developing. With 120 film the > pre-soak water comes out dark indigo blue. I peel the film off the paper > and cut the end with the adhesive on it - at first I thought I must of left > some paper in there, but it doesn't look like it What puts the blue in the > water - and if I were to not rinse, would it cause any probelms? Do you see any difference in the results doing a presoak? As I understand it, the emulsion on 135/120/220 are all roughly the same. It's a few 4x5 & 5x5 and a lot of 8x10 & larger that gets a thick emulsion which responds to presoaking. In particular, TMax. Hence 2 different developers, with RS for sheet and TMax for the rest. CRB Consider the Balkans and Iraq. The claims about Iraq included: Weapons of mass destruction exist and Iraq is a training ground for terrorists. After we found multiple terrorist training facilities, the complaint is that we haven't found "hard" evidence. Like a treaty or somethings. Sheesh. Aren't the training camps enough? The claim about the Balkans was: WWIII might start if we don't go in. Historical nonsense. Just some manipulation from the White House. Shall we not hold President Clinton equally responsible for the deaths from this lie? -- just me
RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
If you dont mind the technical stuff your just a "point 'n shooter"! JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution On 10 Mar 2004 at 7:41, Bill Owens wrote: > Oh yes, the technical issues are much more important that actually going out and > taking photos. If you sort out the technical issue before you go out taking photos you'll be in for less of a surprise/disappointment when you come back :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
Hi Rob, On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:43:12 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: >Has anyone here proven that DA lenses are designed to be sharper than their FF >35mm equivalents? My take on the DA lens revolution was that they are designed >to only cover an APS sensor (and secondarily designed to extract more cash from >your wallet) and are more controlled in their CA given that image sensors seem >more prone to magnify such errors. And as a consequence of the limited image >circle the lenses can be designed to be physically much smaller. I guess my >theory will be put to test when Pentax releases a DA 600/4 lens. I would guess that the 'size & weight' advantage may work out that way for wide-angles and zooms with a complex optical construction where the lens-parts are way bigger than the theoretical smallest possible aperture. (focal-length divided by f-stop) For a 600mm f/4 you are going to need a 150mm diameter front-element to get that aperture ... No reason to make DA lenses for that reason. I also have a feeling that the image circle on those longer lenses is way bigger than needed anyway. The only thing they could do is save on optical design cost since only the very center of the image-circle will be used ... Regards, JvW -- Jan van Wijk; http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
Re: Polarizer and rotating front element
Using a polarizer on a rotating front element (like the 70-210mm F): It's not rocket science here - # 1 - compose/focus # 2 - adjust polarizer for effect # 3 - set exposure # 4 - readjust polarizer, if necessary # 5 - check exposure # 6 - take the photo Somewhat awkward but doable. Ken Waller -Original Message- From: Boros Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Polarizer and rotating front element (was: Re[2]: PAW: City Hall Tower) Hello Boris, Snip . If anybody got some experience using a polarizer with such lens, please share yor thoughts/opinions/war stories. Attila PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Polarizer and rotating front element (was: Re[2]: PAW: City Hall Tower)
- Original Message - From: "Boris Liberman" Subject: Re: Polarizer and rotating front element (was: Re[2]: PAW: City Hall Tower) > Hi! > > Attila, thanks for your word about my photo. > > I recently bought an F 70-210/4-5.6 lens that also has rotating front > element. I do have 49 mm polarizer but this is my first such lens. > I've no idea how would I use polarizer on it. Perhaps pre-focusing, > switching to manual focus if necessary and then adjusting the > polarizer would do the trick, but it sounds all too involved... > > At the moment I don't think I will have to use polarizer on that lens. > So you can say I give up. Rotating fronts are a bit of a nuisance, it's one of the reasons I dislike zooms, as it seems part of the breeding of that lens type. Do your final composition, including focus, then adjust the polarizer. William Robb
Re: 120 film darkroom q
- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: 120 film darkroom q > > I usually rinse a couple of times to get rid of most of the blue dye, > but it's more superstition than anything else ;) I've never noticed any > problems when I've forgotten to do it. > Pre rinsing is a good idea, as it helps make the development more even. That it rinses out a chemically inert dye is secondary. William Robb
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
- Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution > If you dont mind the technical stuff your just a "point 'n shooter"! Wrongo me boy. It's not so simple as that. There is not giving a rats fart about technical stuff at all (The point and shooter). Then, theres minding the technical stuff, but not letting it get in the way (a glimmer of enlightenment). Then, theres used to give a rats fart about it until realizing that it doesn't make a whit of difference ( The enlightened photographer). Then, theres minding the technical stuff above all else (the anal retentive). I am sure there are other classes, but you get the point (perhaps). William Robb
Re: M42 lens on K mount
- Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" Subject: Re: M42 lens on K mount > No it doesn't work with all M42 lenses some of the lenses have flanges > that are too narrow. I don't have a lot of M42 lenses, the 17mm Tak is the only one I have with a wide enough flange to allow this, were I inclined to try it on another lens (I'm not). William Robb
RE: first post XP-2 and PAW
Exactly. When I first commented on the photo I wanted to see more detail in the highlights. I haven't totally changed my mind, but I do see how the highlights give it a somewhat haunting image, which works in this photo. David Madsen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.davidmadsen.com -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 11:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: first post XP-2 and PAW The nicest thing about this is exemplified in just this situation: a couple of people like something, others don't, but what the dialogue does, at least for me, is to allow one to take another look at a photograph through, as it were, another's eyes, perhaps seeing something that was overlooked, or seeing the same thing differently, and, in so doing, perhaps learn something or expand one's vision. David Madsen wrote: > > I couldn't agree more, Frank. That we all have different opinions is why > this is fun. As for blown out highlights, sometimes they add to the photo, > sometimes they don't. > > David Madsen
Re: PAW--FisheyeWaterFall Redux
Alle 08:45, mercoledì 10 marzo 2004, Peter J. Alling ha scritto: > Having taken a few suggestions I re-photographed my second PAW here it > is along with the URL > of the first for anyone who might be interested. > > http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PAW_--_FisheyeWaterfall2.html > > http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PAW_--_FisheyeWaterfall.html the latter doesn't works Searching for something on your home page (which I didn't found) I've tryied this one: http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/ it's funny... BTW, where is the second one? The first one is... amazing! Ciao Danilo ---
Re: OT: PayPal
I like the clarification. "As long as the claim is made withing 30 days of the purhase". I thought that they didn't want to hear about the problem before 30 days because "the item may still show up". So their policy is that they will do nothing before 30 days is up, and they will do nothing after 30 days. Or in other words, they will do nothing. And of course thay charge your extra for that service. However, that only applies to NY. Else where their former policy still applies, they will do nothing. One has to, I think realize that using PayPal since Ebay took them over is the same as sending cash. Except it costs the seller extra. Still, it is convenient. -- Chris Brogden wrote: If you thought PayPal was tough on sellers before... http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/03/08/paypal.fined.ap/index.html chris -- 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: Polarizer and rotating front element
It is not that the polarizer doesn't work, it is just that you have to adjust it everytime you change focus. I use polarizers to control reflections, not to make the sky look like a crayon drawing. I sometimes think that if some aliens landed and looked through a couple of books of photographs they would think we had interstellar travel, because I have never seen skies like that on earth. However, I fully realize almost no one agrees with me on this. -- Boros Attila wrote: That is a very fine photo! I don't have a polarizer (yet). My lens has a rotating front element, and as I understand it is a pain to use with a polarizer. If anybody got some experience using a polarizer with such lens, please share yor thoughts/opinions/war stories. -- 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: What gear is on your "lust list" ? Recommendations? 70-210
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Andre Langevin wrote:
> >>Assuming that we are talking budget lenses here, Pentax M80-200/4.5 or
> >>F70-210/4-5.6, is the general wisdom. The A70-210/4 is more expensive,
> >>though it's supposed to be a lot "better" than the other two.
> >>Kostas
>
> A lot better? I remember having seen here, repeatedly, that the F is
> the best performer, which is what Photodo found also.
Note the quotes ("") in my OP. For a start, the A is a stop brighter
at the long end; it is constant aperture (easier with flash); and it
is metallic. I regret the "a lot" bit, a bit :-) I too would opt for
the F, but I have even heard people (outside the list) say the F is
not a patch on the A. Perhaps they are wrong, or they have different
criteria to me.
Kostas
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
Oh yes, the technical issues are much more important that actually going out and taking photos. Bill Well, the is the "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" as opposed to the "Photography-Discuss Mail List" :-) Seriously, your point is well taken. Besides, many of us lens-heads enjoy discussing the minutae of Pentax optical systems! --Mark
Re: Tokina 80-400 AT-X
Does anyone have any experience with this lens? Is it any good? Steven Desjardins A bit off-topic but Tokina makes a dedicated low-power achromatic close-up lens, the "CUP 840", which is also a cheaper alternative to the Pentax T-226 ($60. instead of $110.) Both have about 0,5 diopter power. It would take the F or FA 300/4.5 from its min. dist. (2m) to about 1 meter. But you would also need a step-up ring as the Tokina takes 72mm and the Pentax 67mm. Andre
Re: Tokina 80-400 AT-X
...also the A200/2.8 and 200/2.5 with a 77-72 step-down ring. Andre
RE: OT: Germans and credit cards (was Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ?
The German Word for it is: "Bankeinzug" or "Lastschrifteinzugsverfahren" which is a veeery long word . The idea behind it is to avoid the costs that credit card companies charge. If I give somebody my account data and give him or her the written permission to charge my account, this person has only to pay the bank for imbursing, which is a reasonable amount compared to the huge margins you have to pay when you use a credit card. And it works also between people who don't have a contract with a credit card firm. To make this system work, you have to have the possibility to refuse the payment, if somebody got hold of your account data. The time limit is 6 weeks. HTH Cheers Adelheid -Original Message- From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Dienstag, 9. März 2004 21:18 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Germans and credit cards (was Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? UK direct debit works the same way. In order to get people to trust direct debit, the banks had to give an unconditional guarantee that anybody whose account is direct-debited can recall the money. I presume that there must be some sort of time limit, but I've no idea what it is. The system works extremely well. I pay all my regular bills that way, and have done for years. Unlike a standing order, it works for variable amounts. There is no simpler (or cheaper) system. It's the US that is out of step here! John On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:00:51 +, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > >> Is it true, that everybody in the States has a credit card? >> I think diffusion is much less over here. >> I for example haven't got one, and I know very few people who do. >> They're expensive and you almost never really need one... except for >> foreign transactions - but since the Euro came, even bank transfer to >> other EU-countries and the UK is free now with IBAN & BIC. > > this low penetration of credit cards is something of a German > peculiarity. A few years ago I worked for a .com and was one of the > people involved in setting up the German website, in particular the > payment systems. For the .com and .co.uk we just did credit cards. For > .de we had to get involved in cheques, credit referencing, the rather > strange German version of Direct Debit, a very payer-friendly approach > to refunds, usw. > > For instance, with the German Direct Debit (I've forgotten the German > name for it), the customer (or someone claiming to be him - there's no > way to tell online) gives you his bank account number and details - no > card or signature involved over the net - and you, the retailer, take > the money and send over the goods. But, the customer has the right to > take their money back at any time up to some quite long time limit - > they can just phone their bank and the bank takes the money out the > retailer's account, no questions asked. It's then up to the retailer > to try and get the goods back. So the retailer has to sign up with one > of the big credit referencing agenciees who, of course, charge good > money for chasing people who do this kind of thing. > > We found some of the things we were expected to do quite horrifying. > It involved a degree of trust we would never have extended to the > English or the Americans. But, it seems that on average German > consumers are far more honest than we are. > -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? Recommendations? 70-210
I too would opt for the F, but I have even heard people (outside the list) say the F is not a patch on the A. Outside the list... hmm... does it count? Perhaps they are wrong, or they have different criteria to me. Kostas I heard such praise for the F (the Pentax, not the Takumar) that I bought one recently but won't try it before spring. I had the 70-210 for a while many years ago. I only used it a few times in good contrasty light and the pictures were fine. I'm pretty sure that closed-down a bit, all three lenses should give rather equivalent results though. Andre
RE: PAW: guitar
> From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Amita Guha posted: > > http://www.beyondthepath.com/photos/paw/2004-03-07.html > > That looks familiar, so it's probably a brand I know. It's > not Yamaha (at least it doesn't match mine). Who made it? > > Oh yeah, I like the photo BTW. Thanks! It is actually a Yamaha F335. Big fat dreadnought. I've had it for a year and I still can't really play yet. My hubby plays metal on an electric.
RE: PAW: guitar
> Definitely. It certainly makes me want to go spank the plank. Spank the plank...hehe...gotta remember that one. I'm glad you guys all liked the shot. Thanks for the comments! :) Amita
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
My comment was meant to say that there are some people here who are more concerned with technical issues than they are with taking pictures. Bill - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:42 AM Subject: RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution > If you dont mind the technical stuff your just a "point 'n shooter"! > JCO > > -- -- >J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com > -- -- > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:05 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution > > > On 10 Mar 2004 at 7:41, Bill Owens wrote: > > > Oh yes, the technical issues are much more important that actually going > out and > > taking photos. > > If you sort out the technical issue before you go out taking photos you'll > be > in for less of a surprise/disappointment when you come back :-) > > Cheers, > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > >
Re: *istD sensor and 35mm lens resolution
> From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > could be because they are stuck with the 45.5mm flange > registration and they are designing even shorter focal length > zoom lenses, the retrofocus factor is kicking their ass. > > The only way they will ever get maximum performance from > a APS sensor system is lenses and bodies designed from the beginning > for APS sensors, i.e. the new Olympus DSLR system. Or change the mirror to allow for the lens optics to protrude back beyond the actual mount, as Canon as done with one lens and one camera. A full-frame sensor would be a better answer. DJE
PAW - Applying makeup
Hi! It is an old Jewish holiday known as Purim where among other things parents dress their kids in carnival clothes and then kids celebrate. I wonder whether any of these two work. I wonder which is better. I wonder what you might want to say... Technically it is Agfa 200, FA 50/1.7 somewhere around f/4... Lighting it natural light from the window on the left. I don't remember whether I used the built-in flash or not. Here are the links: http://boris.isra-shop.com/local/paw/applying-makeup.jpg and http://boris.isra-shop.com/local/paw/applying-makeup-bw.jpg Since it is the same shot just edited differently I thought I'd post two images under single heading... Thanks in advance. Boris
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? Recommendations? 70-210
Oops, it should have been read as: I had the A 70-210 for a while many years ago...
DA lenses
Somebody was wondering why the DA-type lenses seem to be so big when the whole idea was supposedly to make them small. Nikon guys have the same question about "DX" lenses. I think the answer is that the DA lenses are smaller than they would be if they were not DA. Does anybody make a 16-45 that covers 35mm format? Sigma's 15-35 is not exactly small. Nikon's 12-24/4.0 DX is apparently about the same size as the 18-35/3.5-4.5 that it "replaces" on digital, but it's probably a lot smaller than a 12-24 for 35mm would be. I seem to recall that Sigma's 12-24 is not small, and it is noticeably SLOWER which of course cuts size. Personally, from what I can see I think 35mm format produces lenses with obout the right size and optical parameters, and I wish that camera manufacturers would give us 35mm-sized sensors rather than struggling to come out with ultra-ultra-wides of reasonable quality and size to deal with the format-size differences. Even Nikon's ridiculously big and expensive 13/5.6 can't do for APS-sized digital what a 14/2.8 does for film. I'm not sure I want to see a 9.5mm lens. DJE
Re: *istD sensor and 35mm lens resolution
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > could be because they are stuck with the 45.5mm flange > > registration and they are designing even shorter focal length > > zoom lenses, the retrofocus factor is kicking their ass. > > > > The only way they will ever get maximum performance from > > a APS sensor system is lenses and bodies designed from the beginning > > for APS sensors, i.e. the new Olympus DSLR system. > > Or change the mirror to allow for the lens optics to protrude > back beyond the actual mount, as Canon as done with one lens > and one camera. A full-frame sensor would be a better answer. How much does that really help? I think it would allow them to make the rear optic about 5mm closer (about half of the height difference between the CCD size and 35mm film size). I don't know enough about lens design to know how helpful that is. alex
Re: PAW: guitar
Hi! I must say this is among the most original shots I've seen. The geometry is well thought through. Though usually this is called composition, but to my sense of beautiful it appeals more like a geometrical drawing. Everything is flawless about this picture. It deserves to be enlarged and used as a welcome work of art in some modern art studio... Thanks for sharing. Boris
Re: OT: Germans and credit cards (was Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ?
Hi, thanks - 'Lastschrift' was the word I was struggling for and couldn't remember. At eToys we were going to put Lastschrift onto the site, so people could just type in their account details, and we would charge the account. Very open to abuse. -- Cheers, Bob Wednesday, March 10, 2004, 5:57:47 PM, Adelheid wrote: > The German Word for it is: "Bankeinzug" or "Lastschrifteinzugsverfahren" > which is a veeery long word . > The idea behind it is to avoid the costs that credit card companies charge. > If I give somebody my account data and give him or her the written > permission to charge my account, this person has only to pay the bank for > imbursing, which is a reasonable amount compared to the huge margins you > have to pay when you use a credit card. And it works also between people who > don't have a contract with a credit card firm. > To make this system work, you have to have the possibility to refuse the > payment, if somebody got hold of your account data. The time limit is 6 > weeks. > HTH > Cheers > Adelheid
Re: PDML Members websites list update
Hi! Thanks! Boris
Re: OT: Germans and credit cards (was Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ?
Bob W wrote: > thanks - 'Lastschrift' was the word I was struggling for and couldn't > remember. At eToys we were going to put Lastschrift onto the site, so > people could just type in their account details, and we would charge > the account. Very open to abuse. ... sounds like folks might be opening themslves to the Shortschrift all too easily! Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: PAW - Hershey's Rapids
Hi! Scoff and Quaff... Well, straight to my favorites it goes... Wonder how many little linguistic jokes are there in Harry Potter books... Quidditch?! (Ditch a quid?!) Never mind. Boris
RE: PAW: guitar
Amita Guha answered: > > > From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > That looks familiar, so it's probably a brand I know. It's > > not Yamaha (at least it doesn't match mine). Who made it? > Thanks! It is actually a Yamaha F335. Big fat dreadnought. I've had it > for a year and I still can't really play yet. My hubby plays metal on an > electric. Huh. I'd expected more consistency. My circa-1980 Yamaha FG-331 has a thick black line at the outer edge of the soundboard with a thinner black line just inside of that, and the ring around the soundhole goes thick...thin-thick-thin...thick. My Yamaha FG-312 (12-string) of uncertain age is the same except that it has one more thin line on the edge decoration. I had thought that they kept the overall look similar from model to model as part of a "visual signature", but I guess I was wrong. Out of curiosity, how old is your FG335? (I'm pretty sure I've played one and liked it ... which would explain the striping looking familiar. And yeah, I could tell it was a dreadnaught from the shape of the waist. ;-) ) I've got a couple of friends with 100-series Yamahas. They still feel like Yamahas, but it's a very different tone. Not as nice for rythm, I think, but I might borrow one sometime for a lead track that I don't want to play on electric. Ahh, guitars ... -- Glenn
Re: First PAW -- Boys watching their friend use a bow and arrow
Hi! Frank's analysis is extensive and exhaustive... There is one thing that I particularly would think needs fixing. You see, without the title or the story it is not that easy to see that the left-most boy actually shoots with bow and arrow. Which I humbly think wasn't your original intention... Don't be discouraged. You did fine job with DOF control and I see little wrong with this picture except of the above. I don't know how I would approach same shot. Perhaps, though risky it is, I would try to shoot my shot from behind the tree which is in front of the right-most boy... But then it is a bad idea to be in front of the line of fire... Just my cents. As I said, don't be discouraged... Boris
Re: PAE #?
Hi! TMP> The tree to the left looks a bit strange due to it actually being taller TMP> than the skyscrapers, for me, it puts the perspective out a little. Maybe TMP> (I'm not sure where you were standing), you could have moved a little more TMP> to the right to not include the tree in the frame? Just by changing the TMP> angle, you should still have been able to keep all of the sunset and the TMP> rays, cityscape etc in the frame... Although then the light may have been TMP> coming through the clouds differently... I have no idea, just ignore me, I TMP> am thinking out loud and talking rubbish, I fear! lol... Tanya, with all due respect, I do think that the tree actually makes the shot. Which I wrote in my comments I believe. It is light, tree and city - three components, not less. I hope I am not breaking any rules here by countering someone else's opinion... If I do, I apologize in advance. Boris
Re: PAW: Last one from San Francisco
Hi! >> You donate but then you do >> not expect anything in return... Rac> Tsadaka... If I am not mistaken there Judaic law has very specific rules about that. For instance, one has to give to charity at least a very certain part of their income... Boris P.S. Tsadaka in Hebrew means Charity which happens to be from the root rightness or truthfulness or trueness.
Re: PAW: Last one from San Francisco
Hi! g> Yes, I know many people who have a giving mentality. Quite a few of those are g> jews. And yes there are those with a give-me mentality, even to the point they g> are taking from the needy. Unfortunately, I know some of those also. The best g> kind of people, to my mind, are the ones who give to those who are worse off g> than themselves, and accept help from those who are better off for they help g> maintain the balance that a worthwhile society needs. The worst may be those g> whow are always offering help, but never giving it. g> Why would we call your stupid? Because human kindness runs in your family? Now, g> mind you, I might call you silly for even thinking that. I appreciate your words. I only wish that those who sit you-know-where took the volvo-less and home-less folk more into their account. Which they don't. I am speaking of Israel though, not of US of A, for obvious reasons. I am living in Israel for 12 years and I am observing steady growth of amount of people who cannot maintain their living without charity. This is heartwarming for those who give to charity but in actuality this is disaster. Boris
Re: PAW -- Applying Makeup
>-- > >Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:54:22 +0200 >From: Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Hi! > >It is an old Jewish holiday known as Purim where among other things >parents dress their kids in carnival clothes and then kids celebrate. > >I wonder whether any of these two work. I wonder which is better. I >wonder what you might want to say... > Boris, for me the color one is far better. Childrens' makeup is colorful and the dabs of color on the child's face are what help this very nice shot stand out. I also like how the child is looking off in one direction while the adult is looking straight at the child. Aaron
Re: PAW - Applying makeup
Hi! It seems I neglected to mention that the makeup is being applied by my wife to our daughter ... Hope no-one was overly confused here... Boris
Re: PAW - Applying makeup
Nice family shot, Boris. Color works much better for this. Good exposure, nice use of Depth of Field. Do you have more shots of the situation. Just wondering of there's one without your wife's hand covering your child's face. shel Boris Liberman wrote: > > Hi! > > It is an old Jewish holiday known as Purim where among other things > parents dress their kids in carnival clothes and then kids celebrate. > > I wonder whether any of these two work. I wonder which is better. I > wonder what you might want to say... > http://boris.isra-shop.com/local/paw/applying-makeup.jpg and > http://boris.isra-shop.com/local/paw/applying-makeup-bw.jpg >
OT: Epson 2200 mac osx 10.3 and PhotoShopCS
My old printer is on its last legs. It's an Epson 1200 and it has produced more than 1000 12 x 18s. It's not printing very well with OS X 10.3 and Photoshop CS. I think the drivers haven't been uptdated beyond system 10.1, which is quite diffferent. Since it's a clunker anyway, I'm thinking of replacing it with the Epson 2200. Is anyone using this printer with OSX 10.3 and PhotoShop CS. Are you happy? Is this printer due to be replaced? Is there a better printer in the $500 to $800 range that's proven itself with PS CS and OSX 10.3? Paul
Re: PAW - Applying makeup
Hi! SB> Nice family shot, Boris. Color works much better for this. SB> Good exposure, nice use of Depth of Field. Do you have more SB> shots of the situation. Just wondering of there's one SB> without your wife's hand covering your child's face. Shel, I have few more but it takes at least 30-40 minutes to scan and edit so that on one evening I can do at most 3 or so scans... I will be posting more... Boris
RE: PAW: guitar
> > > From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Out of curiosity, how > old is your FG335? (I'm pretty sure I've played one and > liked it ... which would explain the striping looking > familiar. And yeah, I could tell it was a dreadnaught from > the shape of the waist. ;-) ) I got it in February 2003, but I think by then Yamaha wasn't making them anymore because I couldn't find it on their website. Mine has a very nice, warm sound but the action is kind of high. I also want to see if I can find a smaller-bodied acoustic, like a parlor guitar or something. I played piano as a kid and last fall we got a full-size keyboard, so I've been spending more time on that anyway. Meanwhile, on my "lust list" for guitars is one of these guys. I played with one at Sam Ash and loved it. http://www.ibanez.com/guitars/series.asp?s=ax&l=e I promised Nate I wouldn't get my own electric until I actually learn to play. *sigh*
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
It's quite hard to go out and take photos on a mailing list. Personally I'd choose to take photos in the real world and discuss technical issues online. :-) S Bill Owens wrote: Oh yes, the technical issues are much more important that actually going out and taking photos.
Re: Polarizer and rotating front element
You can see skies that look very much like those obtained with a polarizer if you go to a high enough altitude. See http://www.tagne.com/photoinfo.php?id=t01 for example. S graywolf wrote: It is not that the polarizer doesn't work, it is just that you have to adjust it everytime you change focus. I use polarizers to control reflections, not to make the sky look like a crayon drawing. I sometimes think that if some aliens landed and looked through a couple of books of photographs they would think we had interstellar travel, because I have never seen skies like that on earth. However, I fully realize almost no one agrees with me on this. -- Boros Attila wrote: That is a very fine photo! I don't have a polarizer (yet). My lens has a rotating front element, and as I understand it is a pain to use with a polarizer. If anybody got some experience using a polarizer with such lens, please share yor thoughts/opinions/war stories.
Re: PAW - KW's third
Looks just like Western Canada,except for the hilss.LOL Nice shot Ken.I like the effects the rolling hills give it.The lone elevator looks very errie. Pleasing colours too. Dave > Please check out http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > Comments - Likes/Dislikes > > Ken Waller > > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com >
Re: WOW:No picture,but need advice
Snow is definitely "cool" so a warm filter is appropriate along WITH exposure compensation. I do 2 stops for bright snow. Doing 1.5 with an 80A should be suitable. Along this vein, I've used the 80A with weddings to keep the blues out of gowns. Some labs print too "straight" for me and I've compensated for the lab by adding the needed warmpth. Collin -- Keep an eye on the Left. They complain any time we go after any group that hates America. They were ambivalent about going after Al Queda & going into Afghanistan. They really opposed overthrowing Marxists like Aristide and Saddam Hussein, et al. After all, they share a common goal with the former and common world view with the latter. -- just me --
Re: PAW - Applying makeup
Great! I'd love to see more ... ;-)) Your daughter looks like quite a charmer. Boris Liberman wrote: > Shel, I have few more but it takes at least 30-40 minutes to scan and > edit so that on one evening I can do at most 3 or so scans... > > I will be posting more...
Re: CLA for 35mm/f2 SMC-M (also, opinions between 35mm f2 and 35mm f2.8?)
Can anyone recommend a reputable place for Pentax repair that could take a look at my 35mm lens. There is some oil on the blades and the aperture just does not seem as snappy as it should be. I live in the Twin Cities, but am assuming I'll have to mail it somewhere for repair. This is a pretty straight-forward job. I would send it to any reknown place that does not ask too much ($25-30). My repairman is across the border. Mailing to US place might be cheaper. One of the PDML member has a list of repair places. I could not find it on Google. Ask the repairman to apply some "oil barrier" so that the lens won't give you the same problem again (common with the f2.8). On another note, any opinions as to preference of the 35mm f2.8 (A or M) over the 35mm f2? I have been thinking all along that this f2 of mine is so much better that the f2.8, but don't really have any basis for thinking that. http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_35.html Andre
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
On 10 Mar 2004 at 8:58, Gonz wrote: > Not proven, but there is some empirical evidence. Some of those P&S > digitals have very tiny sensors, but lenses to match the proper image > circle. If you calculate the resolution of those lenses, then they come > out quite high. Getting back to DA lenses we know the size of the *ist D sensor and it's not that much smaller than 35mm FF. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW - Applying makeup
Hi Boris, Nice shot, but the hand on the back of the childs neck gives me the impression that she is being forced to wear the makeup. I cant pick between the b/w or colour, they both seem to work well. Regards, Paul Hi! SB> Nice family shot, Boris. Color works much better for this. SB> Good exposure, nice use of Depth of Field. Do you have more SB> shots of the situation. Just wondering of there's one SB> without your wife's hand covering your child's face. Shel, I have few more but it takes at least 30-40 minutes to scan and edit so that on one evening I can do at most 3 or so scans... I will be posting more... Boris
RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
FF 35mm is more than 50% wider angle of coverage compared to *istD sensor, that is HUGE for a given focal length but not anywhere near the difference a tiny P&S sensor would be. that would be mega-HUGE. JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution On 10 Mar 2004 at 8:58, Gonz wrote: > Not proven, but there is some empirical evidence. Some of those P&S > digitals have very tiny sensors, but lenses to match the proper image > circle. If you calculate the resolution of those lenses, then they come > out quite high. Getting back to DA lenses we know the size of the *ist D sensor and it's not that much smaller than 35mm FF. 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
Post Yamaha Guitar feelings on this subject.
Yamaha Guiars have almost nothing to do with Pentax. All of you hell-bent on describing soundhole rosettes please use the new subject. \ Out of curiosity, how old is your FG335? (I'm pretty sure I've played one and liked it ... which would explain the striping looking familiar. And yeah, I could tell it was a dreadnaught from the shape of the waist. ;-) ) I got it in February 2003, but I think by then Yamaha wasn't making them anymore because I couldn't find it on their website. Mine has a very nice, warm sound but the action is kind of high. I also want to see if I can find a smaller-bodied acoustic, like a parlor guitar or something. I played piano as a kid and last fall we got a full-size keyboard, so I've been spending more time on that anyway. Meanwhile, on my "lust list" for guitars is one of these guys. I played with one at Sam Ash and loved it. http://www.ibanez.com/guitars/series.asp?s=ax&l=e
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
And that is perfectly all right. There are some that are more interested in having one of everything Pentax ever made, that is all right too. If I had the money I would probably own hundreds of cameras, but I would not take a lot more photos than I would now if I had the money. And again that is all right. Some of us just take snapshots, and that is all right. Some of us are into pretty pictures, and that is all right. Some are into street photography, and that is all right. Some of us only take photos if someone pays us, and that is all right. Some of us never take photos, but just have to have the newest, latest digital SLR, and that is all right. In fact about the only thing I find not all right on this list is the insufferable attitude that what I, or they, do is better than what someone else chooses to do. -- Bill Owens wrote: My comment was meant to say that there are some people here who are more concerned with technical issues than they are with taking pictures. -- 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: PAW: guitar
I should photograph the back of the caustic guitar at my house (left here by a friend) that has a rather big 'dent' in the back from being used to hit it's owner's brother in the head. Definite imperfections. David Madsen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.davidmadsen.com -Original Message- From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW: guitar Yup. No scratches around the sound hole rosette. Doesn't take much playing to make that area "imperfect". Nice shot, though. Amita Guha wrote: > Thanks! It is actually a Yamaha F335. Big fat dreadnought. I've had it > for a year and I still can't really play yet. My hubby plays metal on an > electric.
RE: PAW: guitar
Spell check failed me. It should be an acoustic guitar, not a caustic guitar. Or maybe it should. David Madsen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.davidmadsen.com -Original Message- From: David Madsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PAW: guitar I should photograph the back of the caustic guitar at my house (left here by a friend) that has a rather big 'dent' in the back from being used to hit it's owner's brother in the head. Definite imperfections. David Madsen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.davidmadsen.com -Original Message- From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW: guitar Yup. No scratches around the sound hole rosette. Doesn't take much playing to make that area "imperfect". Nice shot, though. Amita Guha wrote: > Thanks! It is actually a Yamaha F335. Big fat dreadnought. I've had it > for a year and I still can't really play yet. My hubby plays metal on an > electric.
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #544
> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:49:31 -0500 > From: Andre Langevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: CLA for 35mm/f2 SMC-M (also, opinions between 35mm f2 and > 35mm f2.8?) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" > > >Can anyone recommend a reputable place for Pentax repair that could take a > >look at my 35mm lens. There is some oil on the blades and the aperture > >just does not seem as snappy as it should be. I live in the Twin Cities, > >but am assuming I'll have to mail it somewhere for repair. Which "Twin Cities"? If you mean MSP then I'd recommend Custom Camera Repair at Lake and Bryant. My experience is that cleaning apertures is not all that cheap, since it involves a pretty full disassembly of the lens sometimes. DJE
Re: dorkily enabled
Do NOT knock the KX until you've tried. it. KX can be had with a range-finder split image screen, but the small microprism is very useful. Pulling out the wind lever to meter is a GOOD thing. Smack it back, push that cute little shutter button almost all the way down, and wait for the moment without wasting batteries. The KX is a very, very very good camera. MXs are goofy in comparison. There. Comments welcome. grin. I'd give up everything else I own to keep my KX's running. Except lenses. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My vacation camera solution, a KX, showed up today from KEH. On the whole it's just about right. My only gripes are the lack of a split image focusing screen (which MIGHT be rectifyable) and the need to stand-off the wind lever to turn the meter on. Otherwise it has all the right controls in the right places. The KX seems to be EXACTLY the same size as the F (noticeably smaller than the K2--electronics are smaller than gears) and even the screws on the top and bottom covers are in the same place. I'd suspect there is at least 50% commonality of parts or tooling. Everything is subtly different cosmetically but it really looks like the KX is basically a reworked F, with a few new bits like center-weighted metering and mirror lock-up (of a sort). Presumably the KM is even more spotF-like. The K2 is clearly the more evolved camera, with a number of relocated controls and a different shutter-speed-dial design.
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? Recommendations? 70-210
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Lon Williamson wrote: > These lenses all have failings. Too big, or One Touch, or too > expensive to serve as standbys. Who makes an acceptable, reasonably > flare resistant, small, manual focus, 70/80-200/210 for not much money? I thought that historically One Touch and MF are almost one and the same. If the issue with One Touch is creep, the Kiron has a zoom and focus lock. In any case, unless the F is the one that is too expensive, it is reasonably short, relatively close-focusing and two touch. Would flare-resistance go into your equation? Because then, in principle, you are really limited in choice ;-) Have you checked Stan's page for reviews of the post-F zooms? Interested, Kostas
Re: What gear is on your "lust list" ? Recommendations? 70-210
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Andre Langevin wrote: > >I too would opt for the F, but I have even heard people (outside the > >list) say the F is not a patch on the A. > > Outside the list... hmm... does it count? Dunno. If they (re)join, will the F get a constant aperture or a metal barrel? :-))) Kostas
Re: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
And she takes good shots without knowing what she wants to know. I think we probably agree more than not, Rob. Rob Studdert wrote: Strangely Tan seems quite interested in the technicalities, at least that's the impression I got during our conversations, am I right Tan?
Re: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix...
Holy crap Tan! I was expecting blurry subject movement and lots of odd angles. I should know better than to not expect the best from your shots! Your favorites are good, but this on is amazing too! http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll15.html Christian - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:16 PM Subject: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix... > > So I went to a concert last night with singer Shannon Noll (was runner up on > Australian Idol). BIG news in our sleep little country hicksville. > Over 5000 people attended the concert, that is like double the population of > my entire town! > > Anyways, had some fun trying my hand at concert pix. Was extremely > difficult though as all were handheld and I was in the middle of the mosh > pit, so you can imagine the problems I faced! > > And they kept spraying the damn crowd with water (it was BLOODY hot in that > there pit!), but I spent half the night trying to protect my camera from the > fire hose! > > Anyways, all shots taken on the *ist D with Tamron 28-200mm f4-5.6 Asph lens > at between 135mm and 200mm. All handheld at f5.6 and usually around 1/8 and > sometimes up to 1/20 if I was lucky. All shot with NR on at ISO 1600. > > Actually, come to think of it, I reckon I did pretty well to get even a few > in focus with those settings. My arm muscles must be building up! > > Word of advice - never try to take sharp pics in a mosh pit with a long zoom > lens. It ain't pretty lemme tell you! There will be quite a few drunken > concert goers with bumps on their drunken heads today as a result of them > jumping into my camera (I know, I know, it is a public liability nightmare, > but I figure they were mostly too drunk to remember and besides, it WAS a > mosh pit - most people EXPECT to get bashed on the head with something! > lol)... Anyways, boy did my reflexes get good last night as I tried to > shoot quickly between crowd crushes! > > Here's a few of the better shots, the black blurry bits in the foreground of > some shots are people's heads! It does pay to be that bit taller at times. > I had some poor lady who was like 4ft standing next to me and whinging all > night about how she was shorter than most of the 12 year olds there and > could see less than them cause she didn't have the energy to be jumping > around like a maniac to see over the heads...! lol. > > These two are my favourites: > > http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll11.html > > http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll09.html > > And here are the rest of them > > http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/index.html > > tan. >
Re: OT: A tax question for EU residents
Hi, Wednesday, March 10, 2004, 11:21:27 PM, Rob wrote: > If I shipped a used camera from Australia that was purchased new (with tax > paid) from a vendor inside the EU to an EU member country would it attract a > second round of tax? it's not clear to me what the order of events has been. Here is what I think you're saying: 1. you bought a camera from someone in an EU country 2. they shipped the camera to you in Australia 3. you want to send the camera from Aus to a different EU country If this is the case, then I think it would be liable at least to duty, and possibly also to VAT. If you have paperwork showing that you bought it in an EU country, and paid the necessary taxes, and didn't reclaim them on, for instance, an export VAT reclaim fund, then you might get some reduction. Check with the authorities in the country you're sending to. For the UK look on http://www.hmce.gov.uk/. You may find links to other member states' bogeymen. Despite so-called harmonisation the rules vary from one country to the next. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: PAW: guitar
I thought maybe it plays sharp all the time. David Madsen wrote: > > Spell check failed me. It should be an acoustic guitar, not a caustic > guitar. Or maybe it should. > > David Madsen > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.davidmadsen.com > > -Original Message- > From: David Madsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:40 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: PAW: guitar > > I should photograph the back of the caustic guitar at my house (left here by > a friend) that has a rather big 'dent' in the back from being used to hit > it's owner's brother in the head. Definite imperfections. > > David Madsen > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.davidmadsen.com > > -Original Message- > From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:45 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: PAW: guitar > > Yup. No scratches around the sound hole rosette. > Doesn't take much playing to make that area "imperfect". > Nice shot, though. > > Amita Guha wrote: > > Thanks! It is actually a Yamaha F335. Big fat dreadnought. I've had it > > for a year and I still can't really play yet. My hubby plays metal on an > > electric.
RE: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix...
As David said, "Holy crap are those good!" I took concert piccies a couple of weeks ago, and got back the contacts and they blow, compared to those. For some reason the singer really liked them (can't figure out why), and 4x6 proofs will be back on Friday (she wanted me to order them - go figure). But this isn't about me. It's about Tan. Wow!! Great work!! cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "David Madsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix... Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:36:14 -0700 Let me start by saying "holy crap those are good!". I have done a few concerts in my time, being a musician, and getting good photos in that kind of lighting is hard. You have done a fantastic job. I actually wouldn't have minded seeing a few with a dragged shutter to show even more movement. I am also impressed at the performance of the istD at 1600. I should be ordering mine next week and I can't wait to experiment. David Madsen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.davidmadsen.com -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix... So I went to a concert last night with singer Shannon Noll (was runner up on Australian Idol). BIG news in our sleep little country hicksville. Over 5000 people attended the concert, that is like double the population of my entire town! Anyways, had some fun trying my hand at concert pix. Was extremely difficult though as all were handheld and I was in the middle of the mosh pit, so you can imagine the problems I faced! And they kept spraying the damn crowd with water (it was BLOODY hot in that there pit!), but I spent half the night trying to protect my camera from the fire hose! Anyways, all shots taken on the *ist D with Tamron 28-200mm f4-5.6 Asph lens at between 135mm and 200mm. All handheld at f5.6 and usually around 1/8 and sometimes up to 1/20 if I was lucky. All shot with NR on at ISO 1600. Actually, come to think of it, I reckon I did pretty well to get even a few in focus with those settings. My arm muscles must be building up! Word of advice - never try to take sharp pics in a mosh pit with a long zoom lens. It ain't pretty lemme tell you! There will be quite a few drunken concert goers with bumps on their drunken heads today as a result of them jumping into my camera (I know, I know, it is a public liability nightmare, but I figure they were mostly too drunk to remember and besides, it WAS a mosh pit - most people EXPECT to get bashed on the head with something! lol)... Anyways, boy did my reflexes get good last night as I tried to shoot quickly between crowd crushes! Here's a few of the better shots, the black blurry bits in the foreground of some shots are people's heads! It does pay to be that bit taller at times. I had some poor lady who was like 4ft standing next to me and whinging all night about how she was shorter than most of the 12 year olds there and could see less than them cause she didn't have the energy to be jumping around like a maniac to see over the heads...! lol. These two are my favourites: http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll11.html http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll09.html And here are the rest of them http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/index.html tan. _ MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
sensor size economics
> From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The full frame question boils down to economics. Of course, this > question has been argued to death in this and other forums. A FF Pentax > would probably cost much more than most people here could afford, this > just to be able to break even. Even then, I don't believe that there is > a volume/price point constrained by Pentax's typical market and also > constrained by the sheer cost of the materials that would allow them to > break even. Unless there is a breakthrough in chip manufacturing that > allows CCDs to be made at this size inexpensively, this is not going to > happen anytime in the near future. Canon may not have broken even yet > on their 1DS, despite its $8000 price tag, but they are also doing this > to make their branding image more valuable which sells more of their > other cameras. Kodak's ONLY DSLR is full frame, and costs about half as much. I imagine Kodak is making money on it, since Kodak is in enough financial trouble without supporting a DSLR if it isn't a money-maker. It's also a question of exactly what economics. Pentax isn't going to produce a *istD full frame for $1500 anytime soon, no. I don't think anybody is. $4000 might be achievable, though, and that's cheaper than the EOS1D and D1 started selling for. Both of those cameras sold quite well, although perhaps not to a Pentax-type market. Personally, I'd probably be in the market for a $4000 full frame DSLR if it were just a bit more capable than the *istD, because it would be almost an even break financially. It would take me about $2500 worth of new ultra-wide lenses to get to the same level of functionality that I enjoyed with film cameras, and another several thousand dollars worth of fast wide-angles would become meaningful again if I had a full frame DSLR. These are Nikon lenses, but I can see guys with the 18/3.5, 15/3.5, 28/2.0, and 31 FA being in the same boat. DJE
Re: CLA for 35mm/f2 SMC-M (also, opinions between 35mm f2 and 35mm f2.8?)
Shel's list is on my site. When I entered Pentax repair in google it was the 5th item that came up. http://graywolfphoto.com/pentax/pentax_repair_shops.html -- Andre Langevin wrote: Can anyone recommend a reputable place for Pentax repair that could take a look at my 35mm lens. There is some oil on the blades and the aperture just does not seem as snappy as it should be. I live in the Twin Cities, but am assuming I'll have to mail it somewhere for repair. This is a pretty straight-forward job. I would send it to any reknown place that does not ask too much ($25-30). My repairman is across the border. Mailing to US place might be cheaper. One of the PDML member has a list of repair places. I could not find it on Google. Ask the repairman to apply some "oil barrier" so that the lens won't give you the same problem again (common with the f2.8). On another note, any opinions as to preference of the 35mm f2.8 (A or M) over the 35mm f2? I have been thinking all along that this f2 of mine is so much better that the f2.8, but don't really have any basis for thinking that. http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_35.html Andre -- 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: First PAW -- Boys watching their friend use a bow and arrow
Boris, Despite my "extensive and exhaustive" analysis, I think that the proper cropping did wonders. Did you see Lasse's re-work of the image on those WOW threads? Along with cleaning things up, he cropped out the right hand boy, and enlarged the image. It really worked well! I've long since deleted the post, but it should be in the archives somewhere. I still feel bad that I went and did exactly what I've said many times that I hate. "You should have shot it from a different angle, etc, etc". I should practise what I preach! cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: bransky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: First PAW -- Boys watching their friend use a bow and arrow Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:35:12 +0200 Hi! Frank's analysis is extensive and exhaustive... There is one thing that I particularly would think needs fixing. You see, without the title or the story it is not that easy to see that the left-most boy actually shoots with bow and arrow. Which I humbly think wasn't your original intention... Don't be discouraged. You did fine job with DOF control and I see little wrong with this picture except of the above. I don't know how I would approach same shot. Perhaps, though risky it is, I would try to shoot my shot from behind the tree which is in front of the right-most boy... But then it is a bad idea to be in front of the line of fire... Just my cents. As I said, don't be discouraged... Boris _ http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: dorkily enabled
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >The K2 is clearly the more evolved camera, with a number of relocated >controls and a different shutter-speed-dial design. > >It does sort of point out how the K series are essentially evolved >spotmatics (along the lines of the Metallica prototypes and such) and the >real "new design" came with the M line. I almost wonder if the K series >was put out simply to introduce the bayonet mount and use up stock, and >the M line was already in the works in 1975. I think you may well be right about that except for the K2, which shares almost nothing with earlier Pentax cameras (or any of the other K series cameras). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: first post XP-2 and PAW
...and in the process, Shel learned "I'm still right, and frank's dead wrong!" LOL! -frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: first post XP-2 and PAW Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:22:36 -0800 The nicest thing about this is exemplified in just this situation: a couple of people like something, others don't, but what the dialogue does, at least for me, is to allow one to take another look at a photograph through, as it were, another's eyes, perhaps seeing something that was overlooked, or seeing the same thing differently, and, in so doing, perhaps learn something or expand one's vision. _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
RE: first post XP-2 and PAW
...of course, I'd ~never~ say that I like blown out highlights in someone else's photo, just because I've taken so many photos with the highlights inadvertantly blown out by overexposure, after which I've pawned off the print as "artsty". http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2069022 "Uh, yeah, I was going for the 'haunting' look. Yeah haunting, that's the ticket." -frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "David Madsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: first post XP-2 and PAW Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:24:15 -0700 Exactly. When I first commented on the photo I wanted to see more detail in the highlights. I haven't totally changed my mind, but I do see how the highlights give it a somewhat haunting image, which works in this photo. _ http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: PAW and WOW
Whats wrong with a PC as long as you don't run Windows on it? On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 00:31, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 10 Mar 2004 at 17:36, Lon Williamson wrote: > > > It amazes me that Pentax shooters can be Techno folks. > > LOL, next you'll say you're surprised we don't all use Mac's > > Cheers, > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
Jens, Interesting result. As you mentioned in your text, your scanner may be the limiting factor for your MZ-S => Fuji Superia => Epson 3200 flow. The imaging system in the scanner probably isn't sharp enough to capture all of the detail in the film. I have an Epson 2450 (the older version of the 3200). A few months ago, I shot some resolution targets with a medium format film camera and scanned them with my 2450. I saw a lot more detail in the film with a 30x microscope than was visible in the scanned results. It would be interesting to take your film and have it commercially scanned with a high-end scanner to see how much better (if at all) the results are compared to your 3200. --Mark Hi all I have now posted my Analog versus Digital test shots. I know that this thread is not about this. But I was hoping to maybe inspire some of you guys to make similar tests, using the *ist D and an analog Pentax camera, maybe even using the same lenses, or lenses of comparable quality and resolution. Please visit: http://gallery50012.fotopic.net/c132825.html You may consider this a PAW. All the best Jens Bladt
Re: PAW: City Hall Tower
Attila, I didn't mean to discourage you - quite the contrary; I hope you go out and take many more photos of buildings or whatever you want to take photos of. They should turn out the way you want them to, not the way I want them to. If you're satisfied with them, that's all that really matters. You seem satisfied with this photo, so that's what's important. OTOH, you posted it here on this list, and asked for comments. I gave you mine. If such comments are discouraging, then perhaps you shouldn't post. I don't say that with any sarcasm or anger; I merely state a fact. This is all pretty subective, isn't it? If a photo is shot in a style that doesn't appeal to me, it's pretty unlikely that I'll be moved by it. I can appreciate the technical skill involved, but I look to more than that when assessing a photo. And, as far as what Tom said, well, actually I am "into architecture". I've taken many photos of buildings over the years, with varying results. And, I know a teeny bit about architecture and the architectural process (not much, to be sure, but a bit). But, whether I'm into architecture or not, has little to do with whether I like a photo (even an architectural photo). But, as I said, please, if you don't like what I said, ignore me. I don't mean any harm, nor do I want to discourage. I really loved your seagull shot (and said that on the list). Just so you know it's nothing personal cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Boros Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Boros Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: PAW: City Hall Tower Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:38:51 +0200 First I want to thank you all who commented on this shot. BL> To me it looks like the image that just is. It does not have much BL> emotion or meaning in it. It is just an image of a nice looking BL> building unfortunately taking on a day when skies were rather dull BL> looking. It was taken intentionally on an overcast day. So it is not a snapshot, neither was taken on a trip, it is right here in Oradea;) I wanted to take it on an overcast day to eliminate some very unpleasant shadows. So I had to say bye-bye to the nice looking deep blue sky. It was a compromise, but I thought it is better to sacrifice the sky rather than the nice small arhitectural ornaments. BL> I think I would take out the little antenna just on the right to the BL> flag on top of the building. With all respect Boris, I wouldn't do that... it is just part of it, and I don't feel it right to take it out. But I may consider "faking the sky". ft> I must say, it's a well executed snapshot. Nice and sharp, the colours of ft> the tower are nice. As Boris said, however, the sky is really washed out ft> and not at all attractive to me. It needs to be blue. Or there should be ft> some clouds or something angry to make it interesting. Thanks Frank, but as I wrote before it is not a snapshot. Maybe I don't know how to make good arhitectural photos, that is. You and Boris made me think to correct the sky in Photoshop. But I'm still not sure... I am reluctant to digital alterations. All this reminds me a joke I read earlier on PDML. An american couple went in Ireland on vacation, and the wife yelled that 'Ireland does not look like photos of Ireland'. The point is, I don't intented to make it look nicer than it actually is. g> Frank is not much into architecture (GRIN). I think it is a nice well done shot. g> Sometimes a clear record is all that is wanted, not all photos have to be artsy. g> Some of the folks on the list ought to look at a good book on architectural g> photography, but not one on advertising architectural photography which tends to g> be artsy pictures of buildings. Thank you Graywolf, at last some encouraging words, so I won't give up to shoot architecture:) I am not much into architecture myself, but I think it is an interesting subject, and I want to learn more. Attila _ MSN Premium with Virus Guard and Firewall* from McAfee® Security : 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: OT: Epson 2200 mac osx 10.3 and PhotoShopCS
Paul, I don't have one, and I don't use a Mac. I hope this is helpful ;-)) But a good friend does use a Mac with the newer OS, and he also uses the Epson 2200. He's happy, and believe me, were he not, I'd know about it. We did some printing at his place not too long ago, and the results were acceptable. >From what I've gleaned, it's a good printer. It uses similar technology to the bigger 9600, from which I've pulled a few prints. The 9600 was driven by a new Mac, too ... I like the results better from the 9600, but that may be because the operator runs a high-end lab, and everything is superbly calibrated and working at its peak. Rus just does his simple home stuff, doesn't use the printer every day, hasn't done as good a job in choosing and using paper stock ... still, the results are good. Ummm, Rus is using PS 7.01, unless he's upgraded in the past month or so. shel Paul Stenquist wrote: > > My old printer is on its last legs. It's an Epson 1200 and it has > produced more than 1000 12 x 18s. It's not printing very well with OS X > 10.3 and Photoshop CS. I think the drivers haven't been uptdated beyond > system 10.1, which is quite diffferent. Since it's a clunker anyway, I'm > thinking of replacing it with the Epson 2200. Is anyone using this > printer with OSX 10.3 and PhotoShop CS. Are you happy? Is this printer > due to be replaced? Is there a better printer in the $500 to $800 range > that's proven itself with PS CS and OSX 10.3? > Paul
Re: PAW and WOW
Hi Lon ... I don't understand your comment about smackin' me with a backhoe. Is that anything like gittin' whupped upside the haid with a 2x4 that's been soakin' in creosote for dang near a month? If so, thet sukka's sure gonna hurt some Anyway, I'm glad you like the PAW and the WOW (which I had nothing to do with, BTW) I've taken to filtering the PAW and the WOW to their own separate folders, the results of which are like having three lists instead of one, and makes reading the list a very easy and pleasurable past time. Great to have your comments here ... the more support for the PAW and the WOW the better balanced the list will be overall. And please don't get me wrong ... the technical stuff is good and it's important, yet it's nice to have more diversity on the PDML. shel Lon Williamson wrote: > > I do like these new directions the group is taking. > Whether you like Shel or not (and, BTW, welcome back, > Shel), WOW and PAW are a wonderful change from the > Technoweenie stuff that goes on in here. > > It amazes me that Pentax shooters can be Techno folks. > > I don't comment on a lot of these New Features because > Some Folks (no names mentioned) submit three or four > pictures a week for PAW (A picture a week). Nonetheless, > I find the change refreshing. Shel is Hell on Wheels with > Ideas. If I were 60 or thereabouts, and I'm close, I'd > smack him with a backhoe. grin.
RE: first post XP-2 and PAW
On 10 Mar 2004 at 18:09, frank theriault wrote: > ...of course, I'd ~never~ say that I like blown out highlights in someone > else's photo, just because I've taken so many photos with the highlights > inadvertantly blown out by overexposure, after which I've pawned off the > print as "artsty". > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2069022 > > "Uh, yeah, I was going for the 'haunting' look. Yeah haunting, that's the > ticket." I saw a documentary on a young Sydney photographer Trent Parke a week ago, one of his current projects is shooting city folk in shafts of light to great a haunting look, see: http://www.canvas-art.nl/stock/artists/parkeautio/images/trent2.html Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix...
Tan - Two and fifteen - both have the makings of album covers. Paul - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:16 PM Subject: Fairygirl's first attempt at concert pix... > > So I went to a concert last night with singer Shannon Noll (was runner up on > Australian Idol). BIG news in our sleep little country hicksville. > Over 5000 people attended the concert, that is like double the population of > my entire town! > > Anyways, had some fun trying my hand at concert pix. Was extremely > difficult though as all were handheld and I was in the middle of the mosh > pit, so you can imagine the problems I faced! > > And they kept spraying the damn crowd with water (it was BLOODY hot in that > there pit!), but I spent half the night trying to protect my camera from the > fire hose! > > Anyways, all shots taken on the *ist D with Tamron 28-200mm f4-5.6 Asph lens > at between 135mm and 200mm. All handheld at f5.6 and usually around 1/8 and > sometimes up to 1/20 if I was lucky. All shot with NR on at ISO 1600. > > Actually, come to think of it, I reckon I did pretty well to get even a few > in focus with those settings. My arm muscles must be building up! > > Word of advice - never try to take sharp pics in a mosh pit with a long zoom > lens. It ain't pretty lemme tell you! There will be quite a few drunken > concert goers with bumps on their drunken heads today as a result of them > jumping into my camera (I know, I know, it is a public liability nightmare, > but I figure they were mostly too drunk to remember and besides, it WAS a > mosh pit - most people EXPECT to get bashed on the head with something! > lol)... Anyways, boy did my reflexes get good last night as I tried to > shoot quickly between crowd crushes! > > Here's a few of the better shots, the black blurry bits in the foreground of > some shots are people's heads! It does pay to be that bit taller at times. > I had some poor lady who was like 4ft standing next to me and whinging all > night about how she was shorter than most of the 12 year olds there and > could see less than them cause she didn't have the energy to be jumping > around like a maniac to see over the heads...! lol. > > These two are my favourites: > > http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll11.html > > http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/pages/ShannonNoll09.html > > And here are the rest of them > > http://www.tanyamayer.com/shannonnoll/index.html > > tan. > >
Re: PAW and WOW
>> On 10 Mar 2004 at 17:36, Lon Williamson wrote: >> >> > It amazes me that Pentax shooters can be Techno folks. >> >> LOL, next you'll say you're surprised we don't all use Mac's >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Rob Studdert >Whats wrong with a PC as long as you don't run Windows on it? >Frits Wüthrich LOL. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution
not only that, but use the best film and digital settings, i.e. ISO 50 not ISO200. jco J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Mark Erickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:24 PM To: pentax-discuss Subject: RE: *ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution Jens, Interesting result. As you mentioned in your text, your scanner may be the limiting factor for your MZ-S => Fuji Superia => Epson 3200 flow. The imaging system in the scanner probably isn't sharp enough to capture all of the detail in the film. I have an Epson 2450 (the older version of the 3200). A few months ago, I shot some resolution targets with a medium format film camera and scanned them with my 2450. I saw a lot more detail in the film with a 30x microscope than was visible in the scanned results. It would be interesting to take your film and have it commercially scanned with a high-end scanner to see how much better (if at all) the results are compared to your 3200. --Mark >Hi all >I have now posted my Analog versus Digital test shots. I know that this >thread is not about this. But I was hoping to maybe inspire some of you guys >to make similar tests, using the *ist D and an analog Pentax camera, maybe >even using the same lenses, or lenses of comparable quality and resolution. > >Please visit: http://gallery50012.fotopic.net/c132825.html >You may consider this a PAW. > >All the best >Jens Bladt
RE: CLA for 35mm/f2 SMC-M (also, opinions between 35mm f2 and 35mm f2.8?)
I had the A35/2.8 few years ago. It was good lens optically, although not razer sharp. There are some mechanical & optical differences between the M & A so their parts aren't that interchangable. Make sure the aperture spring of the M is in good condition. Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Can anyone recommend a reputable place for Pentax repair that could take a look at my 35mm lens. There is some oil on the blades and the aperture just does not seem as snappy as it should be. I live in the Twin Cities, but am assuming I'll have to mail it somewhere for repair. On another note, any opinions as to preference of the 35mm f2.8 (A or M) over the 35mm f2? I have been thinking all along that this f2 of mine is so much better that the f2.8, but don't really have any basis for thinking that. Thanks. Randy Jackson _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN Premium http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
RE: first post XP-2 and PAW
Rob, That is so freaking wild! I like that a lot. thanks, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I saw a documentary on a young Sydney photographer Trent Parke a week ago, one of his current projects is shooting city folk in shafts of light to great a haunting look, see: http://www.canvas-art.nl/stock/artists/parkeautio/images/trent2.html Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 _ Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
