Re: lens cleaning
Hi, > OMG, not THAT debate again :-) [...] > Again, De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum (meaning loosely, your mileage > may vary). > Both approaches, To Filter or Not To Filter, are fundamentally > different for different kind of photography. > I would end with some funny punchline from Monty Python to make this > less serious (is that even possible ?), but my memory is failing > me... Please, others, put some nice MP reference here :) The song (click "Download Here"): http://www.pythonline.com/plugs/idle/index.shtml The lyrics: http://macartisan.typepad.com/cupertino/2004/05/eric_idles_fcc_.html -- Cheers, Bob
Re: OT: Windows Scob virus collects passwords, financial data; Macintosh unaffected
My comments were perfectly pleasantly presented, unlike your own and those of Daniel J Matyola. Looks like it is the same few who spoil it for the rest as always. Incidentally, what is your contribution to this discussion Lewis other than to hurl insults? Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 00:23, Lewis Matthew wrote: Perhaps they didn't raise an eyebrow because they were pleasantly presented - a tactic which you have yet to master. Lewis From: Antonio Aparicio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Then what about all the OTHER OT NON PENTAX THREADS? Lets see, there was the Tan is leaving thread (very touching by the way), the Cotys fridge contents thread (usual drivel from Coty), and the unforgetable OT: Loo with a view. Non of which raised an eybrow. Antonio On 6 Jul 2004, at 22:53, alex wetmore wrote: Becuase it has nothing to do with pentax cameras and this is not the operating system religous war discussion list. alex On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Antonio Aparicio wrote: Christian, Interesting. Why the need to end this particlar thread? Antonio On 6 Jul 2004, at 22:18, Christian wrote: how to end this thread: "Antonio, You are so right! I hadn't seen the errors of my ways. Without your constand attention to Microsoft Windows vulnerabilities I would be completely lost in a pile of viruses, spyware and hijackers. Thank you so much for educating me. Now i will throw out my Windows computers and run out and buy Macs to replace them. Thank you again. I will be forever in your debt. Keep up the good work and make sure you continue to state the failings of Microsoft and the virtues of Macintosh." Christian -Original Message- From: Bob Blakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Jul 6, 2004 3:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Windows Scob virus collects passwords, financial data; Macintosh unaffected There's no malevolent body of twits investing their time to destroy either of these cars. Didn't you understand that a malevolent body of twits investing their time to destroy was the major point of the argument? No? Everyone else did. Regards, Bob... From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bob, If your only reply to the very seriuous securityh issue facing most of the worlds (Windows) computers is to point to maket share numbers, then I am afraid you are further removed from reality than I had thought. Market share and security are not the same thing. A car analogy for you. Volvo are a lot more secure than say Ford. But ford have a greater market share. Antonio On 6 Jul 2004, at 19:53, Bob Blakely wrote: Jostein, it's no use yacking back to him. Antonio has no sense of what's really happening, and he never will. Due to his own blind spots, he is incapable of understanding the following: 1.Windows (client) has a 93.8% share of the market 2.Mac & Linux are each about 3% of the market. http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml? articleID=15202215 Now if someone is a cracker ass out to bring folks computers to their knees shouting uncle so that you can claim credit (via pseudonym, of course), which operating system is he going to target? Hint: Everyone on this list knows this, save the fool. Only an fool would claim that a Mac or Linux system is inherently more safe than a Windows system. The number of attempted attacks on them is paltry at best. It's easy to say you have the fastest hotrod in town when you've never really raced. Do you want to be more secure? Well then, buy that MAC or Linux operating system and be glad that everyone else isn't using it. That's what keeps you safe. But remember, the same thing that keeps you safe is what's responsible for the difference in software shelf space devoted to Windows vs. MAC and Linux together. So don't whine about lack of software diversity, my Mac & Linux friends, it's the visible sign of the very thing that keeps you relatively virus free - lack of market share. Remember: "It is impossible to make anything fool- proof because fools are so ingenious.." - unknown. Regards, Bob... "The heart of a fool is in his mouth, but the mouth of a wise man is in his heart." - Benjamin Franklin From: "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please, antonio, Quote my arrogant statements. And since you say "again", please quote my previous arrogant statements too, if you can. I'd like to learn from my mistakes. Quoting Antonio Aparicio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Jostein, I think the arrogance and abuse (yet again) is all yours. Not to mention the flames. All I did was pass on the information. Cmon Jostein, any other product would be pulled from the market on safety grounds by now, not to mention trade descriptions/not fit for the purpose for which it was sold! - and yet with Windows we have 1,000s of viruses, trojans, etc. etc., all of which apparently the responsibility of the user acording to your argument. If anyone falls foul then it is their fault for not not downloading the latest fix fr
Re: OT: Windows Scob virus collects passwords, financial data; Macintosh unaffected
Total nonsense Daniel. Most OT threads, particularly thsoe by Coty and Frank have nothing interesting whatever to say, are juvenile and attack other participants openly. Just check the archives, it is all there. Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 00:05, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: The other OT threads are conducted by people that have some thing interesting to say, and do so in an intellegent and civilized manner, without senseless and juvenile personal attacks on other participants. Antonio Aparicio wrote:i Then what about all the OTHER OT NON PENTAX THREADS? Lets see, there was the Tan is leaving thread (very touching by the way), the Cotys fridge contents thread (usual drivel from Coty), and the unforgetable OT: Loo with a view. Non of which raised an eybrow.
Re: OT: Windows Scob virus collects passwords, financial data; Macintosh unaffected
Yes Bob, but the point is that the client machines are Windows machines! Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 01:03, Bob Blakely wrote: Many viruses require MANY, MANY machines to accomplish their foul mission. For example, every server, Mac, Windows or Linux, is vulnerable to denial of service attacks. For this, the perp requires a vast army of clients to simultaneously request (false) services to overload the target server or it's comm system's capacity. For this, the client (your) machines are the virus target to receive a program that will surreptitiously attempt access the targeted server. Regards, Bob... --- "No man's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session." -- Mark Twain From: "Anders Hultman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bob Blakely: 1.Windows (client) has a 93.8% share of the market 2.Mac & Linux are each about 3% of the market. These numbers are desktop systems; personal computers. If you look at market shares for web servers (which I thought this thread was about, at least at some point) you'll see that the IIS web server from Microsoft has a 21 percent market share, while the open source web server Apache has a 67 percent market share: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html Now if someone is a cracker ass out to bring folks computers to their knees shouting uncle so that you can claim credit (via pseudonym, of course), which operating system is he going to target? For desktop systems the answer of course is Windows. For web servers it would by the same logic be Apache, and not Microsoft IIS, but it seems it is not. Certainly, there have been numerous hacking attepmts at Apache servers too, and some of them have succeeded, as the release of security updates from the Apache group suggests. But still, these type of things much more often happens to IIS servers than to Apache servers. There must be a reson for that. Only an fool would claim that a Mac or Linux system is inherently more safe than a Windows system. The number of attempted attacks on them is paltry at best. It's easy to say you have the fastest hotrod in town when you've never really raced. Well, for attempts to spread virues or such that is true. Paltry at best. But for attempts to break into servers, well... Unix security have been hard tested for a longer period of time than Windows even have existed. anders - http://anders.hultman.nu/ med dagens bild och allt!
RE: Loo with a view
Would you be confident, you're unseen in there? (My grandmother would not really believe the lights in the fridge went out when closing the door :-). Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Ryan Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 5. juli 2004 08:11 Til: PDML Emne: OT: Loo with a view A friend forwarded this. It's quite amusing. http://www.serpentineroad.com/forum/album_page.php?pic_id=508 Cheers, Ryan
Re: SMC lenses
>>F (made for the SF series - SFX, SF1, SF7 etc.) Must dissagree with this one. The KF is for MEF only and as far as I know, there was only 1 lens. KFA is for SFX etc James
Re: lens cleaning
>> I would end with some funny punchline from Monty Python to make this >> less serious (is that even possible ?), but my memory is failing >> me... Please, others, put some nice MP reference here :) BW> The song (click "Download Here"): BW> http://www.pythonline.com/plugs/idle/index.shtml BW> The lyrics: BW> http://macartisan.typepad.com/cupertino/2004/05/eric_idles_fcc_.html Now THAT's nice ;-) Thanks! Another keeper from great Mr.Idle. Incidentally, both Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam are coming for a summer film festival here in Czechia (well more likely Moravia), and John Cleese will be seen in Prague next week! It's a pitty I am on my way to Romania and Serbia (if all goes well) at the end of this week. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Romanian PDML
Buna Ziwa! in around 10 or 14 days, if I am not lost in Serbia, I am going to cross to Romania. I have already been there, and it was very nice. I am asking if any of the Romanians on the list would like to meet. My schedule is not yet clear at all (as when you are 'hiking, you don't know much where the winds of fate will blow you), but I would like to visit Bucurest this time, which I missed the last time, and will probably be seen in Timisoara and Arad/Oradea on my way back home (as that's the best route back). I have heard about a nice bar in Bucurest by the train station, which I wouldn't want to miss. Thanks! Mail me off-list please If anybody is interested in a little meeting (warning though, I will be traveling light so without any Pentaxes, just a small camera :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: 43 Limited "Pre-computer?"
Pål, I have mixed feelings about stories like the one you told below, about the old lens designer who towards the end of his life sets out to design the ultimate lens like in the old days... I can say, that in the industry I work in, similar stories are often used to motivate and entertain dealers and customers as they pretend to give them a look behind the curtain - but they are made up by marketing agencies for exactly that purpose and have very limited (if any) facts behind. If Mr. H. really is the chief lens designer then he most probably has not much to do with actual lens design but is spending his day reviewing Powerpoint presentations on business strategies... I don't know how close you are (or have been) to Pentax so I could be completely wrong and your story is entirely true... it just rang a bell. Sven Zitat von Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Tom wrote: > > > So how images from a particular lens can have a "pre-computer" look versus > > an 'absence of computer look' is simply beyond me. An how that can be > > blanketly stated, considering all the variables that will go into producing > > an image, is even more beyond me. > > Computers are used in order to eliminate various aberations in optical design > among other things. Unfortunately, aberrations are giving lenses certain > desireable (for some that is) characteristics. Some of these characteristics > are related to bokeh (thats why some of the best corrected lenses, macro > lenses, often show nasty bokeh characteristics). > In the good old days the look produced from various lenses were very much in > the hands of the lens designer (not the computer), in many ways a kind of > art. With the 43 Limited Mr. Harakara (Pentax chief lens designer; the one > who design all(?) the classic * lenses) and a famous japanese photographer > (who's name I've forgotten but he was 77 years old when the 77 Limited was > presented as a gift to him), set out to try to reproduce the pleasant image > quality characteristics produced by pre-computer designed lenses (the good > ones I assume); particularly the three dimensional feel of the images. In > order to achieve this, they "turned off" the computer. Fine tuned various > aberations and judged the results from the images themselves produced by the > lens; not curves produced by test equipment. Hence the 43 Limited, and also > the 77 Limited (to some extent at least), are designed very differently from > "normal" lenses. Incidentally, the 31 Limited is not designed by Harakawa and > is per! > haps a more "traditional" lens. > > > Pål > > > > - Ende der weitergeleiteten Nachricht -
Re: Filters work!!!!!
"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >From: "Mark Roberts" > >> Mine don't even go to the "bit bucket" - they get deleted >completely. > >Can Outlook Express be made to do that? I have no idea. (Don't get me started on Outlook Express or I'll start sounding like Antonio! ) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Is this THE "70-210mm f4-5.6 SMC Pentax-F" from Pentax Samba 2004?
Hi! Hello Don It is! Jens I second that ... Boris
OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp? liArticleID=131776&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=1&liChannelID=171&liFl avourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1 The security issues in Internet Explorer have highlighted the need for companies to think about supporting other web browsers on their customer-facing websites to control the security threat. A number of security bodies and industry experts, including the US government-backed CERT, and non-profit Sans Institute, have urged companies to consider Microsoft alternatives. These include Netscape, Opera, Mozilla and Apple's Safari. Richard Brain, technical director at security consultant ProCheckup, said: "It is a good idea to use other, safer browsers like Firefox by default, and the more complex, buggy Internet Explorer to access those sites which will only work with IE. "IE is an overly complex bit of software that should really get back to its simpler roots as a web browser, so that Microsoft developers can simplify it and remove its security holes," he said. "Online businesses that follow this advice may have to re-engineer their websites to make them fully accessible to non-Microsoft browsers." Phil Cracknell, security consultant at NetSecurity, advises his clients to use non-Microsoft web servers, based on Unix, Linux, and Netscape, together with Microsoft IIS, to confound the hackers. "More obscure operating systems will get hacked less," Cracknell said. He added that Microsoft should not be vilified, because it has provided what users demanded. "We wanted interactive stuff and to plug things into the browser; and there's a cost to that: there will be ports open. "The Windows environment, while it is slated for OS vulnerabilities, has had to go through a hardening process, and I think Microsoft has stepped up to the mark," Cracknell said. Analysts said it will be possible, although not effortless, to develop interactive, animated e-commerce sites that can be viewed on other browser platforms. Bola Rotiba, senior analyst for software development strategy at Ovum, said it is a myth that websites will not work well in non-Microsoft browsers. "Why should companies lose any functionality? There is nothing to say the animations shouldn't exist [in alternative browsers]," Rotiba said. Rotiba added that translating the site for different browsers can be straightforward. "It depends on how much abstraction has been done to build the site. HTML is not an issue; bog-standard HTML can be optimised easily. "The questions to ask are what is the site doing: is it dynamic or static? If it uses dynamic HTML and cascading style sheets, it will take more work," Rotiba said. If the site uses a high degree of scripting languages like PHP and CFML (ColdFusion Markup Language), developers will also have their hands full, she said. "Tools like Macromedia MX, and Dreamweaver MX allow you to produce a site for every platform available. But if you've written the scripts in something like CFML, there are not many tools available to translate the interactive, dynamic part," Rotiba said.
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
What I would like to know also is what software is used on the server that maintains this list? Some have received viruses from the list, whilst others have not had their messages appear, whilst others have had their IDs faked Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 13:53, Antonio Aparicio wrote: http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp? liArticleID=131776&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=1&liChannelID=171&liF lavourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1 The security issues in Internet Explorer have highlighted the need for companies to think about supporting other web browsers on their customer-facing websites to control the security threat. A number of security bodies and industry experts, including the US government-backed CERT, and non-profit Sans Institute, have urged companies to consider Microsoft alternatives. These include Netscape, Opera, Mozilla and Apple's Safari. Richard Brain, technical director at security consultant ProCheckup, said: "It is a good idea to use other, safer browsers like Firefox by default, and the more complex, buggy Internet Explorer to access those sites which will only work with IE. "IE is an overly complex bit of software that should really get back to its simpler roots as a web browser, so that Microsoft developers can simplify it and remove its security holes," he said. "Online businesses that follow this advice may have to re-engineer their websites to make them fully accessible to non-Microsoft browsers." Phil Cracknell, security consultant at NetSecurity, advises his clients to use non-Microsoft web servers, based on Unix, Linux, and Netscape, together with Microsoft IIS, to confound the hackers. "More obscure operating systems will get hacked less," Cracknell said. He added that Microsoft should not be vilified, because it has provided what users demanded. "We wanted interactive stuff and to plug things into the browser; and there's a cost to that: there will be ports open. "The Windows environment, while it is slated for OS vulnerabilities, has had to go through a hardening process, and I think Microsoft has stepped up to the mark," Cracknell said. Analysts said it will be possible, although not effortless, to develop interactive, animated e-commerce sites that can be viewed on other browser platforms. Bola Rotiba, senior analyst for software development strategy at Ovum, said it is a myth that websites will not work well in non-Microsoft browsers. "Why should companies lose any functionality? There is nothing to say the animations shouldn't exist [in alternative browsers]," Rotiba said. Rotiba added that translating the site for different browsers can be straightforward. "It depends on how much abstraction has been done to build the site. HTML is not an issue; bog-standard HTML can be optimised easily. "The questions to ask are what is the site doing: is it dynamic or static? If it uses dynamic HTML and cascading style sheets, it will take more work," Rotiba said. If the site uses a high degree of scripting languages like PHP and CFML (ColdFusion Markup Language), developers will also have their hands full, she said. "Tools like Macromedia MX, and Dreamweaver MX allow you to produce a site for every platform available. But if you've written the scripts in something like CFML, there are not many tools available to translate the interactive, dynamic part," Rotiba said.
Re: Thanks for all the Info ..... and OT: Sorry!
Quoting Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Someday I may just get lucky and get one good enough to share here. May that day come soon, Don. And remember that lots of us put up photos to learn from each other too. Cheers, Jostein This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: Is this THE "70-210mm f4-5.6 SMC Pentax-F" from Pentax Samba 2004?
Thanks Boris! (And Jens) I can't wait to get it, hope it's in the good condition it says it is. You quoted a post from Jens below, I never recieved that post. Does that happen often on this list? I've had it happen a few times now, it males threads very hard to follow. Don > -Original Message- > From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 6:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Is this THE "70-210mm f4-5.6 SMC Pentax-F" from > Pentax Samba 2004? > > > Hi! > > >Hello Don > >It is! > >Jens > > I second that ... > > Boris >
Re: Pentax A 70-210 f4
Charles Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked: > Can any one advise how this lens operates on an ist D. Are there any better > options. Hello Charles, I've tested it on my *ist D but I did no side by side comparison with any other zoom lens, just a quick comparison with the FA 85/1.4 (at 85mm, of course...). The FA* lens performed a little better, but not that much. If you are looking at a affordable, non AF lens with constant aperture in this zooming range I guess it may be the right choice. I do also own the M 80-200/4.5, a really good performer, at least on film (it is smaller - not much, but enough - and lighter). I didn't try it on the *ist D, though, so cannot comment. Ciao, Gianfranco = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
RE: Slide storage.
William Robb wrote: > > PS - I grudgingly accept that digital image storing takes up much > less > > space, but I like my slides. > > > > It's just as easy to lose an image though. Thanks! I'm sure I'll find that myself very soon :-) Malcolm
RE: Slide storage.
Leon Altoff wrote: Hi Leon, > Don't believe it when people tell you that digital storage > takes up less space. I fit 54 raw files to a cd. I have two > copies of each CD in different brands of cd with different > coatings (one silver one gold). The difference is not that > great. Maybe I should invest in a dual layer DVD burner. I have an empty CD/DVD rack I bought on eBay last year that holds 440 of them. What I am capturing and keeping on digital I will transfer from hard disc to DVD, so it isn't a problem, at least for now! > As for storing slides. I keep mine in plastic boxes that > hold about 8 boxes of 36. Each slide is individually > numbered and details of what is on each slide is kept on an > Access database with details of what is on each slide, when > it was take, categories etc and most importantly what box it > is in (or if it is on loan to someone). It even shows me a > thumbnail of the slide if I happen to have scanned it at any > point. I can search on any criteria that I have information > on. It also has data on all my digital images, what CD it is > on and of course thumbnails of all of them. The last thing I > added was macros to write the webpages for my next webpage > update (long over due). I wrote it as a project to teach > myself about Access. I can see I should have kept a record of such things as they returned from processing, but we have been looking for another house again recently and most of my stuff has been in some form of storage for some time. I can't stand it any longer and am trying to get some order in everything - move or not. I am not a great lover of the small boxes, but if you know where the slide you are looking for is, fine. > It shouldn't really matter how you store them as long as you > have a system for keeping track of where they are. LOL! I know that now... What I want is a cabinet to store several thousand, although I have never seen such a thing (if one even exists). Malcolm
RE: Slide storage.
Antonio Aparicio wrote: > Personally I prefer transparent slide sheets, in > chronological order, as I can easlily flick throught he pages > to find the slide I want. These do have their advantages, especially to see a page at a time, but they take up so much room. > Boxes I find anoying as I have to lift each slide out one by > one to find the one I want. Oh yes! Malcolm
Re: OT: Windows Scob virus collects passwords, financial data; Macintosh unaffected
Mr. Aparicio: I said nothing about you, positive or negative. You asked a question, which I answered. I am amazed that somehow that offended you. Antonio Aparicio wrote:i
Re: MZ6
James said: > Whats everyones opinion on the MZ6 - MZL camera? > > I have to up grade cause my Super program meter doesn't work any more :( and I cannot get it repaired. (the guy who looked at it totally %%#$$#%$ the meter cause it did mostly work) . In the time-honoured mailing-list/bulletin board/usenet tradition of not answering EXACTLY the question asked (grin) -- IMO the upgrade from the Super Program is the ZX-5n. Assuming you can find one. What I mean by this is, my Super Program stopped getting any use once I purchased a ZX-5n. In terms of features, the ZX-5n is a SuperProgram with autofocus and a built-in winder and flash (and no PC socket). In terms of control interface, it's an LX with autofocus, more autoexposure modes, a built-in winder and flash (and no PC socket). Also it is quieter than both those bodies. As I say, that's my opinion. Incidentally, the one thing I do know about the model you actually asked about is that the US name is ZX-L. I mention this in case it helps you in your search. ERN
Re: Tom, I'm wrong! (not completely though)
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Dario Bonazza wrote: > A revised test shot series of the F 70-210, compared to the Takumar 3.5/200 > and the Sigma, is here: > > http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p13e.htm > (it might take some time to load the heavy page) Many thanks for it. It seems that the F is not very good at the centre (even at 8) but it's more consistent in the edges. I am really puzzled by the last set of pictures though, where I think the roof is sharper or as sharp on the F, but the aerial is significantly unsharp (outside the DOF???) Is this a demonstration of your statement that it focuses at a closer plane? In any case, I find there are very few options for a mid-range, AF tele zoom. I am reluctant to try the FA Pentax offerings (and may be a fool for it, so bring me to my senses). And even if money was not an issue, I would not be keen to drag about the 1.5kgs of the Pentax 2.8 (is that a tripod/monopod only jobbie?), or even the 1.2kgs of the Tokina 2.8 offering. The F will have to do, I think. Kostas
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Thanks for getting back Doug. 1. Thanks for the reassurance. 2. I have never had a message lost on the internet except for on this list. I think there is a problem here you need to look into. How can you be sure that the brand of software you use is of no consequence, clearly something is not working. 3. Good. Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:03, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Antonio, 1. Nobody has gotten a virus from the list. The list software strips attachments and rejects anything but plain text. Any virus arriving at an emailbox purporting to be from the list address has simply had the address spoofed, as the virus is written to propagate itself through hijacked addresses. 2. Lost messages are a fact of life on the Internet. There are too many hops an email has to make to guarantee that each one will reach its intended destination. One thing I do is have several dummy accounts set up here and there, all subscribed to either the list or the digest. That way I can keep an eye on traffic and if the loss exceeds my threshold I will take a look to see if there is anything common to the lost messages. Trust that I do all I can to ensure smooth delivery of your deathless prose. 3. People who have had their ID's hijacked are, unfortunately, victims of other members of the list. I have spoken privately to a couple of people about this, and I hope such foolishness will not happen again. The brand-name of the software I use is of no consequence to you. All you have to know is that it works, for the most part. From: Antonio Aparicio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2004/07/07 Wed AM 07:57:09 EDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice What I would like to know also is what software is used on the server that maintains this list? Some have received viruses from the list, whilst others have not had their messages appear, whilst others have had their IDs faked Antonio
Re: Filters work!!!!!
What if I change my sig to say, Pentax? LOL. Regards, Pentax On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:14, William Robb wrote: Mark, the word "Antonio" in the message body is one of the words that will cause a message to hit my bit bucket. Normally, I wouldn't have seen your reply, except that I glanced at the ten or so messages that downloaded to my deleted items this morning and noticed that you had sent a reply to my question. Thanks for the answer, I don't think Outlook Express can do a total nuke. Bill - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: Filters work! I have no idea. (Don't get me started on Outlook Express or I'll start sounding like Antonio! )
Re: OT: Windows Scob virus collects passwords, financial data; Macintosh unaffected
What are you talking about? On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:31, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: Mr. Aparicio: I said nothing about you, positive or negative. You asked a question, which I answered. I am amazed that somehow that offended you. Antonio Aparicio wrote:i
Re: MZ6
James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whats everyones opinion on the MZ6 - MZL camera? Hi James, I bought a used one few months ago as a ''just in case'' camera. I didn't really needed it, but the price seemed fair and I was thinking about coupling it with an AF360FGZ for off camera wireless TTL flash (handy, sometimes). I don't really like the absence of a IF button on a camera that controls the aperture also from the body, but the ergonomics are good enough. I like the custom functions but quite dislike the spot metering only available when you press the ML button... The shape of the handle is a bit better than that on the MZ-5n/3 cameras. The metering is quite good, the slides come out well exposed. The finder is annoyingly small, it covers a bit less than that of the MZ-5n/3 (with more or less the same magnification, so the ''hole'' looks smaller). It is of course fully compatible with any Pentax lens. Hope this helps. Ciao, Gianfranco = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
You don't know what you're talking about. No one has ever received a virus from this list. The server software is not your business or mine. Regards, Bob... --- "No man's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session." -- Mark Twain From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > What I would like to know also is what software is used on the server > that maintains this list? Some have received viruses from the list, > whilst others have not had their messages appear, whilst others have > had their IDs faked
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Thank you Antonio for that interesting article. I shall scrap IE henceforth. Keep us all informed with your insightful revelations about the insecurities and failings of ALL MS products. Please continue to overlook the fact that this is a PHOTOGRAPHY and more specifically a PENTAX discussion list, not an operating system discussion list. Christian
Re: Filters work!!!!!
How about "I'm always right" instead. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 6:35 AM Subject: Re: Filters work! Clueless wrote: > What if I change my sig to say, Pentax? LOL. > > Regards, > Pentax
Re: MZ6
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Gianfranco Irlanda wrote: > The finder is annoyingly small, it covers a bit less than that > of the MZ-5n/3 (with more or less the same magnification, so the > ''hole'' looks smaller). Hi Gianfranco, Have you got a -5n/3 and a -6? Out of curiosity, does the viewfinder of one appear brighter than the other? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Slide storage.
I keep all my slides in plastic sheets, sorted by subject and date. The sheets are kept in 3-ring binders on a book shelf. What I like about the plastic sheets is that I can throw a whole sheet on the light box and quicly view all the slides and find the ones I want without sorting through little boxes and one slide at a time. I'm paranoid about digital storage so I have multiple very large hard drives on several file-servers and keep multiple copies of images. I also periodically burn every image to CD and have multiple CDs which are kept in jewel cases and rarely ever used to prevent scratching. I'd really like to get an external RAID device for my linux SAMBA server for added protection. Space is still an issue with digitl storage! Christian -Original Message- From: Malcolm Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Jul 7, 2004 8:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Slide storage. Having spent a couple of hours trying (without success) to find a set of slides I took a few years back, I realise my current storage system - such as it is - needs a re-think. I have sets in plastic boxes as sent back from development, slide sheets that take 20 a page and one or two larger boxes. What I need to do is standardise storage formats. Apart from the larger boxes, which contain an index and make it easy to find a particular slide, it is a real problem to find anything else. It would also be nice for them all to be in one place and take up less room. Does anyone have a solution to this problem? As I am still using a fair bit of slide film, this is a growing problemI wish I hadn't started re-organising things now :-( Malcolm PS - I grudgingly accept that digital image storing takes up much less space, but I like my slides.
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Wow Antonio! You are a wealth of information! I never thought I would learn so much about MS products on a Pentax photography list! If you come across anything on underwater basket weaving or how to prove that refrigerator lights actually go out when the door is shut, I'm sure we'd be interested in those too! Thanks again, Norm Antonio Aparicio wrote:
Re: SMC lenses
>>>F (made for the SF series - SFX, SF1, SF7 etc.) > Must dissagree with this one. The KF is for MEF only and as far as I know, there was > only > 1 lens. > KFA is for SFX etc It seems as if the two of you are referring to two different systems of nomenclature here. The "A", "F", "FA" (etc.) names are taken from the markings on the lenses (and the MEF's one dedicated lens was referred to by Pentax as an "AF" lens), while the "KF", "KA", "KAF", "KAF2", "KA2" (etc.) names are the nomenclature to refer to the K-mount details. See Table 1 (and also Figure 1) on Boz's (extremely useful - Thanks once again, Boz!) web site at http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/technology/summary/index.html . Just as an aside, I believe that the only name used in the "A", "F", "FA" (etc.) system of nomenclature that was ~not~ taken from the designation embossed on the lens is the "K" name (where Pentax simply referred to "SMC" on its pre-"M" lenses). Fred
Re: Pentax A 70-210 f4
> just a quick comparison with the FA 85/1.4 (at 85mm, of > course...). The FA* lens performed a little better, but not that > much. ...which is to be expected, of course, when comparing a zoom with an F* prime... (The above quote is a strong compliment for the A 70-210/4.) My overall favorite, of the few 80-200 and 70-210 Pentax zooms I have used, is in fact the A 70-210/4. (And, I have a LN- copy of the sometimes-touted F 70-201/4-5.6, if anyone's interested...) My impression of the M 80-200/4.5 is that it is also a really good zoom, but it is not ~better~ than the A 70-210/4, and it lacks the (sometimes useful) A electrical contacts and the wider zoom range (70-210, at 3:1, is distinctly wider than 80-210, at 2.5:1). I did not find the F 70-201/4-5.6 to be better than the A 70-210/4, and its variable (and mostly smaller, except at 70mm) aperture does not fit my shooting style. Of course, AF is important to some... Fred
RE: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
We field tested that when I was in University actually and they do go out ;-) > -Original Message- > From: Norm Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > or how to prove that > refrigerator lights actually go out when the door is shut, > I'm sure we'd be interested in those too!
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Somone reported receiving a virus from the list last month. Given the recent security scares with microsoft server software distributing spyware and the like I think that it is in everybodys interest. Why hide it? Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:43, Bob Blakely wrote: You don't know what you're talking about. No one has ever received a virus from this list. The server software is not your business or mine. Regards, Bob... --- "No man's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session." -- Mark Twain From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> What I would like to know also is what software is used on the server that maintains this list? Some have received viruses from the list, whilst others have not had their messages appear, whilst others have had their IDs faked
Re: Filters work!!!!!
You are always right about what? Pentax On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:45, Steve Larson wrote: How about "I'm always right" instead. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California Pentax
Bye ...
Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel
takumar lens dates?
Has anyone attempted to work out the correlation between when an M42 takumar lens was produced and its serial number? As I understand it, the mfortytwo.info site is attempting to collect serial numbers to test the theory that lenses were made in batches with consecutive serial numbers, which implies the obvious assumption that the serial numbers are assigned in roughly chronological order. Especially for the earlier lenses which were often only in production for a couple of years, it ought to be possible to line up serial numbers with dates within a year or two. I'm thinking about slurping down the mfortytwo.info database and doing it, but before I do I want to make sure that nobody has already done it. DJE
RE: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
You mean you are still using it? I scrapped IE and Windows a couple of weeks back when he first showed us the error of our ways - thanks Antonio, I had never realised how bad this stuff was before! Why is this information not common knowledge in the public domain or on news websites etc? > -Original Message- > From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 07 July 2004 14:45 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice > > > Thank you Antonio for that interesting article. I shall > scrap IE henceforth. Keep us all informed with your > insightful revelations about the insecurities and failings of > ALL MS products. Please continue to overlook the fact that > this is a PHOTOGRAPHY and more specifically a PENTAX > discussion list, not an operating system discussion list. > > Christian > > >
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
My pleasure. By the way, unless you hadnt notices, photography is now digital, uses the internet and the, computer, browser and software you use in directly related to photograpy in the modern age. And it is also directly related to this group, which if you hadnnt noticed is taking place on the internet. Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:44, Christian wrote: Thank you Antonio for that interesting article. I shall scrap IE henceforth. Keep us all informed with your insightful revelations about the insecurities and failings of ALL MS products. Please continue to overlook the fact that this is a PHOTOGRAPHY and more specifically a PENTAX discussion list, not an operating system discussion list. Christian
Re: Bye ...
Bye. Have a nice vacation. Antonio On 7 Jul 2004, at 16:19, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Now you are just being sarcastic. On 7 Jul 2004, at 16:21, Rob Brigham wrote: You mean you are still using it? I scrapped IE and Windows a couple of weeks back when he first showed us the error of our ways - thanks Antonio, I had never realised how bad this stuff was before! Why is this information not common knowledge in the public domain or on news websites etc? -Original Message- From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 July 2004 14:45 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice Thank you Antonio for that interesting article. I shall scrap IE henceforth. Keep us all informed with your insightful revelations about the insecurities and failings of ALL MS products. Please continue to overlook the fact that this is a PHOTOGRAPHY and more specifically a PENTAX discussion list, not an operating system discussion list. Christian
Re: *ist D Metering Issue
It does tell you that you're out of range. The chosen ap or shutter speed blinks when out of range in Av or Tv mode. But it's easy to ignore the blinking in the heat of battle. Paul On Jul 7, 2004, at 9:15 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, alex wetmore wrote: I cannot believe that it will not tell you on the viewfinder though. It does so on the -50 and the -5n. Kostas
Re: MZ6
> BTW, I think > the -3 is a -5n with a faster shutter, but I may be wrong. You're right. John John Whittingham Technician -- Original Message --- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:22:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: MZ6 > On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, James wrote: > > > Whats everyones opinion on the MZ6 - MZL camera? > > I struggled between -6 and -5n (you may be able to find my postings > on the archive). The -6 has the modern interface and will work with FAJ > lenses on aperture-priority; the -5n won't. The -6 also has the > new(er) P-TTL flash exposure metering mode. The -5n has a brighter > viewfinder, as it is pentaprism, rather than pentamirror. I bought > the -5n, as I found it at a good price, and I really like it; I am > particularly enamoured with its shutter. I already had a -50 (which has > the new interface) and while I got used to the -5n's traditional > interface, I still think the new one is better. YMMV. BTW, I think > the -3 is a -5n with a faster shutter, but I may be wrong. > > Kostas --- End of Original Message ---
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
On 7 Jul 2004 at 16:17, Antonio Aparicio wrote: > Somone reported receiving a virus from the list last month. Given the > recent security scares with microsoft server software distributing > spyware and the like I think that it is in everybodys interest. Why > hide it? Fact: The list strips attachments (Doug has confirmed this) Fact: no one received a virus from the list, it just looked like it came from the list (spoofed address). I receive viruses from my own addresses every day and I don't run any MS internet mail clients or servers. And I don't believe that I've missed a message from the list excepting when my email box has been saturated. I don't have a clue why you are missing so many emails but I doubt it's to do with the list server. Maybe it's your Apple Mail client rejecting MS initiated posts :-) PS That last bit was a joke. 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: takumar lens dates?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Has anyone attempted to work out the correlation between when an M42 takumar lens was produced and its serial number? A Yes, Gerjan von Oosten in "The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Scew Mount Guide"
Re: Bye ...
On the contrary, Shel, I always viewed you as a big part of this list, and I am sure most of the others agree. Your opinions are always expressed clearly and strongly, and always gave us something of value to consider, whether we agreed or not. You'all hurry back, hear? Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel
Re: Bye ...
On 7 Jul 2004 at 7:19, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I > probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel > much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope > I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be > good, boys and girls ... Ciao. I hope you've learnt a thing or two from us too. Ciao 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: Bye ...
Hi! Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel Shel, you will be missed, at least by some list members. You've (re)started PAW and me thinks you should be commended for that. We'll try and keep that tradition. I daresay you would always be welcome back... Boris
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
You wouldn't happen to have any of that research handy that you could post to the list, do you? Norm Rob Brigham wrote: We field tested that when I was in University actually and they do go out ;-) -Original Message- From: Norm Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or how to prove that refrigerator lights actually go out when the door is shut, I'm sure we'd be interested in those too!
Re: Bye ...
> Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I > probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't > feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. > I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive > way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > > Shel > > Enjoy your vacation. Take care of yourself! Be well, and good light. Peace. ERN
PAW - well, kind of....
Hey, Guys ORiginal photo taken by me with Pentax LX :) THis is a pastel of mine I put up on ebay. (I went through a brief stage of drawing and painting again a couple of years ago) http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3734895701&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT My photo exists somewhere in my apartment - alas, who knows where annsan
Re: Bye ...
I hope my disagreeing with you had nothing to do with this decision. For one thing there are five people on the list I consider truely excellent street photographers. You are one of those five. You have contributed a lot of useful information to the list. I, for one, think the list will be poorer without you here. -- Shel Belinkoff wrote: Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Messages failing to post again
It seems either my posts are failing to get to the list, or the list is failing to return them to me... don't know which... Pretty aggravating. Complain. Complain. Tom C.
RE: OT: My latest toys.. something 'old' and something 'new'
Fred Widall wrote: The Cocarette has a 105mm F4.5 Tessar lens and produces 6x9cm negatives. Apart from a very minor pinhole in the bellows (now fixed) and a dirty lens (now cleaned) the camera is in amazing shape for 75+ years. I've found that by stopping the Tessar down to F16 I get excellent sharpness and resolution. Not bad for a CA$40 camera off Ebay. But does it have matrix metering and will a digital back be available? :) Tom C.
RE: 43 Limited "Pre-computer?"
according to the internet its "Shinro Ohtake" -Original Message- From: Dario Bonazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 2:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 43 Limited "Pre-computer?" Pål Jensen wrote: > With the 43 Limited Mr. Harakara (Pentax chief lens designer; Jun Hirakawa. > the one who design all(?) the classic * lenses) Afaik, Mr. Hirakawa designed the F*/FA* lenses, not the A*. Not completely sure. > and a famous japanese photographer (who's name I've forgotten but he was 77 years old when the 77 Limited was presented as a gift to him), Shoji Ohtake. Dario Bonazza
Re: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
> > From: Antonio Aparicio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2004/07/07 Wed AM 09:34:27 EDT > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice > > Thanks for getting back Doug. No problem. > > 1. Thanks for the reassurance. Again, no problem. > > 2. I have never had a message lost on the internet except for on this > list. I think there is a problem here you need to look into. How can > you be sure that the brand of software you use is of no consequence, > clearly something is not working. The software works fine; a message comes in, gets readdressed to the list subscribers, and is sent out. Once it leaves the server, any number of things can happen to it that is not under the software's control, or mine. Sometimes the email doesn't make it. If you've never lost a message, it tells me two things. 1.) You're extremely lucky, and 2.) you haven't used email for very long. I have nearly twenty years in the wired world that tells me shit happens and there's very little you can do about it. If a message is properly addressed and formatted (no guarantee, as I see bounced and mis-addressed messages every day) and the software sends it out to the list, then it has done its job. If User X gets the message and User Y doesn't, then there is something in the pipeline between the list software and User Y that is fouling things up, because the software doesn't pick and choose which users to send the messages to; it simply adds the subscriber address to the address field and sends it on. You are, of course, free to believe what you wish, but keep one thing in mind while you do so: I am involved in the list intimately every day. Even on vacation, if I have access to the web, I check to make certain it is running properly. I will decide whether or not something is "clearly wrong," and then act accordingly. No amount of hand-wringing over imagined Gatesian conspiracies is going to change that. > > 3. Good. Yep. > > Antonio Doug p.s. Marnie, clean out your emailbox.
RE: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Actually, I've received LOTS of viruses because of this list Not THROUGH the list, but because my email is sitting on some poor saps infected computer, I have gotten plenty of attachments with viruses from those fools... -el gringo -Original Message- From: Bob Blakely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 9:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice You don't know what you're talking about. No one has ever received a virus from this list. The server software is not your business or mine. Regards, Bob... --- "No man's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session." -- Mark Twain From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > What I would like to know also is what software is used on the server > that maintains this list? Some have received viruses from the list, > whilst others have not had their messages appear, whilst others have > had their IDs faked
Re: Slide storage.
Negafile used to make such a thing. I considted of stackable wooden drawers and a stand to put the stack of drawers on. The made them for slides as well as about anysize negative you could think of. I do not know if they are made any longer. Just checked google, yes they are still made. http://www.negafile.com/photo_cases.htm - Malcolm Smith wrote: What I want is a cabinet to store several thousand, although I have never seen such a thing (if one even exists). -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
RE: 43 Limited "Pre-computer?"
Is that the "Offical" internet or the non-official one? :) Tom C. (likes causing trouble) From: "El Gringo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: 43 Limited "Pre-computer?" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 12:17:19 -0400 according to the internet its "Shinro Ohtake" -Original Message- From: Dario Bonazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 2:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 43 Limited "Pre-computer?" Pål Jensen wrote: > With the 43 Limited Mr. Harakara (Pentax chief lens designer; Jun Hirakawa. > the one who design all(?) the classic * lenses) Afaik, Mr. Hirakawa designed the F*/FA* lenses, not the A*. Not completely sure. > and a famous japanese photographer (who's name I've forgotten but he was 77 years old when the 77 Limited was presented as a gift to him), Shoji Ohtake. Dario Bonazza
Re: Bye ...
Shel, I have always enjoyed you photographs and as a rank amateur, the thoughtful assistance you have so frequently provided. Enjoy your vacation and return soon. Wishing you well Otis Wright Paul Sorenson wrote: Shel - I'm mostly a lurker with not a lot of participation in the back and forth commentary, but...I've always been impressed with the thoughtful comments you have made and have enjoyed the photos you have posted. Your street photography offers visual commentary on the "human condition" (however that is interpreted). I've always considered you a large part of this list, so - enjoy your vacation, but don't stay away. You will be missed. Paul - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 9:19 AM Subject: Bye ... Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel
OT: Way OT: Silk Screen Photomasters
I would like to establish contact with someone (located in US or Canada) who is experienced in the handling of photomasters for silk-screen printing in a production environment. Please respond off list to URL below. Thanks in advance. Otis Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #768
> > Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 16:34:20 +0200 > From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Michel_Carr=E8re-G=E9e?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: takumar lens dates? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > > >Has anyone attempted to work out the correlation between when an M42 > >takumar lens was produced and its serial number? > > > >A > > > Yes, Gerjan von Oosten in "The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Scew Mount Guide" Unfortunately, no. I've got the book. He has dates of production, and does attempt to correlate dates of CAMERAS with serial numbers, but not dates of LENSES. Even the camera info is sketchy. He's got nothing on serial number ranges of lenses other than the approximate date of the switchover to SMC, probably because the info was not availible. Actually, I have a super-takumar 24/3.5 that has a serial number that SHOULD be SMC by his reckoning, and from what I can tell has neither cam nor coating. I think mfortytwo.info is actually an attempt to prove Gerjan's theory that the lenses were made in batches with consecutive serial numbers. My question is--given a lens with serial number xxx, when was it made? Given Gerjan's dates of production, and the mfortytwo.info database of serial numbers, it ought to be possible to work out a rough correspondance. I'll do it if it hasn't been done already. DJE
RE: Pentax slogan
"We just love Pentax cameras so much, we want to keep them to our selves". Oh, so that's where the DA lenses are going. Poor Nguyen. I'm on the road again, a quick trip to Lewiston, Maine. Arrived yesterday late afternoon. The skies were just clearing at Portland airport. So I headed 40 miles south with the *ist D to Nubble Lighthouse, but of course the skies there were overcast and refused to clear. Today, naturally is sunny and beautiful -- the day I have to be in a conference. Tomorrow is supposed to be rainy again. One gets spoiled living in sunny New Mexico. Joe
Re: Slide storage.
I'm always a bit nervous when they don't list their prices on the web site, but this look like a first class storage system. graywolf wrote: Negafile used to make such a thing. I considted of stackable wooden drawers and a stand to put the stack of drawers on. The made them for slides as well as about anysize negative you could think of. I do not know if they are made any longer. Just checked google, yes they are still made. http://www.negafile.com/photo_cases.htm
Re: Slide storage.
IIRC they go for something around $140 per drawer. Lots more filled with the envelopes for negatives. You will see a lot of these in stock agencies, photostudios, doctors offices, etc. -- Daniel J. Matyola wrote: I'm always a bit nervous when they don't list their prices on the web site, but this look like a first class storage system. graywolf wrote: Negafile used to make such a thing. I considted of stackable wooden drawers and a stand to put the stack of drawers on. The made them for slides as well as about anysize negative you could think of. I do not know if they are made any longer. Just checked google, yes they are still made. http://www.negafile.com/photo_cases.htm -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: Slide storage.
Hi, >> It shouldn't really matter how you store them as long as you >> have a system for keeping track of where they are. > LOL! I know that now... > What I want is a cabinet to store several thousand, although I have never > seen such a thing (if one even exists). http://store.preservationequipment.co.uk/store/show-product.cfm?p=656 http://store.preservationequipment.co.uk/store/show-product.cfm?p=654 http://www.adorama.com/LG1500G.html?sid=10892234383850608 http://www.conservation-by-design.co.uk/acidfree/acidfree29.html -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Apologies
Jostein, in an act of contrition, offered the following: "For the wasted bandwidth from my part today. Sometimes, the urge to wave a red flag before the bull is irresistable. :-) Won't do it again..." no no no, you can't get away that cheap. I don't know what you said or did or who you said it to or did it to but I think you should distribute lots of presents to prove your sincerity. To help you choose one for me, anything in a K mount would fit just perfectly. Tom (waiting expectantly) Reese
Re: Romanian PDML
Hi, Wednesday, July 7, 2004, 10:50:57 AM, Frantisek wrote: > Buna Ziwa! >in around 10 or 14 days, if I am not lost in Serbia, I am going to >cross to Romania. I have already been there, and it was very nice. >I am asking if any of the Romanians on the list would like to meet. [...] I was very warmly welcomed and looked after by 2 Romanian PDMLers when I was there a few years ago. I hope you have at least as much good luck and enjoy yourself there as much as I did. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Bye ...
On 7/7/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, offered: >Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I >probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't >feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. >I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive >way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > >Shel Take care Shel. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Apologies
Well, I was going to apologize myself, but remaining a bastard is cheaper! HAR! Regards, Bob... From: "Tom Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Jostein, in an act of contrition, offered the following: > > "For the wasted bandwidth from my part today. Sometimes, the urge to wave a > red flag before the bull is irresistable. :-) > > Won't do it again..." > > no no no, you can't get away that cheap. I don't know what you said or did > or who you said it to or did it to but I think you should distribute lots of > presents to prove your sincerity. To help you choose one for me, anything in > a K mount would fit just perfectly. > > Tom (waiting expectantly) Reese
Re: Lens compatibility questions
On 7/7/04, Anders Hultman, discombobulated, offered: > Tokina 28-200/3.5-5.3 >It will not physically mount on the *istD even though it mounts on my >ME:s and my Program A. There is an extra bit of flange in the mount >that bumps into a part inside the camera. Look here: > http://anders.hultman.nu/kamera/special-k.jpeg > http://anders.hultman.nu/kamera/istd-bump.jpeg >Does anyone know if that extra piece of flange is good for anything? >Can I let a workshop cut it away? Will anything bad happen then? All >my other lenses has the shorter flange as seen to the left, except >for this one that has the longer one, and also except for the Tamron >200/3.5 that actually has no flange at all. That flange is attached to a plastic (possibly) surround that will unscrew out of the rear body of the lens. To test, you could remove it completely, re-attach the k mount flange and test on the camera. Obviously with the flange removed there will be a gap present and over time dust could invade the lens, so machining off the correct amount and replacing the flange would be a good alternative IMO. Taking apart a lens is so easy. It's the putting it all back together in the right order that is the hard part ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
SMCP-M 1:4 75-150mm
Do any have any feedback about this lens ? Any good or bad about it ? BTW if you heard about a Tokura 1:2.8/3.8 35-70mm? Regards, Thibouille
Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
Hi, Wednesday, July 7, 2004, 12:53:26 PM, Antonio wrote: > http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp? > liArticleID=131776&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=1&liChannelID=171&liFl > avourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1 Everybody here knows how to use the internet and how to browse the web. Everybody here is at least as capable as you are of learning about the pros and cons of the different platforms and web browsers. Everybody here is an adult and takes full responsibility for their buying decisions. Everybody here is capable of making a reasonably well-informed buying decision. You may be eager to help, and very enthusiastic about your own decisions and choices, and these are commendable virtues, but not everybody here shares your criteria or priorities for choosing software. As well-meaning as they may be, your posts about some of the flaws in MS software are a waste of everybody's time, including your own. Everybody here already knows all this stuff. Everybody here is at least as well informed on these matters as you are. Everybody here has already made their buying decisions, in full knowledge, so your would-be helpful posts are wasted. You would save yourself and other people a lot of time and trouble if you stopped posting this stuff. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: lens cleaning
My take on filters is that I am swaying to not using them. I used to use filters always, on every lens, if only as a protection. Even the works Betacam had a UV on the front - and boy that came in useful. One day I was using an unfamiliar car with a lift-up tailgate and the camera caught the corner of it whilst being moved ready for de- rigging from the tripod. The filter took the impact square on and immediately broke. Because the filter glass took the brunt, the corner of the tailgate did not penetrate any further, and no damage at all to the front element of a £6000 lens. However, I have always been aware that there is inevitably an increase in flare using filters on lenses with inadequate lens shading (for whatever reason). This started to bug me quite a bit and now I have turned full circle and do not use filters on most lenses. This is anything wider than 100mm, even shaded. I still have a filter on a 70-200, but even there I am doubting it's worth. Jury's still out on that one. I certainly do not use one on a mid range zoom like a 24-70, nor primes like 50 and 24. I think that each shooting situation has to be assessed individually regarding whether or not flare is evident, but my default is not to have a filter aboard. When lenses are in the bag, they are capped. When they come out of the bag, the caps come off and stay in the bag, always. Even on that Smegma 14mm 2,8 which many have seen at GFM - the front element is bulbous - must be very similar to the new Pentax 14mm. But the built-in lens hood does protect the front element to a degree, and I am more than comfortable with carrying it un-capped. As for the TV camera? It does *not* have a filter in place anymore. Aha, you ask, why is this, especially after that opening cautionary tale ? Well, us staff guys don't own our kit, and one of our chaps had a very unfortunate accident with his camera. He left it unattended on the tripod in a wind (a big no-no, but I don't know the exact circumstances) and surprise surprise it blew over onto the lens. The camera was repairable but the lens was a write off and a few days later he had a brand new lens delivered to replace the ageing dinosaur that succumbed. My lens is only 4 years old, but I would never say no to a new one ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: lens cleaning
- Original Message - From: "Cotty" Subject: Re: lens cleaning > My take on filters is that I am swaying to not using them. > However, I have always been aware that there is inevitably an increase in > flare using filters on lenses with inadequate lens shading (for whatever > reason). This started to bug me quite a bit and now I have turned full > circle and do not use filters on most lenses. Does the switch to Canon lenses have anything to do with this? I have been told, but cannot comment first hand, that they are more prone to flare all on their own. I can see how any filter would only exacerbate the problem. William Robb
RE: Bye ...
Shel I've always enjoyed your contributions on this list. I for one will be sorry to see you go. I truly hope after your vacation you reconsider and return. I can tell you that you had a great deal to do with inspiring me to do more black and white. You helped me see the potential that exists in that format. I skip and trash a lot of messages in this list, but have almost always read the ones from you with interest. You will never have everyone in a list this big agreeing with everything you say and do. It is unfortunate that some feel the need to express their critiques in a manner that tends to be hurtful. In a court of law a persons past is usually not allowed to be evidence presented in regard to the offense in question. The offense is judged on it's merits only. I would offer the idea that critiques of images be just that, judged on that images merits only. I would also further suggest that critiques be offered only when they are requested. Sometimes people just want to do show and tell, not be judged. Hope you have a happy safe vacation and return with the pictures to prove it! Dave > -Original Message- > From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 10:20 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Bye ... > > > Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few > days and I > probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't > feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been > helpful. > I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive > way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > > Shel > >
Re: Bye ...
Your point of view and many PAWs will be missed. I for one learn the most from people whose views differ from mine, especially those who can express them with intelligence and courtesy. Enjoy your time away.
RE: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice
That's Doug's right and choice not to say. Just as it is your choice whether or not to subscribe to this list. I also think what you might be missing here and what Doug was trying to tell you is, I can choose to send you a virus Antonio, and just make it look like it came from this list. The internet is a very complicated place with a lot of trickery possible by those much more savvy then I. Almost anything is possible. I can also confirm that Doug's statement about html coded and messages with attachments being refused by the list. I sometimes forget to send a new message in Plain text and it is returned to me. Likewise if I add a URL as an attachment. This lists setup is about as secure as it's going to get IMHO. If you think about it, how much sense does it make that only "ONE" person on this list gets the virus. If one goes out on the list server, we all get it. If one person gets a virus looking like it came from this list, it's a fake, and that person alone was targeted by some unscrupulous individual. Mandrake Linux offers the perfect solution for those of you that are worried. When you install this OS, it offers some different security settings from the beginning. This setting is called "PARANOID". > -Original Message- > From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 10:18 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: Non-Microsoft browsers are most secure choice > > > Somone reported receiving a virus from the list last month. Given the > recent security scares with microsoft server software distributing > spyware and the like I think that it is in everybodys interest. Why > hide it? > > Antonio > > > On 7 Jul 2004, at 15:43, Bob Blakely wrote: > > > You don't know what you're talking about. > > No one has ever received a virus from this list. > > The server software is not your business or mine. > > > > Regards, > > Bob... > > --- > > "No man's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in > > session." > > -- Mark Twain > > > > > > From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >> What I would like to know also is what software is used on the server > >> that maintains this list? Some have received viruses from the list, > >> whilst others have not had their messages appear, whilst others have > >> had their IDs faked > > >
RE: Thanks for all the Info ..... and OT: Sorry!
This was the very common dried out (sticky) lube problem. You have to wind 3-4 times (or hold the advance lever cocked for a while) before the shutter and mirror will cock. Requires dis-assembly, cleaning and re-lube. I've done a couple dozen of them now, most of my eBay offerings have recieved this treatment. That, some other cleaning and some new foam seals and they're good for several more years of shooting. I still think the Super is the best sounding camera Pentax ever made, great handling too. No matter how fancy I get, even if I buy the *ist D I'll have a couple Supers around. Don > -Original Message- > From: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:13 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Thanks for all the Info . and OT: Sorry! > > > Hi > Don > do you mind telling us what failure you where able to repair on your ME > Super? > This could be useful information, at least for me :-) > thanks > Markus > > > > > From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 2:17 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Thanks for all the Info . and OT: Sorry! > > > > > > Oddly enough after only a week or so reading this list and carefully > > listening to the critiques I took an old ME Super I repaired out > > last night > > > > Don > > > > > >
SV: Bye ...
I second that! Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Daniel J. Matyola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. juli 2004 16:34 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Bye ... On the contrary, Shel, I always viewed you as a big part of this list, and I am sure most of the others agree. Your opinions are always expressed clearly and strongly, and always gave us something of value to consider, whether we agreed or not. You'all hurry back, hear? > Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days > and I > probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I > don't > feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been > helpful. > I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a > positive > way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > > Shel
Re: Bye ...
Well, for a newcomer like me (less than a year) you are an important part of this list. Have a nice vacation! DagT På 7. jul. 2004 kl. 16.19 skrev Shel Belinkoff: Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. Shel
Re: lens cleaning
On 2004-07-07, at 20:55, Cotty wrote: When lenses are in the bag, they are capped. When they come out of the bag, the caps come off and stay in the bag, always. Even on that Smegma 14mm 2,8 which many have seen at GFM - the front element is bulbous - must be very similar to the new Pentax 14mm. No, this new Pentax DA 14 has rather flat front glass and takes normal 77mm filters contrary to most FF 14 mm :-) -- Best regards Sylwek
RE: SMCP-M 1:4 75-150mm
Not a pro lens, but a good lens. There was recently a thread about this lens. Regards Jens mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 7. juli 2004 20:51 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: SMCP-M 1:4 75-150mm Do any have any feedback about this lens ? Any good or bad about it ? BTW if you heard about a Tokura 1:2.8/3.8 35-70mm? Regards, Thibouille
OTF metering question
I'm sure there's a good reason for this, but it's not obvious to me. Every modern Pentax film body (from the SF series onwards, plus the Super-A) features TTL flash metering, and hence has a second OTF light meter. As far as I know though, only the LX offers OTF metering for available light photography. Anyone know what the technical limitation is? (This post inspired by today's enablement with a Super-A, courtesy of John W...) S
Re: lens cleaning
On 7/7/04, William Robb, discombobulated, offered: >Does the switch to Canon lenses have anything to do with this? I have >been told, but cannot comment first hand, that they are more prone to >flare all on their own. >I can see how any filter would only exacerbate the problem. Actually no! The decision to not use the filters was primarily made when using non-Pentax glass on Pentax bodies. Particularly the Tokina 28-70 which I did notice the flaring on. I have not particularly noticed any exceptional flaring on Canon lenses, but the lens hoods *are* bloody big. I still have a Tok 28-70 in EOS - so there's a ready made test I can do, eh. I'll get onto it in a couple of weeks when I've got some annual leave from work. If I set the Tok and Canon to 50 mm and compare to my K50mm, with and without lens shades, might be an interesting comparison. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: lens cleaning
On 7/7/04, Sylwester Pietrzyk, discombobulated, offered: >> When lenses are in the bag, they are capped. When they come out of the >> bag, the caps come off and stay in the bag, always. Even on that Smegma >> 14mm 2,8 which many have seen at GFM - the front element is bulbous - >> must be very similar to the new Pentax 14mm. > >No, this new Pentax DA 14 has rather flat front glass and takes normal >77mm filters contrary to most FF 14 mm :-) Aha. Velly intellesting... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Bye ...
hope to see you back soon! I always admired your pictures and I think I learned a lot from them... ^_^ bye Katrin On 7 Jul 2004 at 7:19, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days > and I probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, > I don't feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've > been helpful. I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two > people in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > > Shel > > ** Desertrose Chris' & Katrin's X Japan homepage! Please visit it! http://www.xjapan.de * >From now on I will try to live for you and for me. I will live with love...with dreams... and forever with tears.. **
RE: OT: My latest toys.. something 'old' and something 'new'
>Fred Widall wrote: >>The Cocarette has a 105mm F4.5 Tessar lens and produces 6x9cm negatives. >>Apart from a very minor pinhole in the bellows (now fixed) and a dirty >>lens (now cleaned) the camera is in amazing shape for 75+ years. I've >>found that by stopping the Tessar down to F16 I get excellent sharpness >>and resolution. Not bad for a CA$40 camera off Ebay. > >But does it have matrix metering and will a digital back be available? :) > >Tom C. I think they added matrix metering in 1928, and the digital back is due out next year :) I confess I'm not very impressed with the speed of the auto-focus on this either - I can wait for hours and it still doesn't focus !!! Fred.
RE: SMCP-M 1:4 75-150mm
Thibouille, It is briefly reviewed at: http://home.att.net/~alnem/html/pentax_zooms.html Jim www.jcolwell.ca
OT: Indirect favour request
A friend of mine, though not a PDML member, is looking for someone to do him the favour of handling a transaction in the UK. I figure it can't hurt (much) to ask, so I'm asking... (This is someone I've known for about 22 years, and trust. He's also the person who bought me an enlarger as a gift.) -- Glenn > From: John Rehwinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Buyer in UK? > Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:27:22 -0400 > > I'm trying to buy a UV filter for a Nikon SB-140 flash, but neither of > them > are made any more. I did find a vendor with one in stock, but they're > in > the UK and don't ship overseas. > > So, I'm looking for someone in the UK willing to order a very expensive > part for me and reship it to me in the United States. > > Anybody care to help out? > > -- Thanks, > John "Spam" Rehwinkel
Re: Lens compatibility questions
Anders, I had a similar extended flange on a Vivitar Series 1 70-210/3.5. It was quite simple to remove, but now the face and edges of the rear element are exposed, and so I have to be careful. I should probably modify the flange and re-attach it, but then there are many things that I should do... Jim www.jcolwell.ca
RE: Bye ...
Hi, Shel, Are you finally reuniting with your long lost brother Graywolf? :-) Guess we'll still feel the presence... Yefei > > Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 07:19:34 -0700 > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Bye ... > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a > few days and I probably won't return to the list for quite > some time. Frankly, I don't feel much a part of things here > ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. > I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people > in a positive way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > > Shel >
RE: Loo with a view
Can't help but comment on this, sorry! What if the one way glasses are installed the other way? So you feel suspicious when looking from outside, but once you get in, you will feel quite secure, won't you? :-) Yefei > > Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 09:45:17 +0200 > From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Loo with a view > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Would you be confident, you're unseen in there? > (My grandmother would not really believe the lights in the > fridge went out when closing the door :-). > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: Ryan Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 5. juli 2004 08:11 > Til: PDML > Emne: OT: Loo with a view > > > A friend forwarded this. It's quite amusing. > http://www.serpentineroad.com/forum/album_page.php?pic_id=508 > > Cheers, > Ryan >
Quick lens comparison - F and A 70-210s
G'day, There seems to have been a fair bit of discussion about these two lenses recently, so I'm posting this message which has been sitting in my 'drafts' folder for a while. I've recently conducted a fairly unscientific and limited comparison of these two lenses on the *ist D: SMC A 70-210mm f4 SMC F 70-210mm f4-5.6 Pretty rudimentary test - photographed my bookshelf from about 6m (20ish feet?) with both lenses on the tripod mounted *ist D at 70mm, about 120mm (not marked on the F), and 210mm, wide open and at f8 at each FL. Then as an afterthought I compared both lenses at 210/f5.6. Shot jpeg, daylight WB, 400 ASA. Unfortunately I didn't make efforts to fix exposure, so it's slightly variable. I had to guess where 120mm was on the F version, and it was slightly different to the FL of the A at 120mm. Focussed manually with as much precision as I could using the refconverter A with viewfinder magnification. Centre sharpness was examined at 100% and I just had a guess at which was sharper (from writing on book spines etc.). Shooting RAW may be a good idea for the future, though it wasn't too hard to see the winner in most comparisons. No attempt was made to compare sharpness variation of each lens across the zoom range. The results: A vs F [EMAIL PROTECTED] A [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? [EMAIL PROTECTED]/4.5] A [EMAIL PROTECTED] A [EMAIL PROTECTED]/5.6] F [EMAIL PROTECTED] A [EMAIL PROTECTED] F A aperture comparison (is it better wide open or at f8?) 70 ? 120 8 210 8 F aperture comparison 70 8 120 8 210 5.6 And I was hoping for a clear winner )-: The A appears sharper in most situations, but the F has the advantage of size and AF, as well as that edge it has at 210/5.6. These lenses will probably both be on the market as soon as I locate a F* 300/4.5 at a reasonable price (-: Hope this has been of interest to some. If anyone bugs me enough I may put up a page with the samples for you to see yourself. David
tentative M42 lens dates
OK, I sat down with the "The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Screwmount Guide" and the serial number data from m-fortytwo.info and hashed out some serial number/date correspondances. The method used was this: determine the year of introduction of a lens, determine the lowest attested serial number for this lens, assume that that the serial numbers had progressed to said number by said year. This assumes the following: 1) serial numbers are unique. As I understand it, there is no evidence that this in not true. 2) while Asahi may have produced lenses in batches, serial numbers were in general used sequentially. 3) Gerjan's dates of introduction are correct. 4) m-fortytwo.info's serial numbers are correct. Most of them are Gerjan's! I expect some errors exist in the database either from typographical errors or misidentification of exact lens models. 5) the lens serial numbers are original, not changed by replacement of parts for repair or deliberate forgery. Note that this doesn't say anything about dates of sale. Stuff could have sat around a while in some dark corner before actually entering the market or the field. serial # 546014 was in use by 1958 (interpolation puts serial # 60 in use by 1961) serial # 677842 was in use by 1963 serial # 732001 was in use by 1965 serial # 2241359 was in use by 1967 (big jump!) serial # 3435021 was in use by 1968 serial # 4188173 was in use by 1971 serial # 4635057 was in use by 1972 (interpolation puts serial # 550 in use by 1973) serial # 6872336 was in use by 1974 serial # 7370589 was in use by 1974 I suspect that slightly lower numbers were in fact in use by any given year, given that it seems unlikely that the several thousand entries in the database have captured the first production batch of every lens when over 7 million lenses were made. Also, I'd expect Japanese availibility of many of the lenses to be a little earlier than for Europe/America, and I assume fewer of the Japanese-market lenses made it into the database. My underlying interest in the whole chronology thing is that I was born in January of 1969. I was sure that I had a couple of lenses with serial numbers around the 1,000,000 mark that were older than I am because the lenses were discontinued before 1969. In fact it appears that serial number 1,000,000 was probably issued in 1965 or 1966. It looks very likely that any lens with a serial number less than 3,500,000 is older than I am--this includes almost all my Takumars and Super Takumars, pretty much my entire pre-SMC kit! DJE
Re: Bye ...
Shel, There will be an unfillable gap in the list while you're gone. The last time you were away there was too little art and too much science. I anticipate the day when you return, and we are again complete and in balance. regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Time for me to move on. Have a long vacation coming up in a few days and I > probably won't return to the list for quite some time. Frankly, I don't > feel much a part of things here ... so, thanks to all who've been helpful. > I hope I've been able to help or influence one or two people in a positive > way. Be good, boys and girls ... Ciao. > > Shel > > >
Re: Bye ...
Good luck Shel, enjoy your vacation, and let us know how the wedding went. Butch
Re: PAW
- Original Message - From: "Ann Sanfedele" Subject: Re: PAW > > I asked about the mustard, too -- > Don't see Wheatfield answering (yet) > > guess he just can't cut it, eh? > > But seriously what is it, Bill? Mustard, for the third time. William Robb
