Re: Help with Lens/Flash Selection ist*D
Is it worth going to some better lenses, maybe pentax? Or better quality sigma? Suggestions? I am doing alot of portrait photo's, though I love my macro and night shots, maybe a bit of scenery. Also helping a friend with their wedding photography. - Depends on your budget, I cannot recommend the DA 16-45 highly enough. It is one of Pentax's best standard zoom lenses ever. There is also a Sigma 18-55 (or so) f2.8, if you need a fast zoom and can stand the weight and cost. Pentax is also bringing out the DA 18-55, but it's image quality will probably not equal that of the DA 16-45. Yes, it is worth getting better lenses. We all learn that the hard way. - Looking for a good flash suggestions too. Pentax? Sigma? Metz? - I am pleased with the AF 360 FGZ. Others want more power and swivel capacity. Sigma has a new digital flash coming out soon in Pentax mount, or perhaps already available. It will have more power and swivel. You do need a flash with digital TTL (two flashes, the first to measure exposure off the shutter), specifically for Pentax. For Pentax it is called P-TTL. Joe
Re: Firmware reverse compile
Kodak used to supply a deevelopment kit for their digital cameras. (I down loaded it once, it seemed to be quite primitive). Graywolf wrote: Why not just download the firmware update and browse through it? I would bet you could figure out enough from it to hack the camera. Calculators allow you to write user programs, I know of no one that allows to to hack the operating system. What a warranty nightmare that would be. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Hyperthetical question regarding fungus.
It depends on the cost differential of course, as well as rarity. After cleaning the lens will most likely never be the same. Malcolm Smith wrote: Assuming there was a rare lens which you had the opportunity to buy - hypothetically - would it be worth buying relatively cheaply and hoping it will be able to be cleaned for a reasonable sum, or is it best avoided until a perfect lens comes along, however long you may have to wait? Malcolm -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Congratulations, Herb!
Herb, congratulations from me too. The images are all stunning, and especially the one that won the Grand Prize. I like these a lot. Joe
RE: *ist DS
Previous posts: DPreview is right. Delay is NOT mirror lock up ... not even close in terms of control. Shel > From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Incidentally, Dpreview's statement that it lacks mirror lock-up, while > the *ist D has it, is wrong. Both have the 2-second delay option, > functioning as a mirror lock up. Dpreview claimed that the D had mirror lockup and the DS lacked it. I interpreted this to mean the 2-second delay. Yes, I know the difference between that and real lock-up. The D and the DS have the same functionality (or lack) in that regard. Both have the 2-second delay. This is what I meant whan I said that Dpreview was wrong. Joe
Re: *ist series support for setting the aperture on the lens(was: ist D AE mode for K & M lenses)
Michel Carrère-Gée wrote: Christian a écrit : William Robb wrote on 9/21/2004, 12:07 PM: > > LX, and Super Program for sure. It's done via a window that projects > a view of the aperture ring into the finder. > > William Robb > > LX and MX for sure. Super Program does not have a little window. At least mine didn't. And the fisrt equiped: the KX ! As long as we're taking an inventory the K2DMD. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: PAW - Sunset, 6:06PM
Never heard of Kenneth Noland ;-)) Mike's stopped typing to me about six months ago. Now if I can only get him to stop calling But Ann, I thought you knew I had ventian blinds and plaster walls. Shel > From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://home.earthlink.net/~digisnaps/sunset.html > > > > Something a little different ;-)) > > Like Kenneth Noland, do ya Shel??? > When I read the subject line, I was going to tease > the hell out of you and say something like "well > good thing it isnt a flower or Mike JOhnson will > never type toyou again -- > but i see you were just being sneaky :) > > Now I see you have venetian blinds and plaster > walls. I kinda like this. > > ann
Re: LX frame spacing
Don't recall ever saying that. Don't use short strokes except in very rare instances ... can't recall when I've last done that. Shel > From: Stan Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Shel has said that he does not fully wind but uses a series of short > strokes. I think this causes the inaccuracies.
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
no, it's not one of the ones i have tried. in addition to iseemedia PhotoVista (i have been using it since 1.32), PanoVue Image Assembler, Ulead Cool 360, VR Toolbox PanoWorx, i've tried at least 3 or 4 other programs. PhotoVista is the best of the inexpensive ones. of the programs i have tried on the www.panoguide.com site, i have to agree with their basic assessments. the ones i own but have never used are Photoshop, Photoshop Elements, and PaintShop Pro. as soon as i read that they don't correct for the FOV of the lens, i didn't even bother trying. the wider FOV of the base lens, the more you have to reproject the image before stitching, either into a cylinder or a sphere. that requires knowing or calculating the real FOV, not the nominal, for your lenses. depending on conditions, i use my Sigma 12-24 or the DA 16-45 in portrait mode on my *istD. if i am using my Nikon Coolpix 5000, i will use the wide angle adapter with its 19mm equiv FOV, again in portrait mode. i did only a few panoramas on film because of skew in the scanned images from my mounted slides. i had more success with negatives, but they gave me other hassles with grain. i actually miscounted, i had 4 VR panoramic heads, not 3. i'm down to 3 now and am looking to sell the Kaidan one. if anyone is interested, contact me offline. i started doing panoramas when i got my first digital camera, a Casio 1.3 megapixel when the very first 2 megapixel cameras were just being announced. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:27 PM Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > Herb, have you checked out Panorama Maker from Arcsoft?
Three more days to go
Hi All. Well the Markham fair photo contest dead line is Saturday. I have my digital turned 35mm print outs ready,i have my 6 hand made B&W prints and just got back my 3 MF colour prints today.Resizing my digital entries as we speak. Submitting 20 all together so x ing fingers,judging is Sunday. Purpose of this email, i'v run out of past photos to enter,so now i HAVE to get my ass in gear and shoot some new topics. See ya in a few days Dave
Re: Sharpest Color Film
Hi Bruce ... You've recommended the Impressa before, and I've used it a few times. I like it, and if there were some in the freezer, that would probably been my choice. However, I'm relegated to using what's on hand today and making a choice between the films mentioned. Shel > From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 9/22/2004 9:46:09 AM > Subject: Re: Sharpest Color Film > > Hello Shel, > > Another film to put on your short list is Konica Impressa 50. Depends > on the project. The Konica seems to do a bit better with scenics, > while the Reala seems a bit better on people. I used both quite a > bit.
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Like I said in my last post, there is nothing esoteric about single exposures or the ability to compose and see what your photograph is going to look like before you take it. There is nothing esoteric about a subject in or out of focus. I have a lot of experience with LF cameras and know what they can do. This "pan and stitch" technique might work for some things but it certainly does not have the versatility of a LF camera. It's better than nothing if all you have is a single low res camera but to those of you who are excited about higher resolution photography I suggest you investigate "normal" LF photography before you decide that "pan and stitch" is anywhere near as good as normal LF. JCO -Original Message- From: Daniel Matyola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching I have been following this thread with some interest, but it has become exceedingly tiresome. Too many of you are witing about actual experience, rather than esoteric theory. It appears that Mr. O'Connell is right, and the rest of you guys are full of crap. I know that because he tells us so, over and over. To save the waste of bandwidth, I suggest that everyone else shut up and left Mr. O'Connell do all the talking (which wouldn't be much of a change in any event). Then we can all read and learn from the master, and once a week or so tell him how wonderful he is and how gratefull we all are to be his pupils. Sent via the KillerWebMail system at stanleypmlaw.com
Re: PAW - Sunset, 6:06PM
Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > http://home.earthlink.net/~digisnaps/sunset.html > > Something a little different ;-)) Like Kenneth Noland, do ya Shel??? When I read the subject line, I was going to tease the hell out of you and say something like "well good thing it isnt a flower or Mike JOhnson will never type toyou again -- but i see you were just being sneaky :) Now I see you have venetian blinds and plaster walls. I kinda like this. ann
Re: Sharpest Color Film
Shel. Reala. I've never been impressed with superior. Local lab seemed to always print soft and magenta. Dave. > Need a quick answer if you can. Which have you found to be the sharper, > more detailed color film: Fuji Reala or Fuji Superior? Have you found any > that's sharper? > > I have a roll of Royal Gold 25 that's a bit out of date that John Francis > gave me a couple of years ago. I'm not too concerned with color fidelity > in this project, but want the best detail and resolving power I can find > with the film that's now in my freezer. Will this out of date film have > suffered an loss of resolving power or sharpness over time? > > Shel > >
Re: OT: Limeric (was Re: D*MNIT!!!!! A bargain hunter misses out.)
The cameras from a certain company Were once worth every penny Now they s**k But we don't give a ... Because we won't ever buy any Butch Black wrote: Gotta play. There once was a Pentaxian list The digest oft lost in the mist Off topics were many Could bet your last penny That someone eventually got pissed Butch
OT: Limeric (was Re: D*MNIT!!!!! A bargain hunter misses out.)
Gotta play. There once was a Pentaxian list The digest oft lost in the mist Off topics were many Could bet your last penny That someone eventually got pissed Butch
Re: PAW - Sunset, 6:06PM
What is it? Sunset on a wall? Jim A. > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 19:08:01 -0700 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: PAW - Sunset, 6:06PM > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:08:02 -0400 > > http://home.earthlink.net/~digisnaps/sunset.html > > Something a little different ;-)) >
Re: {Spam?} Pentax Full Frame
Canceled. Seems they shared the sensor with the late un-lamented Contax FF 6mp digital, which proved to be a technological and economic disaster. Kevin Waterson wrote: What ever happened to the Pentax full frame digital? http://www.imaging-resource.com/EVENTS/PMAS01/982079635.html Kind regards Kevin - "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: PUG - Halloween
HAR. There's only one true world wide valid interesting theme, but I won't dare to mention it. Rob Studdert wrote: On 22 Sep 2004 at 22:14, Caveman wrote: C'mon guys what about a Halloween PUG theme ? You might find that it's just a little exclusive as a choice for a world wide theme.
Re: PUG - Halloween
On 22 Sep 2004 at 22:14, Caveman wrote: > C'mon guys what about a Halloween PUG theme ? You might find that it's just a little exclusive as a choice for a world wide theme. 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 - Sunset, 6:06PM
This suspiciously looks like the job a local lab did to my films before I had enough of it and bought a digicam ;-) Just kidding. Nice shot. Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~digisnaps/sunset.html Something a little different ;-))
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
I have been following this thread with some interest, but it has become exceedingly tiresome. Too many of you are witing about actual experience, rather than esoteric theory. It appears that Mr. O'Connell is right, and the rest of you guys are full of crap. I know that because he tells us so, over and over. To save the waste of bandwidth, I suggest that everyone else shut up and left Mr. O'Connell do all the talking (which wouldn't be much of a change in any event). Then we can all read and learn from the master, and once a week or so tell him how wonderful he is and how gratefull we all are to be his pupils. Sent via the KillerWebMail system at stanleypmlaw.com
PUG - Halloween
C'mon guys what about a Halloween PUG theme ?
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Gosh lets not go into that discussion. This is all subjective. I liked a lot Larry's photo, if you didn't it's your opinion and you're entitled to have and that's it. John C. O'Connell wrote: How is an out of focus image "pleasing to the eye"?
PAW - Sunset, 6:06PM
http://home.earthlink.net/~digisnaps/sunset.html Something a little different ;-))
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
What you describe is totally different and much better solution. In that case they don't have to pan which is much better. But being tied down in a studio is not very useful for nature photography. Still not a substitute for a lightweight field LF film camera for nature JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching i was in a Detroit studio the other day where a lot of cars are shot for magazine ads and brochurs. They were shooting with a Cambo 4x5 camera and a back that was fitted with four digital sensors. Each was around 7 megapixels I would guess, because the final image was 60 megapixels raw. The digital back was tied into a Mac that stitched the images together according to preset parameters. The results were very good. The studio photographer claimed they were at least as good as 4x5 film, and of course the instant feedback was invaluable. "Auto stitching" is alive and well in large format photography. Paul On Sep 22, 2004, at 9:12 PM, Herb Chong wrote: > Larry is selling all his large format equipment because stitching is > better > for him than LF. if you want to define the small area where a 4x5 > camera is > still superior as the only thing that matters to you, go right ahead. > the > examples shown and discussed are none of those. > > Herb... > - Original Message - > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:59 PM > Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > > >> NO , I do understand. Of course you can do SOME >> things this way but to say it is a suitable >> replacement for LF in general is really absurd. > >
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
How is an out of focus image "pleasing to the eye"? That is what will happen if the circlar "plane" of focus doesn't have enough depth of field on a flat object. As far as technical accuracy goes, why stitch if the goal isnt a higer resolution image and if you're out of focus you wont achieve it now will you? You cant even "Get" a fleeting moment with stitching so how does that please your eye? How do you make a perfect composition when you cant even see your final image on the ground glass? This stuff isnt the stuff of forensics, this is BASICS of photography so your way off base here with that comment. I really think it is a very POOR substitute for LF if you ask me based on all the things I mentioned below. JCO -Original Message- From: Caveman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching JCO, You're perhaps right. And, if we were into forensics photography, probably all the technical accuracy would matter a lot, but here it was just about some arteestec shot, what really counts is that the image is pleasing to our eyes and not how many planes of focus were actually stitched there. That's the photographer's darkroom and I don't need to know about it. J. C. O'Connell wrote: > How about a SINGLE exposure? (Decisive Moment) > How about selective DOF? > How about lower distortion? > How about camera movements? > How about accurate composition on the ground glass. > How about a true Plane of focus at ANY distance? > There's probably a whole lot more too > > Those reasons above are huge and make the stitching > technique seriously limited compared to normal LF photography. I think > the DSLR solution is a better digital camera with a bigger and higher > resolution sensor, not stitching. But even then you arent going to > get the movements with all your lenses like you do with > LF. > JCO > > > -Original Message- > From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > > > Larry is selling all his large format equipment because stitching is > better for him than LF. if you want to define the small area where a > 4x5 camera is still superior as the only thing that matters to you, go > right ahead. the examples shown and discussed are none of those. > > Herb... > - Original Message - > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:59 PM > Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > > > >>NO , I do understand. Of course you can do SOME >>things this way but to say it is a suitable >>replacement for LF in general is really absurd. > > > >
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
JCO, Assuming EVERYTHING you say is absolutely correct, so what!? Larry is getting the results he wants using the technique and gear that works for him. So, what's the big deal? One thing that you must remember is that Larry's photographing out west, where the vistas and distances and scenery are very different than the relatively close scenery in the east. I know where Larry's photographing. His equipment choice makes sense from the POV of ease and convenience. And he obviously enjoys the post processing techniques. And he's used LF gear, so he has a point of comparison. You've neither photographed out west (AFAIK) nor used the camera and software he's using. So, who's better to judge what's best for Larry? Shel > From: J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > How about a SINGLE exposure? (Decisive Moment) > How about selective DOF? > How about lower distortion? > How about camera movements? > How about accurate composition on the ground glass. > How about a true Plane of focus at ANY distance? > There's probably a whole lot more too > > Those reasons above are huge and make the stitching > technique seriously limited compared to normal LF photography. > I think the DSLR solution is a better digital camera > with a bigger and higher resolution sensor, not > stitching. But even then you arent going to get > the movements with all your lenses like you do with
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
i was in a Detroit studio the other day where a lot of cars are shot for magazine ads and brochurs. They were shooting with a Cambo 4x5 camera and a back that was fitted with four digital sensors. Each was around 7 megapixels I would guess, because the final image was 60 megapixels raw. The digital back was tied into a Mac that stitched the images together according to preset parameters. The results were very good. The studio photographer claimed they were at least as good as 4x5 film, and of course the instant feedback was invaluable. "Auto stitching" is alive and well in large format photography. Paul On Sep 22, 2004, at 9:12 PM, Herb Chong wrote: Larry is selling all his large format equipment because stitching is better for him than LF. if you want to define the small area where a 4x5 camera is still superior as the only thing that matters to you, go right ahead. the examples shown and discussed are none of those. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:59 PM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching NO , I do understand. Of course you can do SOME things this way but to say it is a suitable replacement for LF in general is really absurd.
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
JCO, You're perhaps right. And, if we were into forensics photography, probably all the technical accuracy would matter a lot, but here it was just about some arteestec shot, what really counts is that the image is pleasing to our eyes and not how many planes of focus were actually stitched there. That's the photographer's darkroom and I don't need to know about it. J. C. O'Connell wrote: How about a SINGLE exposure? (Decisive Moment) How about selective DOF? How about lower distortion? How about camera movements? How about accurate composition on the ground glass. How about a true Plane of focus at ANY distance? There's probably a whole lot more too Those reasons above are huge and make the stitching technique seriously limited compared to normal LF photography. I think the DSLR solution is a better digital camera with a bigger and higher resolution sensor, not stitching. But even then you arent going to get the movements with all your lenses like you do with LF. JCO -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching Larry is selling all his large format equipment because stitching is better for him than LF. if you want to define the small area where a 4x5 camera is still superior as the only thing that matters to you, go right ahead. the examples shown and discussed are none of those. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:59 PM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching NO , I do understand. Of course you can do SOME things this way but to say it is a suitable replacement for LF in general is really absurd.
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
How about a SINGLE exposure? (Decisive Moment) How about selective DOF? How about lower distortion? How about camera movements? How about accurate composition on the ground glass. How about a true Plane of focus at ANY distance? There's probably a whole lot more too Those reasons above are huge and make the stitching technique seriously limited compared to normal LF photography. I think the DSLR solution is a better digital camera with a bigger and higher resolution sensor, not stitching. But even then you arent going to get the movements with all your lenses like you do with LF. JCO -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching Larry is selling all his large format equipment because stitching is better for him than LF. if you want to define the small area where a 4x5 camera is still superior as the only thing that matters to you, go right ahead. the examples shown and discussed are none of those. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:59 PM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > NO , I do understand. Of course you can do SOME > things this way but to say it is a suitable > replacement for LF in general is really absurd.
Re: help on sale of large format lenses
That sounds like fun, or is that just bizarre... Caveman wrote: Only problem would be with portraits. Unless you stuff your models first that is. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: RE: help on sale of large format lenses Just remember however, there's more than one way to skin a cat. Talking about skinning cats. If one scans a 4x5 negative at 2400 ppi (a number I feely admit I pulled from my ass), one would end up with a file that is 8400 x 11,400 pixels An istD will match that in 4 exposures (more or less). Or has the Finca Los Primos rendered me unable to be coherent? William Robb -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
RE: Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy?
Thanks everyone for all the good tips! My eyes and ears are open. Don > -Original Message- > From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 5:20 PM > To: PDML > Subject: Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy? > > > Now that I'm in a position to purchase a couple of REALLY nice lenses, I'm > not finding any for sale! > Looking for something along the lines of a 300/2.8 or 400/4. > AF/MF is of second importance to quality and speed. > Where should I look? Any suggestions? > Tried KEH, Adorama, B+H, a general internet search and the "bay". > Best I found was a 500/4.5 giant and a 200/2.5 for $555.00 US from a 95.2% > seller! (NOT!) > > TIA > Don >
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Herb, have you checked out Panorama Maker from Arcsoft? Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > another couple of good sites are www.panoramic.net and www.panoguide.com. > i'm thinking about getting RealViz Stitcher to replace my current program, > iseemedia PhotoVista. PhotoVista is the best of the inexpensive programs. > Stitcher is one of the best programs for the PC. QuickTime VR Studio is > highly recommended for the Mac. > > Herb > - Original Message - > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:49 AM > Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > > > > Geometry can be treated a few ways in good stitching programs. The final > print > > can be configured to provide a cylindrical view (true panoramic), > rectilinear > > (under 180 degree V or H OAV) but ultra wide shots start looking strange > and > > spherical projection for display in VR applications. > > > > The optimum set-up would have the mount rotating about the lenses nodal > point > > but it's far less of a problem if there isn't a mix of near/far subject > matter. > > > > Good info can be read at: > > > > http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/ > > http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/oxfordtour/stitchingtest/update.html > >
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Wrong , you cant correct an out of focus planar subject taken with techniques that have spherical or cylindrical "planes of focus" after the fact with software. The photo on that page neither has a near field planar subject nor a very wide "panning" angle looking at the subject. I don't see what lens he used or distance to far wall specified, is it described on another page? JCO -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching On 22 Sep 2004 at 20:59, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > I repeat, this curved field issue has nothing > to do with the lenses, It's the FILM/SENSOR > rotation that is causing it, so why the > references to macro lenses, etc I made the reference to macro lenses not Herb, I was being facetious. As you should well know virtually all 35mm format lenses excepting the best macro designs don't provide planar focus. Yes the panning effect will swamp the lens errors but there is software which can correct these aberrations (obviously only for image with an AOV of under 180 degrees). Have you actually had a look at the following page yet? http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/detail.htm 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: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
On 22 Sep 2004 at 20:59, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > I repeat, this curved field issue has nothing > to do with the lenses, It's the FILM/SENSOR > rotation that is causing it, so why the > references to macro lenses, etc I made the reference to macro lenses not Herb, I was being facetious. As you should well know virtually all 35mm format lenses excepting the best macro designs don't provide planar focus. Yes the panning effect will swamp the lens errors but there is software which can correct these aberrations (obviously only for image with an AOV of under 180 degrees). Have you actually had a look at the following page yet? http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/detail.htm 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: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Larry is selling all his large format equipment because stitching is better for him than LF. if you want to define the small area where a 4x5 camera is still superior as the only thing that matters to you, go right ahead. the examples shown and discussed are none of those. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:59 PM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > NO , I do understand. Of course you can do SOME > things this way but to say it is a suitable > replacement for LF in general is really absurd.
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
Also, Nodal point has NOTHING to due with the curved field due to panning. The curved field is there where you pan on the node or not. JCO -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 7:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching why is this relevant? do you shoot wide open all the time? as for close vs far, it depends on how much care you take in finding the nodal point and how good your lens is. if you have nothing close, the nodal point pretty much doesn't matter. i'm a couple of centimeters off the nodal point on my panoramas and you can't tell the difference between that and distortion in the lens. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > Software may be able to correct for typical geometry, but there is NO > WAY it can correct for curved or spherical "plane" of focus due to the > panning. > > Both the plane of focus curvature and geometery errors due to > non-nodal panning would be much worse for closeup objects vs. > infintiy.
Re: Back - and stormy
William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Peter J. Alling" > Subject: Re: Back - and stormy > > > From what I know of the Nobel committees choices for the last few > > years, I think I choose William Robb and Greywolf, at least they > > don't let Ideology get in the way of observation. > > Shucks. > I'd like to thank my father especially for teaching me to be both > skeptical and rational. My mother for her sense of fair play, my > brother for moving out when he did,.. Sorry, the music started in the auditorium and you have to get off the stage now... the rest of you speech did not go out over the airwaves... annsan in the control room
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
The whole point of stitching is HIGH resolution. If the subject goes out of focus due to curved or spherical field you defeat the whole purpose of doing the stitching in the first place. DUH. And a lens doesn't have to be wide open for the subject to go out of focus. -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 7:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching why is this relevant? do you shoot wide open all the time? as for close vs far, it depends on how much care you take in finding the nodal point and how good your lens is. if you have nothing close, the nodal point pretty much doesn't matter. i'm a couple of centimeters off the nodal point on my panoramas and you can't tell the difference between that and distortion in the lens. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > Software may be able to correct for typical geometry, but there is NO > WAY it can correct for curved or spherical "plane" of focus due to the > panning. > > Both the plane of focus curvature and geometery errors due to > non-nodal panning would be much worse for closeup objects vs. > infintiy.
Re: OT - 1Dsmll 16MP?
On 22 Sep 2004 at 19:46, Cotty wrote: > What is the published operating temp range (say) of the *ist D? AFAIK they have never published it (Pentax non-comittal?) it does however have time setttings for 62 cities over 28 time zones. 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: Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy?
going to have to keep looking and looking. you'll be looking for the * lenses. they are rare and go fast, not to mention pricey. both lenses you mention in AF mount will be a couple of thousand in good shape. MF won't be much cheaper. the 500/4.5 is too hard to deal with for wildlife if it is the manual aperture version. the M* 300/4 can be had for quite a bit less but it is on the shorter end. Herb - Original Message - From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 6:19 PM Subject: Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy? > Now that I'm in a position to purchase a couple of REALLY nice lenses, I'm > not finding any for sale! > Looking for something along the lines of a 300/2.8 or 400/4. > AF/MF is of second importance to quality and speed. > Where should I look? Any suggestions? > Tried KEH, Adorama, B+H, a general internet search and the "bay". > Best I found was a 500/4.5 giant and a 200/2.5 for $555.00 US from a 95.2% > seller! (NOT!)
Re: OT - 1Dsmll 16MP?
most electronic components work better when cooled a lot. this is what they do to run very fast computers. liquid nitrogen cooled, even. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 2:46 PM Subject: Re: OT - 1Dsmll 16MP? > Someone on a different list was chirping in about issues with resistors > and other electronic components. Could this be the case? What is the > published operating temp range (say) of the *ist D?
Re: istDs - what a great camera!
Peter, Quite right about the LX, which I should not have included in the list. I'm also wrong about the FAJ lenses, which I had thought were introduced at the time of the MZ-50. However, the MZ-50 was a portent of things to come, and the FAJ lenses were bound to follow. John On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 03:12:47 -0400, Peter J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: John Forbes wrote: Your point about the "new Pentax philosophy" isn't valid. Pentax IS supporting K/M lenses on the *ist D, and arguably they work rather better than they do on the LX, MX, KM and KX. This is just stupid, the LX is full aperture AE metering. It will give you a suggested reading and then even if your lens doesn't stop down correctly it will still give you the proper exposure. The others are manual mechanical cameras. They offer offer open aperture metering with K & M lenses something that the *ist-d doesn't offer no matter what you do. They will give you incorrect exposures if the lens doesn't stop down, but then you have bigger problems anyway. The statement is illogical on it's face. You seem to think that these lenses are unusable. They're not. Since buying my *ist D I have actually gone out and bought MORE M lenses (can't find any K ones at a reasonable price in the UK). I don't think that anyone has said that. You've built a straw man to knock down intentionally or unintentionally. Yes I know that the K mount lenses are usable on the *ist-D, easier to use than m42 lenses on a K body, but the loss of this "minor" compatibility implies something about the future that's disturbing. The people who have been complaining are venting their disappointment, even some who have the camera or plan to buy one are disappointed. And your screw mount comparison isn't valid either. Screw mount lenses are a pain to use on any K mount camera because the adaptor doesn't stop the lens down. K and M lenses ARE stopped down on the *ist D. I think you misunderstand. It's not that the m42 lenses are easier to use on a K mount camera, they aren't. For the loss of functionality with the screw mount lenses you gained a rapid lens change capability with K mount lenses. Pentax giveth, Pentax taketh away, but in the current situation Pentax simply taketh away. We and the members of Japanese lists complained, a lot, and Pentax produced a software "update", kludge actually, that allows the use of K/M lenses on the *ist-D, you should thank us. And why are you arguing this now? Pentax dropped the aperture ring several years ago, and some film cameras don't work at all with K and M lenses, unlike the *ist D. You're out of date, and blaming the wrong camera. Try the MZ-50, which was introduced in 1997. Pentax didn't drop the aperture ring, in fact the new FA-D macro lenses have aperture rings, you sir are the one who's completely wrong. The MZ-30/50/60 were beginners Kit cameras, pretty much P&S with the capability of changing lenses. Many were disappointed when the found out that the limitations in their nifty new cameras. I'm arguing now because there have been so many people who have been willfully misunderstanding my and many other's point. I don't know for sure why some others are arguing. John On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 08:32:48 -0400, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't need to buy or use the camera to see what they are doing sucks. Less support of legacy products with absolutely nothing gained in the process. This is kinda similar to when they switched from screwmount to K-mount. The SM auto aperure and aperture sensing was lost on the newer K bodies but there WAS a great gain, much better, quicker, mounting and unmounting of the new K lenses. But in this case with the istD, with the K/M ignorance there is NO GAIN, it's all LOSS. Secondly, the second "point" you make is terrible. People who don't want a "non-K/M compatable" camera DON'T BUY IT. Of course the ones who do buy it don't mind and arent going to argue otherwise. Thirdly I don't think you did read the paragraph below because it isnt a *istD issue commentary. It's the new major pentax philosophy that I am very disappointed in... JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 8:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: istDs - what a great camera! Or course I read it. But it's only your opinion, and it's not even based on personal experience. IThe vast majority of Pentax users who've bought and used the *istD don't agree with you. On Sep 18, 2004, at 7:58 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Guess you didn't read this: JCO wrote: You guys don't seem to understand the implication of abandoning support of K/M lenses with no technical ( and no one has yet proven it was a cost issue either) reason to do so. They have crossed the line and can longer be trusted to support anything you buy for any time as they may decide whatever
Re: OT - 1Dsmll 16MP?
given the number of people who actually use a 1Ds at temperatures below 0C, i would say that it's not a hard a fast rule, while the power issue is. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:34 AM Subject: Re: OT - 1Dsmll 16MP? > L-ion batteries work effectively down to about -20 deg C, TFTs and LCDs on the > other hand don't like the cold (normal temp range LCDs and TFTs generally work > down to only 0deg C). So I'd assume that the operating temp limit specs were > more a function of LCD performance than power issues.
Re: Enabled? What?
Ah, I see. So the random chance of an LX going cheap on ebay was my "enablement" ;) Now I just need to be "enabled" with some more glass (20-ish, 85, 200, 300) and a motor drive. ;) __ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: Mirror cleaning
Ah..., Use a new Q-tip each time. Obvious to me, but maybe not to others. -- Graywolf wrote: Use alcohol (Everclear is best, but isopropyl will work) on a Q-tip (cotton swab on a stick). Do not press down, just the weight of the Q-tip is all. Then use the other end to wipe the alcohol off. Repeat until the mirror is clean. I repeat do no put pressure on the Q-tip. -- Sarbu Alexandru wrote: Hi there... Here I am again, quite sad this time... I don't know why, but I *had* to look my *new* ME Super to the wrong person. Of course, she thought the camera is *empty* so she stick a finger inside. Now there is a huge fingerprint, right on the mirror :sad grin: Can it be cleaned? It seems it can't, as everyone says "don't touch the mirror - ever"... but I'm still asking, just in case. Alex Sarbu ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com
RE: Spot meter
I've been very happy with the Pentax Digital Spotmeter which is Zone VI modified. You might want to consider that for critical B&W work. The meter is small, it's accurate, it can be tripod mounted, you can add a filter in front of the lens just as you can in front of a camera lens, you can get a neat "holster" for it so you can wear it on your belt or slide a camera or camera bag strap thru it. The downside is that it's only a 1-degree spot meter. No bells, no whistles, no fancy features. Of course, that keeps it small and quick to use. Some people like all that stuff, I like to keep things simple. maybe you do, too. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Andy Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 9/22/2004 11:01:06 AM > Subject: Spot meter > > Hi guys, > I'm in need of a spot meter for my Fuji GW670iii. > I'm just wondering which one I should get... > The Pentax digital spotmeter or the Minolta Spotmeter F?... > Any advice? > > Cheers! > Andy > > >
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
why is this relevant? do you shoot wide open all the time? as for close vs far, it depends on how much care you take in finding the nodal point and how good your lens is. if you have nothing close, the nodal point pretty much doesn't matter. i'm a couple of centimeters off the nodal point on my panoramas and you can't tell the difference between that and distortion in the lens. Herb... - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > Software may be able to correct for typical geometry, but > there is NO WAY it can correct for curved or spherical > "plane" of focus due to the panning. > > Both the plane of focus curvature and geometery errors due to > non-nodal panning would be much worse for closeup > objects vs. infintiy.
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
another couple of good sites are www.panoramic.net and www.panoguide.com. i'm thinking about getting RealViz Stitcher to replace my current program, iseemedia PhotoVista. PhotoVista is the best of the inexpensive programs. Stitcher is one of the best programs for the PC. QuickTime VR Studio is highly recommended for the Mac. Herb - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:49 AM Subject: RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > Geometry can be treated a few ways in good stitching programs. The final print > can be configured to provide a cylindrical view (true panoramic), rectilinear > (under 180 degree V or H OAV) but ultra wide shots start looking strange and > spherical projection for display in VR applications. > > The optimum set-up would have the mount rotating about the lenses nodal point > but it's far less of a problem if there isn't a mix of near/far subject matter. > > Good info can be read at: > > http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/ > http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/oxfordtour/stitchingtest/update.html
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
their gear is about the middle of the price range for VR panorama gear. i used to have a pair of Kaidan pan heads. i gave one to a good friend of mine in return for a favor and the other is mostly retired. i use a RRS pan clamp with the B-16 adapter bracket for now. i may drop the adapter bracket when i get a new camera because then i will be able to get a dedicated L bracket for it. Herb - Original Message - From: "Stephen Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9:28 AM Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > Apparently it can be a bit of an issue. My just-arrived > Really Right Stuff catalogue came with a supplement featuring > their (rather pricey) gear for accomplishing this.
Crazy times...
Hi everyone, Just stopping in to say hi! Things are totally crazy for me at the moment. I was away last weekend for 4 days (thurs, fri, sat, sun), shooting two weddings and a Debutante Ball. Home for Monday and Tuesday, and then off again yesterday (Wednesday) to shoot some PR shots for a mine that was having a visit by an Aussie gold medal winning Olympian. Today I fly to Cairns, shoot a wedding there, then fly to Brisbane, shoot a wedding there on Saturday, and fly back to Mackay, and shoot a wedding there on Sunday. Drive the 4 hour drive home on Sunday night. Drive to Rockhampton (5 hours) on Tuesday (WITH my poor kids who I am missing badly at the moment with all of this time away from them), for a little holiday and to take them to the beach and waterslide park etc. Back home, and another wedding next weekend. THEN, back to Rockhampton AGAIN on Monday, for a "checkup" with my plastic surgeon. All in all, during this week, I will cover around 7000kms!! Completely ridiculous, although money-wise things are starting to roll along quite well. I have just signed a contract for a new home of my own (in Mackay - plan to move after christmas in time for the new school year), and it has its very own shop front/studio! Just waiting for the final finance approval, and I will officially be $250k in debt! eek! Very exciting stuff though! Recovery wise, my new "assets" are doing really well, and feeling great. I think they are really enjoying their new "home". lol. Must go, gotta get yesterdays shots edited and online for my client so that I have empty CF cards for tomorrow. tan.
Re: Back - and stormy
I did not see the original post of this. I am flattered, even if Peter can not spell graywolf correctly. Gee, Bill, I always thought you and I were just smart-asses... GRIN! -- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" Subject: Re: Back - and stormy From what I know of the Nobel committees choices for the last few years, I think I choose William Robb and Greywolf, at least they don't let Ideology get in the way of observation. Shucks. I'd like to thank my father especially for teaching me to be both skeptical and rational. My mother for her sense of fair play, my brother for moving out when he did, my wife for tolerating me, and all of you for putting up with me. I will also mention Tom Cakalic for being the only list member brave enough to actually meet me for a special thank you. Love you all, good night. William Robb: Nobel Prize Nominee Wow, that looks good right after my name.
Re: Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy?
My suggestion is to look for a Tamron 300/2.8 or 400/4.0 (adaptall) since you don't need AF. I have a 300/2.8 AF version (same glass as the MF version) that I was extremely lucky to find at a local dealer. Generally they show up on ebay at decent prices. This is a link to a current auction: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3344&item=3841049587&rd=1 If you have any questions let me know Paul -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sep 22, 2004 3:19 PM To: PDML <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy? Now that I'm in a position to purchase a couple of REALLY nice lenses, I'm not finding any for sale! Looking for something along the lines of a 300/2.8 or 400/4. AF/MF is of second importance to quality and speed. Where should I look? Any suggestions? Tried KEH, Adorama, B+H, a general internet search and the "bay". Best I found was a 500/4.5 giant and a 200/2.5 for $555.00 US from a 95.2% seller! (NOT!) TIA Don
Re: Mirror cleaning
Use alcohol (Everclear is best, but isopropyl will work) on a Q-tip (cotton swab on a stick). Do not press down, just the weight of the Q-tip is all. Then use the other end to wipe the alcohol off. Repeat until the mirror is clean. I repeat do no put pressure on the Q-tip. -- Sarbu Alexandru wrote: Hi there... Here I am again, quite sad this time... I don't know why, but I *had* to look my *new* ME Super to the wrong person. Of course, she thought the camera is *empty* so she stick a finger inside. Now there is a huge fingerprint, right on the mirror :sad grin: Can it be cleaned? It seems it can't, as everyone says "don't touch the mirror - ever"... but I'm still asking, just in case. Alex Sarbu ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com
Re: Out to Pasture
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:26:21 +1000, Ryan Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Interesting feel to it Frank.. First impression is that of a crime scene > photo- I guess I'm not too far off.. it's a bit of a crime isn't it! Would > have liked to have seen a coloured one too- any in your collection? > > Cheers, > Ryan > Hi, Ryan, Nope, no colour. Sorry. Glad you liked it, though, and thanks for commenting! cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: a question re: b & w......
Wratten 90 filter. Shel Belinkoff "People that hate cats will come back as mice in their next life." > [Original Message] > From: Karen Clanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 9/22/2004 11:58:23 AM > Subject: a question re: b & w.. > > can anyone tell me what those little round pieces of thick blue acrylic are > called? you look through them to make everything look like a monochrome to > see values etc which are not as obvious when you look at things in color > and take it in b & w. > > i have my husbands but want to get one for a friend and don't even know > what to search for. > > karen
Long, Fast Glass-Where to Buy?
Now that I'm in a position to purchase a couple of REALLY nice lenses, I'm not finding any for sale! Looking for something along the lines of a 300/2.8 or 400/4. AF/MF is of second importance to quality and speed. Where should I look? Any suggestions? Tried KEH, Adorama, B+H, a general internet search and the "bay". Best I found was a 500/4.5 giant and a 200/2.5 for $555.00 US from a 95.2% seller! (NOT!) TIA Don
Re: PAW: Out to Pasture
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:48:27 -0400, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nice shot. It's the classic abandoned classic. It appears to be quite > restorable. Is it an early sixties Jag S-Type? > Paul Hi Paul, Glad you liked the photo. I think it's a Jag Series IV Saloon. I've always thought they were among the most beautiful Jags - which says a lot, because Jaguar made (and continues to make) gorgeous automobiles. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: a question re: b & w......
Hi, Wednesday, September 22, 2004, 7:50:23 PM, Karen wrote: > can anyone tell me what those little round pieces of thick blue acrylic are > called? you look through them to make everything look like a monochrome to > see values etc which are not as obvious when you look at things in color > and take it in b & w. > i have my husbands but want to get one for a friend and don't even know > what to search for. I think you may be look for a black & white contrast viewing filter. Try Tiffen: http://www.tiffen.com/camera_filters.htm#Contrast%20Control%20Filters -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Back - and stormy
And I would like to THANK YOU for spelling my name correctly! Tom C. From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Back - and stormy Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:08:30 -0600 - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" Subject: Re: Back - and stormy > From what I know of the Nobel committees choices for the last few > years, I think I choose William Robb and Greywolf, at least they > don't let Ideology get in the way of observation. Shucks. I'd like to thank my father especially for teaching me to be both skeptical and rational. My mother for her sense of fair play, my brother for moving out when he did, my wife for tolerating me, and all of you for putting up with me. I will also mention Tom Cakalic for being the only list member brave enough to actually meet me for a special thank you. Love you all, good night. William Robb: Nobel Prize Nominee Wow, that looks good right after my name.
Re: Back - and stormy
- Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" Subject: Re: Back - and stormy > From what I know of the Nobel committees choices for the last few > years, I think I choose William Robb and Greywolf, at least they > don't let Ideology get in the way of observation. Shucks. I'd like to thank my father especially for teaching me to be both skeptical and rational. My mother for her sense of fair play, my brother for moving out when he did, my wife for tolerating me, and all of you for putting up with me. I will also mention Tom Cakalic for being the only list member brave enough to actually meet me for a special thank you. Love you all, good night. William Robb: Nobel Prize Nominee Wow, that looks good right after my name.
Re: Spot meter
- Original Message - From: "Andy Chang" Subject: Spot meter > Hi guys, > I'm in need of a spot meter for my Fuji GW670iii. > I'm just wondering which one I should get... > The Pentax digital spotmeter or the Minolta Spotmeter F?... Both are very good. The one thing Minolta does well is light meters. I'd buy based on which one I found easier to use. (The Pentax digital spot meter is as easy to use as it gets) You should also look at ambient meters (Gossen Luna Pro for example). Often they are more useable than spot meters, and can usually have a spot attachment fitted. William Robb
Re: a question re: b & w......
Monovue http://www.srbfilm.co.uk/publish/page14.html Karen Clanin wrote: can anyone tell me what those little round pieces of thick blue acrylic are called? you look through them to make everything look like a monochrome to see values etc which are not as obvious when you look at things in color and take it in b & w. i have my husbands but want to get one for a friend and don't even know what to search for. karen
Re: PESO: Pineapple field
It's a subtle abstract 8-) Jostein wrote: Ryan wrote: http://home.iprimus.com.au/heygoose/pineapple1s.jpg (shot on good ol Reala) Mike W. replied: Hedgehog orgy! Or Spencer Tunnick shoots hedgehogs. I like abstracts that suggest something. Me too... Don't see the suggestion of orgy in this one though...;-) Cheers, Jostein
RE: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
You cant compensate after the fact with software if the plane of focus does not match the subject. i.e. if the subject was a flat front of a building and the shooting technique results in a "plane of focus" of a sphere instead of a plane. JCO -Original Message- From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 4:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching That would be interesting to see (the selective focus shot). Much of the field curvature may not be as significant as the geometric distortions. From what I've seen, its just a projection, and in fact is probably better compensated by software than can be by a lens of the equivalent focal length. J. C. O'Connell wrote: > You can correct geometry sometimes but you > cant correct plane of focus after the fact. > All of these images I have seen so far are > using small fstops which is masking the > field curvature. Id like to see what happens > on a selective focus shot with considerable > panning > JCO > > -Original Message- > From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:44 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching > > > Yes, you do have to compensate if taking geometry into account. This > fellow did it like I mentioned before, this is an extreme example: > > http://tinyurl.com/6zmnj > > He has many other images in his gallery that are very impressive. > > rg > > John C. O'Connell wrote: > > >>If you pan the camera to take the sequence of photos >>to be stitched later, isnt the fact that the camera >>back is panning going to give you a curved "plane" >>of focus or in the case of vertical as well as >>horizontal panning, give you a spherical "plane" >>of focus? >> >>I would think this could be masked with small apertures >>to gain depth of field, but what about geometry? >>I don't see how you could do architecture via stitching. Another >>thing, in order to get correct geometric projection, wouldn't you need > > >>to mount the camera such that the panning axis is at the nodal point >>of the lens instead of the usual tripod mount which is further back >>near the focal plane? JCO >> >> > > >
Re: LX frame spacing
Hi, Andre Langevin wrote: The LX I had with me gave a strange sensation when cranked during the rainy days. Friction was felt as in the need of lubrication. (I know it does not as this is probably a ball bearing mechanism.) Sounds like a bearing is breaking up. Definitely service time, as the problem will only get worse and probably rapidly so at some point. That point being about 30 seconds before the shot of a lifetime. mike
Re: LX frame spacing
Hi, I agree. When using it "by hand" I tend to fully wind with one stroke and then give it another push to make sure. I assume that my winder needs servicing. Stan Halpin wrote: Shel has said that he does not fully wind but uses a series of short strokes. I think this causes the inaccuracies. Yes, the camera 'should' be able to accomodate nonstandard usage, but it seems not to. stan (from beautiful cloudy rainy cold Vilnius) On Sep 22, 2004, at 10:45 AM, mike.wilson wrote: Hi, Andre wrote: I'm back from Mongolia and looking at my unmounted slides and there is a lot of irregular frame spacing. As the photos were taken with an LX I understand this is not normal as the LX is supposed to be able to register precisely the frames (so that, for example, you can go back to a previous shot and take another exposure). Is this an easy problem to fix? My LX was serviced by Pentax UK last year. It was brought to "new standard condition" on all functional assemblies. With the winder attached, I get irregular spacing. Without winder, it does not seem to happen. The winder was not serviced. It seems that the _real_ problem is that the LX will _allow_ irregular spacing if, for example, the winder is not functioning correctly or the user is not winding fully. I would check my technique first and then, if irregular winding is confirmed, get it serviced.
Re: PESO: Pineapple field
> Ryan wrote: > > http://home.iprimus.com.au/heygoose/pineapple1s.jpg (shot on good ol Reala) > Mike W. replied: > Hedgehog orgy! Or Spencer Tunnick shoots hedgehogs. I like abstracts > that suggest something. Me too... Don't see the suggestion of orgy in this one though...;-) Cheers, Jostein
Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching
That would be interesting to see (the selective focus shot). Much of the field curvature may not be as significant as the geometric distortions. From what I've seen, its just a projection, and in fact is probably better compensated by software than can be by a lens of the equivalent focal length. J. C. O'Connell wrote: You can correct geometry sometimes but you cant correct plane of focus after the fact. All of these images I have seen so far are using small fstops which is masking the field curvature. Id like to see what happens on a selective focus shot with considerable panning JCO -Original Message- From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Large Format vs. Digital/Stitching Yes, you do have to compensate if taking geometry into account. This fellow did it like I mentioned before, this is an extreme example: http://tinyurl.com/6zmnj He has many other images in his gallery that are very impressive. rg John C. O'Connell wrote: If you pan the camera to take the sequence of photos to be stitched later, isnt the fact that the camera back is panning going to give you a curved "plane" of focus or in the case of vertical as well as horizontal panning, give you a spherical "plane" of focus? I would think this could be masked with small apertures to gain depth of field, but what about geometry? I don't see how you could do architecture via stitching. Another thing, in order to get correct geometric projection, wouldn't you need to mount the camera such that the panning axis is at the nodal point of the lens instead of the usual tripod mount which is further back near the focal plane? JCO
Re: Enabled? What?
Cotty wrote: > > On 22/9/04, Jon M, discombobulated, unleashed: > > >I've noticed that people tend to post > >"Enabled:whatever" when they aquire new equipment. > >That doesn't really match the definition of "enabled" > >I have in my head, is there some PDML-specific > >significance of this word? > > Jon, go on eBay right now and bid on that lovely lens you've had your eye > on all week. You know that you really really want it, and even if the Mrs > will tut-tut, you know in your heart of hearts that she will forgive you > and All Will Be Well, and you will have a wonderful new bit of Pentax kit > to add to your growing collection. > > If you follow this advice, you have been well and truly enabled :-) > > Cheers, > Cotty > However, the REAL definition of "enabled" means someone gave you (or , um, you earned) enough to buy that whatever, or do that whatever. As in, I won the lottery so now I can be ISt*D enabled :) more definitions welcome annsan
Re: Spot meter
This one time, at band camp, "Andy Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi guys, > I'm in need of a spot meter for my Fuji GW670iii. > I'm just wondering which one I should get... > The Pentax digital spotmeter or the Minolta Spotmeter F?... > Any advice? If it were my money, I would go for the Pentax Kevin - "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Re: LCD monitor color calibration
Yes, I have a PC machine. Mac tools just can't help me. Matja > I guess you're talking about PC monitors?? I'm using an Apple Cinema > Display on a Mac G4 dual 1.25. I set my color space to Colorsynch > Generic RGB. My monitor is an exact match for my prints. I previously > used a CRT, a Sony Trinitron clone. It was okay, but my Apple Cinema > Display flat panel shows far more detail. I can see the grain on 4800 > dpi scans of 6x7 Ektachrome 100 VS film. I am totally satisfied with > this combination. Paul On Sep 21, 2004, at 9:07 PM, Herb Chong wrote: > > > very hard to do on an LCD and that is why i replaced my recently > > deceased NEC 5FG (13 years old) with a CRT, the NEC Mitsubishi > > 2070SB. CRTs still give the best color fidelity and dynamic range > > without viewing angle problems. your LCD is properly calibrated for > > the correct viewing angle. > > > > Herb > > - Original Message - > > From: "Matjaz Osojnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 1:26 PM > > Subject: LCD monitor color calibration > > > > > >> So, what do you guys and gals do? Is the spider the only solution > >> and does it work well with LCD? Any other tips? Any help is really > >> appreciated. > > > > > >
Re: LCD monitor color calibration
Dave, thanks for reply. > LCDs are pretty difficult to calibrate. In general you don't get any > control over the colour temperature - it's fixed by the backlight. Yep. I've noticed that. Poor temperature control. Seems now that a LCD dedicated spyder is the only way to go. Al least for a PC based system I have. > The Spyder can profile an LCD if you select "native" as the white > point. Then colour-aware applications (eg Photoshop) can use that > profile as the preview device. Applications that don't support colour > management won't be helped by profiling. > As for Gamma calibration tools, on an LCD they seem pretty much useless to me, just like Alin wrote. If you try to repeat the procedure a few times, it just doesn't get any closer. Matja > I don't know how well software-based calibration (eg Adobe Gamma) > works with LCDs. > > Cheers, > > - Dave > > http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ > >
Re: LCD monitor color calibration
Thanks. I was hoping there is some magic touch out there which can get you closer to a proper calibration. But obviously there are no shortcuts. It is a pity because I really don't have a proper feeling for postprocessing on LCD right now. On CRT I was able to adjust a photograph close to my liking within minutes. Not anymore. Oh, well, I might try with a spyder. Matja > On 21 Sep 2004 at 19:26, Matjaz Osojnik wrote: > > > So, what do you guys and gals do? Is the spider the only solution > > and does it work well with LCD? Any other tips? Any help is really > > appreciated. > > The curve required to correctly simulate gamma 1.8 or 2.2 on an LCD is > of different shape than those suitable for CRT monitors (most software > gamma adjustment tools). Calibration devices designed specifically for > LCD like the Colorvision Spyder and the Gretag Eye-One Display will do > a much better job but don't expect it to rival a late CRT. > > > 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: Spot meter
Andy, I have a Fuji GW670ii, and occasionally use a Spiratone SP-1 spot meter - it works fine. Most of the time, I use a Sekonic Studio Deluxe II L-398M incident light meter with the GW670ii, and also with my Pentax 35mm cameras when the light is tricky or the image has a dark or light bias. For me, the incident light meter is much more valuable than the spot meter - do you use one ? Jim www.jcolwell.ca
RE: Mirror cleaning
The mirror can be scratched easily, but not so easily like the plastic focus screen. To clean the mirror, I use Kodak Lens Tissue and folded it up into small piece and held by a tweezer, then applied some pure isopropyl alcohol (found in drug stores) on the tissue to wipe the mirror with minimal force in one direction once, then repeat the process until the mirror is clean. Just don't rub the mirror or reuse the tissue. Pay extra attention not to touch the screen by the tissue or alcohol, and always blow off as much dirty as you can first. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Hi there... Here I am again, quite sad this time... I don't know why, but I *had* to look my *new* ME Super to the wrong person. Of course, she thought the camera is *empty* so she stick a finger inside. Now there is a huge fingerprint, right on the mirror :sad grin: Can it be cleaned? It seems it can't, as everyone says "don't touch the mirror - ever"... but I'm still asking, just in case. Alex Sarbu _ Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented Microsoft® SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
Re: Enabled? What?
On 22/9/04, Jon M, discombobulated, unleashed: >I've noticed that people tend to post >"Enabled:whatever" when they aquire new equipment. >That doesn't really match the definition of "enabled" >I have in my head, is there some PDML-specific >significance of this word? Jon, go on eBay right now and bid on that lovely lens you've had your eye on all week. You know that you really really want it, and even if the Mrs will tut-tut, you know in your heart of hearts that she will forgive you and All Will Be Well, and you will have a wonderful new bit of Pentax kit to add to your growing collection. If you follow this advice, you have been well and truly enabled :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Fwd: still_enabled
This is a forwarded message From: Fiso_PENTAX <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: pentax-discuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004, 10:39:41 AM Subject: still_enabled ===8<==Original message text=== Hello All, > Out of curiosity, have you tried tekade.de or something more local > than a Canadian ebay retailer perhaps? > > HTH, > > Kostas Hi Kostas, thanks for the link... Tekade: IstD 1400 + BG1 130 = 1530 Euro -> 1860 USD I have no relations in Germany, if I want them legally ship to Budapest, that means +25% friendly Hungarian tax. :( 2327 Us$ Out of question... > > B&H Photo in NY offers the *istC for $1239. They are very reliable. > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ > Paul Stenquist Hi Paul, IstD 1240 + BG1 160 = 1400 USD and NO TAX !!, And they are known very reliable Looks promising... thanks. Canadian 'gray': IstD, Grip, 2*256 CF, 2 crappy lenses, bag & whatewer = 1950 USD with shipping - 200 rebate?? = 1750 USD, if it's true. but: > > Hi. > The area code is 519 which indicates it a Souther Ontario, Canada company. Lots > of neg > feed back in > the past 6 months. > > Dave Yes, this IS the key information for me, I am way to far from the US/Canada to run into problems with them .. Thanks for the help. -- Best regards from Budapest, Fiso_PENTAX mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ===8<===End of original message text===
Re: Enabled? What?
Hi, Wednesday, September 22, 2004, 6:55:09 PM, Jon wrote: > I've noticed that people tend to post > "Enabled:whatever" when they aquire new equipment. > That doesn't really match the definition of "enabled" > I have in my head, is there some PDML-specific > significance of this word? yes. We had a subscriber called Mike Johnson who started this use. Somebody would express a wish for a barely-attainable piece of equipment, and he would supply a large number of reasons why the person should buy whatever. This enabled the person to buy. -- Cheers, Bob
a question re: b & w......
can anyone tell me what those little round pieces of thick blue acrylic are called? you look through them to make everything look like a monochrome to see values etc which are not as obvious when you look at things in color and take it in b & w. i have my husbands but want to get one for a friend and don't even know what to search for. karen
Re: OT - 1Dsmll 16MP?
On 23/9/04, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed: >L-ion batteries work effectively down to about -20 deg C, TFTs and LCDs >on the >other hand don't like the cold (normal temp range LCDs and TFTs generally >work >down to only 0deg C). So I'd assume that the operating temp limit specs were >more a function of LCD performance than power issues. Someone on a different list was chirping in about issues with resistors and other electronic components. Could this be the case? What is the published operating temp range (say) of the *ist D? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Enabled? What?
Jon M wrote: I've noticed that people tend to post "Enabled:whatever" when they aquire new equipment. That doesn't really match the definition of "enabled" I have in my head, is there some PDML-specific significance of this word? It means that someone has bought a new toy. :-) /Henri
AW: Mirror cleaning
Alex, you can rub as long as you want with a piece of cotton towel. The ME Super mirror coating is quite sturdy, unlike the silver coating on really old cameras. Even if you scratched the mirror it would not matter - you would not see a difference in the viewfinder. So, just rub away, but don't apply too much pressure, the mirror still is but a thin piece of glass... And take care not to touch the focussing screen. THAT part is really delicate. Have fun! Sven -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Henri Toivonen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. September 2004 17:48 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: Mirror cleaning Sarbu Alexandru wrote: >Hi there... >Here I am again, quite sad this time... >I don't know why, but I *had* to look my *new* ME >Super to the wrong person. Of course, she thought the >camera is *empty* so she stick a finger inside. Now >there is a huge fingerprint, right on the mirror :sad >grin: >Can it be cleaned? It seems it can't, as everyone says >"don't touch the mirror - ever"... but I'm still >asking, just in case. > >Alex Sarbu > > > I have cleaned the mirror on my SFX, it was no biggie, just don't press hard on it, very light touch. Maybe you're really not supposed to do that, but I did, and it still works. /Henri
Re: National symbols
Tequila is Mexican Juan's Columbian. Keith Whaley wrote: Graywolf wrote: Doesn't bother me. I am a Finn on my mothers side. Aha! That says a lot! Dorsal or ventral? Although I heard from her Aunts and Uncles that a lot of the people living in Finland are Swedes (actually, they always said, "Goddamned Swedes")... GRIN! Isn't it strange that the heaviest coffee drinkers live in countries where the stuff will not grow? Okaay...what do you suppose Juan Valdez drinks? Tequila? keith -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: PAW - Valhalla
Yeah, that's basically it. A tight corner on a two lane mountain road. About maybe 200ft of visibility in either direction to watch for traffic. Even pulled over as far as possible, I was taking up half my lane, meaning when cars came by in my lane they had to cross the center line to get by. Glag you liked it. Tom C. From: "Ryan Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: PAW - Valhalla Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:21:28 +1000 Good capture Tom! So what exactly was this place you stopped at that you weren't supposed to? Blind corner on a cliff? Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 3:11 PM Subject: PAW - Valhalla > This was taken in the Kootenay Mountains in British Columbia at Slocan Lake, > earlier this month. My family spent three wonderful days with William Robb > and his family. > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2718332 > > Tom C. > > >
RE: PESO suggestion
Good idea... Let's call ity SYNC. Tom C. From: "mike.wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: PESO suggestion Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:57:29 +0100 Hi, I'm probably in a minority of one here but I used to really like the "Synchronicty" PUG. As it is the autumnal equinox today, how about those interested posting a picture taken in the next 12 (or so) hours? mike CITY OF SUNDERLAND COLLEGE DISCLAIMER Confidentiality: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If they come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this email and highlight the error. Please note that the views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the college. Security Warning: Please note that this email has been created in the knowledge that Internet email is not a 100% secure communications medium. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of security when emailing us. Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure thay are actually virus free.
Re: National symbols
You didn't have to point that out Keith :) Tom C. From: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: National symbols Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 03:08:02 -0700 Tom C wrote: I was in Starbucks today. I was late for work. I was grouchy and in a hurry. There were four brewers for regular drip coffee, all empty. The young girl turned around and said, "I'm sorry we're out, would you mind waiting 2 minutes?" I replied "I thought I came to a coffee place". The other barista said, "Yes sir, you did" with a sweet smile plastered on her face and a pleasant tone of voice. I said "Well I don't have 2 minutes to wait, I'll go elsewhere." They said they were sorry and wished me a nice day. Good for her. A good example of calm and gracious service in the face of adversity. In Paris the counter help would be throwing pots and pans around with loud grumbling... And in the meawhile, YOU wasted far more than two minutes in travel and dialog time. keith Tom C.
RE: PESO suggestion
Good idea... Let's call ity SYNC. Tom C. From: "mike.wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: PESO suggestion Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:57:29 +0100 Hi, I'm probably in a minority of one here but I used to really like the "Synchronicty" PUG. As it is the autumnal equinox today, how about those interested posting a picture taken in the next 12 (or so) hours? mike CITY OF SUNDERLAND COLLEGE DISCLAIMER Confidentiality: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If they come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this email and highlight the error. Please note that the views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the college. Security Warning: Please note that this email has been created in the knowledge that Internet email is not a 100% secure communications medium. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of security when emailing us. Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure thay are actually virus free.
Re: Sharpest Color Film
But what do I know? :) Tom C. I think the Superia has a sharper look than Reala. Whether is is sharper is anyones guess. Well, perhaps a bit less of a guess... http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Film%20test/FujiReala.jpg http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Film%20test/FujiRealares.jpg http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Film%20test/Superia100.jpg http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Film%20test/superia100res.jpg http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Film%20test/Ektar25.jpg http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/Film%20test/Ektar25res.jpg Anyway, I'll trot this stuff out for you and maybe it will help William Robb
Re: Sharpest Color Film
Hello Shel, Another film to put on your short list is Konica Impressa 50. Depends on the project. The Konica seems to do a bit better with scenics, while the Reala seems a bit better on people. I used both quite a bit. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, September 22, 2004, 7:21:28 AM, you wrote: SB> Need a quick answer if you can. Which have you found to be the sharper, SB> more detailed color film: Fuji Reala or Fuji Superior? Have you found any SB> that's sharper? SB> I have a roll of Royal Gold 25 that's a bit out of date that John Francis SB> gave me a couple of years ago. I'm not too concerned with color fidelity in SB> this project, but want the best detail and resolving power I can find with SB> the film that's now in my freezer. Will this out of date film have suffered SB> an loss of resolving power or sharpness over time? SB> Shel
RE: Sharpest Color Film
I would go with Reala. I have always been greatly impressed with the detail and color rendition. That's my $.02. Tom C. From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Sharpest Color Film Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 07:21:28 -0700 Need a quick answer if you can. Which have you found to be the sharper, more detailed color film: Fuji Reala or Fuji Superior? Have you found any that's sharper? I have a roll of Royal Gold 25 that's a bit out of date that John Francis gave me a couple of years ago. I'm not too concerned with color fidelity in this project, but want the best detail and resolving power I can find with the film that's now in my freezer. Will this out of date film have suffered an loss of resolving power or sharpness over time? Shel
Re: Firmware reverse compile
Wow. The MLU idea is a great one and probably pretty simple to do also. rg Rob Studdert wrote: On 22 Sep 2004 at 14:18, Steve Jolly wrote: This is pure speculation, but I suspect that what Pentax have done is performed the Bayer interpolation with 16-bit precision and then kept the extra information. It's not "padding" as such - dropping the four least-significant bits would be equivalent to a second stage of quantisation, introducing extra quantisation noise. RAW files are just that, RAW sensor data, pre-interpolated. Case in point many other cameras on the market that use this sensor manage to provide RAW files of a size which can be directly related to the fact that they only contain 12bits per pixel. However! In practice the effect might well be very small, making the trade-off worthwhile to gain an effective 33% increase in memory card capacities. The effect will be 6.31M pixels x 4 bits (3.16MB) per image and more if compression was introduced too. Personally my first target would be to implement something like proper MLU support... This would be another great upgrade. 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: LX frame spacing
CLA. William Robb It's been CLA'ed a year ago... I'd suggest that it's typical of the LX ... while the camera is "supposed" to be very precise, I've never had one that was... Shel Surprising... Shel has said that he does not fully wind but uses a series of short strokes. I think this causes the inaccuracies. Yes, the camera 'should' be able to accomodate nonstandard usage, but it seems not to. stan (from beautiful cloudy rainy cold Vilnius) You lucky guy. Cold doesn't affect photographers when there is something to catch (apart from a cold)... My LX was serviced by Pentax UK last year. It was brought to "new standard condition" on all functional assemblies. With the winder attached, I get irregular spacing. Without winder, it does not seem to happen. The winder was not serviced. It seems that the _real_ problem is that the LX will _allow_ irregular spacing if, for example, the winder is not functioning correctly or the user is not winding fully. I would check my technique first and then, if irregular winding is confirmed, get it serviced. mike The LX I had with me gave a strange sensation when cranked during the rainy days. Friction was felt as in the need of lubrication. (I know it does not as this is probably a ball bearing mechanism.) On that aspect, it looks like the LX is often not as precise as stated by Pentax... Not that big a deal anyway. Andre
Re: Sharpest Color Film
The RG25 would likely be the winner. You shouldn't have a problem if it's been frozen. Doesn't the color fidelity of color film usually suffer the most over time? Next choice would be the Superior. There isn't a difference in sharpness between the Superior and Reala, but there is in color rendering, so you may want to save the Reala for another project where color is important. t On 9/22/04 7:21, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Need a quick answer if you can. Which have you found to be the sharper, > more detailed color film: Fuji Reala or Fuji Superior? Have you found any > that's sharper? > > I have a roll of Royal Gold 25 that's a bit out of date that John Francis > gave me a couple of years ago. I'm not too concerned with color fidelity in > this project, but want the best detail and resolving power I can find with > the film that's now in my freezer. Will this out of date film have suffered > an loss of resolving power or sharpness over time? > > Shel > > >
Re: PAW and request for honest contructive critique
This is a realy good shot, and very amusing. Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Among other things I've spent some time in Oslo just walking around and trying to catch the moment. Here is one attempt: http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/48074 Any and all comments from those who are more experienced in this that I am are most welcome. Thanks. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Sharpest Color Film
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Robert Woerner wrote: > I vote for Reala from personal experience. It is my sharp color print film > of choice since Kodak Royal Gold 100 disappeared...man I liked that film. Have you tried the newer Kodak offering (Royal Supra)? I don't like its colours as much as I like Superia/Centuria, but it could well be the same/similar to the one you liked. Just a thought, Kostas
Re: Enabled: SMC-M 75-150/4
You may well be right... All the more reason to hang onto my 135mm f/3.5... keith Jim Colwell wrote: Henri, I often use a Kiron 75-150/4 for the same purpose. I'm convinced that the subject's comfort level for informal portraits and candids at gatherings of family and friends is inversely proportional to the lens size, especially the diameter of the front element. Many people cringe when you point a 135/1.8 or 135/2.3 at them, but they aren't particularly bothered by a small diameter lens. Jim www.jcolwell.ca
Re: *ist series support for setting the aperture on the lens(was: ist D AE mode for K & M lenses)
William, I guess, I am, Mr A has taken a particular dislike to me, which I don't mind since I've killfiled the A***, I'd much rather argue about Photography with people I like than anything with an obnoxious abrasive A***. The only time I see his posts is when others reply to them. I usually find this to be blissful. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Antonio" Subject: Re: *ist series support for setting the aperture on the lens(was: ist D AE mode for K & M lenses) Except reliability also means consistency - if it never works then it is 100% consistent and hence reliable, whichh I wuold imagine was Peters spin on things. Who is Peter? Anyway, my experience with pentax AE is limited to the LX, Super Program and Program plus. On all three cameras (well 6 if you count samples I have used) I have had inexplicable underexposure errors randomly, but fairly frequently. Honestly, I don't know if it is caused by the ISO resistor, or the aperture estimator resistor. I do know that replacing the ISO resistor on the LX (I had all three of mine replaced with new ones last service) did not correct the problem. As you said, reliability and consistency are closely related. I honestly cannot depend on Pentax AE in the form I am used to using it in to be consistent, therefore it is unreliable. Regarding the istD and it's use of pre A lenses, the metering method is 100% consistent and reliable. This is an improvement. It means I can use pre A lenses using an automatic exposure method with an assuredness of correct exposure, something I have not enjoyed in the past. I am willing to take the extra button push to get an exposure that I am certain is correct, over an exposure that may be incorrect, especially since on a film camera, I have no way of knowing if the exposure was right or not until some time after taking the picture. William Robb -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Back - and stormy
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Peter J. Alling wrote: > Could people please put Antonio's name in the subject if they respond to > him. I'd like my filter to catch it so I don't have to even see his > spew. You won't be able to make people comply with that. I'll give you another tip, though. Most mail software already does something similar automatically behind the scenes. Make your filter act on the contents of the In-Reply-To header. anders - http://anders.hultman.nu/ med dagens bild och allt!
