FS Friday: Kenko auto extension tube set
Set of 3 K-mount extension tubes: 12mm, 21mm and 36mm. All are in pristine condition, except for the lettering which is rubbing off on the 12mm and 21mm tubes. They have all 7 FA series electrical contacts, but no AF actuator so the only thing you lose using the tubes is AF. 3 tubes stacked go beyond 1:1 with a regular 50mm lens. I am selling them because I don't use them very much anymore, and they are just cluttering up my shelf. $65 US or $75 CAD takes the set. Email me off list if you are interested. -Scott
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
Not sure what you mean by that. What does faking stop down metering to do a test have to do with handheld metering? Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it nescessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you? John -- Original Message --- From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:44:31 -0600 Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Not sure what you mean by that. What does faking stop down metering to do a test have to do with handheld metering? Handheld metering is always going to be useful, especially incident metering. We were trying to find a way to fake a K-body into using a K-mount lens like a screwmount would behave on the body, i.e. the aperture set would look like it was wide open so that there would be no inaccuracy in the stop down mechanism. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Makes a complete nonsense of using a handheld meter then! John -- Original Message --- From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 16:45:10 -0600 Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Hmmm. You may be right on that, since normal K mount cameras may depend on this, whereas the *istD does not have it. I'll have to test this and report my results. rg Don Sanderson wrote: This will work for the aperture but I believe it will also throw the cameras meter way off. When not fully seated the lever that reports how many stops from full open the lens is set won't be in the correct position. 1/8 of a turn could be several stops. Don -Original Message- From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 3:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Christian, A couple of reasons. First, a week or so back JCO made the assertion that by metering thru a lens set at the taking aperture, measuring the actual light transited rather than having the camera essentially calculate the exposure, would result in a more accurate, or precise, exposure. I'd like to see if there's any truth to that, and if there's any practical difference. My guess would be that the difference would be so tiny as to be insignificant. Esp with film since there is so much latitude. But if you are really interested in testing this, an interesting way to do this would be to use Mark's trick with the *istD, that is, mount the lens so that it is not fully locked, to a position such that the lever that keeps the aperture wide open is not engaged. I believe he said it was about 1/8 of a turn or so, but check with him. This is ok for tests like you want to do, but I would not recommend this for everyday shooting, as the lens is in somewhat of a precarious situation not fully locked in and could fall off. Also, I want to compare two similar lenses, one being a Super Tak that can only be used stopped down on K bodies and the other being a K mount version of the lens. It would seem that if the metering styles used were the same (assuming there IS any difference as suggested by JCO), the comparison between the two lenses may be more accurate. However, I doubt that I'd want to shoot that way when making regular photographs. Oh, there's a third reason: I've just a little too much time on my hands right now LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there a way to use a K-mount lens on the K, M, or LX bodies with stop down metering instead of having to use open aperture? Just a silly question, and forgive my ignorance, but why would you want to? --- End of Original Message --- --- End of Original Message ---
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
It's not a matter of faith. Checking and calibrating one's equipment negates the need for faith. It's not that I don't trust open aperture metering ... I'm just trying to see if there's any significant difference in results between open aperture and stopped down readings, which is actually incidental to the original intent of comparing two lenses which are said to be the same optically, one of which operates with stop down metering. Shel [Original Message] From: John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it necessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you?
Pentax sponsors roundworld trip
Hi, From the website: http://www.longwayround.com/lwr.htm Click on Partners then sponsors. Site is a bit Flashy and my be slow to load on dialup. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
[PAW] A bridge in Luzern
http://www.republika.pl/sylwekp/PAW/Luzern.jpg Beautiful woodden bridge in Luzern, Swiss at the sunset. Comments are as always welcome :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
PESO: Red alternative I
I had so many Red photos (and I know I didn't PUG the easiest one) that I've decided to PESO some of them as well. Here's the first of them: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2852939size=lg Comments are welcome, as always. DagT
RE: *ist DS and continuous autofocus
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:01:56 +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: I wonder if anybody really uses AF-C, except for clip-zoom-mode/power-zoom-work, perhaps? Jens I use continuous AF when photographing my children on fast moving rides. That's about it, but it works well for that. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: frank theriault They (the dogs, that is) were docile as little kitty cats. This has been my experience with the breed as well. Number one in the UK biters (number of bite incidents, severity not counted)league Golden Labrador. Alsatian, Dobermann, Pit bull, Rottweiler - none of them in the top ten. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
At 22:15 2004.11.04 -0500, you wrote: Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:56:47 -0600 From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Fred Widall Subject: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Pitbulls are about to become an endangered species in Ontario. Our provincial goverment is about to introduce a total ban on them. Eventually, they will have to ban all dogs. The mentality that produces breed bans will just move from breed to breed as each one is deemed to be dangerous. William Robb Back in Oklahoma we had a neighbor (and I use the term loosely) whose pit bull would get loose and trap us in our hosue. Did it 3 times. Only wish I'd had a gun. Collin You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact. Howard Hendricks
Re: OT: Yankee elections
ft Did I say that? ft It actually sounds like a fairly lucid, level-headed comment. ft Couldn't have been me... ft LOL Hi Frank, of course it wasn't you, I was just spindoctoring your message a bit ;-) Good light! fra
'dem French
Can't build an army but they can build lenses! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=4688item=3850915731rd=1 [ I thought at this price nobody would mind me posting it. : ) ] Collin You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact. Howard Hendricks
Re: Last-minute political camera fun
Then he's really hurt, poor tyke. Paul Stenquist wrote: Frank has come down firmly on both sides of the fence vbg.
Re: 'dem French
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Collin R Brendemuehl wrote: Can't build an army but they can build lenses! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=4688item=3850915731rd=1 Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Kostas
Re: *ist DS and continuous autofocus
JB I wonder if anybody really uses AF-C, except for JB clip-zoom-mode/power-zoom-work, perhaps? Depends on shooting style. I use cont.AF all the time, but with AF activated by a back button instead of the shutter release. Actually it was sport shooters who probably insisted on the secondary AF button, and it's a great feature for any quicker work. Dissociation of AF and shutter release. Good light! fra
Re: USAF target and resolution tests
i saw the image. i haven't say that there was no clipping only because it was a grey day. but what i meant, was something different: you you have a low contrast day, you can have your histogram shifted to the right (overexposed), and still have no clipping of highlights. and at the same time, your shadows will be in the higher-bit range of the samples. this should give an image that can withstand big adjustments much better. best, mishka On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:06:56 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4 Nov 2004 at 23:03, Mishka wrote: i guess grey day is the key here. that should be perfect for digital -- you can fine-tune the histogram right on the spot, without risking to lose either end of it. The histogram only reflects the post processing setting in camera, however it's not a problem. If you looked at the example RAW file I posted the other day you will see that it was shot in near midday sun on a cloudless day. The RAW file clips only in an area of bright white and specular reflection and there is still good detail in the deep shadows. The range is well under-utilized on drab days, it's very difficult to make a bad exposure in such lighting. 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: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's not that I don't trust open aperture metering ... I'm just trying to see if there's any significant difference in results between open aperture and stopped down readings, which is actually incidental to the original intent of comparing two lenses which are said to be the same optically, one of which operates with stop down metering. Shel, I don't know if this may help, but it does exist at least a K-mount body from Zenit (it should be the Zenit 122K) which meters in stop down with K mount lenses. You may have to look for it if you want to perform the test you have in mind without having to operate frankencameras modifications... :-) Ciao, Gianfranco PS: if I may add my thought about your question, my guess is that you won't find a significant difference comparing the metering in stop down to the open aperture metering unless there's a certain amount of imprecision of the aperture. = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Statistics suggest that the proportion of dangerous pit bulls is quite high, at least in some parts of the US. That is reason to be concerned. The proportion of dangerous red sports cars is quite low. On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:54 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Because irresponsible people have cross bred pit bulls to make them vicious, ill-tempered fighting dogs. Perhaps that's not the case in Canada, but it's true in the US. Yes, there are some good ones, but they look exactly like the ones that will tear our leg off. And what problem is this going to solve? BTW, do you consider all little red sports cars dangerous? Or just the ones driven by irresponsible people? William Robb
Re: pentax/nikon sync cords compatible?
I seem to remember that someone found out that certain Canon synch cords are compatible. Mark in Michigan, mebbe? Alan Chan wrote: Only the centre contact is located the same. It means you can fire the flash, but no extra communication, no auto zoom, no ttl or anything else. Just plain manual focus. So they are not compatible. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Could anyone who uses both Pentax and Nikon equipment please let me know whether the pentax 5p type cord (with hotshoe adapters) and the SC-17 type nikon cords are interchangeable. The contacts seem to be in the same configurations. Are they?
Re: USAF target and resolution tests
My gray day histograms were not clipped. I bracketed each shot by half stops and the middle one looked best on most shots. The histograms generally were far from the shadow end, and the highlight end had a few spikes from some of the white sky highlights but the meat of the curve was centered. On most shots, I pushed up the exposure until the histogram reached the right end and pushed the shadows until it reached the lower end. I turned up the color temperature to 5850. Then I increased saturation and contrast significantly. I used shadows/highlights to mellow some of the gray sky reflections. Once I had more color in these I burned them in. Then I increased red saturation only another step. Finally, I adjusted contrast and brightness a bit more. On some exposures I pulled back the green curve a bit in the middle of the range. I posted one of these before. I'll post the url again, along with a url for a conversion of the untouched RAW image. The tweaked image is first, the untouched one second. In addition to the steps outlined above, you'll see I had to remove some parking lot concrete blocks, and I cropped out the sky. (That was Annsan's suggestion. Thanks Ann:-) I did 16 shots for the magazine article. I've printed four or five on the Epson 2200, and they look very nice. That's usually an indication that they will print well on offset four-color process after conversion to CMYK. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2816809size=lg http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2853243size=lg On Nov 5, 2004, at 2:06 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 4 Nov 2004 at 23:03, Mishka wrote: i guess grey day is the key here. that should be perfect for digital -- you can fine-tune the histogram right on the spot, without risking to lose either end of it. The histogram only reflects the post processing setting in camera, however it's not a problem. If you looked at the example RAW file I posted the other day you will see that it was shot in near midday sun on a cloudless day. The RAW file clips only in an area of bright white and specular reflection and there is still good detail in the deep shadows. The range is well under-utilized on drab days, it's very difficult to make a bad exposure in such lighting. 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: 'dem French
KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run Simply, people prefer different things because of their different tastes ;-) World would be boring otherwise, don't you think ;-) ? Good light! fra
Re: 'dem French
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote: KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run (I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for). Kostas
RE: USAF target and resolution tests
This isnt that complicated. Digital sensors have dynamic range just like film does. At some point they clip at higher light levels and at some point they just produce noise at lower light levels. THAT is the dynamic range of the sensor itself and it doesn't matter what the bit depth of the A/D is after the sensor, you cannot get more Dynamic Range in the output than the sensor itself has by increasing the bit depth. That said, if the bit depth is too little compared to the dynamic range of the sensor there will be problems because without enough output shades of gray (bit depth) there would be obvious visable banding as the sensor's dynamic range increases due to technical improvements. But you have to remember that increasing the bit depth of the output isnt increasing the dynamic range of the sensor, it is only making whatever dynamic range the sensor has fully usable. I do not claim to be an expert on this but my understanding on this is that the sensors are limiting dynamic range at this point, not the bit depth of the a/d conversions so just increasing bit depths of todays sensors will not increase the recorded dynamic range, just more more invisibly finer shades of gray possible out of the same limited recorded dynamic range. JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Greater bit depth provides greater dynamic range. That was discussed here a week or so past, and that's what I understood from the likes of John Francis and others, whose opinions and technical expertise I have come to trust Anyway, all the technical talk gives me a headache. Amplitude shmaplitude (to paraphrase another thread), I'm only reporting what I've seen and what I've come to understand from those, both on and off this list, who are true experts when it comes to working with digital files. Like I said, I'm mostly ignorant about these things, and maybe my terminology is sometimes incorrect, but I stand by my statement, qualifiers and all. So, if you want to argue your point on technical grounds and theory, I'm outta here, because I just don't know enough of the terminology and will get lost very easily. I just know what I've seen and what the experts have shown and told me. Shel [Original Message] From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/4/2004 10:29:16 PM Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests I think you might have misunderstanding of what higher bit depth means. Bit depth is a amplitude resolution parameter, not a dynamic range parameter. Dynamic range of a digital sensor is independent of the bit depth of the output. More bits does not mean more dynamic range, it just means more gray shades. Bit depth is the number of grey shades from **output** pure black to **output** pure white, dynamic range on the other hand is the number of **input** fstops between the sensor's pure white (clipping)output and the sensor's dark noise(pure black) output . Two different digital sensors can have same bit depth but different dynamic range or vice versa What I was referring to about specialized films is that super low contrast films could have a greater DYNAMIC RANGE than digital for extremely contrasty scenes and super high contrast films could have a better amplitude resolution (bit depth) for extremely low contrast scenes than digital. JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests I'm saying that, from what I've seen of high bit RAW files, yes, I believe they can. Again, take my comments with a grain of salt (and note the qualifiers) as I'm still just learning this stuff, and have just started to work with digi RAW files. Remember, digital can be very well matched with the scene, and there's control for manipulation throughout the workflow. Shel [Original Message] From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/4/2004 9:50:03 PM Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Are you saying that digital sensors can capture as wide a scene contrast range as the widest range (low contrast) color neg films can? Are you saying that digital sensors can capture as narrow a scene contrast range as accurately range as the highest contrast color slide films? JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:12 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests I'm not sure your assessment of digital (especially 12-bit or greater RAW files) is correct. Maybe with the 8-bit digicams that are so much in use, but not with a higher end DSLR with 12-bit or 14-bit capture. Shel
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
On 5/11/04, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: Statistics suggest that the proportion of dangerous pit bulls is quite high, at least in some parts of the US. That is reason to be concerned. The proportion of dangerous red sports cars is quite low. Of course, you could maybe have a red sports car being driven by a pit bull.. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
Yep. Get the old, non-auto K tube set. Shel Belinkoff wrote: Is there a way to use a K-mount lens on the K, M, or LX bodies with stop down metering instead of having to use open aperture? Shel
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Statistics suggest that the proportion of dangerous pit bulls is quite high, at least in some parts of the US. That is reason to be concerned. Sure, statistics can be made to say whatever you like. Perhaps little red sports cars were a bad analogy. lets just pick cars in general. Statistically, they are very dangerous. They kill lots of people, and should probably be banned (using yhe logic you have presented). In 2003, in the USA alone, some 42,643 people died in traffic accidents. That's 116 per day. From 1999 to 2003, the number of traffic deaths is 211506. source: http://www.brakesonfatalities.org/ And this doesn't even begin to tally up the number of injuries, both serious or minor that didn't end in a fatality. And your concerned about a few dogs? Ban one dog, and the people that have ruined that breed will move on to another breed, and get that one banned. So they will move on to another one and get it banned. And on and on. Wouldn't it make more sense to ban the people who ruin dogs rather than the dogs themselves? I was talking to an AmStaff breeder at our show this spring. Apparently, the Staffordshire Bull terrier (one of the Pit Bulls roots) was known in England as a nanny's dog because they were so unaggressive towards people that they were safe to leave with small children. The problem with Pit Bulls is that in order to make them aggressive, they have to be abused to the extreme. Give me any dog, I don't care what breed, I can give you back a monster within a month. It's pretty easy to do if you know how (I do) and have the inclination (I don't). Allow the knee jerk reaction about certain breeds to continue, and pretty soon the domestic canine will be extinct. Make people responsible for their actions instead ( I realize this doesn't have the political optics of doing something, however misguided) and everyone can be happy. William Robb
Re: USAF target and resolution tests
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests What I was referring to about specialized films is that super low contrast films could have a greater DYNAMIC RANGE than digital for extremely contrasty scenes and super high contrast films could have a better amplitude resolution (bit depth) for extremely low contrast scenes than digital. You'll need to come up with some facts before you have credibility on this one. You are a self professed non user of high quality digital imaging technology. What you are referring to may or may not exist. OTOH, what does exist at the moment are digital sensors (the istD has one of these) with an 11 stop range. See http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html for an explanation. Even the widest range colour film on the market today would be hard pressed to come up with an 11 stop dynamic range, I believe 9 stops is closer to the present state of the art. Digital will, of course, get better as the technology evolves. Film is dead in the water from a technological evolution standpoint. William Robb
Re: USAF target and resolution tests
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests I just know what I've seen and what the experts have shown and told me. Shel, what we actually see on paper is not germaine unless we can come up with the correct technocrap to back it up. Real life don't mean anything. Theory, not reality, is where it's at nowadays. William Robb
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/11/05 Fri PM 02:42:45 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Yes, if it's not per capita of the dog population, then it's exactly what one would expect, since Golden Labs are very common in most countries. On Nov 5, 2004, at 9:03 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 9:27:01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Number one in the UK biters (number of bite incidents, severity not counted) league Golden Labrador. Alsatian, Dobermann, Pit bull, Rottweiler - none of them in the top ten. Just curious if that ranking is in total number of incidents, or is it normalized in some way? TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ Exactly the point I was making. All those docile old mutts that have finally had enough of the kids swinging from their ears finally take a bite. IIRC, the rest of the top ten was made up of lap dogs and other assorted pets. No guard or attack types there because people tend to keep out of their way. Pit bulls were bred from bull terriers as fighting dogs (hence pit) and are, as a breed, not one I would contemplate as a pet. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 9:27:01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Number one in the UK biters (number of bite incidents, severity not counted) league Golden Labrador. Alsatian, Dobermann, Pit bull, Rottweiler - none of them in the top ten. Just curious if that ranking is in total number of incidents, or is it normalized in some way? TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/11/05 Fri PM 02:03:39 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 9:27:01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Number one in the UK biters (number of bite incidents, severity not counted) league Golden Labrador. Alsatian, Dobermann, Pit bull, Rottweiler - none of them in the top ten. Just curious if that ranking is in total number of incidents, or is it normalized in some way? TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ Don't know, sorry. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Yes, if it's not per capita of the dog population, then it's exactly what one would expect, since Golden Labs are very common in most countries. On Nov 5, 2004, at 9:03 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 9:27:01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Number one in the UK biters (number of bite incidents, severity not counted) league Golden Labrador. Alsatian, Dobermann, Pit bull, Rottweiler - none of them in the top ten. Just curious if that ranking is in total number of incidents, or is it normalized in some way? TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: *ist DS and continuous autofocus
Yep. I second that. Separate AF button is great. With it, camera focuses when I want it, and only when I want it. Matja JB I wonder if anybody really uses AF-C, except for JB clip-zoom-mode/power-zoom-work, perhaps? Depends on shooting style. I use cont.AF all the time, but with AF activated by a back button instead of the shutter release. Actually it was sport shooters who probably insisted on the secondary AF button, and it's a great feature for any quicker work. Dissociation of AF and shutter release. Good light! fra
Re: 'dem French
OK maybe you dunno but Angenieux was one of thse brands (like Leica lens eg) which are just excellent everywhere. A 28-70mm 2.8 was excellent at 28 at 2.8 as well as as 70mm. No distortion, no vignetting... nothing. They ran out of business 'cos... well not enough people to buy these I guess. But the equivallent zoom from Nikon/Pentax/minolta/Canon were at least half the price... end were pretty good. thibouille - Message Initial - De : Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 01:37 PM A : 'Kostas Kavoussanakis' Objet : Re: 'dem French On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote: KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run (I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for). Kostas
Re: 'dem French
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK maybe you dunno but Angenieux was one of thse brands (like Leica lens eg) which are just excellent everywhere. A 28-70mm 2.8 was excellent at 28 at 2.8 as well as as 70mm. No distortion, no vignetting... nothing. True, but... this particular one is a bit of a dog, isn't it. Marks and cleaning marks on the front element, cleaning marks on the rear element, and the body is not all that pristine... Why pay for the best of the lot, if it's [probably] no longer able to compete with unsullied lenses? Seems way out of line, considering it's condition. Used to be top of the line, perhaps, but it's been abused along the way, hasn't it. Not worth it. keith whaley They ran out of business 'cos... well not enough people to buy these I guess. But the equivallent zoom from Nikon/Pentax/minolta/Canon were at least half the price... end were pretty good. thibouille - Message Initial - De : Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 01:37 PM A : 'Kostas Kavoussanakis' Objet : Re: 'dem French On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote: KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run (I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for). Kostas
Re: USAF target and resolution tests
I should add that I sharpened to 62 in the RAW converter. I may have added a bit of unsharp mask after conversion. Paul On Nov 5, 2004, at 8:11 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: My gray day histograms were not clipped. I bracketed each shot by half stops and the middle one looked best on most shots. The histograms generally were far from the shadow end, and the highlight end had a few spikes from some of the white sky highlights but the meat of the curve was centered. On most shots, I pushed up the exposure until the histogram reached the right end and pushed the shadows until it reached the lower end. I turned up the color temperature to 5850. Then I increased saturation and contrast significantly. I used shadows/highlights to mellow some of the gray sky reflections. Once I had more color in these I burned them in. Then I increased red saturation only another step. Finally, I adjusted contrast and brightness a bit more. On some exposures I pulled back the green curve a bit in the middle of the range. I posted one of these before. I'll post the url again, along with a url for a conversion of the untouched RAW image. The tweaked image is first, the untouched one second. In addition to the steps outlined above, you'll see I had to remove some parking lot concrete blocks, and I cropped out the sky. (That was Annsan's suggestion. Thanks Ann:-) I did 16 shots for the magazine article. I've printed four or five on the Epson 2200, and they look very nice. That's usually an indication that they will print well on offset four-color process after conversion to CMYK. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2816809size=lg http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2853243size=lg On Nov 5, 2004, at 2:06 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 4 Nov 2004 at 23:03, Mishka wrote: i guess grey day is the key here. that should be perfect for digital -- you can fine-tune the histogram right on the spot, without risking to lose either end of it. The histogram only reflects the post processing setting in camera, however it's not a problem. If you looked at the example RAW file I posted the other day you will see that it was shot in near midday sun on a cloudless day. The RAW file clips only in an area of bright white and specular reflection and there is still good detail in the deep shadows. The range is well under-utilized on drab days, it's very difficult to make a bad exposure in such lighting. 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: 'dem French
Yes, totally agree, I just assumed that maybe not everyone knew about Ang?nieux ;) - Message Initial - De : Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 02:33 PM A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: 'dem French [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK maybe you dunno but Angenieux was one of thse brands (like Leica lens eg) which are just excellent everywhere. A 28-70mm 2.8 was excellent at 28 at 2.8 as well as as 70mm. No distortion, no vignetting... nothing. True, but... this particular one is a bit of a dog, isn't it. Marks and cleaning marks on the front element, cleaning marks on the rear element, and the body is not all that pristine... Why pay for the best of the lot, if it's [probably] no longer able to compete with unsullied lenses? Seems way out of line, considering it's condition. Used to be top of the line, perhaps, but it's been abused along the way, hasn't it. Not worth it. keith whaley They ran out of business 'cos... well not enough people to buy these I guess. But the equivallent zoom from Nikon/Pentax/minolta/Canon were at least half the price... end were pretty good. thibouille - Message Initial - De : Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 01:37 PM A : 'Kostas Kavoussanakis' Objet : Re: 'dem French On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote: KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run (I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for). Kostas
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
William Robb wrote on 11/5/2004, 9:31 AM: snip lots of things about dogs, etc Thanks Bill. I was just composing something along the same lines no need to send it now. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 'dem French
- Original Message - From: Keith Whaley Subject: Re: 'dem French Used to be top of the line, perhaps, but it's been abused along the way, hasn't it. Not worth it. Optically, an FA50/1.4 will probably outperform it under any given criteria as well. The Anginieux lenses were very good in their day, but that day is long gone now. William Robb
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
- Original Message - From: Doug Franklin Subject: Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 9:27:01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Number one in the UK biters (number of bite incidents, severity not counted) league Golden Labrador. Alsatian, Dobermann, Pit bull, Rottweiler - none of them in the top ten. Just curious if that ranking is in total number of incidents, or is it normalized in some way? They count duck in those statistics. Of course the duck has already been shot. HAR!! Seriously though, and I can only speak for my jurisdiction, if a person seeks medical attention for a dog bite, they will be questioned about what type of dog did the biting. This is where the statistics come from. Unfortunately, many victims of dog bites are children or others uneducated about dog breeds. Any black and tan dog becomes either a Rottie or a Doberman. Boxers become Pit Bulls. I know of a few Pit Bull attacks where no pit bull exists, and upon investigation, the dog turned out to be another breed. Unfortunately, once the term Pit Bull has been listed on the complaint form, it is there to stay. The victim of the dog bite is the one who has final say on the breed that bit them. If people would take a half day and learn about what makes dogs tick, there would be fewer problems. William Robb
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Yes, if it's not per capita of the dog population, then it's exactly what one would expect, since Golden Labs are very common in most countries. Just to be pendantic, there is no recognized breed Golden Lab. Golden Retriever. Yellow Lab. William Robb
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
- Original Message - From: Christian Subject: Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) William Robb wrote on 11/5/2004, 9:31 AM: snip lots of things about dogs, etc Thanks Bill. I was just composing something along the same lines no need to send it now. Yer welcome. Beats the heck out of discussing crooked politicians too. William Robb
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Pit bulls were bred from bull terriers as fighting dogs (hence pit) and are, as a breed, not one I would contemplate as a pet. But they are not, by nature, agressive towards people. William Robb
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
William Robb wrote on 11/5/2004, 10:01 AM: Just to be pendantic, there is no recognized breed Golden Lab. Golden Retriever. Yellow Lab. William Robb Once again, Bill you beat me to the punch! -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: USAF target and resolution tests
Here is a good page by a guy who ran tests. http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernardk/tutorials/360/technical/hdri/ He puts the dymanic range of reala color film at about 15 stops. So that is dramatically better than 11 you state and I have read some of the current DSLRs are actually about 9 which is virtually same as a good slide film not as good as a good color neg film in terms of maximum recordable dynamic range. Coindidentally, 15 stops is the same maximum range as human vision of a given scene (doe not take into account long term range extension of dark adjusted eyesight at low light levels or maximum stop down of pupil aperture at high light levels). JCO -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:43 AM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Re: USAF target and resolution tests - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests What I was referring to about specialized films is that super low contrast films could have a greater DYNAMIC RANGE than digital for extremely contrasty scenes and super high contrast films could have a better amplitude resolution (bit depth) for extremely low contrast scenes than digital. You'll need to come up with some facts before you have credibility on this one. You are a self professed non user of high quality digital imaging technology. What you are referring to may or may not exist. OTOH, what does exist at the moment are digital sensors (the istD has one of these) with an 11 stop range. See http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html for an explanation. Even the widest range colour film on the market today would be hard pressed to come up with an 11 stop dynamic range, I believe 9 stops is closer to the present state of the art. Digital will, of course, get better as the technology evolves. Film is dead in the water from a technological evolution standpoint. William Robb
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
William Robb wrote on 11/5/2004, 10:10 AM: Pit bulls were bred from bull terriers as fighting dogs (hence pit) and are, as a breed, not one I would contemplate as a pet. But they are not, by nature, agressive towards people. No, they were bred to be aggressive towards other dogs. Which is why I was always wary of pit bulls when I was walking my dogs. Then again, I was also wary of poodles (there was an extremely aggressive, poorly trained and badly behaved standard poodle in my neighborhood that constantly went after my dogs. The owner walked it off-leash and took no responsibility for its actions. I was sooo tempted to let my White German Shepherd take it out; but I'm a responsible dog owner and actually put myself between them to avoid a fight. Meanwhile the poodle owner would walk on by... This happened on too many occasions to count and my questions and comments to the owner always went unanswered.) and any other dog I saw where I could tell there was little or no obedience training. I'm dogless now, losing both my German Shorthaired Pointer and White German Shepherd to disease, but it still pisses me off when I see poorly trained dogs. A little obedience training goes a long way. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Astia 100F vs *ist D
Anybody knows what is the range of Fuji Astia 100F ? I find that Astia has low enough contrast for me so I would like to compare that with *ist D. Did anybody use Astia before *ist D ? What are the differences ? - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:28 AM Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Here is a good page by a guy who ran tests. http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernardk/tutorials/360/technical/hdri/ He puts the dymanic range of reala color film at about 15 stops. So that is dramatically better than 11 you state and I have read some of the current DSLRs are actually about 9 which is virtually same as a good slide film not as good as a good color neg film in terms of maximum recordable dynamic range. Coindidentally, 15 stops is the same maximum range as human vision of a given scene (doe not take into account long term range extension of dark adjusted eyesight at low light levels or maximum stop down of pupil aperture at high light levels). JCO -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:43 AM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Re: USAF target and resolution tests - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests What I was referring to about specialized films is that super low contrast films could have a greater DYNAMIC RANGE than digital for extremely contrasty scenes and super high contrast films could have a better amplitude resolution (bit depth) for extremely low contrast scenes than digital. You'll need to come up with some facts before you have credibility on this one. You are a self professed non user of high quality digital imaging technology. What you are referring to may or may not exist. OTOH, what does exist at the moment are digital sensors (the istD has one of these) with an 11 stop range. See http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html for an explanation. Even the widest range colour film on the market today would be hard pressed to come up with an 11 stop dynamic range, I believe 9 stops is closer to the present state of the art. Digital will, of course, get better as the technology evolves. Film is dead in the water from a technological evolution standpoint. William Robb
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
- Original Message - From: John Whittingham Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it nescessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you? External meters excel in conditions that give built in meters fits. The most accurate way to measure the light falling on the subject. Built in meters are measuring what is reflected off the subject, and are easily fooled. William Robb
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
Recently I came across an article about exposure in which a class of 15 people were given lessons on how to make proper exposures. Each of the people brought their own cameras, which ranged from decent amateur models to very expensive professional models. They all metered the same scene at the same time, all using the same aperture for the test. The result: 15 cameras produced seven different exposures with exposure variations by as much as three stops. Shel [Original Message] From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: John Whittingham Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it necessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you? External meters excel in conditions that give built in meters fits. The most accurate way to measure the light falling on the subject. Built in meters are measuring what is reflected off the subject, and are easily fooled.
Re: USAF target and resolution tests
Over the last few years I've seen numerous things photographic that were said, here and elsewhere, to not be possible. I don't understand a lot of the techno-jargon, but I do believe my eyes and experiences. Recently Rob Studdert provided a pointer to a page that explained some of what we are discussing. I read one of the articles, and I'm still not sure if the article supported or contradicted the position that digi can have a wide range of latitude. My photographic philosophy is simple: I point, I shoot, I process, and I look at the results. Shel [Original Message] From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Shel Belinkoff I just know what I've seen and what the experts have shown and told me. Shel, what we actually see on paper is not germaine unless we can come up with the correct technocrap to back it up. Real life don't mean anything. Theory, not reality, is where it's at nowadays. William Robb
RE: USAF target and resolution tests
OK ... sounds convincing ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] This isnt that complicated. Digital sensors have dynamic range just like film does. At some point they clip at higher light levels and at some point they just produce noise at lower light levels. THAT is the dynamic range of the sensor itself and it doesn't matter what the bit depth of the A/D is after the sensor, you cannot get more Dynamic Range in the output than the sensor itself has by increasing the bit depth. That said, if the bit depth is too little compared to the dynamic range of the sensor there will be problems because without enough output shades of gray (bit depth) there would be obvious visable banding as the sensor's dynamic range increases due to technical improvements. But you have to remember that increasing the bit depth of the output isnt increasing the dynamic range of the sensor, it is only making whatever dynamic range the sensor has fully usable. I do not claim to be an expert on this but my understanding on this is that the sensors are limiting dynamic range at this point, not the bit depth of the a/d conversions so just increasing bit depths of todays sensors will not increase the recorded dynamic range, just more more invisibly finer shades of gray possible out of the same limited recorded dynamic range. JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Greater bit depth provides greater dynamic range. That was discussed here a week or so past, and that's what I understood from the likes of John Francis and others, whose opinions and technical expertise I have come to trust Anyway, all the technical talk gives me a headache. Amplitude shmaplitude (to paraphrase another thread), I'm only reporting what I've seen and what I've come to understand from those, both on and off this list, who are true experts when it comes to working with digital files. Like I said, I'm mostly ignorant about these things, and maybe my terminology is sometimes incorrect, but I stand by my statement, qualifiers and all. So, if you want to argue your point on technical grounds and theory, I'm outta here, because I just don't know enough of the terminology and will get lost very easily. I just know what I've seen and what the experts have shown and told me. Shel [Original Message] From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/4/2004 10:29:16 PM Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests I think you might have misunderstanding of what higher bit depth means. Bit depth is a amplitude resolution parameter, not a dynamic range parameter. Dynamic range of a digital sensor is independent of the bit depth of the output. More bits does not mean more dynamic range, it just means more gray shades. Bit depth is the number of grey shades from **output** pure black to **output** pure white, dynamic range on the other hand is the number of **input** fstops between the sensor's pure white (clipping)output and the sensor's dark noise(pure black) output . Two different digital sensors can have same bit depth but different dynamic range or vice versa What I was referring to about specialized films is that super low contrast films could have a greater DYNAMIC RANGE than digital for extremely contrasty scenes and super high contrast films could have a better amplitude resolution (bit depth) for extremely low contrast scenes than digital. JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests I'm saying that, from what I've seen of high bit RAW files, yes, I believe they can. Again, take my comments with a grain of salt (and note the qualifiers) as I'm still just learning this stuff, and have just started to work with digi RAW files. Remember, digital can be very well matched with the scene, and there's control for manipulation throughout the workflow.
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
Thanks ... it's not that big a deal that I'll want to get another camera for this little project. I suspect that you're correct wrt the difference in exposure between the two methods. Believed that all along, but since the gist of the project is to compare two lenses with the same optical formula, one of which only works with stop down metering, it seemed like it might be fun to compare metering methods, too. Shel [Original Message] From: Gianfranco Irlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't know if this may help, but it does exist at least a K-mount body from Zenit (it should be the Zenit 122K) which meters in stop down with K mount lenses. You may have to look for it if you want to perform the test you have in mind without having to operate frankencameras modifications... :-) Ciao, Gianfranco PS: if I may add my thought about your question, my guess is that you won't find a significant difference comparing the metering in stop down to the open aperture metering unless there's a certain amount of imprecision of the aperture. = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
If people would take a half day and learn about what makes dogs tick, there would be fewer problems. William Robb AMEN ! Bill
Re: 'dem French
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, totally agree, I just assumed that maybe not everyone knew about Ang?nieux ;) I understand. However, almost anyone who has been keenly aware of who makes what in the 35mm camera industry over the past 40 years or so, ought to know of Angenieux. They had quite a reputation for excellence, in every respect, 'build' as well as optically. But, I do appreciate your bringing it to the attention of the group. There are always those whose interest has been very narrow, and they might well have missed the maker. I don't think they are much of a player today, but they sure were back then! keith whaley - Message Initial - De : Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 02:33 PM A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: 'dem French [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK maybe you dunno but Angenieux was one of thse brands (like Leica lens eg) which are just excellent everywhere. A 28-70mm 2.8 was excellent at 28 at 2.8 as well as as 70mm. No distortion, no vignetting... nothing. True, but... this particular one is a bit of a dog, isn't it. Marks and cleaning marks on the front element, cleaning marks on the rear element, and the body is not all that pristine... Why pay for the best of the lot, if it's [probably] no longer able to compete with unsullied lenses? Seems way out of line, considering it's condition. Used to be top of the line, perhaps, but it's been abused along the way, hasn't it. Not worth it. keith whaley They ran out of business 'cos... well not enough people to buy these I guess. But the equivallent zoom from Nikon/Pentax/minolta/Canon were at least half the price... end were pretty good. thibouille - Message Initial - De : Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 01:37 PM A : 'Kostas Kavoussanakis' Objet : Re: 'dem French On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote: KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run (I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for). Kostas
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Wouldn't it make more sense to ban the people who ruin dogs rather than the dogs themselves? Using the car/accident analogy, wouldn't it also make more sense to ban the people that drive the cars that get into accidents? Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Statistics suggest that the proportion of dangerous pit bulls is quite high, at least in some parts of the US. That is reason to be concerned. Sure, statistics can be made to say whatever you like. Perhaps little red sports cars were a bad analogy. lets just pick cars in general. Statistically, they are very dangerous. They kill lots of people, and should probably be banned (using yhe logic you have presented). In 2003, in the USA alone, some 42,643 people died in traffic accidents. That's 116 per day. From 1999 to 2003, the number of traffic deaths is 211506. source: http://www.brakesonfatalities.org/ And this doesn't even begin to tally up the number of injuries, both serious or minor that didn't end in a fatality. And your concerned about a few dogs? Ban one dog, and the people that have ruined that breed will move on to another breed, and get that one banned. So they will move on to another one and get it banned. And on and on. Wouldn't it make more sense to ban the people who ruin dogs rather than the dogs themselves? I was talking to an AmStaff breeder at our show this spring. Apparently, the Staffordshire Bull terrier (one of the Pit Bulls roots) was known in England as a nanny's dog because they were so unaggressive towards people that they were safe to leave with small children. The problem with Pit Bulls is that in order to make them aggressive, they have to be abused to the extreme. Give me any dog, I don't care what breed, I can give you back a monster within a month. It's pretty easy to do if you know how (I do) and have the inclination (I don't). Allow the knee jerk reaction about certain breeds to continue, and pretty soon the domestic canine will be extinct. Make people responsible for their actions instead ( I realize this doesn't have the political optics of doing something, however misguided) and everyone can be happy. William Robb PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Many people have the same opinion of Rotties, Dobermans and German Shepherds. All of these dogs I've ever met, have basically been big babies. Bill
Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer
FWIW, I just purchased 2 of the Sandisk Digital Photo Viewers from PCMall.com @ 19.98 each, including shipping. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer On 4 Nov 2004 at 23:25, Kenneth Waller wrote: Stan, funny you should post this. I just purchased a 1 GB CF Scandisk card and checked out their website when I noticed their digital viewer. I was going to post a question to list about it and then I saw yours. Where did you get it? I got given somthing similar for my b'day last month, it's from AverMedia and it's called EZMedia Player USB 2.0. It suppost 6 types of cards and acts as a USB 2.0 card reader. It plays JPG, MPEG and MP3 on any regular TV with composite of S-Video inputs and it has an IR remote control, pity it's mains powered (via plug pack). http://www.averm.co.uk/avermedia/products/photoviewer_EZmediaplayer.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 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) Pit bulls were bred from bull terriers as fighting dogs (hence pit) and are, as a breed, not one I would contemplate as a pet. But they are not, by nature, agressive towards people. As a pack animal, they would not challenge the alpha male (although you should have seen my brother's Huskies when they thought they could get away with it) or probably anyone else they perceived as higher in the order, which could include family children. I'm sure I don't want to be around a purpose-built fighting machine if it decides that I am worth challenging. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/11/05 Fri PM 03:28:49 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt) I'm dogless now, losing both my German Shorthaired Pointer and White German Shepherd to disease, but it still pisses me off when I see poorly trained dogs. A little obedience training goes a long way. Sorry to hear that. Agreed about training. Worst thing to happen here was revoking the law requiring dog licences. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer
From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/11/05 Fri PM 04:03:27 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer FWIW, I just purchased 2 of the Sandisk Digital Photo Viewers from PCMall.com @ 19.98 each, including shipping. Do these depend on the TV system for function? In other words, will they work on other than NTSC? mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
RE: USAF target and resolution tests
Well, John, it's time for another aspirin too many graphs and charts and logs of this and that. However, one paragraph stood out amongst all the techo talk: Before I go any further I should point out that this test is only going to produce a theoretical result. Since I am testing film, the dynamic range that I will be calculating will be much higher than any figure normally quoted for film because very small changes will be detected. At some point these changes will become irrelevant to the appearance of the image but since this is a subjective judgement I'm going to leave it at the calculated value for now. I'll return to the subjective arguments later. Shel From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Here is a good page by a guy who ran tests. http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernardk/tutorials/360/technical/hdri/ He puts the dymanic range of reala color film at about 15 stops. So that is dramatically better than 11 you state
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Yes, and it's done frequently and in many jurisdictions. Too many moving violations or accidents and one's license is suspended or revoked. Shel [Original Message] From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wouldn't it make more sense to ban the people who ruin dogs rather than the dogs themselves? Using the car/accident analogy, wouldn't it also make more sense to ban the people that drive the cars that get into accidents?
Re: 'dem French
They have closed anyway... maybe the reason why already huge price became, well, astronomical ones? Go figure... - Message Initial - De : Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 03:58 PM A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: 'dem French [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, totally agree, I just assumed that maybe not everyone knew about Ang?nieux ;) I understand. However, almost anyone who has been keenly aware of who makes what in the 35mm camera industry over the past 40 years or so, ought to know of Angenieux. They had quite a reputation for excellence, in every respect, 'build' as well as optically. But, I do appreciate your bringing it to the attention of the group. There are always those whose interest has been very narrow, and they might well have missed the maker. I don't think they are much of a player today, but they sure were back then! keith whaley - Message Initial - De : Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 02:33 PM A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: 'dem French [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK maybe you dunno but Angenieux was one of thse brands (like Leica lens eg) which are just excellent everywhere. A 28-70mm 2.8 was excellent at 28 at 2.8 as well as as 70mm. No distortion, no vignetting... nothing. True, but... this particular one is a bit of a dog, isn't it. Marks and cleaning marks on the front element, cleaning marks on the rear element, and the body is not all that pristine... Why pay for the best of the lot, if it's [probably] no longer able to compete with unsullied lenses? Seems way out of line, considering it's condition. Used to be top of the line, perhaps, but it's been abused along the way, hasn't it. Not worth it. keith whaley They ran out of business 'cos... well not enough people to buy these I guess. But the equivallent zoom from Nikon/Pentax/minolta/Canon were at least half the price... end were pretty good. thibouille - Message Initial - De : Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoy? : Vendredi , Novembre 5, 2004 01:37 PM A : 'Kostas Kavoussanakis' Objet : Re: 'dem French On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Frantisek wrote: KK Why would anyone (other than a collector, but then again it's in KK well-used cond) prefer this lens to Pentax's SMC offerings? Why would anyone (other than a collector) prefer Pentax's SMC offerings to Nikon glass? grin, duck run (I have a few but only give you the relevant one) Because they already have investment in the other mount? The Angenieux in that auction is an M42 (so not even the best Pentax -- let alone Nikon :-P -- bayonet can compete with that if you have a Spottie), at 1200 dollars. There must be a compelling reason for that (which I am casually looking for). Kostas
Re: [PAW] A bridge in Luzern
Nice shot. I love that bridge. It burned down a decade ago, just after we had visited there. It was reconstructed because of its beauty and its use as a symbol of Luzern. The photo is a bit dark on my monitor, but I suspect that is my problem. Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: http://www.republika.pl/sylwekp/PAW/Luzern.jpg Beautiful woodden bridge in Luzern, Swiss at the sunset. Comments are as always welcome :-)
RE: USAF target and resolution tests
Well since you are a tinker type I suggest you go out and take some pictures with a really good lens of a really high contrast scene using a DLSR and a wide range film and SLR and find out for yourself. If you do not have access to really good film printing, just inspect the negatives I have never read anywhere that digital can yet match the dynamic range of the widest range films. And this is all color of course, if you go BW and pull processing the range of film would be even greater JCO -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 11:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Well, John, it's time for another aspirin too many graphs and charts and logs of this and that. However, one paragraph stood out amongst all the techo talk: Before I go any further I should point out that this test is only going to produce a theoretical result. Since I am testing film, the dynamic range that I will be calculating will be much higher than any figure normally quoted for film because very small changes will be detected. At some point these changes will become irrelevant to the appearance of the image but since this is a subjective judgement I'm going to leave it at the calculated value for now. I'll return to the subjective arguments later. Shel From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Here is a good page by a guy who ran tests. http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernardk/tutorials/360/technical/hdri/ He puts the dymanic range of reala color film at about 15 stops. So that is dramatically better than 11 you state
Re: 'dem French
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, William Robb wrote: Optically, an FA50/1.4 will probably outperform it under any given criteria as well. The Anginieux lenses were very good in their day, but that day is long gone now. Yes, but it won't mount on a Spottie. I was wondering about a comparison with compatible/really competing products. Was the Angenieux MCed? K
Something you probably wanted to hear for a long time
Hi! Just some minutes ago I got my dirty hands on *istD of my own. Wow! Hurray! I cannot believe it. Well, expect more news from me then... Feel free to respond ;). -- Boris mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Hi, Sorry to hear that. Agreed about training. Worst thing to happen here was revoking the law requiring dog licences. too bloody right. They should have put the price up enough to pay for the dogshit to be cleaned up and DNA-tested to identify the dog and its owner, who could then be prosecuted under public health and general nuisance regulations. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Bob W wrote on 11/5/2004, 11:45 AM: Hi, Sorry to hear that. Agreed about training. Worst thing to happen here was revoking the law requiring dog licences. too bloody right. They should have put the price up enough to pay for the dogshit to be cleaned up and DNA-tested to identify the dog and its owner, who could then be prosecuted under public health and general nuisance regulations. Another neighbor's little dogs crap in my front yard all the time. Recently I stepped in it and was livid. Ever since then if I find dog crap in my yard I put it on the owner's doorstep. Yes, I'm passive aggressive, and yes I should report them, but the incidents have become less frequent. Maybe next time I'll put it in their mailbox. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAW convertors question
The PhaseOne C1 Raw converter has an option for selecting colour space for output, and one of the options is generic gray scale. It will output a 16 bit grayscale image. I cannot vouch for the maths behind it, though. Jostein - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 4:34 AM Subject: RAW convertors question While we are on the subject of Digital raw files I just remembered something I wanted to ask for a while. Do all raw file conversion programs convert only to color and up-rez the image? Reason I ask is wouldn't there be some image qualtiy gains for monochrome output by summing the 4 rgbg pixels into one and outputting a true 1.5 Mpixel mono signal (4 rgbg pixels per output pixels) instead of a interpolated color signal that is later desaturated? JCO
Re: Something you probably wanted to hear for a long time
Congratulations Boris. The fun begins :-). I'm working at home today, but it's a nice sunny day, so I may just have to pack my *ist D and a couple of lenses and go to town for an hour or two. Paul On Nov 5, 2004, at 11:38 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Just some minutes ago I got my dirty hands on *istD of my own. Wow! Hurray! I cannot believe it. Well, expect more news from me then... Feel free to respond ;). -- Boris mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
I suggest living room, and using a Cat bulldozer to push it there. Christian wrote: Ever since then if I find dog crap in my yard I put it on the owner's doorstep. Maybe next time I'll put it in their mailbox.
Re: OT: Travel suggestions
And Cotty is the name on your passport. :-P Ryan - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 3:38 AM Subject: Re: OT: Travel suggestions If you're people ring Buckingham, they'll be in for a shock - or rather you will be when youi get there - she won't be there! She lives in Buckingham Palace in London ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT: Travel suggestions
Thanks for the suggestion Daniel. The folks of a friend of mine are in Dublin- he was already prepping to furnish me with a flurry of addresses, but I just finalised where I'll be. Paris over the new year. Top of my list, Montmarte! :-) The travel agent was telling me it'd be more worth it to choose somewhere else instead of Prague because UK to Prague I could get rather cheaply on Easyjet instead, so I could use the free sidetrip to somewhere else. However, with what Paris'll cost me, I think I might miss out on Prague :-(! Oh well.. Any of you fellas in Paris? Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: Daniel J. Matyola [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 2:56 AM Subject: Re: OT: Travel suggestions If you go to Dublin, be sure to visit Newgrange, which is just an hour north of the city, and Kilamainham Gaol, near the Guiness Brewery. They give one a real sense of Irish history, from the earliest days to the fight for independence. Ryan Lee wrote: Hi Gianfranco, Possibly the youngest on the list at a tiny 24. I'd like to go to Dublin sometime in my life, but probably not this trip because it's not too far a stretch from the UK (not intending step on anybody's toes!). But I really do want to visit the birthplace of my name! Mun Riann your name was, laddie? Aye drink up! Also, bent on finding a serpent they say they don't have :-) Monument, museums, art galleries, great food, reasonable security and hospitality- not that much to ask is it? I'd like to think I'm reasonably urbanised, but the thing is I'm afraid of coming across as a lost 17 year old (which I could pass off for I've been told) with a big fat DSLR round my neck- hence my safety paranoia.. Decisions decisions..
RE: Something you probably wanted to hear for a long time
Boris Liberman wrote: Just some minutes ago I got my dirty hands on *istD of my own. Wow! Hurray! I cannot believe it. Excellent! I remember mine was brilliant fun. Malcolm
Re: [PAW] A bridge in Luzern
Daniel J. Matyola wrote on 05.11.04 17:29: Nice shot. I love that bridge. It burned down a decade ago, just after we had visited there. It was reconstructed because of its beauty and its use as a symbol of Luzern. Thanks. It was indeed burned down, but both ends remained original, so that you can recognise it by darker wood... And the paintings inside of this bridge are interesting! The photo is a bit dark on my monitor, but I suspect that is my problem. Well, it was cloudy evening, and the last rays of sun lighted just the bridge, so this photo could seem quite dark but of course I can't see what you can see on your monitor :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Greetings All, To add my 2 cents to the discussion: And to further illustrate how far pittbull hysteria can go-- My oldest daughter has 3 pitt bulls. All of them are big (very big, in fact) cuddly lapdogs. She somehow got involved in the pitt bull rescue organization here in Lake Charles. I don't know any details about that organization, but I assume they take surrendered or taken dogs from bad owners, etc. Anyway, she simply could not keep three big dogs in her little house and little yard, especially since one was pregnant. I talked to my wife, she was adamant against it, not because it was a pitt bull, but because she thought it was a big dog, and would eat her little dog, and the cats. But I finally talked her into it, because the dog I wanted was well known to her. She knew it had not only a gentle disposition, but it was young and trainable, and had acted very submissive and obedient around my four younger daughters, who lived at home with us. her name is Darla-- she's a beautiful white pitt bull with a black patch over the left side of her face-- I couldn't call her Petey as in the Our Gang 1930s comedy shorts that she resembles so much, but in a nod to the series, we named her after the leading lady. So, the dog came to live with us, and everything has gone well. Except for the fact that this very powerful dog can clear a six-foot high fence when she gets a running start. Keeping her in the yard, though it is plenty big enough for her, has been a problem. Fortunately, the neighbors know her and she is gentle and submissive to them; they simply call me or bring her back. Here's the rub: when my in-laws found out we had gotten a dog, they were happy-- until Grandma found out it was a pitt bull. Immediately, she told us we had to get rid of the dog. Or else she would never come to visit again. No compromise, no discussion. She did explain that when she was a little girl, she saw a playmate mauled by a pitt bull. Needless to say, this has started a major situation in our home. I told my wife, even after we've had the dog for a month now, that I would give her up to straighten the situation out. I was hoping, of course, that she would not make me give up the dog. I was hoping she would see just how unfair and unreasonable Grandma's demand was. I even wrote Grandma a well-thought out defense of my position. With no luck. My wife agreed. She thought her mom's position was indefensible, and not justifiable, when considering the demand linked with the consequences. So, the dog remains, and it will be interesting to see how holidays play out. I've made concilliatory gestures, volunteering to put her at the kennel during their visits, things like that; but, no response yet. And thanksgiving approaches. It doesn't help that my wife was always the black sheep of her family-- she is using this situation to remind herself that she was always on the outs with her parents, and I suppose it is bringing up lots of buried bad blood. An illustration over how far people can take hysteria over a breed of dog. I never had anything for or against these dogs, but now I am definitely pro pitt bull. Greetings from CajunLand USA South Louisiana Sid Barras
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Bob W wrote: Hi, Sorry to hear that. Agreed about training. Worst thing to happen here was revoking the law requiring dog licences. too bloody right. They should have put the price up enough to pay for the dogshit to be cleaned up and DNA-tested to identify the dog and its owner, who could then be prosecuted under public health and general nuisance regulations. And to cover basic dog-handling training, which you would have to pass before you were allowed to take the animal home. And chipping, to go eith the DNA databank creation. About £250 per annum would be about right. Per dog. mike
RE: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Sid Barras describes how to become a multi-millionaire by breeding pitt bulls: Here's the rub: when my in-laws found out we had gotten a dog, they were happy-- until Grandma found out it was a pitt bull. Immediately, she told us we had to get rid of the dog. Or else she would never come to visit again. No compromise, no discussion. What an advertisement! Malcolm
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
William Robb mused: - Original Message - From: John Whittingham Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it nescessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you? External meters excel in conditions that give built in meters fits. The most accurate way to measure the light falling on the subject. Built in meters are measuring what is reflected off the subject, and are easily fooled. William Robb Oh, I don't think it's the *meter* that's fooled; it has a very good understanding of just what the reflected light level turns out to be. The foolishness comes if the operator assumes this should be taken as the value for setting the exposure, without applying any corrections. There's an exposure compensation setting on the camera for a reason. Failing to use it is just as stupid as failing to focus or frame.
Re: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer
Mike, the literature states it uses NTSC PAL formats. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/11/05 Fri PM 04:03:27 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer FWIW, I just purchased 2 of the Sandisk Digital Photo Viewers from PCMall.com @ 19.98 each, including shipping. Do these depend on the TV system for function? In other words, will they work on other than NTSC? mike PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
mike wilson mused: Bob W wrote: Hi, Sorry to hear that. Agreed about training. Worst thing to happen here was revoking the law requiring dog licences. too bloody right. They should have put the price up enough to pay for the dogshit to be cleaned up and DNA-tested to identify the dog and its owner, who could then be prosecuted under public health and general nuisance regulations. And to cover basic dog-handling training, which you would have to pass before you were allowed to take the animal home. And chipping, to go eith the DNA databank creation. About £250 per annum would be about right. Per dog. Oddly enough, there are parts of the world that seem to manage to have an effective, efficient animal control system (rounding up strays, a shelter where abandoned animals may be turned in, etc.), enforcement of laws against animals defecating, all paid for by annual licensing a lot less than that, even for un-neutered animals. I believe the going rate around here nowadays is about $200 to get a (chipped neutered) animal from the pound, and maybe $20 or so a year thereafter. I don't know what the rate is for an un-neutered animal, except that it's much more than for a neutered one. - at least 3X.
FW: SMC Pentax 24/2.8 (K)
Hi folks, I have for sale an SMC Pentax 24/2.8 (so, K-mount, but before the M-Series) very clean optically, with original caps. There is some brassing, but nothing too drastic. There is no internal dust and of course no fungus, scratches or anything. The aperture ring clicks very positively and the iris stops down snappily. There is some little play on the ring (towards the back-to-front direction, not left-to-right). It comes with the hard dedicated case, which has some light scratches. Overall a very usable lens you will not be ashamed to put on your camera, but not one for the collector. Looking for £120 (plus postage at actual cost). As usual, you have 2 months to send it back for a full refund if there is a fault I have not described. Kostas
FA: Cobra AF750 flashgun
It is my auction and it ends next Thursday. It includes the dedicated bracket (which, cleverly, has an AF beam on the module sitting on the hotshoe). Dedicated for Pentax AF (see listing in the description. Other Pentax AF cameras may be covered too, I will investigate with Cobra on your request): http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3850793448 Kostas
Re: pentax/nikon sync cords compatible?
I don't think it's Canon because their 4 data contracts are located on one side only while Pentax's data contracts are located around the centre contract. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan I seem to remember that someone found out that certain Canon synch cords are compatible. Mark in Michigan, mebbe?
Re: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
Hi, And to further illustrate how far pittbull hysteria can go-- [...] when she was a little girl, she saw a playmate mauled by a pitt bull. [...] An illustration over how far people can take hysteria over a breed of dog. I never had anything for or against these dogs, but now I am definitely pro pitt bull. I wonder exactly who is being hysterical - the person with the horrific past experience, or the person who puts an animal before their family. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: PAW: White Pitbull (an hommage to Elliott Erwitt)
frank theriault wrote: Okay, the EE thing is a joke - it's actually somewhat blasphemous to have a photo of mine mentioned in the same breath as The Master, but who better to blaspheme but me? vbg. Comments are always welcome - indeed, they are encouraged. Here's the chance for everyone who I slagged critiquing this month's PUG to get back at me! vbg http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2851649 cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson Well, You know I gotta love this one, Frank :) EE probably would like it too I never saw a more forlorn looking pitbull and he probably is a sweet dog. ann
Re: OT: Travel suggestions
Paris is very enjoyable, although the locals aren't as friendly as in Prague, Amsterdam, Scandanavia or Italy. Learn the Metro (subway). It is very convenient and very useful. Don't miss the Louvre, the Eifel Tower, Notre Dame and the usual sights. Walk around the left bank a lot. Many colorful areas and nice cafes. The Luxembourg Gardens is a great place to relax, enjoy the sights and watch -- or photograph -- the people. The Rodin museum was one of my favorite, especially the outside garden. The bread and the wine and the creme brulee are unequalled, and the food, pastries and chocolate are pretty good as well. It's hard not to enjoy yourself in a place like Paris. Dan M Ryan Lee wrote: Thanks for the suggestion Daniel. The folks of a friend of mine are in Dublin- he was already prepping to furnish me with a flurry of addresses, but I just finalised where I'll be. Paris over the new year. Top of my list, Montmarte! :-) The travel agent was telling me it'd be more worth it to choose somewhere else instead of Prague because UK to Prague I could get rather cheaply on Easyjet instead, so I could use the free sidetrip to somewhere else. However, with what Paris'll cost me, I think I might miss out on Prague :-(! Oh well.. Any of you fellas in Paris? Cheers, Ryan
Re: Something you probably wanted to hear for a long time
Great. Go out, take few thousand pictures, and tell us what you think g Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/5/2004 11:38:30 AM Hi! Just some minutes ago I got my dirty hands on *istD of my own. Wow! Hurray! I cannot believe it. Well, expect more news from me then... Feel free to respond ;). -- Boris mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SV: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer
The sell it on line... http://www.sandisk.com/retail/dpv.asp Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 5. november 2004 05:45 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer I bought it from the Sandisk site, I was ordering a 1 GB CF card and decided to add the Viewer to the order. I was intrigued when it was selling in the spring for $79, at $39 I could not resist. Stan On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: Stan, funny you should post this. I just purchased a 1 GB CF Scandisk card and checked out their website when I noticed their digital viewer. I was going to post a question to list about it and then I saw yours. Where did you get it? Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Digital slide show - Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer The last couple of years, whenever I have visited my in-laws, I have done a 'slide show' on my 15 laptop. My father-in-law used to be an avid photographer and is one who loves to see other's photos, my mother-in-law likes the people pictures of family in particular. In their 90's, neither can cope with an LCD screen for more than a few minutes. I just bought a $39 Sandisk Digital Photo Viewer. Plug it into the outlet, hook a cable to your TV, plug in a CF card, et voila, a slide show on your home TV. I am impressed. Fairly quick response when you hit the 'rotate' button, and, even better, it remembers which photos have been rotated from horizontal to vertical. It steps through 2mb files at about 3 sec each, slower if you want. I assume that a version for digital TV's will be coming, if it isn't here already, but for quick viewing of family photos, this is a treasure. Stan
Re: Astia 100F vs *ist D
David, Astia 100F specs at: http://www.fujifilm.com/jsp/fuji/epartners/bin/RAP100FAF3-149E_1.pdf Should be a good test. Fuji claims an RMS granularity factor of 7 ..lowest of any slide film. Looking forward to your test results. Jack David Zaninovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Anybody knows what is the range of Fuji Astia 100F ? I find that Astia has low enough contrast for me so I would like to compare that with *ist D. Did anybody use Astia before *ist D ? What are the differences ? - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell To: Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:28 AM Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests Here is a good page by a guy who ran tests. http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernardk/tutorials/360/technical/hdri/ He puts the dymanic range of reala color film at about 15 stops. So that is dramatically better than 11 you state and I have read some of the current DSLRs are actually about 9 which is virtually same as a good slide film not as good as a good color neg film in terms of maximum recordable dynamic range. Coindidentally, 15 stops is the same maximum range as human vision of a given scene (doe not take into account long term range extension of dark adjusted eyesight at low light levels or maximum stop down of pupil aperture at high light levels). JCO -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:43 AM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Re: USAF target and resolution tests - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: USAF target and resolution tests What I was referring to about specialized films is that super low contrast films could have a greater DYNAMIC RANGE than digital for extremely contrasty scenes and super high contrast films could have a better amplitude resolution (bit depth) for extremely low contrast scenes than digital. You'll need to come up with some facts before you have credibility on this one. You are a self professed non user of high quality digital imaging technology. What you are referring to may or may not exist. OTOH, what does exist at the moment are digital sensors (the istD has one of these) with an 11 stop range. See http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html for an explanation. Even the widest range colour film on the market today would be hard pressed to come up with an 11 stop dynamic range, I believe 9 stops is closer to the present state of the art. Digital will, of course, get better as the technology evolves. Film is dead in the water from a technological evolution standpoint. William Robb __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
PESO - My first pano
Some people have asked about the lake I live on. This was shot 11/2/2004 and shows a small portion of the lake. My house would be out of the frame on the near right. warning ~130KB http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=10pos=0 click the image to view the 2000x563 image The original is ~7000x~2000 4 vertical format images stitched together using PTAssembler. I only spent a few minutes on it. comments always appreciated. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
Exactly. I'm curious myself. I trust the open aperture metering, but I'm also curious how much of a delta there is between that and the fixed aperture metering. Shel Belinkoff wrote: It's not a matter of faith. Checking and calibrating one's equipment negates the need for faith. It's not that I don't trust open aperture metering ... I'm just trying to see if there's any significant difference in results between open aperture and stopped down readings, which is actually incidental to the original intent of comparing two lenses which are said to be the same optically, one of which operates with stop down metering. Shel [Original Message] From: John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it necessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you?
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
John Whittingham wrote: Not sure what you mean by that. What does faking stop down metering to do a test have to do with handheld metering? Well if you cannot trust open aperture metering and feel it nescessary to use the lens stopped down for accuracy then who's to say how the camera would perform when set to the exposure reading from an external meter? You have to have some faith in the equipment you use, don't you? I do trust it. Someone was trying to do a comparison, that is all. John -- Original Message --- From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:44:31 -0600 Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Not sure what you mean by that. What does faking stop down metering to do a test have to do with handheld metering? Handheld metering is always going to be useful, especially incident metering. We were trying to find a way to fake a K-body into using a K-mount lens like a screwmount would behave on the body, i.e. the aperture set would look like it was wide open so that there would be no inaccuracy in the stop down mechanism. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Makes a complete nonsense of using a handheld meter then! John -- Original Message --- From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 16:45:10 -0600 Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Hmmm. You may be right on that, since normal K mount cameras may depend on this, whereas the *istD does not have it. I'll have to test this and report my results. rg Don Sanderson wrote: This will work for the aperture but I believe it will also throw the cameras meter way off. When not fully seated the lever that reports how many stops from full open the lens is set won't be in the correct position. 1/8 of a turn could be several stops. Don -Original Message- From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 3:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Christian, A couple of reasons. First, a week or so back JCO made the assertion that by metering thru a lens set at the taking aperture, measuring the actual light transited rather than having the camera essentially calculate the exposure, would result in a more accurate, or precise, exposure. I'd like to see if there's any truth to that, and if there's any practical difference. My guess would be that the difference would be so tiny as to be insignificant. Esp with film since there is so much latitude. But if you are really interested in testing this, an interesting way to do this would be to use Mark's trick with the *istD, that is, mount the lens so that it is not fully locked, to a position such that the lever that keeps the aperture wide open is not engaged. I believe he said it was about 1/8 of a turn or so, but check with him. This is ok for tests like you want to do, but I would not recommend this for everyday shooting, as the lens is in somewhat of a precarious situation not fully locked in and could fall off. Also, I want to compare two similar lenses, one being a Super Tak that can only be used stopped down on K bodies and the other being a K mount version of the lens. It would seem that if the metering styles used were the same (assuming there IS any difference as suggested by JCO), the comparison between the two lenses may be more accurate. However, I doubt that I'd want to shoot that way when making regular photographs. Oh, there's a third reason: I've just a little too much time on my hands right now LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there a way to use a K-mount lens on the K, M, or LX bodies with stop down metering instead of having to use open aperture? Just a silly question, and forgive my ignorance, but why would you want to? --- End of Original Message --- --- End of Original Message ---
Re: 'dem French
They have closed anyway... maybe the reason why already huge price became, well, astronomical ones? Go figure... Angenieux stil makes a lot of lenses but for cine and scientific purposes. Andre
Re: FA77/1.8 update
Would Pentax (or any qualified technician) be able to upgrade the old 77mm with the new gear? Do you have the name of someone at Pentax who is knoeledgeable about this kind of things (part #...) ? Andre
Re: FA77/1.8 update
Old 77mm? New 77mm? Did I miss something? Whats the difference? Sam - Original Message - From: Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:01 PM Subject: Re: FA77/1.8 update Would Pentax (or any qualified technician) be able to upgrade the old 77mm with the new gear? Do you have the name of someone at Pentax who is knoeledgeable about this kind of things (part #...) ? Andre
PESO: A fracion of a Rainbow
As I was walking towards the beach to watch the rainbow it started disappearing. The clouds began to cover the sun. That's when I saw what can be described as fraction of a rainbow. Pentax *ist D, SMC Pentax M*4.0/300mm http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p8887114.html Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: PESO - My first pano
Beautiful lake and a nice panorama shot. You obviously planned it well. I'd love to see it with half as much sky, more lake, more contrast and more saturation. Paul On Nov 5, 2004, at 3:36 PM, Christian wrote: Some people have asked about the lake I live on. This was shot 11/2/2004 and shows a small portion of the lake. My house would be out of the frame on the near right. warning ~130KB http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=10pos=0 click the image to view the 2000x563 image The original is ~7000x~2000 4 vertical format images stitched together using PTAssembler. I only spent a few minutes on it. comments always appreciated. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PAW] A bridge in Luzern
Beautiful shot. Great framing and composition. It appears a bit dark and moody on my monitor as well, but the light wood planking is brilliant in the sun and rich in color. I like the juxtaposition of that against the more somber elements. Paul On Nov 5, 2004, at 11:29 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: Nice shot. I love that bridge. It burned down a decade ago, just after we had visited there. It was reconstructed because of its beauty and its use as a symbol of Luzern. The photo is a bit dark on my monitor, but I suspect that is my problem. Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: http://www.republika.pl/sylwekp/PAW/Luzern.jpg Beautiful woodden bridge in Luzern, Swiss at the sunset. Comments are as always welcome :-)
Re: PESO - My first pano
On 5/11/04, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed: Some people have asked about the lake I live on. This was shot 11/2/2004 and shows a small portion of the lake. My house would be out of the frame on the near right. warning ~130KB http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=10pos=0 click the image to view the 2000x563 image That's a beautiful place Christian. You did a great job stitching it - I can't see any joins ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
