Re: Viewfinder registration
My question with regard to this thread is: How difficult is it to test and repair registration problems, assuming a competent repair person is handed the camera? Anyone had experiences? -Lon
Re: macro teleconverters
We've got two Vivitar A macro TCs here; the one I use typically gets slapped on a Kiron 105 macro or a K 135 to give me a cheap long macro lens. Works well enough that I no longer feel the need for an expensive 200 macro. Pentax, AFAIK, did not make a TC with variable extension. Pentax DID make a variable extension tube, though, and you can still buy it (as well as both tube sets, the 50mm tube, and the 100mm tube) from BH. -Lon Don Sanderson wrote: I don't believe Pentax ever did. I own 2 of the Vivitars, 1 M and 1 A version. I'm quite pleased with both, before I owned true macro lenses one of the Vivitars and an A 50/1.4 made a very nice 100mm F2.8 macro. Don
Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop
Here's a neat trick: Reduce the file size in one big mushy step, then use Focus Magic. It does a very nifty job of demushing in this situation. Shel Belinkoff wrote: I recently heard that the best way to reduce a large file to one that's substantially smaller is by using a step-by-step process rather than just making the reduction in one step. I've numerous 4000ppi scanned BW film images of about 40mb and I want to reduce it to 100ppi with a wide dimension of 800-900 pixels. Does anyone know what the procedure is for doing a step-by-step reduction? I tried it by going from 4000ppi to 2000ppi to 1000ppi, etc., but the results were soft and mushy. Is there a better way to reduce the size and rez of such files? Shel
Re: Arghhh.... My Tokina AT-X ProII 28-70mm sucks big time (Lens test results) !!
Jens Bladt escribió: I did some quick tests - and now it seems to have improved to the same performance as the Tokina 2.8-4.3 28-70mm at 28mm and still much better at 70mm. It's still not as impressive as it used to be. Not as sharp as the (very expensive) SMC FA 2.8/28-70mm. Yes, I agree. If I could afford the FA 28-70 mm 2.8, no doubt I would have bought it. But it is a question of getting what you pay for. Anyway, my Tokina is an excellent lens for the price. As for flare: I don't have the original tulip shaped lens hood anymore. I droped it in the sea from a chopper sometime ago. I use a metal hood, I got from a water damaged, later version. I think it's not quite as effective as the original hood. At 28mm the front element is almost at the front of the lens barrel. I guess there's not much flare protection at 28mm. You are right. The original hood is to shallow to provide adequate masking at 28 mm.
RE: DS
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Chris Stoddart wrote: Out of interest, in the UK BestCameras are now offering the *istDS for £759.99 inc a 18-55mm lens. Says it's due Nov/Dec. http://tinyurl.com/3o2sp http://parkcameras.co.uk are on the same wavelength. Kostas
Re: Arghhh.... My Tokina AT-X ProII 28-70mm sucks big time (Lens test results) !!
William Robb escribió: Well cripes almighty Carlos! How can you get on your high horse and make a statment like that without making formal, scientific, error free tests. Don't you realize that visual impressions gotten by long experience in the field don't mean shit around here? Haven't you figured out that in order for a statement to be valid you have to test the equipment six ways from Sunday? You just don't get it do you? You have to test your equipment on a test bench, seek out every possible flaw in it and toss out anything that is less than perfect. If you don't do it that way, you are just a hack photographer, and a dumb one at that. Go back to shooting swimming pools and stop wasting our time here. HAR!!! It's a joke. I'm afraid now it is too cold and windy in town to go to the nearest swimming pool and shoot some frames ;-) Seriously, the only test I have performed in the last few years has been a series of shots of an IT8 target with a pair of different films, in order to build an ICC profile of those films to use such profiles with Vuescan. Previously, I also shot a resolution target to see what was the real resolution of my Epson scanner, but I haven't returned to that scientific path since.
Re: A Question About Macro Lenses
I only own older extension only macros; from what I gather from reading, zoomy zoom macros suffer no light falloff when close-focusing but may lose a bit of focal length. Sounds like a good trade-off to me. -Lon Rob Studdert wrote: I find using macro lenses at non-macro distances most often more advantageous than not. I see (and test) no optical deficit for one (over regular lenses of comparable quality, FL and speed) and secondly I only have to lug a single lens for the FL to cover a multitude of shooting situations. I'd still like to see indisputable proof of just how inferior my zoomy zoom zoom type macros are over the old fixed lens designed macros in normal shooting situations.
Re: I just ordered myself a *ist DS with DA18-55 lens.
The same argument would apply to CF vs PC Card (PCMCIA) memory cards, but where are they? SD cards will be cheaper and higher capacity than CF in the future due to the demand from their use in PDAs, phones, MP3 players, etc. CF will go and Pentax will be een as having led the pack into the future. Nick -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert[EMAIL PROTECTED] But, since SD is increasing capacity, and the price is coming down,as a new user there seems to be little benefit to using CF. IOW, I see them as about the same, both suited to their purpose. What I was alluding to is that at any point in time the maximum memory capacity per silicon is the same regardless of containers in which they are placed, ie SD will never catch up unless manufactures purposefully neglect the CF product line. CF are now at 8GB and SD are 2GB, the larger the solid state memory option the less we will need to rely upon sensitive and power hungry electro- mechanical devices for bulk storage in the field.
Re: A Question About Macro Lenses
On 15 Nov 2004 at 6:25, Lon Williamson wrote: I only own older extension only macros; from what I gather from reading, zoomy zoom macros suffer no light falloff when close-focusing but may lose a bit of focal length. Sounds like a good trade-off to me. I'd say that's a pretty accurate assumption WRT FL, my V125/2.5 looks to be just a tad over 100mm FL when approaching 1:1 mag. However in a recent little test I made comparing my V to an older bellows lens the V seemed to need about a half stop extra exposure a any aperture to equal the old lens exposure wise. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: A Question About Macro Lenses
On 15 Nov 2004 at 7:23, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Unless the 125mm zoomed out to 62.5mm at 1:1, it is going to need exposure compensation. Of course you are correct, I was simply drawing a relative comparison to another lens. What you have is essentially a variable aperture zoom with that lens, how do do you know what exposure compensations to use? I don't really care but I do know now that relative to a non-zoom macro lens it requires about an extra half stop when approaching 1:1. I haven't used external meters for macro photography since the late 80's. Then I had a 67 and bellows and I was glad to get my hands on a TTL prism. Does the lens barrel have exposure compensation markings on it? No At least with a fixed focal length and aperture you can calculate the correct compensations based on magnification or bellows extension, but with variable aperture those techniques won't work... ..or you (I) could use the TTL metering, which I do quite successfully. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
I see good black hair detail on Copper. Of course one could get picky about pose, etc. But there's no real need to do so. Very good work, Dave. When you get to a darkroom to make some prints, it wold be nice to see one at each of grades 2, 3, and 3 1/2. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: I just ordered myself a *ist DS with DA18-55 lens.
Keith Whaley wrote: [...] Actually, what you mean is, 35mm format won out over all the dozen or other film sizes attempted over the years. The same thing will likely happen to digital cameras. I imagine we'll end up with two sizes in the end. While I suspect 35mm film is overwhelmingly dominant, you still CAN get 120 film here and there. What will win out? I meant which digicard, not which film! g [kw] It looks like CF at the moment, maybe SD will be the second? I don't know how xD or SmartMedia is progressing. My little Optio S4 uses SD/MMC. At least that's one commitment for Pentax... g keith whaley
RE: Help me find a flash/umbrella bracket
Hi Collin, Do these have the bracket with them to mount a hot shoe style flash on? I can only see an umbrella? Thanks for the info.! They're fairly general-purpose. There's a bracket avaialble for connecting a handle-type flash. The post on the back has a threaded head so you can mount a shoe slave and set a shoe flash on top of it. These are long brackets, about 2 1/2 ft. Nice for the home studio. The Manfrotto shoe/clamp mentioned earlier is what I'd get if I wasn't already using this type. The onlyl issue there is the closeness of the flash to the umbrella. But just put a wide angle diffuser on your flash and you're set. And you can use a shave shoe under the flash. They're pretty cheap on eBay. Like $10-$15 or so. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
RE: A Question About Macro Lenses
Unless the 125mm zoomed out to 62.5mm at 1:1, it is going to need exposure compensation. What you have is essentially a variable aperture zoom with that lens, how do do you know what exposure compensations to use? Does the lens barrel have exposure compensation markings on it? At least with a fixed focal length and aperture you can calculate the correct compensations based on magnification or bellows extension, but with variable aperture those techniques won't work... JCO -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 7:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: A Question About Macro Lenses On 15 Nov 2004 at 6:25, Lon Williamson wrote: I only own older extension only macros; from what I gather from reading, zoomy zoom macros suffer no light falloff when close-focusing but may lose a bit of focal length. Sounds like a good trade-off to me. I'd say that's a pretty accurate assumption WRT FL, my V125/2.5 looks to be just a tad over 100mm FL when approaching 1:1 mag. However in a recent little test I made comparing my V to an older bellows lens the V seemed to need about a half stop extra exposure a any aperture to equal the old lens exposure wise. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: I just ordered myself a *ist DS with DA18-55 lens.
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff Subject: Re: I just ordered myself a *ist DS with DA18-55 lens. OK ... your points are valid, to a point. As a user who has not sunk any money into CF cards, and a minimal amount into a few memory sticks, I'm not wedded to the CF concept, although, admittedly, I kind of like CF cards. However, one reason I like them is because they had/have the largest capacity and many purchasing options. But, since SD is increasing capacity, and the price is coming down,as a new user there seems to be little benefit to using CF. IOW, I see them as about the same, both suited to their purpose. For someone who has a lot invested in CF, I can certainly understand their preference. The problem as I see it is that either way, they are going to irritate their customers (not that Pentax ever seems concerned about that). If this is the start of a trend, and they continue it into a new high spec camera, they irritate present istD users who want to upgrade. If it is not the start of a trend, and they put out a high spec camera that uses CF cards, they irritate the istDS user who is looking for an upgrade path. As for the comment about CF getting phased out, ultimately to be followed by the phasing out of SD cards, well, that's what you get when you go digital. The cameras, and all else associated with them, are a product designed to promote obsolescence. Oh damn! I missed that prediction! Get rid of CF and SD, whither next? And why would those cards go anyhow? Having missed the statement, maybe I also missed the rationale...if there was any. At some point, enough people will just say fuck you to the manufacturers and boycott new purchases until the companies that deliberately obsolesce support equipment pull their heads out of their asses. Film shooters have had a capture format standard (35mm film cartridges) for almost 80 years. I think digital shooters should be demanding the same respect. William Robb Actually, what you mean is, 35mm format won out over all the dozen or other film sizes attempted over the years. The same thing will likely happen to digital cameras. I imagine we'll end up with two sizes in the end. While I suspect 35mm film is overwhelmingly dominant, you still CAN get 120 film here and there. What will win out? It looks like CF at the moment, maybe SD will be the second? I don't know how xD or SmartMedia is progressing. My little Optio S4 uses SD/MMC. At least that's one commitment for Pentax... g keith whaley
Re: I just ordered myself a *ist DS with DA18-55 lens.
On 15 Nov 2004 at 11:24, Nick Clark wrote: The same argument would apply to CF vs PC Card (PCMCIA) memory cards, but where are they? SD cards will be cheaper and higher capacity than CF in the future due to the demand from their use in PDAs, phones, MP3 players, etc. CF will go and Pentax will be een as having led the pack into the future. Wishful thinking. You would happen to own an ATRAC, DAT, DCC, SA-CD or HD-CD audio player? There's nothing like leading the pack :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
Thanks Bruce. She's pretty attached to her owner. Iwas suprised i got her to stand this long with out running over to him. I have a head/shoulder shot i'll scan and see how that looks. Dave Dave, That is a nice shot! The background is great and having him standing up on the rock...The only improvement I can think of would be to have him looking directly at you. Bruce Saturday, November 13, 2004, 5:19:45 PM, you wrote: bcin Got busy Friday night and developed a few rolls of Tmax bcin 100 from Sept and October. Some bcin swamps bcin and Split rail fences on roll two,but i like this one of bcin Copper. Very over cast day,in the bcin hills of bcin Madawaska Ontario,K1000 with 35-80 4.5/5.6 zoom,developed bcin in Tmax developer. I went over bcin the time bcin by 35 sec cause i was not paying attention to the stop bcin watch.g(It was Friday night after bcin all.LOL) bcin Hope you enjoy and comments welcome. bcin http://www.caughtinmotion.com/paw/copper2.jpg bcin Dave
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
Should have been - champion Kenneth Waller UnderstoodvbgThanks for the comment. Dave
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
Thanks Peter. I saw her jump on the rock and i just knew i had to get that shot.:-) My daughter and i would love to get a chocolate lab one day. They are a great dog,but take up a lot of time for training and we just dont have that at the moment. MAYBE after next show season if the horse gets sold. Dave That's a very nice shot of Copper, almost a bread standard illustration. He appears to have a very proud bearing which you caught perfectly.
RE: A Question About Macro Lenses
TTL is fine but a lot of people do Macro with strobes (myself included), and I am not aware of any SLR cameras that can do TTL flash metering. My technique is I use a flash meter, calculate bellows factor exposure compensation, and determine a base fstop. But even then I usually bracket unless I have used exact same lighting setup, film speed, lens and magnification, etc. I would imagine with a DSLR its just a matter of running a few exposures and adjust fstop until you get what you want on the image review screen. JCO -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 8:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: A Question About Macro Lenses On 15 Nov 2004 at 7:23, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Unless the 125mm zoomed out to 62.5mm at 1:1, it is going to need exposure compensation. Of course you are correct, I was simply drawing a relative comparison to another lens. What you have is essentially a variable aperture zoom with that lens, how do do you know what exposure compensations to use? I don't really care but I do know now that relative to a non-zoom macro lens it requires about an extra half stop when approaching 1:1. I haven't used external meters for macro photography since the late 80's. Then I had a 67 and bellows and I was glad to get my hands on a TTL prism. Does the lens barrel have exposure compensation markings on it? No At least with a fixed focal length and aperture you can calculate the correct compensations based on magnification or bellows extension, but with variable aperture those techniques won't work... ..or you (I) could use the TTL metering, which I do quite successfully. 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: A Question About Macro Lenses
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, J. C. O'Connell wrote: What you have is essentially a variable aperture zoom with that lens, how do do you know what exposure compensations to use? You don't, TTL calculates things for you. Kostas
Re: A Question About Macro Lenses
Most SLR cameras made in the last 25 years or so can do TTL flash metering. The LX does it quite nicely. When checking exposures with a DSLR, you don't want to rely on the image review. It can be very misleading. You really have to look at the histogram. On Nov 15, 2004, at 8:30 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: TTL is fine but a lot of people do Macro with strobes (myself included), and I am not aware of any SLR cameras that can do TTL flash metering. My technique is I use a flash meter, calculate bellows factor exposure compensation, and determine a base fstop. But even then I usually bracket unless I have used exact same lighting setup, film speed, lens and magnification, etc. I would imagine with a DSLR its just a matter of running a few exposures and adjust fstop until you get what you want on the image review screen. JCO -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 8:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: A Question About Macro Lenses On 15 Nov 2004 at 7:23, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Unless the 125mm zoomed out to 62.5mm at 1:1, it is going to need exposure compensation. Of course you are correct, I was simply drawing a relative comparison to another lens. What you have is essentially a variable aperture zoom with that lens, how do do you know what exposure compensations to use? I don't really care but I do know now that relative to a non-zoom macro lens it requires about an extra half stop when approaching 1:1. I haven't used external meters for macro photography since the late 80's. Then I had a 67 and bellows and I was glad to get my hands on a TTL prism. Does the lens barrel have exposure compensation markings on it? No At least with a fixed focal length and aperture you can calculate the correct compensations based on magnification or bellows extension, but with variable aperture those techniques won't work... ..or you (I) could use the TTL metering, which I do quite successfully. 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: A Question About Macro Lenses
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, J. C. O'Connell wrote: TTL is fine but a lot of people do Macro with strobes (myself included), and I am not aware of any SLR cameras that can do TTL flash metering. I probably don't understand what you mean by TTL flash metering. All Pentax AF, the Super-A and the LX do TTL flash metering during exposure (off the film/sensor). They quench the flash. I guess the strobes are not controllable like that or sth? Kostas
RE: Help me find a flash/umbrella bracket
Yes you need a hot shoe that screws onto the umbrella adapter. Either 1/4 or 3/8 thread. There is a genuine pentax adapter that screws into the umbrella adapter. This one allows the use of dedicated flash functions (such as TTL, contrast control etc.). I think it is termed off-camera shoe adapter F (- don't mix it up with the hot shoe adapters F and FG that do not have a tripod mount). Alexander - Original Message - From: Steve Pearson Subject: RE: Help me find a flash/umbrella bracket Thanks for the suggestion. However, I don't think this will work for what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to mount a hot shoe style flash, say a Vivitar 285, and then bounce it into an umbrella. Maybe I did not see the flash mount on this bracket??? I'm sure Larson makes such a thing. I have a couple of them for my old portable system, pretty sure they were Larson. Have you checked with Porter's? They used to carry all sorts of neat little adaptors and stuff. William Robb __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
Re: I just ordered myself a *ist DS with DA18-55 lens.
Peter J. Alling Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:42:10 -0800 It's also possible that Pentax needed to go to the SD card in the *ist-Ds to fit into the form factor available. It's a bitch for those who have CF cards but Pentax needs a selling point, they've gone for Smallest, it's easily understandable and entry level buyers will look at it and possibly disregard the CF vs SD problem. If they need an upgrade path they can get a SD to CF converter. It's those looking for an inexpensive backup body who are screwed. Smaller. Hmmm. Should this not have been the istDM? Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
unsubscribe
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 4:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #217 -- Content-Type: text/plain pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 04 : Issue 217 Today's Topics: Re: PESO - 17 mile drive #3 [ Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Phot [ Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: A Question About Macro Lenses [ Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: RL Edition Vivitar? [ Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: 3D quality in a lens? [ Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: PESO - let's jazz it up! [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: RL Edition Vivitar? [ Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: hot shoe cover? [ Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: RL Edition Vivitar? [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: OT - Strange eBay listing.[ Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Pentax MF 200mm f2.5? [ Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Horrid hot shoes [ Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Reducing File Size with Photosho [ Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO - let's jazz it up! [ Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: how does the ZX-50 do with ttl f [ Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] -- Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:49:11 -0500 From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO - 17 mile drive #3 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Another very nice shot. Your trip was an obvious success, at least in terms of the photography. Thanks for sharing. Paul On Nov 13, 2004, at 2:40 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Seems about half of my posts the last day or two have not made it to the list. So I'm hoping this one does. Taken on 17 Mile Drive between Carmel and Monterey. Pentax *istD, Sigma 55-200/3.5-5.6 DC, Handheld, Manual Focus http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/pinnacles_0088.htm In case you didn't get the post for the last one: Pentax *istD, DA 16-45/4, circular polarizer, handheld: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/pinnacles_0032.htm Comments welcome. Bruce -- Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:45:50 -0500 From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Really? The Mac jockeys you know must be very deluded. I can't imagine not selecting one's color space or scratch disk. For example, if you don't choose your preferences, the startup disk will be the scratch disk. To get good performance from PS on a Mac you need a firewire hard drive with a lot of empty space as your scratch disk. If you print PS documents from a Mac, you want to set up PhotoShop for ColorSynch. And as noted before, the bicubic interpolation is not always the best. I can't believe that anyone who uses a Mac for photography and has any notion of what they're doing would use all of the default preferences. On Nov 13, 2004, at 1:29 PM, Herb Chong wrote: the Mac jockeys i know tend not to look for preferences and always leave everything just the way it came. Bicubic is the default out of the box and i wonder why anyone would ever change it. Herb... - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 9:09 AM Subject: Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop The file size change preference in General Preferences. I think everyone knows how to set those. The default is Bicubic Better. Bicubic Smoother seems to give better interpolation when upsizing. I'm not certain, but I think it's irrelevant when downsizing. However, getting back to Shel's question, one step downsizing is better than a mutitude of steps. The same is reportedly true of upsizing (interpolation). -- Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:01:11 -0500 From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: A Question About Macro Lenses Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit you went like Try it yourself and then comment. I've done it
Re: unsubscribe
Don't do that, it's *extremely* rude. S Burgess, Otto (LNG-DAY) wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 4:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #217 -- Content-Type: text/plain pentax-discuss-d DigestVolume 04 : Issue 217
Re: unsubscribe
Nasty boy! Especially considering long digest that you send to us mindlessly... Wouldn't that be better to ask on the list how to unsubscribe??? -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: unsubscribe
Burgess, Otto (LNG-DAY) wrote: snip entire digest Sorry, you can check out any time you like but you can never leave... Especially if you keep posting the entire digest back to the list. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
I see good black hair detail on Copper. Of course one could get picky about pose, etc. But there's no real need to do so. Very good work, Dave. Thanks very much Collin. When you get to a darkroom to make some prints, it wold be nice to see one at each of grades 2, 3, and 3 1/2. Winter is fast approching,so i need something to do on weekends. :-) I use Ilford or Agfa's RC multi purpose pearl papers. I have Ilford filters,which i think you are refering to,or is it the paper. Dave Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: unsubscribe
- Original Message - From: Steve Jolly Subject: Re: unsubscribe Don't do that, it's *extremely* rude. Shucks Steve, now your probably going to give me heck too.. William Robb
Re: A Question About Macro Lenses
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: A Question About Macro Lenses At least with a fixed focal length and aperture you can calculate the correct compensations based on magnification or bellows extension, but with variable aperture those techniques won't work... Your question applies to when ttl flash control is not available, such as when using studio strobes. Since all my cameras have a built in meter, I use the continuous light meter to render an accurate assessment of the required exposure compensation by measuring how many stops of light I lose when extending the lens from infinity to the focus point. William Robb
Re: unsubscribe
- Original Message - From: Burgess, Otto (LNG-DAY) Subject: unsubscribe Not likely, girly-boy. WW
RE: A Question About Macro Lenses
See my last post, TTL Auto Flash is not same as TTL flash meteringAnd yes I would think most studio type strobes do not interface with the camera even if you wanted to do TTL AUTO flash... JCO -Original Message- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 8:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: A Question About Macro Lenses On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, J. C. O'Connell wrote: TTL is fine but a lot of people do Macro with strobes (myself included), and I am not aware of any SLR cameras that can do TTL flash metering. I probably don't understand what you mean by TTL flash metering. All Pentax AF, the Super-A and the LX do TTL flash metering during exposure (off the film/sensor). They quench the flash. I guess the strobes are not controllable like that or sth? Kostas
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
brooksdj Mon, 15 Nov 2004 07:14:25 -0800 Winter is fast approching,so i need something to do on weekends. :-) I use Ilford or Agfa's RC multi purpose pearl papers. I have Ilford filters,which i think you are refering to,or is it the paper. You can do it with filters or with graded papers. Use filters if you have variable contrast papers. That's what most people do. Have fun. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
RE: A Question About Macro Lenses
TTL flash metering is not the same a TLL AUTO FLASH. TTL flash metering gives you the correct fstop value to use with a fixed (usually maximum output) flash power. TTL Auto flash on the other hand uses a fixed fstop and adjusts the flash power DOWN to match that fstop via TTL. Not the same and not as good when you need maximum light JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 8:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: A Question About Macro Lenses Most SLR cameras made in the last 25 years or so can do TTL flash metering. The LX does it quite nicely. When checking exposures with a DSLR, you don't want to rely on the image review. It can be very misleading. You really have to look at the histogram. On Nov 15, 2004, at 8:30 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: TTL is fine but a lot of people do Macro with strobes (myself included), and I am not aware of any SLR cameras that can do TTL flash metering. My technique is I use a flash meter, calculate bellows factor exposure compensation, and determine a base fstop. But even then I usually bracket unless I have used exact same lighting setup, film speed, lens and magnification, etc. I would imagine with a DSLR its just a matter of running a few exposures and adjust fstop until you get what you want on the image review screen. JCO -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 8:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: A Question About Macro Lenses On 15 Nov 2004 at 7:23, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Unless the 125mm zoomed out to 62.5mm at 1:1, it is going to need exposure compensation. Of course you are correct, I was simply drawing a relative comparison to another lens. What you have is essentially a variable aperture zoom with that lens, how do do you know what exposure compensations to use? I don't really care but I do know now that relative to a non-zoom macro lens it requires about an extra half stop when approaching 1:1. I haven't used external meters for macro photography since the late 80's. Then I had a 67 and bellows and I was glad to get my hands on a TTL prism. Does the lens barrel have exposure compensation markings on it? No At least with a fixed focal length and aperture you can calculate the correct compensations based on magnification or bellows extension, but with variable aperture those techniques won't work... ..or you (I) could use the TTL metering, which I do quite successfully. 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: Bit Depth confusion! (Long)
I think your problem is not realizing you are comparing two very different things here. First off color depth is really shades of one color. Whether 8, 12, or 16 bits you are still talking about the shades of the color from white (no color) to black (100% color). The difference is how many shades you can divide it up into. Is that clear? Second colors (as on the screen) is a combination of all the color channels. They are talking about, for instance, 3 channels of 8 bits each (64^3) = 262144 (so called) colors, or 256K in octal(base8). Now when your expand your file from say the 12 bits (from the camera) to 16 bits (in photoshop) all you are doing is taking that 256 shades of one color and filling in (by interpolation) the blanks with calculated intermediate values. The 12bits in the camera is simply padded out to 16 bits because our computers these days are all based upon module-8 (that was not always so back when they were made up of discrete components). That is the 16 bits have values (where the * indicate data bits, and the x indicate no data (padding) bits). graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof - Don Sanderson wrote: (Warning to scientific types: Some numbers are rounded to keep me reasonably sane) A .PEF (12bit) file is ~12MB or ~2B per pixel. A .TIF file (16bit) is ~36MB or ~6B per pixel. A .TIF file (8bit) is ~18MB or ~3B per pixel. **If this is correct so far continue, if not stop and correct me. Without further processing: 8 bits can describe 256 colors. 12 bits can describe 4096 colors. 16 bits can describe 65536 colors. **If this is correct so far continue, if not stop and correct me. .PEF files use 2B per pixel because you have to use 2Bytes to store the 12bits. .PEF files open in PS CS as 16bit files because they ARE 16bit files. PS CS can save these .PEF files as 8bit or 16bit .TIF files. PS Elements can ONLY open and save .TIF files in 8bit. **If this is correct so far continue, if not stop and correct me. I am running my monitor at 32bit color depth, that's over 32 million possible colors. **If this is correct so far continue, if not stop and correct me. Irfanview tells me my 8bit .TIF file contains 910727 unique colors. Irfanview tells me my 16bit .TIF file contains 909879 unique colors. Both these files were created from a .PEF file in PS CS, the .PEF file was imported into CS as is using the CS converter. It was then saved as 8 bit and 16 bit .TIFs from CS with no manipulation of any kind. WARNING: **Now for the Dumb Don questions:** 1.) If the D has only 12 bits to describe each pixel, where do all these thousands of colors come from? I know each pixel is one color, is it the *converter* that figures out from adjacent pixel information how to determine the color of EACH pixel to a resolution of many thousands of colors? 2.) I didn't know till today that PS Elements was using only 8 bit .TIFs. Irfanview indicates that for this particular file 8 bits holds MORE color info than the 16 bit version. Why/How? 3.) Obviously an 8 bit .TIF file resolves far more than 8 bits (256 colors) per pixel and must use all of the 24 bits alloted to each pixel to do this. (I realise these bits store other info as well.) So what is the distinction between an 8 bit and 16 bit .TIF? Would these more accurately be called 24bit and 48bit .TIFs? Or is this more an indication of the platform and software requirements than the file structure? I think I've answered a lot of my own questions by typing this all out but I'd still like some clarification or correction to my jumbled thoughts. ;-) TIA Don (NOW, for dinner and a few aspirin..)
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/14/2004, 4:19 AM: http://www.caughtinmotion.com/paw/copper2.jpg Great looking dog and a great pose. Is she a hunter? She doesn't have the new AKC-Labrador-Retriever-breed-standard-short-fat look about her. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/14/2004, 4:19 AM: http://www.caughtinmotion.com/paw/copper2.jpg Great looking dog and a great pose. Is she a hunter? She doesn't have the new AKC-Labrador-Retriever-breed-standard-short-fat look about her. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yup. Its my buddies bird dog. Trained her from a wee pup.She's 2 1/2 or 3 years old. Memory fart here, sorry.:-)Lives for water.LOL Thanks for the comments,BTW. Dave
Re: unsubscribe
On 15/11/04, Steve Jolly, discombobulated, unleashed: Don't do that, it's *extremely* rude. S Could you please restate your post in blocks of 8. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Photoshop Elements 3 review posted
Now with RAW support. 'Photoshop for the rest of us' apparently http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/adobeelements3/ Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop
Hi, When the file size is reduced in one step, using Bicubic or Bicubic Sharper, there is no mushiness. It's only when reducing by steps, or increments, did the mushiness appear. Focus Magic is an interesting program, but I'd much rather use good Photoshop techniques and implement them well than to rely on plug-ins and programs to do the work for me. Since posting the original question I've learned a couple of techniques that can only improve the quality of reduced files without having to rely on outside programs or plug-ins, and which also allow for very precise local sharpening, contrast control, and the like. Thanks for your suggestion. For now, at least, I'll pass on it. Shel [Original Message] From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/15/2004 2:45:09 AM Subject: Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop Here's a neat trick: Reduce the file size in one big mushy step, then use Focus Magic. It does a very nifty job of demushing in this situation. Shel Belinkoff wrote: I recently heard that the best way to reduce a large file to one that's substantially smaller is by using a step-by-step process rather than just making the reduction in one step. I've numerous 4000ppi scanned BW film images of about 40mb and I want to reduce it to 100ppi with a wide dimension of 800-900 pixels. Does anyone know what the procedure is for doing a step-by-step reduction? I tried it by going from 4000ppi to 2000ppi to 1000ppi, etc., but the results were soft and mushy. Is there a better way to reduce the size and rez of such files? Shel
Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop
I've never really experienced a mushiness problem with downsized files. It seems that if one starts with a nice sharp, high-res image, it's hard to wreck it by making it smaller. I had to downsize some 72 meg tiffs for web use this weekend. I tried doing it with Bicubic, Bicubic Smoother, and Bicubic Sharper. The three resulting jpegs (13 inches on the long side, 72dpi) were identical to my eye, even when wearing my glasses :-). But since the consensus appears to be that Bicubic Sharper is better for downsizing, I'll continue to use it, while using Bicubic Smoother for upsizing. Paul Hi, When the file size is reduced in one step, using Bicubic or Bicubic Sharper, there is no mushiness. It's only when reducing by steps, or increments, did the mushiness appear. Focus Magic is an interesting program, but I'd much rather use good Photoshop techniques and implement them well than to rely on plug-ins and programs to do the work for me. Since posting the original question I've learned a couple of techniques that can only improve the quality of reduced files without having to rely on outside programs or plug-ins, and which also allow for very precise local sharpening, contrast control, and the like. Thanks for your suggestion. For now, at least, I'll pass on it. Shel [Original Message] From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/15/2004 2:45:09 AM Subject: Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop Here's a neat trick: Reduce the file size in one big mushy step, then use Focus Magic. It does a very nifty job of demushing in this situation. Shel Belinkoff wrote: I recently heard that the best way to reduce a large file to one that's substantially smaller is by using a step-by-step process rather than just making the reduction in one step. I've numerous 4000ppi scanned BW film images of about 40mb and I want to reduce it to 100ppi with a wide dimension of 800-900 pixels. Does anyone know what the procedure is for doing a step-by-step reduction? I tried it by going from 4000ppi to 2000ppi to 1000ppi, etc., but the results were soft and mushy. Is there a better way to reduce the size and rez of such files? Shel
Re: Paw Another shot of Copper in BW
You can do it with filters or with graded papers. Use filters if you have variable contrast papers. That's what most people do. Have fun. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl I use the variable paper and have the filters.Maybe this weekend as its supposed to rain both days. Dave
PAW PESO - Air Mail
Just a silly snap, referencing something Frank mentioned a while back. Maybe someone has a suggestion for evening out the tonality in the sky, which is really why I posted this image instead of one of some similar pics. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/mailboxes/airmail.html Shel
Re: PAW PESO - Air Mail
Hey! Good for my first chuckle of the day, and it's only Monday! Like the old joke, it's a good start! g Thanks, keith Shel Belinkoff wrote: Just a silly snap, referencing something Frank mentioned a while back. Maybe someone has a suggestion for evening out the tonality in the sky, which is really why I posted this image instead of one of some similar pics. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/mailboxes/airmail.html Shel
OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Tonight (Monday) on BBC 3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/tv/paparazzi.shtml Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop
After playing around with this a lot over the past week or so, I am not convinced that Bicubic Sharper is ~better~ than Bicubic, they just afford different results. It's quite possible - it seemst to be true based on the number of images I've experimented with - some images lend themselves to Sharper better than others. The problem with Sharper is that the user has no control over the results unless using other techniques, such as multiple layers. Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/15/2004 9:00:06 AM Subject: Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop I've never really experienced a mushiness problem with downsized files. It seems that if one starts with a nice sharp, high-res image, it's hard to wreck it by making it smaller. I had to downsize some 72 meg tiffs for web use this weekend. I tried doing it with Bicubic, Bicubic Smoother, and Bicubic Sharper. The three resulting jpegs (13 inches on the long side, 72dpi) were identical to my eye, even when wearing my glasses :-). But since the consensus appears to be that Bicubic Sharper is better for downsizing, I'll continue to use it, while using Bicubic Smoother for upsizing. Paul Hi, When the file size is reduced in one step, using Bicubic or Bicubic Sharper, there is no mushiness. It's only when reducing by steps, or increments, did the mushiness appear. Focus Magic is an interesting program, but I'd much rather use good Photoshop techniques and implement them well than to rely on plug-ins and programs to do the work for me. Since posting the original question I've learned a couple of techniques that can only improve the quality of reduced files without having to rely on outside programs or plug-ins, and which also allow for very precise local sharpening, contrast control, and the like. Thanks for your suggestion. For now, at least, I'll pass on it. Shel [Original Message] From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/15/2004 2:45:09 AM Subject: Re: OT: Reducing File Size with Photoshop Here's a neat trick: Reduce the file size in one big mushy step, then use Focus Magic. It does a very nifty job of demushing in this situation. Shel Belinkoff wrote: I recently heard that the best way to reduce a large file to one that's substantially smaller is by using a step-by-step process rather than just making the reduction in one step. I've numerous 4000ppi scanned BW film images of about 40mb and I want to reduce it to 100ppi with a wide dimension of 800-900 pixels. Does anyone know what the procedure is for doing a step-by-step reduction? I tried it by going from 4000ppi to 2000ppi to 1000ppi, etc., but the results were soft and mushy. Is there a better way to reduce the size and rez of such files? Shel
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Awww, dang! Yet another fine BBC program I can't get over here... sighhh. keith whaley Oh! Almost forgot: Cheers ~ and keep your pecker up, mates! g Cotty wrote: Tonight (Monday) on BBC 3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/tv/paparazzi.shtml Cheers, Cotty
RE: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Br - you beat me to it! Add BBC4 to the list tonight too though - if you haven't seen it before: Frank Hurley: The Man who Made History (BBC4 Monday, 15.11.2004 21:30-22:30) A look at the life and work of photographer Frank Hurley, who captured some of the earliest images of the world's most remote places. The cinematographer on Ernest Shackleton's doomed Endurance expedition to the Antarctic, Hurley also photographed both World Wars and explored New Guinea. But today's experts believe some of his pictures to be elaborate fakes. Was he a giant of photography or just a conjurer with a camera? -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 November 2004 18:04 To: pentax list Subject: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK Tonight (Monday) on BBC 3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/tv/paparazzi.shtml Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
On 15/11/04, Keith Whaley, discombobulated, unleashed: Awww, dang! Yet another fine BBC program I can't get over here... sighhh. Keith, Tell you what - I'm recording these docs on VHS, I've got the Robert Frank doc and the Helena Wosname model-turned-photog already and will put this doc on the same tape. When it's full, if you like, I can post it to you and you can view and send it back to me. Otherwise you'll have to emigrate ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
Read this: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_eos2 0dopinion=23637 Har!
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
On 15/11/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, unleashed: Br - you beat me to it! ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
A little more on the subject: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/22/1093113057723.html Shel [Original Message] From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/15/2004 10:14:09 AM Subject: RE: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK Br - you beat me to it! Add BBC4 to the list tonight too though - if you haven't seen it before: Frank Hurley: The Man who Made History (BBC4 Monday, 15.11.2004 21:30-22:30) A look at the life and work of photographer Frank Hurley, who captured some of the earliest images of the world's most remote places. The cinematographer on Ernest Shackleton's doomed Endurance expedition to the Antarctic, Hurley also photographed both World Wars and explored New Guinea. But today's experts believe some of his pictures to be elaborate fakes. Was he a giant of photography or just a conjurer with a camera? -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 November 2004 18:04 To: pentax list Subject: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK Tonight (Monday) on BBC 3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/tv/paparazzi.shtml Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
ROTFLMAO Shel [Original Message] From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Read this: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_eos20do pinion=23637
Re: Multiple exposures with * ist D
I've only tried this once, and IIRC, it doesn't work exactly the same way as it did on Z-1. The Z-1 would subtract some time from each exposure to make the final result correct. I think the *istD doesn't do that, but rather take all exposures straight according to the meter. Jostein - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 11:20 PM Subject: Multiple exposures with * ist D Any listers have experience using this function? I'd like to hear of your experience/comments on using this function. Was exposure acceptable etc? Kenneth Waller
Re: Evil! EVIL! EEEVIL!
Have a nice trip, Bob. Careful with your back! Jostein - Original Message - From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 1:52 AM Subject: Re: Evil! EVIL! EEEVIL! Damn! Folding focusing hood for the 67. Two more 120 and two more 220 film holders for the 645 and a Bogen 3251 tripod, long strap 3039 head. I'm in deep trouble! Good thing I don't have a wife! Off to the top of Saddleback mountain for some scenics... Regards, Bob...
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Hi, Monday, November 15, 2004, 6:11:18 PM, Rob wrote: Br - you beat me to it! Add BBC4 to the list tonight too though - if you haven't seen it before: Frank Hurley: The Man who Made History (BBC4 Monday, 15.11.2004 21:30-22:30) A look at the life and work of photographer Frank Hurley, who captured some of the earliest images of the world's most remote places. The cinematographer on Ernest Shackleton's doomed Endurance expedition to the Antarctic, Hurley also photographed both World Wars and explored New Guinea. But today's experts believe some of his pictures to be elaborate fakes. Was he a giant of photography or just a conjurer with a camera? that's a very interesting documentary - it was on a few months ago. I'd only heard of him for his Shackleton photos, but the rest of his career was also very interesting. Quite a man. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Hi, Awww, dang! Yet another fine BBC program I can't get over here... sighhh. Keith, Tell you what - I'm recording these docs on VHS, I've got the Robert Frank doc and the Helena Wosname model-turned-photog already and will put this doc on the same tape. When it's full, if you like, I can post it to you and you can view and send it back to me. Incompatible standards might be your downfall. I tried something similar for Shel a couple of years ago, and even had the tape converted to the US standard, but the quality was apparently so poor at the other end it was unwatchable. Unless you have privileged access to some specialist kit, of course. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: 20x30 from 6MP?
Bruce wrote: I just had MPix.com print up quantity 10 - 20X30 inch prints. They looked very nice. Beyond standard prepping for printing, I did not res them up at all. My local lab tells me that their Epson 7660 resizes files very nicely. I'm guessing that MPix resizes them for printing. -- Bruce, what do you do about sharpening in an order like this? Thanks, Joe
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
On 15/11/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Keith, Tell you what - I'm recording these docs on VHS, I've got the Robert Frank doc and the Helena Wosname model-turned-photog already and will put this doc on the same tape. When it's full, if you like, I can post it to you and you can view and send it back to me. Incompatible standards might be your downfall. I tried something similar for Shel a couple of years ago, and even had the tape converted to the US standard, but the quality was apparently so poor at the other end it was unwatchable. Unless you have privileged access to some specialist kit, of course. Hmm. I can watch NTSC tapes on my PAL vhs machine - if Keith's vhs can see PAL, it should be okay? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Annother pile of test shots
I have now published my next testboard. This time it's lenses at focal length 35mm (@ f2.8 4.0 5.6 8.0) Tokina AT-X 270AF PRoII Tokina 2.8-4.3 28-70mm Pentax SMC F 4-5.6 35-80mm Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm Similar test shots done with these lengts will follow shortly: 28mm, 50mm and 70mm. The pixelation of 6MP digital shots, saved as 300ppi jpegs is limiting the judgement of the performance of the lenses. The differences between the lenses would increase at a higher resolution such as 35mm film, I suppose. Shel and Rob: I believe the Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm is doing well, compared to the zoom lenses. http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9164139.html http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9164140.html All the best Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
Yup, some just have too much money. This had been a question in a local pentax forum a few days ago, too, someone who asked if the *istD could not show a live preview. He accepted it ok, the really sad thing was: his dealer told him it could show a live display. Ah well, local shops - when I aked for the price of a SMC-A 50/1.2 in january the local dealer tried to persuade me to buy a sigma that was 'even faster and cheaper' then the 1:1.2/50, a 1:1/50 from sigma for half the price! He was looking at a macro lens 2.8/50 with 1:1 macro ratio. I bought my *istD at some internet shop who was way cheaper and knew a lot more about what he sold. Sam - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 7:17 PM Subject: RE: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison Read this: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_eos2 0dopinion=23637 Har!
Re: Multiple exposures with * ist D
The *istD way makes more sense to me - leaves you in control of amount of exposure for each shot. Bruce Monday, November 15, 2004, 10:44:03 AM, you wrote: J I've only tried this once, and IIRC, it doesn't work exactly the same J way as it did on Z-1. J The Z-1 would subtract some time from each exposure to make the final J result correct. J I think the *istD doesn't do that, but rather take all exposures J straight according to the meter. J Jostein J - Original Message - J From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] J To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] J Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 11:20 PM J Subject: Multiple exposures with * ist D Any listers have experience using this function? I'd like to hear of your experience/comments on using this function. J Was exposure acceptable etc? Kenneth Waller
Re: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
A case of the brain drain, his brain is draining... Rob Brigham wrote: Read this: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_eos2 0dopinion=23637 Har! -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Hi, Hmm. I can watch NTSC tapes on my PAL vhs machine - if Keith's vhs can see PAL, it should be okay? Might not go the other way. I can also watch NTSC on mine. But it records as PAL (I assume). I had that converted, sent it to California, but apparently it was unwatchable. Maybe Shel remembers and can tell you more. It occurs to me that it should be possible to receive on your computer (if you have a TV receiver card) and perhaps save it as an MPEG or something, and send that. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: 20x30 from 6MP?
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:56:05 -0700 Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce wrote: I just had MPix.com print up quantity 10 - 20X30 inch prints. They looked very nice. Beyond standard prepping for printing, I did not res them up at all. My local lab tells me that their Epson 7660 resizes files very nicely. I'm guessing that MPix resizes them for I simply resize the files in The GIMP and send them off for 30x40 works fine Kevin -- Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
Re: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
He'll have the same problem with the Nikon to. LOL Dave - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 7:17 PM Subject: RE: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison Read this: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_eos2 0dopinion=23637 Har!
RE: Annother pile of test shots
I think you better take another look at the comparison photos. They don't seem to match up with their designations. All I see are air force target tests. Shel [Original Message] From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/15/2004 11:03:49 AM Subject: Annother pile of test shots I have now published my next testboard. This time it's lenses at focal length 35mm (@ f2.8 4.0 5.6 8.0) Tokina AT-X 270AF PRoII Tokina 2.8-4.3 28-70mm Pentax SMC F 4-5.6 35-80mm Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm Similar test shots done with these lengts will follow shortly: 28mm, 50mm and 70mm. The pixelation of 6MP digital shots, saved as 300ppi jpegs is limiting the judgement of the performance of the lenses. The differences between the lenses would increase at a higher resolution such as 35mm film, I suppose. Shel and Rob: I believe the Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm is doing well, compared to the zoom lenses. http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9164139.html http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9164140.html All the best Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Rumor of DA 50-200
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=11073371 I hope they make it a constant f4. If it's another cheap, variable aperture telezoom, I'll probably pass. Since the excellent SMC F 70-210, Pentax hasn't done too well with those. If it was a conservative zoom range, say 50-150, we could probably be confident that it would be a good lens. At 50-200, it is harder to predict. Joe
Re: PAW PESO - Air Mail
Missed the original here (again), but here's a suggestion for evening out the sky gradient. In Photoshop, use the Eyedropper to select the darkest hue you want the gradient to be based on. Then swap background and foreground colour, and use the Eyedropper to select the lightest hue. Use the Magic Wand to select the sky area (had some trouble with the antenna on the web version, but I gueess it'll be OK on a full version of the pic), and apply a small dash of feathering. Then use the Gradient tool to apply a linear gradient from the lower right to the upper left corners and see what happens. To have a bit more control, one can copy the selected sky into a new layer and apply the gradient there. Jostein - Original Message - From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 7:01 PM Subject: Re: PAW PESO - Air Mail Hey! Good for my first chuckle of the day, and it's only Monday! Like the old joke, it's a good start! g Thanks, keith Shel Belinkoff wrote: Just a silly snap, referencing something Frank mentioned a while back. Maybe someone has a suggestion for evening out the tonality in the sky, which is really why I posted this image instead of one of some similar pics. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/mailboxes/airmail.html Shel
Re: Photoshop Elements 3 review posted
Cotty wrote on 11/15/2004, 11:09 AM: Now with RAW support. 'Photoshop for the rest of us' apparently http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/adobeelements3/ It's very good actually. I bought it the other day and then 2 days later got PS CS as a gift. Anyone want an opened-box almost new PSE 3 (windows version) cheap? -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
Sam Jost mused: Yup, some just have too much money. This had been a question in a local pentax forum a few days ago, too, someone who asked if the *istD could not show a live preview. Indeed. I'm sure it's going to be a common question from first-time DSLR purchasers, especially if they are upgrading from a digital PS. I don't think it's a particularly stupid question - you need to know a great deal about the internal implementation detail of a DSLR before you even know how (let alone why) this capability is rendered impossible. I think sneering at the purchaser, or dismissing him as having more money than sense, says rather more about the disparager than about the customer. I suspect I'm probably among the more technically oriented in this group, but when I first played with a DSLR (a Nikon D1, back when they were new) I wondered why it still made noises as though it had a shutter. He accepted it ok, the really sad thing was: his dealer told him it could show a live display. Unfortunately you can't really believe most sales staff. It's usually just ignorance, but there are still some commisson-based product pushers with rather elastic morals (around here they seem to end up working for Frys :-) Ah well, local shops - when I aked for the price of a SMC-A 50/1.2 in january the local dealer tried to persuade me to buy a sigma that was 'even faster and cheaper' then the 1:1.2/50, a 1:1/50 from sigma for half the price! He was looking at a macro lens 2.8/50 with 1:1 macro ratio. I bought my *istD at some internet shop who was way cheaper and knew a lot more about what he sold. Sam - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 7:17 PM Subject: RE: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison Read this: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_eos2 0dopinion=23637 Har!
Re: Rumor of DA 50-200
If it were a constant f4 I would buy it. If it is a variable 4-5.6 I would pass. I don't need another zoom like all the rest. Right now, my lightweight kit is the *istD (sans grip), DA 16-45 and Sigma 55-200/3.5-5.6 DC. I would love to have a constant f4 zoom with about the same optical quality as the DA 16-45. Please listen, Pentax! Bruce Monday, November 15, 2004, 11:21:23 AM, you wrote: JT http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=11073371 JT I hope they make it a constant f4. If it's another cheap, variable JT aperture telezoom, I'll probably pass. Since the excellent SMC F 70-210, JT Pentax hasn't done too well with those. JT If it was a conservative zoom range, say 50-150, we could probably be JT confident that it would be a good lens. At 50-200, it is harder to predict. JT Joe
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Cotty wrote: On 15/11/04, Keith Whaley, discombobulated, unleashed: Awww, dang! Yet another fine BBC program I can't get over here... sighhh. Keith, Tell you what - I'm recording these docs on VHS, Thing is, I'm not sure you folks use the same VHS arrangement we do in the U.S. I have a commercial VHS tape made here that I want to send to a mate in Wales, but I _think_ I'll have to get it converted first. I only know enough to get a bit anxious about it. Not sure if they (U.S. vs. UK) are compatible is simply what I heard... I've got the Robert Frank doc and the Helena Wosname model-turned-photog already and will put this doc on the same tape. When it's full, if you like, I can post it to you and you can view and send it back to me. Otherwise you'll have to emigrate ;-) Only if I could relocate within crawling distance of a fine old pub, thank you... g Cheers, Cotty I'll be looking into it. Thanks for the offer! We'll talk! keith
Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Congratulations! Good to have you back. Paul Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Totally amazing, isn't it! Mighty glad it worked out okay. Do take care for a while, but do the exercises recommended... all for your own benefit! Thanks for letting us know! keith whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Good to hear Vic, and welcome back. Dave Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. Hey, ~great~ news, Vic. Welcome back. Gee, if you'd've let me know, I could've brought over the VS1 90-180/4.5 Flat-Field Zoom (supposedly optimized for surgical photography - g) and taken some souvenir pictures - g. Seriously, Vic, it's ~great~ to hear of your recovery. Cheers, Fred
Re: Over to the Dark side.. ist D vs 20D brief comparison
From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam Jost mused: Yup, some just have too much money. This had been a question in a local pentax forum a few days ago, too, someone who asked if the *istD could not show a live preview. Indeed. I'm sure it's going to be a common question from first-time DSLR purchasers, especially if they are upgrading from a digital PS. I don't think it's a particularly stupid question - you need to know a great deal about the internal implementation detail of a DSLR before you even know how (let alone why) this capability is rendered impossible. And I don't think it is impossible. I'd even go so far to say the live view of digicams will render the DSLR mirror system obsolete one day when there are better sensors and displays. Live view has many advantages: 100% viewfinder, live histogram, silent shutter to name only a few. The stuff is not good enough yet (battery life, display resolution, sensor quality) but it will be. I think sneering at the purchaser, or dismissing him as having more money than sense, says rather more about the disparager than about the customer. I sneer not at not knowing something but at someone who buys very expensive gadgets without trying them first or at least reading a lot about them. I read up reviews, opinions, technical data, handbooks of DSLRs when I wanted to buy one. I didn't just walk in some store, grab the next one looking nice and bought it. Hell, for the money I spent on the *istD, the lenses and stuff my brother bought a used car, and not a small or slow one. I suspect I'm probably among the more technically oriented in this group, but when I first played with a DSLR (a Nikon D1, back when they were new) I wondered why it still made noises as though it had a shutter. Yeah, but you didn't buy and later complain about it. Thats quite a difference, don't you think so? Sam
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Great news, Vic. Glad to hear. Joe
RE: Annother pile of test shots
The remaining three focal lengths: 28mm: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9168605.html 50mm: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9168606.html 70mm: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9168607.html A you can see the Tokina AT-X 270AF Pro II is no good at F2.8 and F4.0, by far the least sharp of the tested zoom lemnses. It's either faulty or not good suitable for digital cameras. I assume that the first reason is best guess. All the best Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 15. november 2004 20:02 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Annother pile of test shots I have now published my next testboard. This time it's lenses at focal length 35mm (@ f2.8 4.0 5.6 8.0) Tokina AT-X 270AF PRoII Tokina 2.8-4.3 28-70mm Pentax SMC F 4-5.6 35-80mm Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm Similar test shots done with these lengts will follow shortly: 28mm, 50mm and 70mm. The pixelation of 6MP digital shots, saved as 300ppi jpegs is limiting the judgement of the performance of the lenses. The differences between the lenses would increase at a higher resolution such as 35mm film, I suppose. Shel and Rob: I believe the Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm is doing well, compared to the zoom lenses. http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9164139.html http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p9164140.html All the best Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Welcome back! Glad things went well. -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, November 15, 2004, 12:29:07 PM, you wrote: Pac Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with Pac flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest Pac version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a Pac double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Pac Looking forward to getting back in gear. Pac thanks Vic
RE: Tokina 1:2.8~4.3 28-70mm (PKA mount)
Kieth. See my two mails: Annother pile of test shots, regarding the Tokina 2.8-4.3 28-70mm lens. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. november 2004 13:05 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Tokina 1:2.8~4.3 28-70mm (PKA mount) Jens Bladt wrote: Funny you should ask: I was just leaving the house to make test shots, comparing Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tokina AT-X ProII 2.6-2.8/28-70mm Pentax SMC-F 4-5.6/35-80mm This lens is, I think, still made. I used mine extensively on recent trips and find that at 35mm, wide open, it's not all that sharp. That's merely one observation, and I've not made it a priority to check it out more carefully, but right now it's on probation! I like the convenience of the lens, but...unless it performs better than that, it will have a short life. If you plan to test it further, I'd be interested in seeing what you get out of it. The only standard zoom lenses I have got until I get myself a 18-35mm, 18-50mm or a 16-45mm. I'll check the focusing as well and post some tests later today. I did some casual test shots the other day, but couldn't really tell the difference - and I thought the Pentax was doing pretty well, cosidering the cost of the lens. I suspect this may end up being a 'sunlight' lens. One I use only on sunny days (stopped down to f/8 or so) and am otherwise quite happy with. For me, in the midrange of apertures, it seems to perform well. keith whaley BTW how come some lenses seem to focus elsewhere than at the screen/film plane, when mounted on the *ist D ?? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 13. november 2004 22:19 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Tokina 1:2.8~4.3 28-70mm (PKA mount) On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Jens Bladt wrote: Tis lens arrived today. Very nice, almost MINT. It's seemingly a good performer. The machro mode is a great feature and I miss having this on my more expensive lenses. Do they perhaps focus closer by default? I noticed that the FA28-80 (lacking macro) is actually more versatile that the F28-80 (with macro) as it focuses at 0.45m anyway. Kostas
RE: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Congrats Vic. I suppose they didn't have to use a Pentax Endoscope :-) Welcome back! Take it easy! Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 15. november 2004 21:29 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 10:29 PM Subject: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic Well done, Vic! Welcome back! Hoping for a speedy recovery to an excellent condition, speaking in second hand gear terms. Lasse
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Hoping for a speedy recovery to an excellent condition, speaking in second hand gear terms. Gee, why not shoot for LN- - g. Fred
RE: macro teleconverters
I have a KENKO Macro TELEPLUS MC7 for KA mount. Made by Tokina, I believe. The only thing missing is an Auto Focus option. I think it's just brilliant. I use it as a regular converter as well. Tests in German FotoMagazine says that the regular Kenko MC7 is SUPER (one of the best of it's kind), but his one is supposed to be average. But I happen to think it's brilliant for my purposes. I rarely use it for macro's but often for photographing drawings, books etc. for Power Point presentations - and even for drawings, I can put into Adobe Illustrator applications as a base for new drawings/layers for projects etc., where digital maps aren't available. I can get anything into my computer this way! Next to my Pentax 1.7 X AF Adapter, it's the best K-mount accessory I ever bought! It's always in my camera bag. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 15. november 2004 11:33 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: macro teleconverters We've got two Vivitar A macro TCs here; the one I use typically gets slapped on a Kiron 105 macro or a K 135 to give me a cheap long macro lens. Works well enough that I no longer feel the need for an expensive 200 macro. Pentax, AFAIK, did not make a TC with variable extension. Pentax DID make a variable extension tube, though, and you can still buy it (as well as both tube sets, the 50mm tube, and the 100mm tube) from BH. -Lon Don Sanderson wrote: I don't believe Pentax ever did. I own 2 of the Vivitars, 1 M and 1 A version. I'm quite pleased with both, before I owned true macro lenses one of the Vivitars and an A 50/1.4 made a very nice 100mm F2.8 macro. Don
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
On 15/11/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic Wow - congrats Vic - probably like most here, I had no idea you were due on the table! If it's any consolation (which it's not) - I have filmed open heart surgery so I have seen what you've been through. Great to hear you're doing well and thanks for letting us know. Take it easy mate! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
On 15/11/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: It occurs to me that it should be possible to receive on your computer (if you have a TV receiver card) and perhaps save it as an MPEG or something, and send that. Yes the thought had crossed my mind, and in fact I have a basic TV tuner called a MyTV2Go but I haven't got it set up for Freeview. What i really need is a Formac Studio box - then I can come straight in from the VHS and dump off to DVD. I'm working on it ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
On 15/11/04, Keith Whaley, discombobulated, unleashed: I have a commercial VHS tape made here that I want to send to a mate in Wales, but I _think_ I'll have to get it converted first. I only know enough to get a bit anxious about it. Not sure if they (U.S. vs. UK) are compatible is simply what I heard... Your mate in Wales will probably be okay - the vast majority of domestic VHS machines in the UK (which operates the PAL standard) are switcheable to NTSC (the north American standard). I would be surprised if your mate couldn't watch it. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Photoshop Elements 3 review posted
On 15/11/04, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed: It's very good actually. I bought it the other day and then 2 days later got PS CS as a gift. Anyone want an opened-box almost new PSE 3 (windows version) cheap? Are you sure it's Windows only? a lot of those Elements CDs are hybrid Mac and PC versions... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: OT - Paparazzi doc on TV in UK
Great doc - and this is the first of three X 1 hour. Brilliant insight into the loathsome profession of real paps - they are absolute vultures! I am an blessed angel in comparison. If I can get them onto DVD I will post some off to those interested. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: macro teleconverters
On 15 Nov 2004 at 23:20, Jens Bladt wrote: I have a KENKO Macro TELEPLUS MC7 for KA mount. Made by Tokina, I believe. The only thing missing is an Auto Focus option. I think it's just brilliant. I use it as a regular converter as well. Tests in German FotoMagazine says that the regular Kenko MC7 is SUPER (one of the best of it's kind), but his one is supposed to be average. I had one (Kenko Pz-AF 2X Teleplus MC7) a few years back for a short while, I sold it pretty quickly as the reduction in contrast compared to my Pentax S, L and AF convertors was very noticeable. Maybe FotoMagazine didn't test for contrast, mine certainly was like new so it wasn't a fogging effect. 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: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
Glad you're back. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just wanted to let everyone know that I survived my open heart surgery with flying colours and am kind of back on the list just monitoring the Digest version while I continue to recuperate. I got out of hospital four days after a double-by-pass. Modern medicine sure has come a long way. Looking forward to getting back in gear. thanks Vic -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site
From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:15 AM Subject: Re: Hi folks- Survived open-heart monitoring site Hoping for a speedy recovery to an excellent condition, speaking in second hand gear terms. Gee, why not shoot for LN- - g. Good (rhetorical) question, Fred. I - was - actually going for the next to MINT quality, but simply forgot about the like new, and thought excellent was next to mint... Thanks for giving me the opportunity to make this clarification. :-) Lasse
Re: Reducing File Size with Photoshop
From: Sam Jost [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 9:34 AM Subject: Re: Reducing File Size with Photoshop From: Lasse Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Each time you save as jpeg, a further compression, and consequently a degradation of image quality, will take place. However if you only close it, there is nothing that will affect the quality of the image that you opened. Not necesseraly - Some software take due note that the jpeg is unchanged and copy the bitstream of the original jpeg on saving. Thanks, Sam. I didn't know this. Do you know which software does, or if there is a way to know? Lasse
Re: Annother pile of test shots
On 15 Nov 2004 at 20:01, Jens Bladt wrote: Shel and Rob: I believe the Pentax SMC M 2.8 35mm is doing well, compared to the zoom lenses. I appreciate your effort but your results don't actually surprise me, I hope the M28/2.8 would be better than the zoom. I like like your test compilation however if you also presented sections towards the edges of the frame I believe that it would prove a lot more useful and revealing. On your full frame image see the edge of the white fence to the left, there is significant CA even though it was shot at f8. This is often the type of thing that differentiates a good lens from a great one, a case in point being the FA24/2. It is razor sharp dead centre but it performs far worse than most other Pentax 24mm primes towards the edges at any aperture. A centre section wouldn't reveal this significant performance issue. To see just how badly CA can affect certain types of images check out the hideous sample image on the following Sigma page shot using a Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC at f9: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/photographer/miyake.htm Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
PAW: Walk and Talk
Comments are always welcome: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2884479size=lg thanks, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
