Re: PESO: In the train
On Dec 18, 2004, at 6:59 PM, Juan Buhler wrote: Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a series. Just wanted to post the first pics taken with my new zoom. I quite like the first one, except maybe for the grey streak at left which I find a little distracting. I like how you can see just enough of the guy's face to pick up an expression. I'm a little more mixed about the second pic. The more I look at it the more I like it but I think it could be improved with some cropping. I'd suggest getting rid of the chair at the right. Just my humble opinion :) Cheers, - Dave, who never seems to comment on PAW/PESO/etc http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Cost to repair PC terminal on istD???
On 17/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: Even then, I was able to make the thing work by pushing the socket back into position and whacking it a couple of times with a hard object. Funny, my wife says the same thing. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
On 17/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: Any, here's the question: Assuming that a rectangular hood is of the appropriate size for a given lens, is there an advantage to using one of the perfect hoods which is a tulip variety. He's a pic of a perfeckt hood on the K24/2.8: Shel, This page may produce interesting reading... http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/lenshood.html HTH Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Portraits wide open, or stop down one or two stops?
On 18/12/04, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed: I liked the portrait of Stefan and prefer it to the second one. thanks Thanks Markus Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Was it really worth that much? Part Deux
Worth even more than that I guess: http://tinyurl.com/52xov Don -Original Message- From: Collin R Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 4:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Was it really worth that much? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemrd=1item=3860946186 ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact. Howard Hendricks
Selling retail
Hi all, I decided to have a go at selling framed prints of some of my photos. It's been a heckuva mad rush to get things set up before Xmas - this past week has been especially hectic - but I've set up a stall in a local craft shop. It's quite a good deal really, you hire your choice of the available stalls and pay a monthly rental based on the size. They handle all the retail side so all I have to do is maintain the stall and replenish the stock. Basically it's a very low-risk way of getting my work out into the marketplace. For the initial stock it was more of a matter of just grabbing whatever I had that was of saleable quality. I have about a dozen of my own prints that I've framed but only half of them were really good enough - the others suffered from some difficulties in the mounting process (I didn't glue them well and if the light is right you can see how the print has blistered slightly). I think I have all of the photos online somewhere... let's have a look: http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/cgi-bin/paw.cgi?date=13-Mar-2004 http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/cgi-bin/paw.cgi?date=17-Apr-2004 http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/cgi-bin/paw.cgi?date=5-Jun-2004 http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/cgi-bin/paw.cgi?date=25-Sep-2004 http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/temp/pans/mt_cook.jpg http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/temp/s_cloud.jpg (this is the full frame: the print has a bit cropped off the right) I have another half-dozen prints waiting to be framed so I'll get those done this week. Might do some more printing as well. I'd also like to sell mounted prints but I need to find a good way of packaging them. Eventually I plan to offer prints for sale online, once I set up the credit card processing facility (oh and after I get my website done). Maybe I'll be able to start catching up on my missed PAWs tomorrow... Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: SV: The film is dead
Hi, Saturday, December 18, 2004, 1:41:06 AM, Graywolf wrote: That is correct. People who do are never experts. Experts are people who talk and write articles. Like me for instance. No. That's an abuse of language, meaning precisely the opposite of the true definition. An expert is a person who is very skilled at doing something, or who knows a lot about a subject. If I have a medical problem I want it looked at by an expert in the subject. Somebody who knows the theory and has the practical experience and expertise to do something effective about it. I don't want it looked at by somebody who sacrifices chickens, carries around a bucketful of leeches, and has never read a medical book in their life. Those people who said ICs couldn't get bigger, and chips couldn't get smaller, were probably not experts (although, of course, true experts do disagree amongst themselves quite often). Those people who built the bigger ICs and smaller chips were experts, in the theory and in the practice of their subject. If you insist that the word 'black' means white, then you no longer have a word to describe black. If you insist that 'expert' means somebody who is all talk with no knowledge, then you no longer have a word to describe somebody who is skilled and knowledgeable about a subject. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: SV: The film is dead
Hi, Saturday, December 18, 2004, 2:50:00 AM, Peter wrote: They were engineers not theorists. I've never met a good engineer who wasn't also a theorist. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: SV: The film is dead
Graywolf wrote: Interestingly enough chip sizes have gotten bigger and chip density has increased to the point where Itel, etc. are ready to start producing dual processors on a single chip. All of this stuff takes me back a few years when they were predicting that IC's were near the end of their development because they could not get smaller and they could not produce bigger chips. As usual the experts were wrong. You can not lose in the long run betting against the experts. I think you're confusing experts with pundits. In the case of ICs, the experts said we're going to run into some hard limits in the not-too-distant future if we continue to make ICs with our current technology. The pundits read this and wrote articles saying we're going to run into some hard limits. The engineers read this and said let's invent a new technology. And they're doing just that. Whether they succeed or not is another question. :-) S
[Autoreply] Re: Re: SV: The film is dead
Sorry, I'm away untill January 12th Your email has been forwarded to my web mail address and I will pick these up from time to time. If its urgent please contact Joan Reed for Chest Clinic stuff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Sonya Johnston for lung function stuff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) or Pam or Martine for sleep lab stuiff ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Thanks, Andrew
Comsumer Zooms
Pemtax may not be the market leader in manufacturing professional lenses for 35mm photography. But Pentax makes very good consumer lenses. I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others. So, what I perhaps can learn is this: Pentax makes excellent consumer lenses. (That Pentax makes great pro lenses, I allready know. But they are quite expensive). If I ever buy third party lenses again, I shall make sure it is pro-level versions, not consumer lenses. All the best. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Cost to repair PC terminal on istD???
I use my *ist D all the time with three Studio Pro lights. Did you wire more than one of them to the PC terminal? Two should be set to slave. Only one should be fired by the camera. Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 12:48 AM, Steve Pearson wrote: I rented a Speedotron 3 light kit. I took about 3 shots with everything working fine. Then nothing. Hooked up the Super Program's PC terminal and it worked fine. Went back and tried the istD one more time, nothing. Luckily, the in-camera flash works fine, and the camera works fine. Hopefully it will be covered under warranty by Pentax. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know how much it costs fo fix a PC socket, but I'd like to know how you fried it. You should just call Pentax Colorado and tell them your PC socket quit working. Don't tell them you fried it Doesn't sound good. Paul Does anyone know what the approximate cost to repair the PC terminal on an istD runs? I think I just fried mine :( __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Joe Wilensky just pointed me towards the Sigma Perfect Hood for use on the K24/2.8. From which Sigma lens is it? Kostas
Speaking of hoods
I have a couple of questions about hoods: - I believe the Takumar 24/3.5 hood vignettes on my K18/3.5. Perhaps I am not careful enough to align it, but on the rare occasion I use this lens I have seen vignetting. Any other options, seeing as one can't easily source the one for the 18? A tulip perhaps? Andre, I don't do DIY, thanks :-))) - Will the Takumar 105/2.8-100/4 hood vignette on the M85/2 (which I have now had cleaned and may try to sell again, but would like to use it until it leaves my hands)? I know, I could test it. At f2? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Pocket camera?
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 6:45:32 AM, Michel wrote: MCG Peter Smekal a crit : Is that comparable to the Yashica T4super/t5? Peter MCG I don't know the Yashica, but the Espio Mini is small as the Olympus MCG * * , and i's Pentax. And is just a normal (albeit small) PS. The Ricoh is a lot more serious camera. That said, the Espio looks nice as well, and is probably in the same league as the Oly :2 . Good light! fra
RE: Speaking of hoods
I've not observed vignetting using the 24/3.5 hood on my 18/3.5, but you can certainly use the Takumar hood made for the 20/4.5 with no problems. The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4 with no vignetting or problems. Shel [Original Message] From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 5:08:38 AM Subject: Speaking of hoods I have a couple of questions about hoods: - I believe the Takumar 24/3.5 hood vignettes on my K18/3.5. Perhaps I am not careful enough to align it, but on the rare occasion I use this lens I have seen vignetting. Any other options, seeing as one can't easily source the one for the 18? A tulip perhaps? Andre, I don't do DIY, thanks :-))) - Will the Takumar 105/2.8-100/4 hood vignette on the M85/2 (which I have now had cleaned and may try to sell again, but would like to use it until it leaves my hands)? I know, I could test it. At f2? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
AFAIK, it's from a Sigma 24mm Shel [Original Message] From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 5:02:00 AM Subject: Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Joe Wilensky just pointed me towards the Sigma Perfect Hood for use on the K24/2.8. From which Sigma lens is it? Kostas
Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
Thanks ... the page has been mentioned earlier, Cotty. Shel [Original Message] From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 12:53:55 AM Subject: Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular On 17/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: Any, here's the question: Assuming that a rectangular hood is of the appropriate size for a given lens, is there an advantage to using one of the perfect hoods which is a tulip variety. He's a pic of a perfeckt hood on the K24/2.8: Shel, This page may produce interesting reading... http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/lenshood.html HTH Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Auggie Wren's Christmas Story
Here it is again, the annual posting of this timeless Christmas story. It is the story upon which the movie Smoke is based, and which appears at the end of the movie, as told to William Hurt by Harvey Keitel. Many of you have read this before, some have requested it be posted again, and, of course, the list now has some new subscribers who are not at all familiar with this short story. Enjoy the read, feel free to pass along the URL ... and have a great holiday season in any case. http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/xmas/auggie.html Shel
Re: PESO - Candelit Self Portrait
If it was a dutch master type, he would need one of those big hats and dark coats. That or a cigar... Seriously, a very nice shot Fred, especially for just a trial. Makes you look wise and serious, but you've got to lose the t-shirt to make it all come together. Regards, Bob S. On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:03:02 -0500, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:00:35 -0500 (EST), Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was messing around with the *ist-DS last evening and I thought I'd see if I could take a shot by candlelight. So I got out my tripod, my remote control F, lit a couple of candles, set the camera to 3200 ISO and this was the result. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2967083 The candles are way over exposured and the harsh light adds little to my innate (or is it inane?) beauty but I quite like the result. Neat shot. I love these sort of available light photos. Reminds me of those old Dutch Master types. Great stuff. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
MX mirror problem
I bought my self a Pentax MX for two days ago, and I took some test photos today. After a while the mirror jammed in locked-up position. This hasn't happened when I tested the camera in room temperature. But the weather was a little bit chilly (5 Celsius, 41,00 Fahrenheit) and windy today. I have read about this problem but I dont know if it's serious. Is easy to fix, what do you think? Or In other words, should I contact the seller and demand my money back? Thanks! /Joakim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15
Re: Speaking of hoods
The Takumar 24/3.5 hood is a perfect fit for the M35/2. It obviously won't provide optimum coverage, but it seems to be adequate, and it looks great :-). Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 8:27 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've not observed vignetting using the 24/3.5 hood on my 18/3.5, but you can certainly use the Takumar hood made for the 20/4.5 with no problems. The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4 with no vignetting or problems. Shel [Original Message] From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 5:08:38 AM Subject: Speaking of hoods I have a couple of questions about hoods: - I believe the Takumar 24/3.5 hood vignettes on my K18/3.5. Perhaps I am not careful enough to align it, but on the rare occasion I use this lens I have seen vignetting. Any other options, seeing as one can't easily source the one for the 18? A tulip perhaps? Andre, I don't do DIY, thanks :-))) - Will the Takumar 105/2.8-100/4 hood vignette on the M85/2 (which I have now had cleaned and may try to sell again, but would like to use it until it leaves my hands)? I know, I could test it. At f2? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Speaking of hoods
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 2:51:48 PM, Paul wrote: PS The Takumar 24/3.5 hood is a perfect fit for the M35/2. It obviously PS won't provide optimum coverage, but it seems to be adequate, and it PS looks great :-). PS Paul Hi Paul, for the M35/2, a perfect hood is the rectangular metal or plastic one for 50mm Pentax. I would guess that the metal rectangular M35/2 hood (which I still have) provides just optimum shielding for M28/2 lens... Good light! fra
Re: Speaking of hoods
Are we talking about the same hood, Paul? Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 5:53:22 AM Subject: Re: Speaking of hoods The Takumar 24/3.5 hood is a perfect fit for the M35/2. It obviously won't provide optimum coverage, but it seems to be adequate, and it looks great :-). Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 8:27 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've not observed vignetting using the 24/3.5 hood on my 18/3.5, but you can certainly use the Takumar hood made for the 20/4.5 with no problems. The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4 with no vignetting or problems. Shel [Original Message] From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 5:08:38 AM Subject: Speaking of hoods I have a couple of questions about hoods: - I believe the Takumar 24/3.5 hood vignettes on my K18/3.5. Perhaps I am not careful enough to align it, but on the rare occasion I use this lens I have seen vignetting. Any other options, seeing as one can't easily source the one for the 18? A tulip perhaps? Andre, I don't do DIY, thanks :-))) - Will the Takumar 105/2.8-100/4 hood vignette on the M85/2 (which I have now had cleaned and may try to sell again, but would like to use it until it leaves my hands)? I know, I could test it. At f2? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Auggie Wren's Christmas Story
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 05:38:38 -0800, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here it is again, the annual posting of this timeless Christmas story. It is the story upon which the movie Smoke is based, and which appears at the end of the movie, as told to William Hurt by Harvey Keitel. Many of you have read this before, some have requested it be posted again, and, of course, the list now has some new subscribers who are not at all familiar with this short story. Enjoy the read, feel free to pass along the URL ... and have a great holiday season in any case. http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/xmas/auggie.html Shel A PDML Holiday Tradition!! Thanks, Shel. Augie Wren always brings a smile to my face. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: In the train
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:59:59 -0800, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two images, taken with the A35-70/4 on the istD at f4, ISO 800: http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0144.html Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a series. Just wanted to post the first pics taken with my new zoom. Comments welcome. I'm with Dave. First one works much better for me than the second. It (the second) just seems very - I don't know - cliche? Maybe it's because it's taken from behind the subject; looks too ordinary. The first, OTOH, seems to have a more voyeuristic feel to it, maybe 'cause we can see his face a bit. I like it! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: MX mirror problem
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:49:04 +0100, Joakim Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I bought my self a Pentax MX for two days ago, and I took some test photos today. After a while the mirror jammed in locked-up position. This hasn't happened when I tested the camera in room temperature. But the weather was a little bit chilly (5 Celsius, 41,00 Fahrenheit) and windy today. I have read about this problem but I don't know if it's serious. Is easy to fix, what do you think? Or In other words, should I contact the seller and demand my money back? Thanks! I bought an MX some years ago, and the mirror jammed up every 10 frames or so. Turned out that a CLA fixed it up real nice. I'm thinking that maybe the cooler temps make the lubricant more viscous, so it jams up the shutter/mirror mechanism easier than at room temp. I'd guess CLA would fix her up (but I could be wrong). cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: MX mirror problem
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:30:11 -0500, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I bought an MX some years ago, and the mirror jammed up every 10 frames or so. Turned out that a CLA fixed it up real nice. I'm thinking that maybe the cooler temps make the lubricant more viscous, so it jams up the shutter/mirror mechanism easier than at room temp. I'd guess CLA would fix her up (but I could be wrong). PS: As an addendum, IMHO, a CLA should be factored into the cost of any used camera, especially one as old as an MX (unless, of course, the seller tells you that it's been recently CLA'ed). Also, you mention that you've heard of mirror problems before. I wonder if you're thinking of the LX, some of which did indeed have a sticky mirror, and the fix isn't always easy or effective, AFAIK. I've not heard of sticky mirrors being endemic to MXen. cheers again, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Portraits wide open, or stop down one or two stops?
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:55:48 +, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 18/12/04, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed: I liked the portrait of Stefan and prefer it to the second one. thanks Thanks Markus I don't know. They're both pretty good. Different, but good. I don't think that I could choose one as being preferable to the other, in technical terms. Aesthetically, the babe's much hotter, though (sorry, Stephan) vbg. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO:a sample of a gold plated clay figure - Pentax Macro 50mm/SFxn
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 02:29:44 +0100, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rob my girlfriend makes clay figures and I will try to photograph each before she sells them to make a nice catalogue in A4 format for her as a present... This is another try with the new Pentax 50mm A 2.8 macro lens and Agfa ISO 200 vista film, flashed with the 280T and negative scanned with the Canon 9900f and corrected in Photoshop. Should I forget about the flash and start using the repro table with 4 lamps I still have not used yet? Will slower film (ISO 100 or even less) add a lot? I just had some Agfa Vista 200 ready. Flash is much more comfortable for me because I do not have to transport the figures to my home and I always carry the Pentax with me nowadays and when I visit her :-) Answers from any Pentax lovers welcome! the link: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2964731 Good idea, and good shot. But, the blown out highlights on the right cheek of the mask are a bit distracting. Others have already given hints as to how to more effectively use flash in these situations, and I'm not a flash guy, so I'll stay mute on that point. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: MX mirror problem
Indeed! Actually, for many cameras, a CLA should be considered a routine maintenance item. Depending on the camera, how much you value it, and its value, every couple of years or so may be a good rule of thumb. Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] PS: As an addendum, IMHO, a CLA should be factored into the cost of any used camera, especially one as old as an MX (unless, of course, the seller tells you that it's been recently CLA'ed). Also, you mention that you've heard of mirror problems before. I wonder if you're thinking of the LX, some of which did indeed have a sticky mirror, and the fix isn't always easy or effective, AFAIK. I've not heard of sticky mirrors being endemic to MXen. cheers again, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Portraits wide open, or stop down one or two stops?
and not only aesthetically... best, mishka Aesthetically, the babe's much hotter, though (sorry, Stephan) vbg. cheers, frank
Re: SV: The film is dead
i suppose, people who do, do that without any kind of expertise (knowledge), just picking some 2x4s and banging them together until... boom! a new IC technology appears! best, mishka On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:41:06 -0500, Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is correct. People who do are never experts. Experts are people who talk and write articles. Like me for instance.
Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
they (square and tulip) are *strictly* equivalent, if designed properly. if not, the one that is mis-designed worse will be worse. mishka On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:42:09 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17 Dec 2004 at 20:52, Andre Langevin wrote: I would put it reverse. The real tulip hood that equates a square hood had small flaps that close its round opening a bit. If you ray trace an ideal hood you will generally find that square hoods are a greater compromise than a well designed tulip hood. 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: OK, I gotta ask!
so do i. and can pronounce it too. mishka On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:44:48 -0600, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob StuddertSubject: Re: OK, I gotta ask! So what's the correct pronunciation for Scheimpflug? Pop Quiz: Who knows what it is without looking it up? For the record, I do. William Robb
Re: D-FA Macros
No. The D-FA 50mm Macro is 1:1 AFAIK so it is NOT the same optic as FA Macro 50mm. Thibouille Alan Chan wrote: --- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news. It tells me that Pentax is at least thinking in terms of full frame digital. Or they just borrowed the FA optics and repackaged them into the more compact plastic bodies? = Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan __ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Cost to repair PC terminal on istD???
Hi Paul, I had all three plugged into the power pack, and I thought I had 2 set up as slaves. This was my first time using these lights, so I'm not completely sure. A local repair shop (Pentax authorized) tells me that there is an internal fuse that has probably blown. I'll send it in to Pentax after the holidays. Looks like I'm off to buy a 360 flash today for wireless set up. --- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I use my *ist D all the time with three Studio Pro lights. Did you wire more than one of them to the PC terminal? Two should be set to slave. Only one should be fired by the camera. Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 12:48 AM, Steve Pearson wrote: I rented a Speedotron 3 light kit. I took about 3 shots with everything working fine. Then nothing. Hooked up the Super Program's PC terminal and it worked fine. Went back and tried the istD one more time, nothing. Luckily, the in-camera flash works fine, and the camera works fine. Hopefully it will be covered under warranty by Pentax. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know how much it costs fo fix a PC socket, but I'd like to know how you fried it. You should just call Pentax Colorado and tell them your PC socket quit working. Don't tell them you fried it Doesn't sound good. Paul Does anyone know what the approximate cost to repair the PC terminal on an istD runs? I think I just fried mine :( __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: D-FA Macros
FA 50 f 2.8 macro is also 1:1.Both FA and D-FA have 8 elements in 7 groups, but this doesn't mean they're identical. There may be different sorts of optical glass used, for example. Optical formulas of 100mm macros are also the same (9 elements in 8 groups). Well, seems that I have to borrow both versions and make a real-life test someday. BR, Margus Thibs wrote: No. The D-FA 50mm Macro is 1:1 AFAIK so it is NOT the same optic as FA Macro 50mm. Thibouille Alan Chan wrote: --- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news. It tells me that Pentax is at least thinking in terms of full frame digital. Or they just borrowed the FA optics and repackaged them into the more compact plastic bodies? = Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan __ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com
Re: SV: The film is dead
niche product means a selling price easily twice that of the mainstream. digital cameras are profitable only in very high volumes or very high prices. Herb... - Original Message - From: Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 10:14 AM Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead Of course the camera would be a niche product. But as cosina has shown us, they can sell niche products quite well - the Epson-Cosina RD1 would be prime application for BW sensor. Increased resolution would benefit these Leica lenses a lot, 1-2 stop more basic sensitivity would be beneficial for a rangefinder as well... And in rangefinder, it could be justified more than in a SLR.
Re: SV: The film is dead
the limiting factor in processors and the limiting factor in imaging sensors are two completely different things. right now, processors are limited by power density while imaging sensors are limited by thermal noise and the number of incoming photons. Herb - Original Message - From: Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 6:48 PM Subject: Re: SV: The film is dead Interestingly enough chip sizes have gotten bigger and chip density has increased to the point where Itel, etc. are ready to start producing dual processors on a single chip. All of this stuff takes me back a few years when they were predicting that IC's were near the end of their development because they could not get smaller and they could not produce bigger chips. As usual the experts were wrong. You can not lose in the long run betting against the experts.
safe Flash Sync Voltages
All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Re: PESO:a sample of a gold plated clay figure - Pentax Macro 50mm/SFxn
Hi Markus, First, I know nothing about flash, so I wouldn't presume to suggest anything in that realm, or the realm of studio or other types of artificial light. Now, my opinion about flash is that it hoovers LOL and is completely inappropriate for these photos unless you really know what you're doing. I'd much prefer working with natural light and possibly some sort of reflector to balance the shadows against the highlights. When i use a reflector for my eBay shots, it's just a piece of white board which balances the diffused light the comes in thru the window in mthe office. Nothing fancy or expensive. Now to the pic itself, apart from the flash problem. A little more air around the figure would be very helpful, especially at the sides and top. The figure seems not to have it's own space, looks too crowded, if you know what I mean. I'd also suggest a darker background, black MIGHT be nice, and with the proper exposure would give the final photo a nice, rich look. Here's a little QD adjustment I made. Hope you don't mind: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/markus-peso.jpg Shel [Original Message] From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 12/18/2004 6:50:44 AM Subject: Re: PESO:a sample of a gold plated clay figure - Pentax Macro 50mm/SFxn On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 02:29:44 +0100, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rob my girlfriend makes clay figures and I will try to photograph each before she sells them to make a nice catalogue in A4 format for her as a present... This is another try with the new Pentax 50mm A 2.8 macro lens and Agfa ISO 200 vista film, flashed with the 280T and negative scanned with the Canon 9900f and corrected in Photoshop. Should I forget about the flash and start using the repro table with 4 lamps I still have not used yet? Will slower film (ISO 100 or even less) add a lot? I just had some Agfa Vista 200 ready. Flash is much more comfortable for me because I do not have to transport the figures to my home and I always carry the Pentax with me nowadays and when I visit her :-) Answers from any Pentax lovers welcome! the link: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2964731
Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Re: D-FA Macros
Alright, my bad. So yes, I think a real test is obviously needed... Thibouille Margus Mnnik wrote: FA 50 f 2.8 macro is also 1:1.Both FA and D-FA have 8 elements in 7 groups, but this doesn't mean they're identical. There may be different sorts of optical glass used, for example. Optical formulas of 100mm macros are also the same (9 elements in 8 groups). Well, seems that I have to borrow both versions and make a real-life test someday. BR, Margus Thibs wrote: No. The D-FA 50mm Macro is 1:1 AFAIK so it is NOT the same optic as FA Macro 50mm. Thibouille Alan Chan wrote: --- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news. It tells me that Pentax is at least thinking in terms of full frame digital. Or they just borrowed the FA optics and repackaged them into the more compact plastic bodies? = Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan __ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
I use my Pentax AF 400T and my Studio Pro mono lights on the *ist D constantly. I must have more than 1000 firings without incident. Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Don Sanderson wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Kata Rain Cover
Just ordered a Kata Elements Cover from B and H. Anyone have any experience of them? http://tinyurl.com/5s6my Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Kata Rain Cover
Anyone have any experience of the Australian Aquatec covers? They seem to be expensive... http://www.sportsshooter.com/funpix_view.html?id=2744 http://www.aquatech.com.au/products/sportshields/sportshields.htm Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
OT - Chimping
Definitive video about 'chimping'. It's a hoot. warning : 38 MB QT clip... http://www.sportsshooter.com/special_feature/chimping/index.html Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
SV: MX mirror problem
Thanks Frank! /Joakim I bought an MX some years ago, and the mirror jammed up every 10 frames or so. Turned out that a CLA fixed it up real nice. I'm thinking that maybe the cooler temps make the lubricant more viscous, so it jams up the shutter/mirror mechanism easier than at room temp. I'd guess CLA would fix her up (but I could be wrong). PS: As an addendum, IMHO, a CLA should be factored into the cost of any used camera, especially one as old as an MX (unless, of course, the seller tells you that it's been recently CLA'ed). Also, you mention that you've heard of mirror problems before. I wonder if you're thinking of the LX, some of which did indeed have a sticky mirror, and the fix isn't always easy or effective, AFAIK. I've not heard of sticky mirrors being endemic to MXen. cheers again, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 2004-10-15
RE: DA 16/45 for CHEAP
Now that's not very nice :-( -- Birdbr... e, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don Sanderson wrote on 12/17/2004, 6:51 PM: Christian? -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Don Sanderson Subject: RE: DA 16/45 for CHEAP Birdbrain could only be one person that I know of.. William Robb
Re: Talking about frail old ladies
My friend has used his Nikon D100 several times with my Pentax 2P hotshoe adapter to trigger my Courtenay studio flashes with no problems. Of course, I have to turn the room lights on so it can see to focus, unlike the MZ-S, which does fine with the modeling lights. Pat White
RE: Comsumer Zooms
Hi Jens I made some good photos with the Tokina 28-70mm SD 3.5-4.5 on the SFXn , maybe this is not the same formula as the Tokina you mentioned? I like the Pentax A Zoom 4.0 35-70mm too because it can focus much closer than the Tokina with 0.7m and has a constant aperture of 4. I liked the 3d-ness on some of the landscape photos made with the Tokina. greetings Markus - I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others.
Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
I wouldn't worry about 7-8 volts on the flash terminal. Now 70-80 volts, I'd worry about. :-) -Mat On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:49:11 -0600, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
RE: Speaking of hoods
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4 with no vignetting or problems. Excellent! I will try it on the FA50/1.7 as well then! Thanks Shel. Kostas (thanks for Auggie Wren's story as well; I am a fan)
Re: Leeches
carries around a bucketful of leeches, Leeches are making a medical comeback seems they can be pretty useful afterall. Jerry in Houston
Re: Car Enabled
OMG, there was a remake of even THAT film? There is a reason to hate hollywood - whenever there is a good film, they ruin it by making a remake ;-) Yeah, Blues Brothers 2000, I think it was called. It was horrible (as one would expect). I didn't see it, I'm going from reviews. YES It is TERRIBLE Except for maybe the last cut. Jerry in Houston
Re: Speaking of hoods
I guess a Tak 55mm 1.8 hood should be fine for any 50mm? Unfortunately the K version has 2mm thread instead of 49mm for the Tak version. I didn't pay attention enough so I got a 52mm hood.. --- Thibouille Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4 with no vignetting or problems. Excellent! I will try it on the FA50/1.7 as well then! Thanks Shel. Kostas (thanks for Auggie Wren's story as well; I am a fan)
Re: PESO: In the train
Thanks Dave and Frank. Yes, I agree about your comments on the second image, although for some reason I liked it when I took it. Goes to show how hard it is to edit your work soon after shooting. Now I think this pic of the same guy is better: http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0145.html But it's funny, last night I didn't think so. Thanks again for your comments. j On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:27:29 -0500, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:59:59 -0800, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two images, taken with the A35-70/4 on the istD at f4, ISO 800: http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0144.html Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a series. Just wanted to post the first pics taken with my new zoom. Comments welcome. I'm with Dave. First one works much better for me than the second. It (the second) just seems very - I don't know - cliche? Maybe it's because it's taken from behind the subject; looks too ordinary. The first, OTOH, seems to have a more voyeuristic feel to it, maybe 'cause we can see his face a bit. I like it! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
RE: PESO:a sample of a gold plated clay figure - Pentax Macro 50mm/SFxn
Hi Shel indeed does a darker background add a lot sometimes. I tried some other shots with a dark grey piece of marble like this eatable piece of art -- we call it Grittibanz in Swiss German http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2968241 but will do it again with the lightning methods Rob and William suggested. Putting the figures on a piece of mirror glass and white cloth and lighten it to make the illusion of floating sounds interesting too. I cropped the image for the web, it has more air on the original negative, I share your thoughts here too. thanks for your ideas and help. Markus Now to the pic itself, apart from the flash problem. A little more air around the figure would be very helpful, especially at the sides and top. The figure seems not to have it's own space, looks too crowded, if you know what I mean. I'd also suggest a darker background, black MIGHT be nice, and with the proper exposure would give the final photo a nice, rich look. Here's a little QD adjustment I made. Hope you don't mind: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/markus-peso.jpg
Eatable Art
Hi Shel sorry for the error, but the photo is 282KB, nothing for slow dial up connections. I forgot to resize the photo before uploading I tried some other shots with a dark grey piece of marble like this eatable piece of art -- we call it Grittibanz in Swiss German http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2968241
Re: Speaking of hoods
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Thibs wrote: I guess a Tak 55mm 1.8 hood should be fine for any 50mm? Unfortunately the K version has 2mm thread instead of 49mm for the Tak version. I didn't pay attention enough so I got a 52mm hood.. Is it metal? Does it screw into the thread or is it the dodgy bayonet type? Kostas (and will it work on the K28/3.5, the K30/2.8 and/or the K35/3.5?)
Quote for the day (on fast lenses)
The SMC-K 50mm F1.2 talk reminded me of a good Dante Stella article on the subject of fast lenses at: http://dantestella.com/technical/fast.html After a lengthy discussion of technical issues related to transmission vs aperture, Dante ends the article with the following quote: But admit it, superspeed lenses are cool
RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
I've been trying to find info on just what the sync contact is actually rated for amp/volt wise. When I contacted Olympus about my C5050 digital I was told 'absolutely not to use' the Vivitar 285 without a flash isolator. It wasn't due to the voltage in that case but the surge current when fired. Since I never use the 285s on the hot shoe anyway it's no trouble to use the Wein device. For $50.00 it will give me a lot of peace of mind. Especially when 100+ miles from home shooting something for money rather than fun. Losing flash ability wou really 'hoover'! (My new favorite word) ;-) Don -Original Message- From: Mat Maessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages I wouldn't worry about 7-8 volts on the flash terminal. Now 70-80 volts, I'd worry about. :-) -Mat On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:49:11 -0600, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
I think you're probably right and it would be fine on all the flashes I listed and the 400T. For $50.00 however I'll get a lot of peace of mind. I don't use the 285s on the shoe anyway so it's no hassle to use the isolator. Don -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages I use my Pentax AF 400T and my Studio Pro mono lights on the *ist D constantly. I must have more than 1000 firings without incident. Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Don Sanderson wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
SV: Comsumer Zooms
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 12:46 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Comsumer Zooms Pemtax may not be the market leader in manufacturing professional lenses for 35mm photography. But Pentax makes very good consumer lenses. I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others. So, what I perhaps can learn is this: Pentax makes excellent consumer lenses. (That Pentax makes great pro lenses, I allready know. But they are quite expensive). If I ever buy third party lenses again, I shall make sure it is pro-level versions, not consumer lenses. All the best. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
RE: Consumer Zooms
Some of my test shots are now published. The foucs point is at the battery in the centre. At 35mm Focal length: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p10009542.html At 70mm Focal length: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p10009545.html Is this a back focus problem (the Tamron lens). Or is this Tamron just a dog! I have seen MTF test giving this Tamron lens grades as good as the other two. If this is valid, my Tamron is a Monday version! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 12:46 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Comsumer Zooms Pemtax may not be the market leader in manufacturing professional lenses for 35mm photography. But Pentax makes very good consumer lenses. I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others. So, what I perhaps can learn is this: Pentax makes excellent consumer lenses. (That Pentax makes great pro lenses, I allready know. But they are quite expensive). If I ever buy third party lenses again, I shall make sure it is pro-level versions, not consumer lenses. All the best. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
I think this is a great invention. Would something like this be available with a device, that can shift + and - ? I know these (without the isolator) are necessary for some digital cameras. I guess this is why my *ist D won't work with the studio strobe outfit. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 16:49 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Relative Sensor Size for W-I-D-E Lens Consideration
I was watching the PBS show Frontline a couple of nights back, and during the intro a video collage is played, in which a 9.8mm f/1.2 lens is shown. Clearly it's a lens for a video camera or 16mm camera, or some such. That got me thinking about the possibility of adapting such a focal length to a DSLR that uses the small sensors. First question, of course, is how does the size of the istD sensor compare to the frame of a video, 16mm, or 35mm movie camera . I think a 35mm movie frame is about 1/2 the size of a 35mm still camera frame. Anyway, what might the possibility be of adapting such a lens to a digi SLR? Any thoughts on that? Looking at the Sony digicam, it's 7.5mm or so at the wide end ... shouldn't some of these movie camera lenses work pretty well for digi slr use? Cotty? Shel
Re: Leeches
On Saturday 18 December 2004 12:11, Jerry in Houston wrote: carries around a bucketful of leeches, Leeches are making a medical comeback seems they can be pretty useful afterall. As I recall, the best medical use for leeches these days is in the post-operative phase of surgery to reattach severed fingers. As it was explained to me: to reattach a severed finger, surgeons must go in and actually repair individual blood vessels. The surgery is very fiddly, being done by means of microscopes and tiny needles and so on. Should blood clot in any of the newly-repaired blood vessels, the whole operation would fail and the finger would need to be amputated. To prevent this, surgeons apply leeches. The leeches eat any blood that leaks out of the wound, and, since leech saliva contains an extremely powerful anticoagulant, they keep blood flowing to the reattached finger. Neatness. Certainly cooler than my dad's boy scout stories of his scoutmaster lighting a cigarette and burning the leeches off the boys after a jungle hike (he was a scout in the Philippines) -Luigi
RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
Changing polarity should just be a matter of making a short adapter cord with the wires 'crossed over'. Older cameras used physical contacts to close the circuit so were not polarity dependent. With newer cameras it depends on what device they use, an SCR will be sensitive to polarity, a double SCR (Triac/Thyristor) won't.- Don -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages I think this is a great invention. Would something like this be available with a device, that can shift + and - ? I know these (without the isolator) are necessary for some digital cameras. I guess this is why my *ist D won't work with the studio strobe outfit. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 16:49 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
RE: Comsumer Zooms
The Tokina is not the same lens, Markus. Perhaps the same formula. Not an SD (whatever that means). It's quite nice, but not really outstanding in any way. I bought it because 35mm is not wide enough for me (for the *ist D). I deposited my Tokina AT-X 2.6-2.8/28-70mm Pro II (brilliant optics BTW) at the photo dealer for repair today. I guess I should have done this a long time ago, instead of buying three mediocre and cheap zooms. Anywasy, the Pentax-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm is remarkably good though, considering I paid 31USD for it. What I really want to do, is to get me an excellent 18-50mm (for *ist D) preferably f. 2.8. (I am used to using pro quality glass by now, and it's not funny going back!) Do anyone have test shots with the new Sigma EX-F18-50/2.8DC ?? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 18:03 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Comsumer Zooms Hi Jens I made some good photos with the Tokina 28-70mm SD 3.5-4.5 on the SFXn , maybe this is not the same formula as the Tokina you mentioned? I like the Pentax A Zoom 4.0 35-70mm too because it can focus much closer than the Tokina with 0.7m and has a constant aperture of 4. I liked the 3d-ness on some of the landscape photos made with the Tokina. greetings Markus - I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others.
Re: Relative Sensor Size for W-I-D-E Lens Consideration
Hi Shel, A 35mm movie camera lens has the widest coverage of those you mentioned, but it still doesn't have a big enough image circle for an APS sized sensor. Unless the lens was designed to cover more than the 35mm movie frame, you would have vignetting in the corners. Paul I was watching the PBS show Frontline a couple of nights back, and during the intro a video collage is played, in which a 9.8mm f/1.2 lens is shown. Clearly it's a lens for a video camera or 16mm camera, or some such. That got me thinking about the possibility of adapting such a focal length to a DSLR that uses the small sensors. First question, of course, is how does the size of the istD sensor compare to the frame of a video, 16mm, or 35mm movie camera . I think a 35mm movie frame is about 1/2 the size of a 35mm still camera frame. Anyway, what might the possibility be of adapting such a lens to a digi SLR? Any thoughts on that? Looking at the Sony digicam, it's 7.5mm or so at the wide end ... shouldn't some of these movie camera lenses work pretty well for digi slr use? Cotty? Shel
RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
Let me know when you find a source for the isolator. I will look into it. I just finished a shoot in my studio. I shot about 50 frames. Again no problems. I should check the pin voltage on my monolights. I have no idea what it is. I think you're probably right and it would be fine on all the flashes I listed and the 400T. For $50.00 however I'll get a lot of peace of mind. I don't use the 285s on the shoe anyway so it's no hassle to use the isolator. Don -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages I use my Pentax AF 400T and my Studio Pro mono lights on the *ist D constantly. I must have more than 1000 firings without incident. Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Don Sanderson wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
RE: Comsumer Zooms
Hey Jens, I'm confused (common), I don't see a 3.5-5.6/ 35-80 in SMC or uncoated Pentax lenses. ;-/ Don -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Comsumer Zooms The Tokina is not the same lens, Markus. Perhaps the same formula. Not an SD (whatever that means). It's quite nice, but not really outstanding in any way. I bought it because 35mm is not wide enough for me (for the *ist D). I deposited my Tokina AT-X 2.6-2.8/28-70mm Pro II (brilliant optics BTW) at the photo dealer for repair today. I guess I should have done this a long time ago, instead of buying three mediocre and cheap zooms. Anywasy, the Pentax-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm is remarkably good though, considering I paid 31USD for it. What I really want to do, is to get me an excellent 18-50mm (for *ist D) preferably f. 2.8. (I am used to using pro quality glass by now, and it's not funny going back!) Do anyone have test shots with the new Sigma EX-F18-50/2.8DC ?? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 18:03 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Comsumer Zooms Hi Jens I made some good photos with the Tokina 28-70mm SD 3.5-4.5 on the SFXn , maybe this is not the same formula as the Tokina you mentioned? I like the Pentax A Zoom 4.0 35-70mm too because it can focus much closer than the Tokina with 0.7m and has a constant aperture of 4. I liked the 3d-ness on some of the landscape photos made with the Tokina. greetings Markus - I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others.
Re: SV: The film is dead
In a message dated 12/18/2004 7:32:25 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: the limiting factor in processors and the limiting factor in imaging sensors are two completely different things. right now, processors are limited by power density while imaging sensors are limited by thermal noise and the number of incoming photons. Herb === Aha, that's it!!! All we need to do is reduce the number of incoming photons!!! Doe aka Marnie (Sorry, silliness can be my only contribution, since the rest is completely over my head.)
RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
Adorama has them, the links are below. Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages Let me know when you find a source for the isolator. I will look into it. I just finished a shoot in my studio. I shot about 50 frames. Again no problems. I should check the pin voltage on my monolights. I have no idea what it is. I think you're probably right and it would be fine on all the flashes I listed and the 400T. For $50.00 however I'll get a lot of peace of mind. I don't use the 285s on the shoe anyway so it's no hassle to use the isolator. Don -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages I use my Pentax AF 400T and my Studio Pro mono lights on the *ist D constantly. I must have more than 1000 firings without incident. Paul On Dec 18, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Don Sanderson wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Re: OK, I gotta ask!
In a message dated 12/17/2004 7:56:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Pop Quiz: Who knows what it is without looking it up? For the record, I do. William Robb For the record, I don't. -frank === Me either. So I'll bite. What/who? Marnie aka that Doe person
Re: SV: The film is dead
But the experts who usually opine that something is impossible are pure theorists. Bob W wrote: Hi, Saturday, December 18, 2004, 2:50:00 AM, Peter wrote: They were engineers not theorists. I've never met a good engineer who wasn't also a theorist. -- 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: PESO: Watching Suzie (another concert photo)
In a message dated 12/17/2004 3:56:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2920209 [snip] Comments are always welcome. Be brave! I'll still like it, no matter what you say! Throw your worst at me! vbg Seriously, thanks in advance for looking and commenting, should you choose to do so. cheers, frank == Nice shot, frank. The image on the right looks like a ghost image of the person on the left. Totally cool. Only thing I could live without is the white in the lower right corner. Good going. Marnie aka that Doe person (I don't need to know how it happened. :-))
PESO?
So PAWs have evolved to PESOs? Pictures every so often? Hmmm, probably suits my style more. Not really a picture of the week type of shooter. Unless, of course, PESO means MORE than once a week? Hehehehehe. Marnie aka that Doe person
Adobe Raw 2.4 Beta
From the Pentax DPReview Forum: The release notes do not mention istDS but I have just this minute downloaded and tried it anyway. Joy oh joy oh joy - it is there!!! I was disappointed to see that it did not mention the DS. Works like a charm! http://download.adobe.com/... .../cameraraw/win/Camera_Raw_2_4_beta.zip Powell
Re: PESO: In the train
In a message dated 12/17/2004 10:01:02 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: images, taken with the A35-70/4 on the istD at f4, ISO 800: http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0144.html Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a series. Just wanted to post the first pics taken with my new zoom. Comments welcome. j === No need to be so self depreciating. :-) Not bad at all. I especially like the bottom picture, as the sleeper is nicely framed by the window behind him. All tuckered out on a train. Commuting. Been there, done that. Very nice. Doe aka that Marnie person
Re: PAW PESO - Rural Snapshot
In a message dated 12/15/2004 5:02:16 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:16:29 -0800, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While driving I spotted this scene, and asked my friend, Ron, who was driving, to stop the truck, and got out to make this photograph. I'd have loved to have gotten closer, but Ron was being a pill and urged me to hurry, and this was the only snap I got. It's a little different from most of my work, and maybe you'll enjoy it. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/911.html Shel = Nice pic. But not quite enough to hold my interest. I find that, for me, middle distance shots, unless there is a spark of color, or something close up in the forefront of the frame, or something highly unusual in the shot that jumps out, just seem sort of ho-hum to me. But that's just me. Doe aka Marnie
Re: Relative Sensor Size for W-I-D-E Lens Consideration
On 18/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: I was watching the PBS show Frontline a couple of nights back, and during the intro a video collage is played, in which a 9.8mm f/1.2 lens is shown. Clearly it's a lens for a video camera or 16mm camera, or some such. That got me thinking about the possibility of adapting such a focal length to a DSLR that uses the small sensors. First question, of course, is how does the size of the istD sensor compare to the frame of a video, 16mm, or 35mm movie camera . I think a 35mm movie frame is about 1/2 the size of a 35mm still camera frame. Anyway, what might the possibility be of adapting such a lens to a digi SLR? Any thoughts on that? Looking at the Sony digicam, it's 7.5mm or so at the wide end ... shouldn't some of these movie camera lenses work pretty well for digi slr use? Cotty? Well now, there's a can of worms opened ;-) In theory I would have said yes it should be possible. Sort of. Depends on the lens. I have found that when wanting to adapt a lens to a body, several things are crucial : the register distance for the lens, the register distance for the body, the type of mount on the lens, and the type of mount on the body. The register distance is the measurement between the mating surface of the body /l ens and the film plane / sensor, and expressed in mm or fractions of an inch. A pretty good table of of registers can be found here: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm Past this, the next crucial stage is, what is the video lens mount type (if wanting to try a video or motion picture camera lens onto a still camera body) ? There are loads. Your old Bolex 16mm camera was C mount IIRC which is a basic screw on system, sort of the Pentax M42 equivalent of the movie old movie world. But different manufacturers have different systems (well there's a surprise) like Aaton, Arriflex, CP etc etc - So, let's take (say) a C mount lens which has a register distance of 17.52mm, and (say) a Pentax K mount camera with a register of 45.46mm. That's a big difference, and going 'the wrong way'. Basically, if the register distance on the stills body is less than the register distance on the lens, then all that is needed is a spacer to move the lens further away from the body the requisite distance. Lets say you have a camera with a register of 50mm and a lens with a register of 70mm and they will mate up okay, but the lens will try and focus to a point a further 20mm behind where the film is in the body. To counteract this, you move the lens further away from the body by 20mm and hey presto, the lens focusses onto the right point. The trouble starts when the body has a register of (say) 70mm and the lens has a register of 50mm - this needs the lens to move 20mm further towards the film plane, and that's a bummer - there's chunks of camera in the way, and you might even get rear elements contacting mirrors and all sorts. So instead, you keep the register distances as is, and bend the light by incorporating a lens into and adapter - expensive and heavy going! But there are several such adapters available - try www.srbfilm.co.uk for more info. Popular makes only ;-) The EOS register is 44mm dead, which meant that all I had to do to was take a Pentax lens and move it 1.46mm further away from the EOS body when mounted. That gets the back focus into the right place and the thing will focus properly onto the film plane / sensor. To put a C mount lens onto a Pentax K would need an optical adapter, natch. However, look at Aaton - lenses made for the Aaton bayonet fitting have a register distance of 48mm - and good old Pentax K is only 45.46 - so bingo - you have room to build an adapter with an extra 2.54mm of metal in it to move the lens that crucial distance further away. BUT !! The Aaton lens is designed to fill a picture area quite small - a 16mm frame is tiny - the thing probably wouldn't get anywhere near to filling a 35mm frame of (say) an MX. And not enough for an *ist D. So as well as register distances, you have to take into account the actual area the light falls onto at that said register distance. Follow this? I'm no engineer 0 just bumbling my way through on a 'need to know' basis. I was lucky - I was adapting similar lenses and even luckier - onto a camera with a smaller sensor. Which is interesting - I haven't tried the Pentax lenses on an EOS film body - I might get vignetting! Sorry for the length, but it's a complicated subject, well to me at least. I haven't mentioned actual fitting - suffice it to say that any good precision metal worker can perform miracles. Again, I was lucky - the EOS / M42 adapter is as common as muck (as we Brits say) and the nice thing about M42 and PK is that the register distances are the same (at 45.46mm) so I instantly had my correct register distances. But obviously the M42 won't accept a PK lens, so why not remove the PK lens mount and simply bolt the EOS / M42 adapter straight onto
Re: Speaking of hoods
It is metal, circular one with a 49mm thread. of course I should have written the K version has 52mm thread and not 2mm. A 58mm cap (a very simple one, from my non SMC 28-80mm) does fit on it pretty well so I can let the hood on the lens. Thibouille Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Thibs wrote: I guess a Tak 55mm 1.8 hood should be fine for any 50mm? Unfortunately the K version has 2mm thread instead of 49mm for the Tak version. I didn't pay attention enough so I got a 52mm hood.. Is it metal? Does it screw into the thread or is it the dodgy bayonet type? Kostas (and will it work on the K28/3.5, the K30/2.8 and/or the K35/3.5?)
Re: Relative Sensor Size for W-I-D-E Lens Consideration
On 18/12/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: A 35mm movie camera lens has the widest coverage of those you mentioned, but it still doesn't have a big enough image circle for an APS sized sensor. Unless the lens was designed to cover more than the 35mm movie frame, you would have vignetting in the corners. Hey, I only took 3584 words to say the same thing ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PsESO - more gulls
In a message dated 12/16/2004 2:09:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: More shots from my day at the beach last month: http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=1pos=11 http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=1pos=10 http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=1pos=8 there's a few more in there as well. Comments appreciated. Thanks. -- Christian === Nice close-ups, Chris. Good lens. My success to date with birds has not been that good. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: PESO: Watching Suzie (another concert photo)
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 06:53:49PM -0500, frank theriault wrote: This is from the same Pirate Jenny concert (the group that my friend Jennifer heads up) as the last two that I posted of this series: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2920209 I kind of hesitated posting this one, because it's a bit - well - offbeat. This particular show featured a couple of dancers, one of which (Suzie Burpee, FWIW), is in this photo. That's her OOF blond hair, sloping shoulder and upper arm in the upper centre of the frame. What I can't figure out, is why her lower body isn't shielding the vibraphones at the bottom. ? What's difficult to figure out? You've got her legs just visible at the right of the picture. She's leaning forward with her hips bent. Perhaps you were thinking this shot was taken from behind her. It wasn't - it's almost a side-on profile.
Re: Speaking of hoods
Kostas Kavoussanakis, at T=1709.56 : The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4 with no vignetting or problems. Excellent! I will try it on the FA50/1.7 as well then! I'm using Tak 28/3.5 on mine. It doesn't work very well as a hood but looks s cl ;) -- alkos at tlen pl
Re: A Boy and His Bolex
In a message dated 12/15/2004 10:05:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Another from the bottom of the box Me with my first movie camera, a 16mm Bolex ;-)) I made a couple of short films (one reel) while I had it. The pic is awful ... of course, being behind the movie camera meant that someone else made the snap. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/bolex_boy.jpg Shel Whoa! BIG, BIG BLACK CAMERA! You're digging up some interesting old pics, aren't you? Doe aka Marnie
Adobe Raw 2.4 Beta
Un-mangled link http://download.adobe.com/pub/adobe/photoshop/cameraraw/win/Camera_Raw_2_4_b eta.zip Powell
Re: PESO:a sample of a gold plated clay figure - Pentax Macro 50mm/SFxn
On Dec 18, 2004, at 4:39 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: First, I know nothing about flash, so I wouldn't presume to suggest anything in that realm, or the realm of studio or other types of artificial light. Now, my opinion about flash is that it hoovers LOL and is completely inappropriate for these photos unless you really know what you're doing. I'd much prefer working with natural light and possibly some sort of reflector to balance the shadows against the highlights. When i use a reflector for my eBay shots, it's just a piece of white board which balances the diffused light the comes in thru the window in mthe office. Nothing fancy or expensive. I discovered the following page the other day. Your comments above spurred my memory. Hope this helps a lot! http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/tips/tabletop.html -- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home made power supply for flashes etc.
I thought some of you guys might want to know this :-) Many years ago (1993, I believe), before I got a professional flash strobe outfit, I made a flash outfit myself. I bought four used Metz CT 45 camera flash units (I already had two). I mounted these separately on an Osram Pilot. This is a device that will hold a camera flash, a lamp (bulb) and an photo umbrella. I got very tired of Loading the flashes with batteries all the time. So I built contact units, that would allow me to use either larger batteries (C) or an AC/DC power supply. The photograph posted below, shows a AC/DC device fitted with a contact that has a built-in condensator/capacitor (A friend of mine, who is an electro-engineer, told me to do this), which will prevent the fuse in the AC device to blow, when to flashes are charging at once. (This is why a big K is written on the unit). Then I made a battery container attrap (in the front of the picture) to put into the flash battery compartment. I connected the stuff, using long wires - and Bingo! I use slave cells for activating all flashes, except the one that's connected to the camera. This way it's not too expensive to get a powered flash outfit with acceptable recharging intervals. In the end I also made soft boxes to fit on two of my four Osram Pilots. All the best Jens http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p10011017.html mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
PESO (lots of 'em): Welbilt@ TT's
So the *istDS's shakedown cruise continues. Went down to my local bar to get some pictures of Welbilt (great indie-altrock band here in Northern Virginia-- look out for 'em: http://www.welbiltmusic.com) at their regular Wednesday show. The results are on my livejournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/ouij One more photo, not on that bunch of concert pics: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/Brunellus/Welbilt%2015%20Dec%2004/becky.jpg The *istDS does NOT like underexposure when you've got the ISO cranked up to 3200: this was wide open at f/1.4 at 1/10th of a second, handheld, in a booth in a dark bar. RGB noise was awful: a bit of channel-mixer to kick it down to greyscale, a bit of selective gaussian blur to reduce the noise, unsharp mask, and suddenly I'm thinking heytri-x! -Luigi
Re: Comsumer Zooms
OK, Don - I admit to being wrong. Here's what it says on the lens: SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. Sorry Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 19:37 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Comsumer Zooms Hey Jens, I'm confused (common), I don't see a 3.5-5.6/ 35-80 in SMC or uncoated Pentax lenses. ;-/ Don -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Comsumer Zooms The Tokina is not the same lens, Markus. Perhaps the same formula. Not an SD (whatever that means). It's quite nice, but not really outstanding in any way. I bought it because 35mm is not wide enough for me (for the *ist D). I deposited my Tokina AT-X 2.6-2.8/28-70mm Pro II (brilliant optics BTW) at the photo dealer for repair today. I guess I should have done this a long time ago, instead of buying three mediocre and cheap zooms. Anywasy, the Pentax-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm is remarkably good though, considering I paid 31USD for it. What I really want to do, is to get me an excellent 18-50mm (for *ist D) preferably f. 2.8. (I am used to using pro quality glass by now, and it's not funny going back!) Do anyone have test shots with the new Sigma EX-F18-50/2.8DC ?? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Markus Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 18:03 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Comsumer Zooms Hi Jens I made some good photos with the Tokina 28-70mm SD 3.5-4.5 on the SFXn , maybe this is not the same formula as the Tokina you mentioned? I like the Pentax A Zoom 4.0 35-70mm too because it can focus much closer than the Tokina with 0.7m and has a constant aperture of 4. I liked the 3d-ness on some of the landscape photos made with the Tokina. greetings Markus - I just tested three consumer zoom lenses: Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical The Pentax-F (for which I have paid 31 USD + shipping) simply beats the crap out of the two others.
RE: safe Flash Sync Voltages
I would have expected, that a pro style camera like the *ist D would have a some kind of isolater built in? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. december 2004 16:32 Til: PDML Emne: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Re: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
My Normans have 200V and my old, old, old Vivitar 283 has 260V. Those kinds of voltages you have to worry about. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Mat Maessen wrote: I wouldn't worry about 7-8 volts on the flash terminal. Now 70-80 volts, I'd worry about. :-) -Mat On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:49:11 -0600, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here are the isolators I'm refering to: http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM To: PDML Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got me a little concerned. The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-( I took some measurements from various units that I use. Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from various flash units: Pentax 200T4.65 Pentax 280T7.18 Pentax AF-360FGZ 3.01 Pentax AF-500FTZ 3.55 Vivitar 285HV 5.80 Vivitar 2856.24 Yake M-110 Studio Flash8.09 I no longer have an O'Scope so I can't measure any 'spike' voltages present at the sync pin when fired. These spikes are what could do real damage. In a properly designed trigger circuit there should be no spikes but I can't prove their presence or absence on these units. As far as I can see the ist D manual only mentions these flash models: 240,330,360,400,500. The 360 and 500 I measured are the lowest sync pin voltage of the lot. This leads me to believe that the newer Pentax's are designed to operate at lower, (sub-TTL logic) levels. I'm reasonably OK with the 200T but the Yake and the 280T really scare me. There is such a thing as a flash isolator available. It fits in the hot shoe and protects the camera from overvoltage/spikes at the sync pin. I will be buying one very soon for the 285s and Yake! I will also not be using the 280T on the D anymore. Don
Re: OT: Car Enabled
A., another expert. I didn't see it but it was horrible. Well, I did see it, it wasn't bad, not up to the original, but not that bad. And it was not a remake, it was a sequel. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- frank theriault wrote: On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 01:41:06 +0100, Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: d. OMG, there was a remake of even THAT film? There is a reason to hate hollywood - whenever there is a good film, they ruin it by making a remake ;-) Yeah, Blues Brothers 2000, I think it was called. It was horrible (as one would expect). I didn't see it, I'm going from reviews. -frank
Re: PESO:a sample of a gold plated clay figure - Pentax Macro 50mm/SFxn
That's essentially what I use, although I was able to get a sheet of white translucent plastic from TAP plastics, a small chain store that specializes in ... ta da! plastic ;-)) I also sometimes use similar sheets to put over the windows when the sun is low in the sky or too bright. There's also some black sheets (not plastic) here for darker backgrounds, as well as a few sheets of medium grey. Shel [Original Message] From: Jon Glass [EMAIL PROTECTED] I discovered the following page the other day. Your comments above spurred my memory. Hope this helps a lot! http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/tips/tabletop.html -- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Relative Sensor Size for W-I-D-E Lens Consideration
humm, isn't an APS sensor 16x24mm? A single frame 35mm is 18x24, so it should cover fine. The problem really is that such lenses are very expensive, multi thousand dollars. I forget what the 16mm frame is (10x14mm maybe) but it would cover some of the smaller sensors. But the same applies they are expensive, not as expensive as the 35mm lenses. A 20:1 f/1.0 zoom would be nice on your $200 digicam. But who is going to spend $2500-3000 for one? It may be posible to addapt some old 35mm fix focal length motion pictures lenses to the istD. They would be fairly cheap (most of them, used), but I think it would take at least as much machining as on Cottys Pentax to EOS mod. BTW, many of those old motion picture lenses do cover double frame (135) quite well, but those particular lenses still tend to be quite expensive. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Shel, A 35mm movie camera lens has the widest coverage of those you mentioned, but it still doesn't have a big enough image circle for an APS sized sensor. Unless the lens was designed to cover more than the 35mm movie frame, you would have vignetting in the corners. Paul I was watching the PBS show Frontline a couple of nights back, and during the intro a video collage is played, in which a 9.8mm f/1.2 lens is shown. Clearly it's a lens for a video camera or 16mm camera, or some such. That got me thinking about the possibility of adapting such a focal length to a DSLR that uses the small sensors. First question, of course, is how does the size of the istD sensor compare to the frame of a video, 16mm, or 35mm movie camera . I think a 35mm movie frame is about 1/2 the size of a 35mm still camera frame. Anyway, what might the possibility be of adapting such a lens to a digi SLR? Any thoughts on that? Looking at the Sony digicam, it's 7.5mm or so at the wide end ... shouldn't some of these movie camera lenses work pretty well for digi slr use? Cotty? Shel
