Re: ist Ds impressions
What about image quality? Some claim that the images of the ist D are rather soft compared to the ist DS. Peter I'm checking out the ist Ds and comparing it to my ist D. Just in case anyone is considering both cameras, here are my impressions: At first glance, the deeper handle seems odd, kind of holding a Canon. Although I think it could grow on me, I'm just too used to the ist D. The display is gorgeous comapred to my ist D. The increase in resolution is noticeable. Size too. The font used in the menues seems a bit crummy and badly rendered, though. The side door (for usb, power and remote) is much better than the clumsy rubber business of the ist D. The little joystick is usable, as opposed to the one on the ist D (which, as I said already, might as well be painted in, it would make little difference.) Changing settings through the main display and the fn button is easier than I thought it would be. It's a Pentax after all, ergonomics are above average. Shutter sounds different. Maybe a little bit louder, maybe a little bit less smooth or more plasticky. Maybe that's the sound of $400... Hyper program would be great, but the Av and Tv modes are easy to set and use, I don't think that's a big problem. The 18-55 is what it is, a little consumer zoom. Seems OK as a first SLR lens, but I expect my gf will outgrow it at some point. All in all, it seems like a really nice camera. I'm happy with the istD, but I'd probably get an istDs if I were shopping today. BTW, she's putting black tape on it, she says my istD looks much better with it... :-) j -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
Re: Pentax 50mm News
On Jan 26, 2005, at 5:12 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: Start saving. Disregarding the good bit (;-) the Canon is 5.2KGBP. 5.2 kilo-giga-billion pixels? Where can I buy one? g - Dave (waiting for a 24x70mm sensor with a Pentax 67 mount in front of it) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: AW: AW: Travelling *istD/DS (was:Digital anguish)
On 26 Jan 2005 at 8:34, Michael Heim wrote: You're quite pessimistic... How many pictures do you store on your pc? There's a lot more other stuff going on your computer than just mp3. I've worked in the computer industry long enough to know how things like this break. My server contains over 75k images all of which are housed on a RAID in a remote server and are backed up and on top end UPS for protection from power deviations. Anyhow I don't smash my server computer on rocks every day whilst bush-walking either but I have busted a limited lens on rocks in a stream. 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: Pentax 50mm News
On 25 Jan 2005 at 23:56, John Celio wrote: I've gotten a lot of stubborn, crotchety old photographers (usually men) in my shop who dislike body-controlled aperture when they come in, but love it once they've had a chance to really try it out in the real world. Something tells me you're the rare type who just won't be happy with anything new, even if it's actually better. I'd suggest giving this new stuff a try, but somehow I doubt you'll take it into consideration. I've had my *ist D for over a year and shot over 10k images with it and I still don't like the body based aperture control. Granted I use it but I can't see one reason that it's so much improved over lens ring based controls that I'd love it? How is it going forward for the user? How can it improve my photography (bearing in mind too that the other two current film bodies that I use regularly only offer aperture control on the lens)? 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: Pentax 50mm News
Something tells me you're the rare type who just won't be happy with anything new, even if it's actually better. I'd suggest giving this new stuff a try, but somehow I doubt you'll take it into consideration. I doubt that I'd last long in my present job if I didn't give new stuff a try but I reject stuff that just doesn't improve the job at hand. I get to use all types of cameras both film and digital - Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Fuji etc. sadly not many Pentax, I still prefer the aperure control on the lens. I'm not saying that body aperture control is wrong I'm just stating a preference. John Whittingham Technician -- Original Message --- From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:56:43 -0800 Subject: Re: Pentax 50mm News It *is* broke, check http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdml.net/msg205063.html It's a goner; do other manufacturers support it even in the way Pentax does? More cost cutting, it's about time Pentax stopped following Canon and Minolta trends, they never where scared of breaking from the norm. It may be cost-cutting, but it makes sense. Aperture control on the camera body is faster and just as easy as turning the dial on a lens. Did you notice even Nikon is ditching aperture rings on most of their lenses? I've gotten a lot of stubborn, crotchety old photographers (usually men) in my shop who dislike body-controlled aperture when they come in, but love it once they've had a chance to really try it out in the real world. Something tells me you're the rare type who just won't be happy with anything new, even if it's actually better. I'd suggest giving this new stuff a try, but somehow I doubt you'll take it into consideration. John Celio ...would rather move forward than become a dinosaur... -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.newpixel.net AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. --- End of Original Message ---
Re: Pentax 50mm News
Har, they'll try to wear you down. Next you'll be told that the new zooms perform as well as primes (unfortunately even some of the new digital primes aren't that spectacular in performance) Yeah it's all a little sad really, I expect a compromise in a zoom lens but there's really no excuse with a prime. Having to use the shorter focal length causes some real problems. and then you'll be told that loosing the aperture ring control made the camera affordable to produce and that it's progress and that you'll get used to it. Double har. Sorry if I sound a little cynical :-) Progress! I'd rather not get used to it, maybe I'd just accept it if I'd never used the aperture control on the lens. I'm all for development but to me this is a backward step. John -- Original Message --- From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:57:54 +1000 Subject: Re: Pentax 50mm News On 25 Jan 2005 at 14:37, John Whittingham wrote: I'd much prefer to save the money and spend it on a good 36mm x 24mm digital body. I would need more then one W/A lens or a very good zoom to replace 24mm, 28mm and 35mm lenses not to mention 17mm rectilinear and 16mm Fisheye that I also use from time to time. Har, they'll try to wear you down. Next you'll be told that the new zooms perform as well as primes (unfortunately even some of the new digital primes aren't that spectacular in performance) and then you'll be told that loosing the aperture ring control made the camera affordable to produce and that it's progress and that you'll get used to it. Double har. Sorry if I sound a little cynical :-) 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 --- End of Original Message ---
Opemus enlargers
Hi, Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is they're russians :( I want to buy one - I'm just starting with that stuff, so I think it should be OK; but I'd like to hear your oppinion first. That's if you ever heard of such things. 10x, Alex Sarbu
Re: AW: New Member
On 26 Jan 2005 at 8:42, Michael Heim wrote: Question from switzerland: what's a pom? http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?dym=0cid=1222455417method=6 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: Opemus enlargers
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu a écrit : Hi, Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is they're russians :( Czech Republic, not russians: http://www.meopta.cz/index.php?set_lang=en
Re: Pentax 50mm News
Rob Studdert wrote on 26.01.05 10:59: I've had my *ist D for over a year and shot over 10k images with it and I still don't like the body based aperture control. Granted I use it but I can't see one reason that it's so much improved over lens ring based controls that I'd love it? How is it going forward for the user? How can it improve my photography (bearing in mind too that the other two current film bodies that I use regularly only offer aperture control on the lens)? I think Rob it's a just matter of getting used to the thing. I learned to used it effectively in my D70 quite fast. And honestly, I don't think that using aperture ring on long zooms like 70-200/2.8 or lenses with tripod mount could be convenient until you've got three hands ;-) And of course you've got a choice of EV step with in-body aperture control. However I still like very much using aperture ring with short lenses mounted on MZ-S. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
fra: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed? To me, a photograph presented as the truth is always a lie, since it always represents the photographers personal representation of something. This is a representation of my dogs lying on the floor, shot from above. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/peso/fellas2.html Please tell me where I am obfuscating the truth. Regards Of course, you are proving my point by showing that the only way to get away from my statement is to keep to the most obvious things shown in the photograph. But, if you want to draw this discussion into absurdities (and I'm sure you know that any discussion about such a statement could be) I could respond that this photo says nothing about the dogs, except that they are flat and positioned on (or being part of) a flat surface. You claim that they are yours and that the photo is taken from above, but the photo says nothing about that so I have to trust you, as I must in relation to photo journalism. Being flat, the dogs on the photo could be on a wall. Nice photo... DagT
Re: AW: AW: Travelling *istD/DS (was:Digital anguish)
OK. It seems under estimated your fighting while taking pictures... ;-). If you have your harddisk (and the arcos isn't much larger than a pack of cigarettes) in a good photo bag, it shouldnt crash on a rock. Michael On 26 Jan 2005 at 8:34, Michael Heim wrote: You're quite pessimistic... How many pictures do you store on your pc? There's a lot more other stuff going on your computer than just mp3. I've worked in the computer industry long enough to know how things like this break. My server contains over 75k images all of which are housed on a RAID in a remote server and are backed up and on top end UPS for protection from power deviations. Anyhow I don't smash my server computer on rocks every day whilst bush-walking either but I have busted a limited lens on rocks in a stream. 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: Opemus enlargers
Yup - you're right. I managed to find the meopta.com site (after I've posted)... I don't understand anything, but those enlargers seems nice for a beginer like me :) So... have you used them? Alex Sarbu On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:29:10 +0100, Michel Carrère-Gée [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu a écrit : Hi, Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is they're russians :( Czech Republic, not russians: http://www.meopta.cz/index.php?set_lang=en
FW: Fw: PENTAX *istDS FIRMWARE UPDATE VERSION (1.01)
Thanks for the additional link, Do you think it only fixes (read changes) Extra-long exposure times, or do Pentax slip other modifications of code in hoping that nobody will notice? Also, has anyone encountered the problem of green noise in an image when noise reduction is turned on? Happy Australia day all! Cheers, Simon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 26 January 2005 1:41 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Fw: PENTAX *istDS FIRMWARE UPDATE VERSION (1.01) also available on the Pentax USA website http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/show_firmware?firmId=3 christian
RE: New Member
Must hold... tongue... Nope, can't do it. Q. What's the difference between a Pom and a 747? A. A 747 stops whining at the airport :-) Simon -Original Message- From: Michael Heim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 26 January 2005 3:42 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: AW: New Member Question from switzerland: what's a pom? Michael -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2005 01:47 An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Betreff: Re: New Member On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:07:55 +0800, David S wrote: Could be worse, it could be taken over by poms ;-) Damned pommy bastards have been trying for years. :-) As long as they bring the good beer and ale we don't put up a hard enough fight to run them off. ;- TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Opemus enlargers
And another question - what would be a fair price for it? (I don't know yet the model; just how much do you think I sould pay for it). If it's model no 6/7 or similar it should also work with medium format film (negatives up to 60 x 60 mm or slides up to 5 x 5 cm) - which would be nice, even if I'll not use medium format for a while. Alex Sarbu On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:42:21 +0200, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yup - you're right. I managed to find the meopta.com site (after I've posted)... I don't understand anything, but those enlargers seems nice for a beginer like me :) So... have you used them? Alex Sarbu On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:29:10 +0100, Michel Carrère-Gée [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu a écrit : Hi, Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is they're russians :( Czech Republic, not russians: http://www.meopta.cz/index.php?set_lang=en
Re: New Member
The same thing is true of airline pilots. Bill - Original Message - From: Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 6:06 AM Subject: RE: New Member Must hold... tongue... Nope, can't do it. Q. What's the difference between a Pom and a 747? A. A 747 stops whining at the airport :-) Simon -Original Message- From: Michael Heim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 26 January 2005 3:42 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: AW: New Member Question from switzerland: what's a pom? Michael -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2005 01:47 An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Betreff: Re: New Member On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:07:55 +0800, David S wrote: Could be worse, it could be taken over by poms ;-) Damned pommy bastards have been trying for years. :-) As long as they bring the good beer and ale we don't put up a hard enough fight to run them off. ;- TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: ist Ds impressions
In RAW I would guess they are identical. With in-camera processing of jpegs, there may well be a difference. Paul On Jan 26, 2005, at 2:59 AM, Peter Smekal wrote: What about image quality? Some claim that the images of the ist D are rather soft compared to the ist DS. Peter I'm checking out the ist Ds and comparing it to my ist D. Just in case anyone is considering both cameras, here are my impressions: At first glance, the deeper handle seems odd, kind of holding a Canon. Although I think it could grow on me, I'm just too used to the ist D. The display is gorgeous comapred to my ist D. The increase in resolution is noticeable. Size too. The font used in the menues seems a bit crummy and badly rendered, though. The side door (for usb, power and remote) is much better than the clumsy rubber business of the ist D. The little joystick is usable, as opposed to the one on the ist D (which, as I said already, might as well be painted in, it would make little difference.) Changing settings through the main display and the fn button is easier than I thought it would be. It's a Pentax after all, ergonomics are above average. Shutter sounds different. Maybe a little bit louder, maybe a little bit less smooth or more plasticky. Maybe that's the sound of $400... Hyper program would be great, but the Av and Tv modes are easy to set and use, I don't think that's a big problem. The 18-55 is what it is, a little consumer zoom. Seems OK as a first SLR lens, but I expect my gf will outgrow it at some point. All in all, it seems like a really nice camera. I'm happy with the istD, but I'd probably get an istDs if I were shopping today. BTW, she's putting black tape on it, she says my istD looks much better with it... :-) j -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
Re: DA14mm f/2.8 quality (was: Pentax 50mm News)
possibly. i usually need f11 for adequate DOF in my landscapes. OTOH, the DA 16-45 is consistently sharper in my use and i use the same range of apertures most of the time. Herb - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 8:56 PM Subject: Re: DA14mm f/2.8 quality (was: Pentax 50mm News) Interesting. At f/8, the DA14mm's aperture is less than 2mm in diameter where the FA16-45 is at 2mm or greater. Perhaps you're seeing the onset of diffraction, reducing the resolution. How do they compare at f/5.6? I normally set aperture between f/4 and f/5.6 with the 14mm.
Re: New Member
LOL Hadn't heard that one before. Dave On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 19:06:47 +0800, Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Must hold... tongue... Nope, can't do it. Q. What's the difference between a Pom and a 747? A. A 747 stops whining at the airport :-) Simon
Re: Pentax 50mm News
Funny. I've recently bought an old MX on Ebay, and I find it very difficult to change shutter speeds while metering through the viewfinder. I really miss the little wheels for shutter and aperture on the Z1-P and the *ist D. People who claim the old ways are best usually haven't given the new ways a proper chance. John On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:33:23 +, John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something tells me you're the rare type who just won't be happy with anything new, even if it's actually better. I'd suggest giving this new stuff a try, but somehow I doubt you'll take it into consideration. I doubt that I'd last long in my present job if I didn't give new stuff a try but I reject stuff that just doesn't improve the job at hand. I get to use all types of cameras both film and digital - Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Fuji etc. sadly not many Pentax, I still prefer the aperure control on the lens. I'm not saying that body aperture control is wrong I'm just stating a preference. John Whittingham Technician -- Original Message --- From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:56:43 -0800 Subject: Re: Pentax 50mm News It *is* broke, check http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdml.net/msg205063.html It's a goner; do other manufacturers support it even in the way Pentax does? More cost cutting, it's about time Pentax stopped following Canon and Minolta trends, they never where scared of breaking from the norm. It may be cost-cutting, but it makes sense. Aperture control on the camera body is faster and just as easy as turning the dial on a lens. Did you notice even Nikon is ditching aperture rings on most of their lenses? I've gotten a lot of stubborn, crotchety old photographers (usually men) in my shop who dislike body-controlled aperture when they come in, but love it once they've had a chance to really try it out in the real world. Something tells me you're the rare type who just won't be happy with anything new, even if it's actually better. I'd suggest giving this new stuff a try, but somehow I doubt you'll take it into consideration. John Celio ...would rather move forward than become a dinosaur... -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.newpixel.net AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. --- End of Original Message --- -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:56:32 -0500, Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: frank, i agree with you 99%, wxcept this part, which i find a bit strange (strange that someone has this kind of expectations of the second oldest profession) This is my part, to which Mishka refers: On the other hand, if I pick up a newspaper, I expect that what's being reported should be grounded in facts, and represent that which the reporter believes to be true, accurate, and based on an objective reality. Mishka: I wrote the paragraph to which you refer very carefully. I attempted to write it in such a way that every word had meaning, and was meaningful. So, I did fudge things a bit. I said that a report should be ~grounded~ in facts, that a reporter should present that which he ~believes~ to be true, and that what's being reported should be ~based~ on an objective reality. Each of those key words gives a lot of wiggle room. I know that every journalist and editor (and publisher, for that matter) has their personal bias and agenda. If they're good at what they do, they try to suppress those things to present as fair and objective report as possible. But even the best efforts will sometimes fall short. So, I guess that what I expect is not 100% accuracy, but rather an honest attempt to be fair and objective. Some attain this, most don't. I recognize that. For what it's worth, if anything, I agree with Frank. However, I thought *motherhood* was the second oldest profession. ERNR mother of two NPPA member
Re: Digital portrait lens
Quoting Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Given the coverage difference, what lens is used by you istD/DS-ers for portraits? 50mm? FA 28-70 f/4 zoomed according to whether I want a head-shot of one person or something more. ERNR
Re: Chimping????
Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 00:15:56 -0500, Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and he was nominally a lawyer as well. Biting tongue, biting tongue... vbg Isn't anyone who went through law school supposed to come out thinking like a LAWYER! or am I just too susceptible to John Houseman's authoritative voice? ERNR
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
i thought that professional mother, that is someone who is paid for giving births, by a third party, is a pretty recent invention. i would say, it's the second oldest hobby :) best, mishka (father of one, no memberships whatsoever) On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:06:16 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what it's worth, if anything, I agree with Frank. However, I thought *motherhood* was the second oldest profession. ERNR mother of two NPPA member
Re: OT: Chimping????
Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: In the alternative, and without prejudice to the foregoing, if it is determined that the image in question is not a PS fake, but is in fact a geniune unretouched photo (which is not herein admitted, but is specifically denied), then I state, and the fact is, that the image of the chimper is not me, but is in fact a person with similar physical characteristics (perhaps Eugene Levy?) to myself, that is to say a stand-in passing themself off as me, and that in fact I am not present in the photo in question. Reinforcing my other comment re: law school graduates. ERNR
Re: Pentax 50mm News
On 26 Jan 2005 at 11:58, John Forbes wrote: Funny. I've recently bought an old MX on Ebay, and I find it very difficult to change shutter speeds while metering through the viewfinder. I really miss the little wheels for shutter and aperture on the Z1-P and the *ist D. People who claim the old ways are best usually haven't given the new ways a proper chance. Bollocks. If primarily shooting aperture priority or manual with a pre-set shutter speed and manual focus an aperture ring around the lens works exceedingly well. I'm now left eye'd so my thumb is always fighting for space with my nose when using the *ist D in aperture priority, and then I still get confused over which way to turn the knob in the heat of the moment. The ring movement was almost a reflex action in me, the farty little wheel on the back I just tolerate. 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: GFM?and ?? to Knarf
Thninking long and hard about trying to go this year. The April Vegas thing is not as expensive as i first thought it would be,so looks good.(brain is still in $0.60 Canadian dollar:-)) I'm submitting my prefered days off for 2005 to the boss this week. Frank,if we go down as a team,when did you leave last time.Wednesday or Thursday. Dave William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Bill Owens Subject: GFM? How many of you folks are planning on attending this year? Thinking about it. William Robb what he said :) save a bunk for me at Central ann
Re: Chimping????
On 25/1/05, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: But, what about the implied offense of comparing Humans and Chimps to journalists... No problem. A whinge of reporters. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: SMC FA-28-90
Fred Widall wrote: Yes, I do. It came as the kit lens with my MZ-7. I've never done any testing of it, but I find it just fine for my needs. Popular Photography reviewed it back in August 2002. http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2article_id=362 OK. Thanks. So, have you tried any of the other similar lenses, like the 28-80 powerzoom, the 35-80 or the 28-70AL? -- Fred Widall, Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.ist.uwaterloo.ca/~fwwidall -- On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Bernd Scheffler wrote: Hello Toralf, Fed Widall uses one, he should comment Best, Bernd
Re: GFM?
On 26/1/05, Bill Owens, discombobulated, unleashed: How many of you folks are planning on attending this year? Sadly impossible for me. Moving house. 2006 is a certainty though ! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Pentax 50mm News
I can appreciate that in your case the old way was better. But for the right-eyed majority, the little wheels are markedly superior once you get used to them, IMO of course. John On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 23:32:43 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26 Jan 2005 at 11:58, John Forbes wrote: Funny. I've recently bought an old MX on Ebay, and I find it very difficult to change shutter speeds while metering through the viewfinder. I really miss the little wheels for shutter and aperture on the Z1-P and the *ist D. People who claim the old ways are best usually haven't given the new ways a proper chance. Bollocks. If primarily shooting aperture priority or manual with a pre-set shutter speed and manual focus an aperture ring around the lens works exceedingly well. I'm now left eye'd so my thumb is always fighting for space with my nose when using the *ist D in aperture priority, and then I still get confused over which way to turn the knob in the heat of the moment. The ring movement was almost a reflex action in me, the farty little wheel on the back I just tolerate. 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 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: OT: Chimping????
On 25/1/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: If Cotty's gonna get me for anything, it'll be that hairpiece comment I made on the weekend. Compared to that, this is small potatoes. V busy at work, just dipping in and out at the mo - revenge on hold ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Update: GF not going Canon!
Quoting Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Some of you might remember that a few weeks ago I said that my gf was thinking about getting a digital Rebel... Well, she just received her istDS with 18-55 from Adorama today. It is always good when we can prevent a fellow human from going over to the Dark Side. If only we could have gotten to Cotty in time. Lasse has announced his Dark Side intentions, if you really want to give it a try ... (perhaps his announcement was a cry for help) :-) ERNR
Re: Pentax 50mm News
On 26 Jan 2005 at 13:01, John Forbes wrote: I can appreciate that in your case the old way was better. But for the right-eyed majority, the little wheels are markedly superior once you get used to them, IMO of course. Sorry if I came across a little gruff but I'm a little over being told what's good for me, when I can plainly see what is and what's not. It's a little like Tiptronic gears to me, adequate but not the same as having a clutch and H pattern stick in hand. 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: GFM?
A year late and a dollar short (my usual), I'm seriously considering it. Be gentle... Stephen Moore - Original Message - From: Bill Owens Subject: GFM? How many of you folks are planning on attending this year?
Re: Digital wide angle lens
- Original Message - From: Peter Smekal Subject: Digital wide angle lens Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?) Peter A15/3.5. It isn't particularly ultrawide on the istD. It's nose heavy, but it's nose heavy on the LX as well. It works well enough. William Robb
Re: How about the FA28-70 AL
Actually, the consensus on Stan's Pentax site seems to be that this (the 28-70 AL, not the FA28-90) is a rather good lens, but there were also some horror stories about elements coming apart or something, a while back on the list... Optically rather good, build is very light. I've had one go bad - rear element seperation, the one I have at present seems OK for the time being. Interesting MTF results on many Pentax standard zooms can be found here: http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Zstd John -- Original Message --- From: Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:35:54 +0100 Subject: How about the FA28-70 AL Regarding my other post about zoom lenses, how about the FA28-70 AL? I mean, what experiences do you lot have with it? How does it compare to that other lens I mentioned, i.e. the FA28-90? Actually, the consensus on Stan's Pentax site seems to be that this (the 28-70 AL, not the FA28-90) is a rather good lens, but there were also some horror stories about elements coming apart or something, a while back on the list... - Toralf --- End of Original Message ---
Re: Opemus enlargers
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And another question - what would be a fair price for it? (I don't know yet the model; just how much do you think I sould pay for it). If it's model no 6/7 or similar it should also work with medium format film (negatives up to 60 x 60 mm or slides up to 5 x 5 cm) - which would be nice, even if I'll not use medium format for a while. Hi Alex, My main enlarger is a Meopta Opemus 6, I think it is a old version because its negative carrier doesn't have anti-newton glass. It goes up to 6x6. It is a very well built item, can print on the base over 30x40cm with a 135 negative and 50mm enlarging lens (I enlarged up to 50x70cm - on the floor - without problem). The thing I love the most in it is the rangefinder focusing (you don't have to look at the projected negative, you only have to make two lines coincide when the carrier is half way in). I cannot help you wrt price, since I paid the equivalent of 200 euro back in 1997 including a Nikkor EL 50/4 lens (both used, like new). Don't know how much is their price brand new right now. It's a shrinking market, I guess. I bought a year or so ago a Krokus 6x9 (with lens) that I paid 45 euro (the shipping was something like 70 euro, though...) Hope this helps. Ciao, Gianfranco = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: Digital wide angle lens
Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?) I really don't care how heavy it is but it's got the right mount and it performs very well [...] Gee, as the user of a number of larger-aperture and longer telephoto lenses, I've ~NEVER~ felt that I was handling any too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' - g. It is true that some combinations are a little harder to hold than others (and this depends on the body as well as the lens, and the presence or absence of a grip does make a difference, too), and that some rigs are not conducive to lugging around very far by hand, but when you need the fatter and/or longer glass, it's nice to have the possible awkwardness involved. Fred
Re: Digital portrait lens
Given the coverage difference, what lens is used by you istD/DS-ers for portraits? I don't have a *istD or DS (YET!), but I suspect that I'll try using the A 50/1.4 nad the A 50/1.2, as well as the K 55/1.8. However, since I do shoot a lot of (often candid) portraits at 85mm to 200mm indoors, and at up to 300mm outdoors,, I suspect I'd still be using a lot of the same lenses. I expect that the 85's, the 135's, and the 28-135/4 (at the longer end) and 60-120/2.8 zooms will still work out really well. Fred
Re: K/M/A 100/4 Macro vs. F/FA 100/2.8 Macro vs. 3rd-Party
I've read either here or on DPReview or both that Pentax macros are better than the best 3rd-party macros, including the Tamron 90 and the Sigma 105. What about the K/M/A 100/4.0 Macro -- is it also better than the Tamron 90 and the Sigma 105? I've had the chance to try many a 100-ish macro lens (90mm-105mm), and I do have to say that I've never found one that wasn't at least very good. (Note that I'm not claiming that they're all good, and there might possibly be exceptions.) I suspect that the differences would be fairly small. Fred
Re: Pentax 50mm News
Just a wee bit gruff! :-) But I think I was just a wee bit dogmatic, so we're square. John On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:30:33 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26 Jan 2005 at 13:01, John Forbes wrote: I can appreciate that in your case the old way was better. But for the right-eyed majority, the little wheels are markedly superior once you get used to them, IMO of course. Sorry if I came across a little gruff but I'm a little over being told what's good for me, when I can plainly see what is and what's not. It's a little like Tiptronic gears to me, adequate but not the same as having a clutch and H pattern stick in hand. 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 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ?
personally, I found the KA version less reliable, because often the contacts were just a tiny bit off and didn't make proper contact. It sure freaked me out when suddently I couldn't take a photo. I threw it out afterwards. Having to rotate the lens a bit on/off to be able to get a photograph is not my idea of good design... This is exactly the same as my experience with the Ka-mount version of the Adaptall-2 mount - a little flaky. And flaky does not make for dependability. However, I do know that others have said they've never had a problem. The plain old K is the best, both mechanically and without exposure quirks because of bad contacts. I don't have too many Tamron lenses, but the ones I do have I really like; however, I use them only with plain old K Adaptall-2 mounts. By the way, my post here is not any sort of a scathing condemnation of Adaptall-2 mounts - I think that the Adaptall-2 system is an example of some really very clever engineering. However, the era of program bodies back in the early 1980's did impose a complication on the mount system that, in my opinion, has never been totally successfully coped with (at least with the Ka version of the mount). (YMMV) Fred
Re: Opemus enlargers
Well, I'll buy an used one (actually it wasn't used for about 10 years, as I've been told - so the model is certainly older than that). I just doesn't feel good paying less than 50usd for it (and other darkroom stuff) Alex Sarbu On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 05:56:22 -0800 (PST), Gianfranco Irlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And another question - what would be a fair price for it? (I don't know yet the model; just how much do you think I sould pay for it). If it's model no 6/7 or similar it should also work with medium format film (negatives up to 60 x 60 mm or slides up to 5 x 5 cm) - which would be nice, even if I'll not use medium format for a while. Hi Alex, My main enlarger is a Meopta Opemus 6, I think it is a old version because its negative carrier doesn't have anti-newton glass. It goes up to 6x6. It is a very well built item, can print on the base over 30x40cm with a 135 negative and 50mm enlarging lens (I enlarged up to 50x70cm - on the floor - without problem). The thing I love the most in it is the rangefinder focusing (you don't have to look at the projected negative, you only have to make two lines coincide when the carrier is half way in). I cannot help you wrt price, since I paid the equivalent of 200 euro back in 1997 including a Nikkor EL 50/4 lens (both used, like new). Don't know how much is their price brand new right now. It's a shrinking market, I guess. I bought a year or so ago a Krokus 6x9 (with lens) that I paid 45 euro (the shipping was something like 70 euro, though...) Hope this helps. Ciao, Gianfranco = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
How about the FA28-70 AL
Regarding my other post about zoom lenses, how about the FA28-70 AL? I mean, what experiences do you lot have with it? How does it compare to that other lens I mentioned, i.e. the FA28-90? Actually, the consensus on Stan's Pentax site seems to be that this (the 28-70 AL, not the FA28-90) is a rather good lens, but there were also some horror stories about elements coming apart or something, a while back on the list... - Toralf
Re: Scanner Comparison
Thanks for the feedback - to some extent the tonality issues may be my doing, since I had to adjust both scans to get them comparable. I saw that the LS 9000 listed as backordered at BH, but assumed it would be available somewhere else. Obviously - if it can't be found that would affect my decision... I had not heard that new Epson flatbed might be coming along, so thanks for the info as well. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 8:49 PM Subject: Re: Scanner Comparison To me, it looks like filmscanner has an edge wrt. tonality and lattitude. Sharpness-wise, they look pretty close. BTW, I have been trying to get Nikon 9000 for almost six months now. It seems to be permanently on back-order (at Amazon, BH and Adorama). At this point I have decided that my lifespan is not infinite and cancelled the open order. Will go with Epson 4870 instead (although there're rumors of 4990 coming some time real soon). Best, Mishka
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
ft maniplation should be allowed. A bit of dodging and burning, ft cropping, that's about it. Even tilting is verboten, AFAIK. Tilting? Does that mean that all of my PJ photographs (which are even more tilted that all Kratochvil's g) are useless now :-( ? Or did you mean some other tilting? :) Good light! fra
Re: Scanner Comparison
Hi Rob - I've heard a lot of negatives about shallow DOF and an impractical film holder with the LS8000. Of course - you never know if what you hear is accurate or not. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 2:58 AM Subject: Re: Scanner Comparison Why not pick up a used 8000 at a bargain basement price? Comparisons reveal no optical benefit of the 9000 over the 8000.
Re: Pentax 50mm News
Original message Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:30:33 +1000 From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's a little like Tiptronic gears to me, adequate but not the same as having a clutch and H pattern stick in hand. You have to try Ferrari/Maserati F-1 style paddle shifters... :-) Christian
Re: Opemus enlargers
Wednesday, January 26, 2005, 11:21:57 AM, Alexandru-Cristian wrote: ACS Hi, ACS Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is ACS they're russians :( I don't want to sound like a patriot (which I am definitely not), but they are made here, in Czech republic. And many of them are rather good. Which model do you mean? Opemuses are for 35mm film, and should support 6x6 as well I think. Never used them though. I use Magnifax IV, which is the larger model and the best from Meopta. For some info on models and age of them, see www.meopta.cz Found the museum with model description here: http://www.meopta.cz/index.php?id=143set_lang=en Suffice to say, old models are rounded, looking like zeppelins or cigars. Newer models are squared, box-like. Accessories like glass/less carriers, antinewton glass, multigrade/colour head, etc. are harder to get for the older models, sometime impossible. The Opemus might be a good all-round model, and used should be very cheap. If you want to do a lot of rollfilm, get a larger model, the Magnifax III or IV. Gianfranco, how was it with the neg carriers/plates, does it print fullframe with neg borders? What else. The models I know are very well build, rugged and all metal. Better in my opinion than the cheap offerings from Durst or similar. And here in the Central/Eastern Europe, it's probably the cheapest good enlarger you can get. I think they are better than the Krokus from Poland, which I used as well. If it comes with a lens - Belar and Anarets are the average. Enough for smaller prints, but for larger detailed BW you want better. Either Meogon (which,I have heard, is pretty good) or a Rodenstock/Nikkor/whatever. Hope this helps. It was a pleasant excursion, now I must get back to work ;-) I just today got better from an illness, and all these back-logged things to do :-( Good light! fra
Re: Digital portrait lens
However, since I do shoot a lot of (often candid) portraits at 85mm to 200mm indoors, and at up to 300mm outdoors,, I suspect I'd still be using a lot of the same lenses. I expect that the 85's, the 135's, and the 28-135/4 (at the longer end) and 60-120/2.8 zooms will still work out really well. Actually, now that I think of it, the 77/1.8, which I've always felt (for my personal tastes) was a little too short for a portrait lens, is now starting to sound more attractive. Fred
Re: Digital wide angle lens
You're the second person I've heard saying that the DA14 isn't particularly sharp. I'd love to see a solid lens test of this lens comparing it against others. I've taken a bunch of pictures with it and they're more than just satisfactorily sharp, but then I don't have any other Pentax mount lenses to use as a point of reference in this focal length range. Godfrey --- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' I really don't care how heavy it is but it's got the right mount and it performs very well, probably better than the DA14/2.8 from all the example I've seen from that lens. I've posted quite a few shots made with the A15/3.5 *ist D combination over the last few months, maybe you missed the posts __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: Pentax 50mm News
--- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a little like Tiptronic gears to me, adequate but not the same as having a clutch and H pattern stick in hand. heheh... Yeah, the Tiptronic is faster shifting and doesn't interrupt power flow. (Hey, I drive a Land Rover Freelander with tiptronic and an Alfa Spider with a traditional 5 speed ... they're both wonderful in their proper use. ;-) Godfrey __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Experience with Super A/Program?
Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance? I've once again got myself to the point that I have 20+ Pentax bodies and a number of lenses that need to get sold one way or the other. I've got 2 very nice Super A's and need a little help deciding whether they go or stay. I like the camera and it's features but have trouble 'trusting' it because of the electronics and rather jarring mirror return. These 2 are pretty enough that I don't want to put them in my kit and start scuffing them up just to find out later they aren't very reliable. TIA Don
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
Motherhood is not a profession, nobody pays for that (grin). Generally the oldest profession is considered to be prostitution, and the second oldest to be spying. I guess I can see where reportage could be equated to spying. BTW, prostitution is common amongst the other primates too. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:56:32 -0500, Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: frank, i agree with you 99%, wxcept this part, which i find a bit strange (strange that someone has this kind of expectations of the second oldest profession) This is my part, to which Mishka refers: On the other hand, if I pick up a newspaper, I expect that what's being reported should be grounded in facts, and represent that which the reporter believes to be true, accurate, and based on an objective reality. Mishka: I wrote the paragraph to which you refer very carefully. I attempted to write it in such a way that every word had meaning, and was meaningful. So, I did fudge things a bit. I said that a report should be ~grounded~ in facts, that a reporter should present that which he ~believes~ to be true, and that what's being reported should be ~based~ on an objective reality. Each of those key words gives a lot of wiggle room. I know that every journalist and editor (and publisher, for that matter) has their personal bias and agenda. If they're good at what they do, they try to suppress those things to present as fair and objective report as possible. But even the best efforts will sometimes fall short. So, I guess that what I expect is not 100% accuracy, but rather an honest attempt to be fair and objective. Some attain this, most don't. I recognize that. For what it's worth, if anything, I agree with Frank. However, I thought *motherhood* was the second oldest profession. ERNR mother of two NPPA member -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
RE: Digital wide angle lens
Peter Not wider than A2.8/20mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/2695269/ This shot was taken with open aperture (f.1:2.8) I'd love to have a SMC-A 3.5/15mm, but they are very expensive (800-1000 USD). Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Peter Smekal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. januar 2005 08:01 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Digital wide angle lens Has anyone used the K or A 15/3.5 as an ultra-wide lens on the *ist D or DS? Maybe it's a too 'nose-heavy lens-camera combination' (?) Peter
Re: Digital portrait lens
Even with the 1.5x crop factor, I still like the 85 1.4, its bokeh is beautiful. Collin R Brendemuehl wrote: Given the coverage difference, what lens is used by you istD/DS-ers for portraits? 50mm? Collin You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact. Howard Hendricks
Re: Opemus enlargers
I have used one, a 6x6cm model, with a separate 35mm frame, and I even have a color head for it. It is built very sturdy, I liked it a lot. I never use it anymore, since I scan my films nowadays, or use my *istD. I should sell it. Anyone interested? On Wednesday 26 January 2005 11:21, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: Hi, Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is they're russians :( I want to buy one - I'm just starting with that stuff, so I think it should be OK; but I'd like to hear your oppinion first. That's if you ever heard of such things. 10x, Alex Sarbu -- Frits Wüthrich
Re: Opemus enlargers
I thought they were Czech. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: Hi, Have you heard about Opemus enlargers? The only thing I know is they're russians :( I want to buy one - I'm just starting with that stuff, so I think it should be OK; but I'd like to hear your oppinion first. That's if you ever heard of such things. 10x, Alex Sarbu -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
Graywolf, taking his life in his hands, said, Motherhood is not a profession, nobody pays for that (grin). I'm guessing that you've never been married vbg. I've been paying a mom for 33 years, and she's worth every penny.
RE: Digital portrait lens
Yes, why not. My FA 1.4/50mm works great for portraits (and other stuff). It's just a little short, though. 57mm equals 85mm, I believe. In fact, a 35-80mm or a 28-70mm can be quite useable too. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Collin R Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. januar 2005 02:24 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Digital portrait lens Given the coverage difference, what lens is used by you istD/DS-ers for portraits? 50mm? Collin You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact. Howard Hendricks
Re: WTB: Spotmatic leather straps
That makes two of us. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Juan Buhler wrote: As the subject says: I really like those thin leather straps that came with Spotmatics. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
Re: Update: GF not going Canon!
Great. Now you can keep her. ;-) Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Scanning VELVIA slides with the HP S20
Very, very nice shots. How the slides look will to some extend depend on the light you see it through/send through it. So judgemnet is somewhat subjective. Perhaps you could use a 5000 Kelvin light box to view the slides. Add then there's the secreen and printer I'm not an expert at all in colour management. But I know it's very tricky - you must have the whole system calibrated to the same profiles etc. Takle a look at this: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/und-print-m gmt.shtml or this: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital1.shtml This is a local company, who made colour management their business: http://www.pixl.dk/index.htm All the best Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: arie07 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. januar 2005 15:08 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Scanning VELVIA slides with the HP S20 Scanning Velvia 100 Slides with HP S20 I am scanning a bunch of Slides from a trip to the US SouthWest and have been having trouble matching colors lightness to look on the screen as they look in the slide. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=466206. I tried the original HP scanning software and Hamrick's Vuescan. Have any of you any tips for me? Thanks Leo - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 6:28 AM Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V05 #99 -- Content-Type: text/plain pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 05 : Issue 99 Today's Topics: Re: PP: Digital Grain [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: MZ-S: what is a good price ? [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Scanner Comparison[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Digital anguish [ David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PP: Digital Grain [ Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Scanner Comparison[ David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Camera Lust! [ Antti-Pekka Virjonen antti-pekka ] Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PP: Digital Grain [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO:nLet's Bar B Q [ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Digital grain and dogmatism [ Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO:nLet's Bar B Q [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Digital grain and dogmatism [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] AW: AW: Digital anguish [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] AW: :Re: 135mm lenses - quality ? [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Dogmatism: what is allowed? [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed? [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] -- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:23:38 -0600 From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PP: Digital Grain Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: PP: Digital Grain I'd love to be proven wrong but I suspect the prints you speak of though resolute would look pretty bad up against prints produced using studio MF digital work-flows these days. Paul? Can you help us out here? I do wonder how much of the errors you speak of would actually be measurable by any means short of a microdensitometer. For all that, there is a lushness to large film contact prints that I find hard to describe in words, but once you see it, you no longer need the explanation. William Robb -- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:32:36 +0100 From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ? Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The good thing about shooting didgatal is that, if the exposure is wrong, you''l find out. About Tamrons success: Since autofocus have prevailed, the sale of Adaptall lenses(mounts must have declined dramatictly. I am buying the KA adapter from Jim,, so I'll get a chance to check it out on my 'ist D before relying on it for film cameras. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: m.s.gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 23. januar 2005 14:27 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ? i have two tamron adapters K
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
Wow, you give your wife a salary? Not to many do, usually just an allowance at best. Do you deduct FICA and Taxes? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Graywolf, taking his life in his hands, said, Motherhood is not a profession, nobody pays for that (grin). I'm guessing that you've never been married vbg. I've been paying a mom for 33 years, and she's worth every penny. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
Re: Digital portrait lens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Given the coverage difference, what lens is used by you istD/DS-ers for portraits? 50mm? FA 28-70 f/4 zoomed according to whether I want a head-shot of one person or something more. ERNR Marnie would have agreed with that assessment, except she sold hers to ME! g keith whaley
Re: OT: Chimping????
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: In the alternative, and without prejudice to the foregoing, if it is determined that the image in question is not a PS fake, but is in fact a geniune unretouched photo (which is not herein admitted, but is specifically denied), then I state, and the fact is, that the image of the chimper is not me, but is in fact a person with similar physical characteristics (perhaps Eugene Levy?) to myself, that is to say a stand-in passing themself off as me, and that in fact I am not present in the photo in question. Reinforcing my other comment re: law school graduates. ERNR I missed the beginning of this second round of chimping - but have to say Levy is great casting for Frank. :) annsan who has chimped now and then
RE: Scanning VELVIA slides with the HP S20
Perhaps this was made for You: http://www.charlottecamera.com/detail.asp?p=23721 Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: arie07 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. januar 2005 15:08 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Scanning VELVIA slides with the HP S20 Scanning Velvia 100 Slides with HP S20 I am scanning a bunch of Slides from a trip to the US SouthWest and have been having trouble matching colors lightness to look on the screen as they look in the slide. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=466206. I tried the original HP scanning software and Hamrick's Vuescan. Have any of you any tips for me? Thanks Leo - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 6:28 AM Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V05 #99 -- Content-Type: text/plain pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 05 : Issue 99 Today's Topics: Re: PP: Digital Grain [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: MZ-S: what is a good price ? [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Scanner Comparison[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Digital anguish [ David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PP: Digital Grain [ Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Scanner Comparison[ David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Camera Lust! [ Antti-Pekka Virjonen antti-pekka ] Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PP: Digital Grain [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO:nLet's Bar B Q [ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Digital grain and dogmatism [ Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO:nLet's Bar B Q [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Digital grain and dogmatism [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] AW: AW: Digital anguish [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] AW: :Re: 135mm lenses - quality ? [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Dogmatism: what is allowed? [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed? [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] -- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:23:38 -0600 From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PP: Digital Grain Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: PP: Digital Grain I'd love to be proven wrong but I suspect the prints you speak of though resolute would look pretty bad up against prints produced using studio MF digital work-flows these days. Paul? Can you help us out here? I do wonder how much of the errors you speak of would actually be measurable by any means short of a microdensitometer. For all that, there is a lushness to large film contact prints that I find hard to describe in words, but once you see it, you no longer need the explanation. William Robb -- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:32:36 +0100 From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ? Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The good thing about shooting didgatal is that, if the exposure is wrong, you''l find out. About Tamrons success: Since autofocus have prevailed, the sale of Adaptall lenses(mounts must have declined dramatictly. I am buying the KA adapter from Jim,, so I'll get a chance to check it out on my 'ist D before relying on it for film cameras. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: m.s.gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 23. januar 2005 14:27 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ? i have two tamron adapters K and KA and long list of tamron lenses.Whenever i put prime/zooms with KA adapter on MZ5 lens locked at minimum AE, received over exposure in programme mode the reason combination of aperture leafes and shutter. Few years back Tamron introduced a P adapter for program Carl Zeiss contax bodies. At that time i had AX and was willing to purchase this adapter but in another forum this P adapter was discussed in detail but results were the same overexposure in P and SP mode. For instance Contax MM lenses function in all mode on their P bodies but Yashica lenses (a subsidiary of Kyocera) only do AE/M modes. It is
RE: Scanning VELVIA slides with the HP S20
I use Eye One - with more or less success: http://world.i1color.com/Perhaps Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: arie07 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. januar 2005 15:08 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Scanning VELVIA slides with the HP S20 Scanning Velvia 100 Slides with HP S20 I am scanning a bunch of Slides from a trip to the US SouthWest and have been having trouble matching colors lightness to look on the screen as they look in the slide. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=466206. I tried the original HP scanning software and Hamrick's Vuescan. Have any of you any tips for me? Thanks Leo - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 6:28 AM Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V05 #99 -- Content-Type: text/plain pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 05 : Issue 99 Today's Topics: Re: PP: Digital Grain [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: MZ-S: what is a good price ? [ Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Scanner Comparison[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Digital anguish [ David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PP: Digital Grain [ Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Scanner Comparison[ David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] RE: Camera Lust! [ Antti-Pekka Virjonen antti-pekka ] Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one [ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PP: Digital Grain [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO:nLet's Bar B Q [ Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Digital grain and dogmatism [ Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: More Dog Stuff[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: PESO:nLet's Bar B Q [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Digital grain and dogmatism [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] AW: AW: Digital anguish [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] AW: :Re: 135mm lenses - quality ? [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Dogmatism: what is allowed? [ Michael Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed? [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] -- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:23:38 -0600 From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PP: Digital Grain Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: PP: Digital Grain I'd love to be proven wrong but I suspect the prints you speak of though resolute would look pretty bad up against prints produced using studio MF digital work-flows these days. Paul? Can you help us out here? I do wonder how much of the errors you speak of would actually be measurable by any means short of a microdensitometer. For all that, there is a lushness to large film contact prints that I find hard to describe in words, but once you see it, you no longer need the explanation. William Robb -- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:32:36 +0100 From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ? Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The good thing about shooting didgatal is that, if the exposure is wrong, you''l find out. About Tamrons success: Since autofocus have prevailed, the sale of Adaptall lenses(mounts must have declined dramatictly. I am buying the KA adapter from Jim,, so I'll get a chance to check it out on my 'ist D before relying on it for film cameras. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: m.s.gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 23. januar 2005 14:27 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Adaptall 2 for Pentax, which one ? i have two tamron adapters K and KA and long list of tamron lenses.Whenever i put prime/zooms with KA adapter on MZ5 lens locked at minimum AE, received over exposure in programme mode the reason combination of aperture leafes and shutter. Few years back Tamron introduced a P adapter for program Carl Zeiss contax bodies. At that time i had AX and was willing to purchase this adapter but in another forum this P adapter was discussed in detail but results were the same overexposure in P and SP mode. For instance Contax MM lenses function in all mode on their P bodies but Yashica lenses (a subsidiary of Kyocera) only do AE/M modes. It is obvious
Re: Update: GF not going Canon!
Graywolf wrote on 26.01.05 5:37: OTOH, those who chose Canon instead of Pentax should be excommunicated (GRIN). Thanks God I choosed Nikon ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Has anyone used the Canon 8400F scanner?
Marcel Bourque wrote on 23.01.05 15:21: Hi; I'm considering buying a Canon 8400F scanner and wondered if any PDML members had any experience with this scanner. I use it. Nothing particulary great but not bad either. Good scan quality, poor software, fair speed (about 2 minutes per 35 mm frame scan with FARE at 1600 dpi) if you have fast computer. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: GFM?
Humm...? Bill's post has not show up here yet. Those who plan on the nature photo seminars had better sign up quick as NPW is likely to sell out early this year. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Stephen Moore wrote: A year late and a dollar short (my usual), I'm seriously considering it. Be gentle... Stephen Moore - Original Message - From: Bill Owens Subject: GFM? How many of you folks are planning on attending this year? -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
Re: ist Ds impressions
In its default setup, the *istDS has Vivid mode and sRGB color space set. JPEG Fine mode images seem sharp and contrasty, with no adjustments to the in-camera controls. Set to Natural color rendering and AdobeRGB color space, a much more neutral color rendering and more modest in-camera sharpening are delivered (again, with the rest of the controls set to defaults). This is how I normally use the camera as I prefer to do my saturation, color and sharpness adjustments in post processing. Can't compare against the *istD directly as I only have the DS. Godfrey --- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In RAW I would guess they are identical. With in-camera processing of jpegs, there may well be a difference. What about image quality? Some claim that the images of the ist D are rather soft compared to the ist DS. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: Digital portrait lens
I guess, I would like to know what folks here on the list consider a portrait. Because I have never considered just one lens to be adequate )especially for small format images where cropping is not so nice). This is what I consider proper for 35mm (I could easly get by with just the focal length on either side): Big heads; 135mm Head shots:100mm Head and Shoulder: 85mm Head and Torso: 70mm 3/4 shots: 50mm Full: 35mm Groups would be shot with the 35-50mm moving farther away for bigger groups. Note how nicely a 35mm-100mm zoom fits in there. The characteristic all of those have in common is they are used at about 5-6 feet which gives the expected perspective for most North Americans of Northern European extraction (Interaction distances very in other cultures). Intimate portraits can be shot nicely from 3 feet or so. People shots from a distance can not, in my personal opinion, properly be called portraits. Since this thread asked about digital portrait lenses, just move down one focal length for APS sized sensors. Once again, it is the distance that important, just select the focal length that minimizes cropping. The old view camera rule of thumb (for head and torso shots) was for a focal length equal to the short side of the negative plus the long side of the negative; with 35mm that would be a 60mm lens, and with an istD it would be 40mm (much shorter than most folks think they need. So, as I asked, what do you consider a portrait? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
RE: Experience with Super A/Program?
Don I have used Super A's for at least decade. IMO it's one of the best cameras Pentax ever made. The user philosophy/concept was later transfered to the PZ-1 (Hyper Modes) and later to the MZ-S. (Turn the aperture ring - you have Aperture Priotity. Turn the Time wheel to manual - you have Shutter Prority. Turn both you have Manual exposure). Put them both back in Auto - you have Program Mode. Simply brilliant - understandable and readable - at a glance. My first one had some slight /periodic problems with bad contacts - it was previously used by a pro-photog/angler in wet conditions (my daughter still uses it, though). My second one I bought new/unused. It's works perfectly in every respect. I prefere this camera to any other camera for travelling/hiking/hillwalking etc. And for Bellows! No mode-selections. It has TTL AE-flash. A + T info in the veiwfinder as well as +/- indications in Manual and EF sign for dialed in exposure compensation. Optional MEII winder or Motor Drive A. Awarded European Canera of the year 1983. I'd prefere this to any other non AF camera. It's like the K1000 but with all three exposure modes. I shot hundreds of rolls with it. I love it. All my South Africa shots were made with a Super A: http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side8.html All the best Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. januar 2005 17:27 Til: PDML Emne: Experience with Super A/Program? Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance? I've once again got myself to the point that I have 20+ Pentax bodies and a number of lenses that need to get sold one way or the other. I've got 2 very nice Super A's and need a little help deciding whether they go or stay. I like the camera and it's features but have trouble 'trusting' it because of the electronics and rather jarring mirror return. These 2 are pretty enough that I don't want to put them in my kit and start scuffing them up just to find out later they aren't very reliable. TIA Don
Re: ist Ds impressions
Paul Stenquist wrote: In RAW I would guess they are identical. With in-camera processing of jpegs, there may well be a difference. Paul If they used the same AA filter that is. I wonder if they did. rg On Jan 26, 2005, at 2:59 AM, Peter Smekal wrote: What about image quality? Some claim that the images of the ist D are rather soft compared to the ist DS. Peter
Re: ist Ds impressions
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:59:29 +0100, Peter Smekal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about image quality? Some claim that the images of the ist D are rather soft compared to the ist DS. I guess I'll find out soon, as my gf starts using the camera. As she plans to shoot RAW, I don't expect to see a difference. Same sensor, same metering system, pretty much same hardware all along. I don't see where any differences would come from, unless you shoot jpegs and have different sharpness and filtering settings. j -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
RE: Experience with Super A/Program?
Thanks Jens, that what I 'wanted' to hear! ;-) Love the look and feel of it, even have a Motor A. I've just bought so many, and seen them on eekBay, that have little problems. Things like being intermittent, no readout, etc. These two seem perfect, guess I'll have to keep at least one of them. Don PS: I only seem to be getting about 50% of the list mail. (Haven't seen one of my own posts in several days.) If anyone else replies and I don't get back to you, would you please send directly to me? Thanks Lots! -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 12:08 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Experience with Super A/Program? Don I have used Super A's for at least decade. IMO it's one of the best cameras Pentax ever made. The user philosophy/concept was later transfered to the PZ-1 (Hyper Modes) and later to the MZ-S. (Turn the aperture ring - you have Aperture Priotity. Turn the Time wheel to manual - you have Shutter Prority. Turn both you have Manual exposure). Put them both back in Auto - you have Program Mode. Simply brilliant - understandable and readable - at a glance. My first one had some slight /periodic problems with bad contacts - it was previously used by a pro-photog/angler in wet conditions (my daughter still uses it, though). My second one I bought new/unused. It's works perfectly in every respect. I prefere this camera to any other camera for travelling/hiking/hillwalking etc. And for Bellows! No mode-selections. It has TTL AE-flash. A + T info in the veiwfinder as well as +/- indications in Manual and EF sign for dialed in exposure compensation. Optional MEII winder or Motor Drive A. Awarded European Canera of the year 1983. I'd prefere this to any other non AF camera. It's like the K1000 but with all three exposure modes. I shot hundreds of rolls with it. I love it. All my South Africa shots were made with a Super A: http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side8.html All the best Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. januar 2005 17:27 Til: PDML Emne: Experience with Super A/Program? Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance? I've once again got myself to the point that I have 20+ Pentax bodies and a number of lenses that need to get sold one way or the other. I've got 2 very nice Super A's and need a little help deciding whether they go or stay. I like the camera and it's features but have trouble 'trusting' it because of the electronics and rather jarring mirror return. These 2 are pretty enough that I don't want to put them in my kit and start scuffing them up just to find out later they aren't very reliable. TIA Don
Re: Experience with Super A/Program?
And it has a very good handling with its attached MotorA :D I will add that although it is not very efficient, there is also an LCD illuminator so even in the dark, you can check shutter/aperture settings :) The only problem for me is that I do not own the little grip so it is quite difficult to handle without the MotorA. Thibouille
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
Hi, Well put, Bob W. Thankyou. I personally believe there is an ultimate truth, an ultimate reality. Well, I'm not sure what you mean by an 'ultimate' truth. I was talking about external / objective reality / truth. I'm informed that it's a common mistake to equate objective truth with objective reality. However, all my investigations have led me to the conclusion that each implies the other, so they are equivalent. Unfortunately, time, space and the off-topicness of the subject mean I'm not going to attempt to justify the claim. The internet is quite a good resource for finding out about this sort of thing, and for learning the arguments which support the idea. You could try googling for 'debating tricks', but you might be more successful with 'critical thinking'. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Experience with Super A/Program?
Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance? Hi, Don. (I'm actually replying to the reply by Jens - I didn't receive your original post.) I've owned quite a few different Pentax bodies over time. Most have gone on to other places. Basically, I have four different active models left in the arsenal here: I've got a couple of Program A's (a.k.a. Program Plus). These are beaters of a sort - they're my two dedicated whale watch trip bodies, and get lots of salt spray and rain and condensation, etc. (Of course, I do try to shield them and the lenses as much as possible, but, well, you know how well that will work on a boat - g.) Since the Program A is the little brother of the Super A (a.k.a. Super Program), this is relevant to mention, since (I assume) the electronics must be similar to that of the Super A. (Yes, I know that the electronics must be a bit simplified, due to fewer modes, but otherwise must be pretty similar.) These guys have been very reliable over a long period of often harsh conditions (one of which is sometimes being stored for too long in my whale watch bag before being wiped off). I suspect that the Super A should also be pretty reliable (as far as moisture goes), within reason, of course. My Super A's (which are my number 1 walking-around bodies, due to their compactness, their light weight, and their full-featured specs) (TTL flash is great for the lazy - g). They do not get abused as much as do the Program A's, but they have also not given me any problems over a long time. I have an ME Super that is my dedicated church camera body, since it is so quiet (unlike the kerchunky sound from the Super A's - g), and since I fortunately usually don't use flash at church (thanks to fast lenses, fast film, and a monopod) (and, once I got hooked on TTL flash, I'll never go back to old-fashioned flash - g). However, back in the 1980's, I had two ME Super's that were my dedicated whale watch trip bodies for a number of years, and neither one of 'em ever failed to work for me, and that's under the same harsh conditions I described above. I point this out to show that, at least some of the time, an electronic body ~can~ give faithful service under pretty marginal (due to moisture) conditions. My LX's are the fourth model bodies that I use regularly, and are, in fact, the ones I like using the most. However, the Super A's are a lot lighter and somewhat quieter, and have TTL flash, too, so I do end up using them when a lot of portability is a requirement. Well, that's my 2 cents worth. (YMMV) Fred
RE: Experience with Super A/Program?
A few years ago, I tried a couple of Super Programs, but I think both had been used fairly heavily and were a bit loose in feel and one had begun to develop shutter problems. After venturing into SF1n/PZ-1/PZ-1p territory for a while, I took a chance on another Super Program offered for sale on the list about a year and a half ago and it was a much nicer body than my previous examples, with obviously low mileage. I liked using it so much that I ended up using it at times instead of the PZ-1p I had, and eventually I sold most of my autofocus equipment and picked up a few more A lenses, including the wonderful 35mm f/2 (a perfect standard lens for this camera, along with the A 50/1.4) and the 35-105 A zoom. I also have the 24mm f/2.8 A lens, which is another wonderful combination with the Super Program without grip. I more recently picked up a Super A (this camera is even better in black) and a Motor Drive A for better handling with the 35-105. I think it was using the Super Program and Super A more that also just led me to purchase a like-new MZ-S, part of an overall return to small, wonderfully engineered Pentax bodies that may be happiest with small primes for a compact package. (And all of this with an eye toward the future -- what film bodies do I want to settle on, assuming I may not buy any more film models after this?) Joe Thanks Jens, that what I 'wanted' to hear! ;-) Love the look and feel of it, even have a Motor A. I've just bought so many, and seen them on eekBay, that have little problems. Things like being intermittent, no readout, etc. These two seem perfect, guess I'll have to keep at least one of them. Don PS: I only seem to be getting about 50% of the list mail. (Haven't seen one of my own posts in several days.) If anyone else replies and I don't get back to you, would you please send directly to me? Thanks Lots! -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 12:08 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Experience with Super A/Program? Don I have used Super A's for at least decade. IMO it's one of the best cameras Pentax ever made. The user philosophy/concept was later transfered to the PZ-1 (Hyper Modes) and later to the MZ-S. (Turn the aperture ring - you have Aperture Priotity. Turn the Time wheel to manual - you have Shutter Prority. Turn both you have Manual exposure). Put them both back in Auto - you have Program Mode. Simply brilliant - understandable and readable - at a glance. My first one had some slight /periodic problems with bad contacts - it was previously used by a pro-photog/angler in wet conditions (my daughter still uses it, though). My second one I bought new/unused. It's works perfectly in every respect. I prefere this camera to any other camera for travelling/hiking/hillwalking etc. And for Bellows! No mode-selections. It has TTL AE-flash. A + T info in the veiwfinder as well as +/- indications in Manual and EF sign for dialed in exposure compensation. Optional MEII winder or Motor Drive A. Awarded European Canera of the year 1983. I'd prefere this to any other non AF camera. It's like the K1000 but with all three exposure modes. I shot hundreds of rolls with it. I love it. All my South Africa shots were made with a Super A: http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt/DreamHC/Side8.html All the best Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. januar 2005 17:27 Til: PDML Emne: Experience with Super A/Program? Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance? I've once again got myself to the point that I have 20+ Pentax bodies and a number of lenses that need to get sold one way or the other. I've got 2 very nice Super A's and need a little help deciding whether they go or stay. I like the camera and it's features but have trouble 'trusting' it because of the electronics and rather jarring mirror return. These 2 are pretty enough that I don't want to put them in my kit and start scuffing them up just to find out later they aren't very reliable. TIA Don
Re: Experience with Super A/Program?
My SuperProgram (SuperA) has never been anything but dead reliable. Been thinking about buying a second one as a backup body for it. It does seem to eat batteries faster than any of my other cameras, but I think I can live with that. -Mat On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:54:31 -0500, Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance?
Re: Pentax 50mm News
The ring movement was almost a reflex action in me, Absolutely, it's instinctive. While I'm on the subject of niggles two of my pet hates are: 1. Lenses whos focusing ring turns in the opposite direction to a genuine Pentax lens. (Congrats to Sigma on the Syncho II lenses) 2. One touch zoom lenses that 'zoom out' when you pull the slide towards you instead of 'zooming in'. (Spent a lot of time at M/cycle races!) John -- Original Message --- From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 23:32:43 +1000 Subject: Re: Pentax 50mm News On 26 Jan 2005 at 11:58, John Forbes wrote: Funny. I've recently bought an old MX on Ebay, and I find it very difficult to change shutter speeds while metering through the viewfinder. I really miss the little wheels for shutter and aperture on the Z1-P and the *ist D. People who claim the old ways are best usually haven't given the new ways a proper chance. Bollocks. If primarily shooting aperture priority or manual with a pre-set shutter speed and manual focus an aperture ring around the lens works exceedingly well. I'm now left eye'd so my thumb is always fighting for space with my nose when using the *ist D in aperture priority, and then I still get confused over which way to turn the knob in the heat of the moment. The ring movement was almost a reflex action in me, the farty little wheel on the back I just tolerate. 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 --- End of Original Message ---
PAW: The Uninvited Guest
Uninvited, but not really unwelcome. No one knew him, but he stayed for a couple of beers and left.' http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3068150size=lg Comments always encouraged. Thanks. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Experience with Super A/Program?
I've had four in total, three are totally reliable and I still own them, one had an electrical fault that was traced to a bad data back, other than that they've never given me any trouble. Great cameras. John -- Original Message --- From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:27:13 -0600 Subject: Experience with Super A/Program? Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance? I've once again got myself to the point that I have 20+ Pentax bodies and a number of lenses that need to get sold one way or the other. I've got 2 very nice Super A's and need a little help deciding whether they go or stay. I like the camera and it's features but have trouble 'trusting' it because of the electronics and rather jarring mirror return. These 2 are pretty enough that I don't want to put them in my kit and start scuffing them up just to find out later they aren't very reliable. TIA Don --- End of Original Message ---
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:57:32 +0100, Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ft maniplation should be allowed. A bit of dodging and burning, ft cropping, that's about it. Even tilting is verboten, AFAIK. Tilting? Does that mean that all of my PJ photographs (which are even more tilted that all Kratochvil's g) are useless now :-( ? Or did you mean some other tilting? :) Good light! fra What I meant is that tilting in the darkroom is bad (for photojournalists, at least). In other words, the tilt of the photo (as taken) must be left as is. No straightening horizons or otherwise changing tilt after the fact. If you ~took~ the photo tilted, that's okay. Hell, I do it all the time! vbg But then again, I'm not a professional journalist. BTW, that tilting rule was one that I read on another list somewhere. I personally would view it the same as cropping (ie: okay, but I'd choose not to do it myself). cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:06:16 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what it's worth, if anything, I agree with Frank. snip I would have thought that agreeing with me is worth ~something~... LOL -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PAW: The Uninvited Guest
Where WERE you? A local bar...party...all friends/acquaintances or not? This black fella with short fingers and no teeth is not the only interesting participant, but he may well be the most outrageous... g You sure DO find interesting places to frequent, Knarf! g keith frank theriault wrote: Uninvited, but not really unwelcome. No one knew him, but he stayed for a couple of beers and left.' http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3068150size=lg Comments always encouraged. Thanks. cheers, frank
Re: GFM?and ?? to Knarf
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 05:00:44 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thninking long and hard about trying to go this year. The April Vegas thing is not as expensive as i first thought it would be,so looks good.(brain is still in $0.60 Canadian dollar:-)) I'm submitting my prefered days off for 2005 to the boss this week. Frank,if we go down as a team,when did you leave last time.Wednesday or Thursday. I left Wednesday, I think. But then I took an overnight bus to Pittsburg, who BTW I'm still pissed of at that they let the Pats win. They didn't ride the Bus (Jerome Bettis) long enough; he'd have worn 'em down. But I digress. I think we should consider hooking up with Mark on the way down - I'd say it's on the way, plus with Mark there's a place to stay Thursday night so we can get there nice and early on Friday. But that's future planning. With no bus, I'd say leave Thursday, get back Tuesday(ish). cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: GFM?and ?? to Knarf
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:37:19 -0500, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, get back Monday? No, actually that would be Tuesday... -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: GFM?and ?? to Knarf
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:36:30 -0500, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip With no bus, I'd say leave Thursday, get back Tuesday(ish). Sorry, get back Monday? -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: GFM?
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:41:35 -0600, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Bill Owens Subject: GFM? How many of you folks are planning on attending this year? Thinking about it. William Robb Never got the original post. Glad I saw all the replies. Not to scare everyone else off, but: I'M SO THERE, BABY!! Wouldn't miss it. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: GFM?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:23:09 -0500, Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: save a bunk for me at Central No worries, Ann. We can share... g cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:06:16 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what it's worth, if anything, I agree with Frank. However, I thought *motherhood* was the second oldest profession. ERNR mother of two NPPA member Eleanor, NPPA? National Proud Parents' Association? Am I close? If anything, I'm thinking the Proud is wrong, the rest right. cheers, frank father of three (that I'm aware of) g -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: Experience with Super A/Program?
Thanks to all who replied, Jens, Mat, Thibouille, Fred and Joe. Now I just have to decide which one (or both?) to keep. It was good to hear that they'll take some abuse and still keep going. I plan to put together a small kit to keep in the car at all times, I've missed too many shots lately. That means, hot, cold, damp and all the rest. Tried it with an MX, it didn't like the cold very much. (To be fair it was only 3 Deg F!) Don -Original Message- From: Mat Maessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 1:12 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Experience with Super A/Program? My SuperProgram (SuperA) has never been anything but dead reliable. Been thinking about buying a second one as a backup body for it. It does seem to eat batteries faster than any of my other cameras, but I think I can live with that. -Mat On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:54:31 -0500, Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who's had a fair amount of experience with the Super A/Program, has it proven trustworthy and fairly consistent in it's performance?
RE: Digital portrait lens
BTW: For 35mm I find my 3.5/70-150mm (Tamran Adaptall) brilliant. Translated to digital (APS) this should be 47-100mm. I'd prefere a 2.0 or 2,8 40-105mm :-))) Does something like this exist for digital? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. januar 2005 17:23 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Digital portrait lens I guess, I would like to know what folks here on the list consider a portrait. Because I have never considered just one lens to be adequate )especially for small format images where cropping is not so nice). This is what I consider proper for 35mm (I could easly get by with just the focal length on either side): Big heads; 135mm Head shots:100mm Head and Shoulder: 85mm Head and Torso: 70mm 3/4 shots: 50mm Full: 35mm Groups would be shot with the 35-50mm moving farther away for bigger groups. Note how nicely a 35mm-100mm zoom fits in there. The characteristic all of those have in common is they are used at about 5-6 feet which gives the expected perspective for most North Americans of Northern European extraction (Interaction distances very in other cultures). Intimate portraits can be shot nicely from 3 feet or so. People shots from a distance can not, in my personal opinion, properly be called portraits. Since this thread asked about digital portrait lenses, just move down one focal length for APS sized sensors. Once again, it is the distance that important, just select the focal length that minimizes cropping. The old view camera rule of thumb (for head and torso shots) was for a focal length equal to the short side of the negative plus the long side of the negative; with 35mm that would be a 60mm lens, and with an istD it would be 40mm (much shorter than most folks think they need. So, as I asked, what do you consider a portrait? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.4 - Release Date: 1/25/2005
Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed?
I suppose by using the word 'ultimate', that I'm trying to say that if I believe in an external objective reality, that I believe it to exist everywhere. Maybe that was a given and I'm confusing the point by using the wrong word. Interesting discussion. Tom C. From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Dogmatism: what is allowed? Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:52:42 + Hi, Well put, Bob W. Thankyou. I personally believe there is an ultimate truth, an ultimate reality. Well, I'm not sure what you mean by an 'ultimate' truth. I was talking about external / objective reality / truth. I'm informed that it's a common mistake to equate objective truth with objective reality. However, all my investigations have led me to the conclusion that each implies the other, so they are equivalent. Unfortunately, time, space and the off-topicness of the subject mean I'm not going to attempt to justify the claim. The internet is quite a good resource for finding out about this sort of thing, and for learning the arguments which support the idea. You could try googling for 'debating tricks', but you might be more successful with 'critical thinking'. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: PAW: The Uninvited Guest
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:34:31 -0800, Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where WERE you? A local bar...party...all friends/acquaintances or not? This black fella with short fingers and no teeth is not the only interesting participant, but he may well be the most outrageous... g You sure DO find interesting places to frequent, Knarf! g The Jet Fuel cafe (my weekend morning hangout) has an anniversary party every April 1. The most recent was #12. Since they're not licenced, they can only have liquor on premises if it's a private party, which I guess this is. Free beer until they run out. Every year they add another keg (so there were 12 free kegs of beer). Somehow, every year they run out of beer at the same time (right around midnight). This fellow was one of the more colourful characters there, that's for certain. I think the short fingers are partial amputations of some sort (I'm guessing he has circulation problems). It may be hard to tell as it's blown out and OOF, but the mitt on his right hand is surgical gauze - I'm guessing he may have had a few fingertips removed from that hand as well. Didn't stop him from having a good time, though. He did ask for me to take his pic, and I gladly obliged... g cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
