Re: Yummy Ektar 25

[Bruce Dayton]

That has got to be one of the saddest things about the film issue -
discontinuing such great films like that.  Almost like Kodak wanted to
dig an early grave.

Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 11:35:13 PM, you wrote:

SB> Dug out some old negs t'nite and found a few rolls that had been shot using
SB> Kodak's Extar 25.  My, oh my, what a nice film.


SB> Shel 

Yummy Ektar 25

[Shel Belinkoff]

Dug out some old negs t'nite and found a few rolls that had been shot using
Kodak's Extar 25.  My, oh my, what a nice film.


Shel 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 11:12:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, to combine two previous posts, there *is* Mission Dolores in *San
Francisco*. Counts as a building, Marnie? =). 

There's also North Beach and Chinatown(for the street photographers) or Golden
Gate Park (for nature photographers).

Pat in SF
=
It certainly does. And San Francisco would be sort of central (except for 
Bruce). But not that far. Sonoma Mission might work too.

What I am going to is pop Mom in the car and drive down to Mission San Jose 
on Thursday and take some shots of the layout (nothing fancy) and report back. 
Post some pictures (better than we can see on the Net which really don't tell 
us much).

I have also suggested:  Borges Ranch (Contra Costa -- old farm buildings -- I 
have not visited there yet), wild flowers on Mt. Diablo (not sure how many 
there are in early March), Ruth Bancroft Gardens (world famous -- have to 
reserve -- desert plants -- Contra Costa), etc. 

I like your suggestions too, Pat.

1. Alcatraz Island (for the prison and Bay views, weather depending) plus SF
water front?
2. Newly remodeled SF Conservatory of Flowers in Golden Gate Park. In spring
time, they have a glorius flower layout in front of the conservatory.
http://www.conservatoryofflowers.org/index.htm
3. Filoli Gardens (near Crystal Springs Reservoir, along I-280). I've never
been but heard nice things. http://www.filoli.org/index.html
===
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
> 
> I don't know about doing photography [at the Rosicrucian Museum]
> they likely require permits and such ...

John Francis wrote:

I wouldn't suggest trying to photograph *inside* the museum.
But it's in a public park, which doesn't require anything special.
==

And, yes, I was suggesting photographing OUTSIDE at the Egyptian Museum. 
Which should also offer some people shots.

Why don't we keep discussing, but hold final decision until I can report back 
on Mission San Jose. I do think the mission idea captured people's 
attention/interest.

And now Mom is looking forward to the outing.

My .02.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Pat K]

Well, to combine two previous posts, there *is* Mission Dolores in *San
Francisco*. Counts as a building, Marnie? =). 

There's also North Beach and Chinatown(for the street photographers) or Golden
Gate Park (for nature photographers).

Pat in SF
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 
> Yup, last year. I got some half-way decent shots. I think buildings, maybe a 
> mission, might be a nice change of pace.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe 

And then John Celio wrote:

P.S.: how about someplace in SF next time, as it's pretty central?




__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Pat K]

Hmm, well, ok. Scratch two off of my very short list. It looks like Marin
County has been visited.

1. Alcatraz Island (for the prison and Bay views, weather depending) plus SF
water front?
2. Newly remodeled SF Conservatory of Flowers in Golden Gate Park. In spring
time, they have a glorius flower layout in front of the conservatory.
http://www.conservatoryofflowers.org/index.htm
3. Filoli Gardens (near Crystal Springs Reservoir, along I-280). I've never
been but heard nice things. http://www.filoli.org/index.html

Pat in SF

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> In a message dated 2/7/2005 9:36:25 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Before I make any suggestions, where has the group already gone in the past?
> 
> Pat in SF
> (hmmm, make that Patsy Kong in SF)
> 
> Pt. Reyes last year. The time before that I think it was Muir Woods. But 
> Bruce would know.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe 
> 
> 




__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Bruce Dayton]

John,

I'll put you on the list.  I really hope that you'll be able to make
it.

So is Sonoma too far away for everyone or
should we put that on the list of potential places?

Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 10:48:08 PM, you wrote:

JC> I'm all for this outing.  As far as missions go, I know the Sonoma mission
JC> pretty well, since my family visited there a handful of times when I was
JC> younger.  Might be a good location, but then again I wouldn't mind seeing
JC> something new.  Anything would be good with me, as long as it's not too much
JC> more than two hours away.

JC> The reason?  My car gets *horrible* gas mileage.  (;

JC> Anyway, I'm not 100% in yet.  I work saturdays, but I'm going to see about
JC> swapping that day with someone else.  Should be fun!

JC> John Celio

JC> P.S.: how about someplace in SF next time, as it's pretty central?

JC> --
JC> http://www.neovenator.com
JC> http://www.newpixel.net

JC> AIM: Neopifex

JC> "Hey, I'm an artist.  I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a
JC> statement." 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Bruce Dayton]

Ok,

So the list is:  (all potentials)
Bruce Dayton (Sacramento - actually Roseville)
Shel Belinkoff (El Sobrante)
Marnie Parker (Walnut Creek)
John Francis (San Jose)
Patsy Kong (San Francisco)
John Mullan (Sonoma)
Godfrey DiGiorgi (Cupertino)

The first meeting we had was at Muir Woods and Muir Beach.  The second
one was at Pt. Reyes.  This will be the third meeting.  The general
format has been to meet mid-late morning, shoot for a while.  Have
lunch somewhere and then shoot some more.  Head home in the evening -
some of us have had a dinner together before heading home.

The current discussion is revolving around shooting at one of the
California missions.  The one we know most about (San Juan Bautista)
is the furthest away and so may not be a good choice.  Those that are
closer nobody knows whether they would be in good enough condition to
warrant doing a shoot there.

If there are other suggestions that would be more central and would be
conducive to a group like that, please bring them up.

We also like to bring equipment that each has to give everyone an
opportunity to look/try things that they might have interest in, not
to mention having a great time talking and sharing.

It would be great if even a few more people in the area would speak up
and join us.


-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 10:14:56 PM, you wrote:

SB> I'm in El Sobrante, if one wants to be specific ;-))

SB> Pat, Marnie, John Celio, Phantom Queen and I are all pretty close to one
SB> another, roughly in the center of the area covered. 

SB> Shel 


>> Pat K mused:
>> > 
>> > Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? 
>>
>> So far, those speaking up:
>>
>> Bruce Dayton -- Sacramento
>> Marnie Parker -- Walnut Creek
>> John Francis -- San Jose
>> Shel Belinkoff -- Berkeley
>> Pat in SF -- San Francisco
>> kd2l? -- Sonoma
>>
>> There are also two recent additions to PDML:  Phantom Queen
SB> (Berkeley/Oakland 
>> border), and John Celio (Walnut Creek), who have not yet made any comment.
>>
>> So, yes, we are all in Northern California, but fairly widely scattered,
SB> so 
>> it makes it a bit hard to figure out where to meet.
>>
>> http://missions.bgmm.com/
>>
>> Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[John Francis]

Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
> 
> I don't know about doing photography [at the Rosicrucian Museum]
> they likely require permits and such ...

I wouldn't suggest trying to photograph *inside* the museum.
But it's in a public park, which doesn't require anything special.

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 10:17:56 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The first outing was a Muir Woods and Pt. Reyes.  There was another at Pt.
Reyes as well, yes?

Shel 

Yup, last year. I got some half-way decent shots. I think buildings, maybe a 
mission, might be a nice change of pace.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[John Celio]

I'm all for this outing.  As far as missions go, I know the Sonoma mission 
pretty well, since my family visited there a handful of times when I was 
younger.  Might be a good location, but then again I wouldn't mind seeing 
something new.  Anything would be good with me, as long as it's not too much 
more than two hours away.

The reason?  My car gets *horrible* gas mileage.  (;
Anyway, I'm not 100% in yet.  I work saturdays, but I'm going to see about 
swapping that day with someone else.  Should be fun!

John Celio
P.S.: how about someplace in SF next time, as it's pretty central?
--
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." 

Re: teleconverters

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 10:31:20 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry to inform you, but there are specific compatibility issues
with the Canon 1.4x Extender II. From Canon's website:

"This tele extender can be used with fixed focal length lenses
135mm and longer (except the 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens), and
the EF 70-200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, and
100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom lenses."

Godfrey
=
Sheesh, my parade is rained on.

But thanks for the info.

Sigh. One of these days I'll just have to break the bank and get some long 
glass.

Marnie aka Doe 

RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Jens Bladt]

So I was: Thanks, Kieth.
Jens
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 8. februar 2005 02:08
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


On the other hand, maybe you wre thinking of ALPA?

http://www.alpa.ch/

The only Alpha of which I know is the Near Infra Red camera.

keith

Jens Bladt wrote:

> Many brand names have been reused as names for products that have nothing
to
> do with the original brand/manufacturer. Trading companiers, that have no
> production anymore or have no real realations with the original brand buy
> old names. Exakta, Contax, Voigtländer - are examples - to mention a few.
I
> believe ther's a market for just "names". When a manufacturer closes down,
> they can make a profit by selling or licensing their name/brand.
>
> A Cosina named Porst is still not a Porst, just a Cosina with "borrowed"
> name tag.
>
> BTW, I may be confusing Alpha (made by Zeiss) with Acra Swiss, a large
> format Swiss camera - portable large format, great for landscapes etc. I
was
> reviewed in Outdoor Photographer a couple of years back.
>
> Jens Bladt
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt

[...]

Re: PESO - Jet Trail

[Bruce Dayton]

Thanks, I believe the tree is called a Liquid Amber.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 9:59:32 PM, you wrote:

DS> Excellent shot Bruce. Totally irrelevant question,  What sort of tree is 
that?


DS> Dave S


DS> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:57:38 -0800, Bruce Dayton
DS> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Where I live (Sacramento, California), we don't get beautiful snowy
>> winters - mostly just fog and rain.  But sometimes, the clouds and sun
>> work together to provide some really nice sunsets.
>> 
>> I was playing baseball with my son as the son was starting to go down.
>> I ran in the house and got the camera and two lenses.  This shot was
>> taken with the *istD and Tokina ATX 400/5.6 AF handheld - working on
>> those techniques that "Steady Stenquist" shared with us.
>> 
>> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1130.htm
>> 
>> ISO 400, 1/1500 @ f9.5 - Converted in C1 to Tiff and sized/sharpened
>> for web.
>> 
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Bruce
>> 
>>

Re: PAW PESO - Oddity & Fear

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 10:25:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fear is supposed to be rough and sorta soft.  Good catch!

No spoof ... I'll even show you the strip of negs and you'll see.  I know
you're half joking, but it turns out I'm kinda sensiutive about that ;-))

Shel 
==
I was just repeating what someone else said. :-) 

You said you didn't know how they happened, and I believe that. Fear looks 
like a double-exposure too. But it is very, very effective. I wish it was a tad 
sharper, but what the hey. Very surreal, like she is merging with a painting 
or something -- a sort of scary painting. Makes me think of that famous one, 
scream, by whatshisname.

Later, Marnie aka Doe 

Re: teleconverters

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

> Cool. Good to know. I've eyed the 1.4. I don't have any L
> glass, but I do have the 28-135 IS.

Sorry to inform you, but there are specific compatibility issues
with the Canon 1.4x Extender II. From Canon's website:
 
"This tele extender can be used with fixed focal length lenses
135mm and longer (except the 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens), and
the EF 70-200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, and
100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom lenses."

Godfrey

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: PAW PESO - Oddity & Fear

[Shel Belinkoff]

Fear is supposed to be rough and sorta soft.  Good catch!

No spoof ... I'll even show you the strip of negs and you'll see.  I know
you're half joking, but it turns out I'm kinda sensiutive about that ;-))

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 2/7/2005 9:50:13 PM
> Subject: Re: PAW PESO - Oddity & Fear
>
> In a message dated 2/3/2005 9:43:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/odd1.html
>
> And here's the fear:
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/fear.html
>
> Comments welcome ... 
>
> Shel 
> =
> Well, I like fear, even if it is quite soft. Oddity is just too odd -- 
> doesn't say a thing to me.
>
> Even if you are spoofing us. :-)
>
> Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Shel Belinkoff]

The first outing was a Muir Woods and Pt. Reyes.  There was another at Pt.
Reyes as well, yes?

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Pat K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Before I make any suggestions, where has the group already gone in the
past?
>
> Pat in SF
> (hmmm, make that Patsy Kong in SF)

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Shel Belinkoff]

I'm in El Sobrante, if one wants to be specific ;-))

Pat, Marnie, John Celio, Phantom Queen and I are all pretty close to one
another, roughly in the center of the area covered. 

Shel 


> Pat K mused:
> > 
> > Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? 
>
> So far, those speaking up:
>
> Bruce Dayton -- Sacramento
> Marnie Parker -- Walnut Creek
> John Francis -- San Jose
> Shel Belinkoff -- Berkeley
> Pat in SF -- San Francisco
> kd2l? -- Sonoma
>
> There are also two recent additions to PDML:  Phantom Queen
(Berkeley/Oakland 
> border), and John Celio (Walnut Creek), who have not yet made any comment.
>
> So, yes, we are all in Northern California, but fairly widely scattered,
so 
> it makes it a bit hard to figure out where to meet.
>
> http://missions.bgmm.com/
>
> Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: PESO -- Canon Girl Becomes Coffee House Girl

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 10:38:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_cgbchg.html

This is a surprisingly good lens, it is however no SMC-P 17mm Fisheye.  
Nothing is exactly sharp, the
lens depends on DOF for focus, there is no focusing helical, and at f8, 
it's widest aperture, as you can see
even in the reduced size photo for the web only the center portion of 
the frame really looks in focus.  There
is also a pronounced color fringing that becomes worse the further from 
the center of the frame you look.  I'm
not sure if this comes from chromatic aberration of from poor color 
correction.  Still this lens and it's sisters,
(made by Sigma and sold under a number of different names, from the mid 
1960's to mid 1970's), seem to be the
only full frame fisheye solutions available to those of us shooting the 
*ist-D and maybe even the Canon and Nikon
APS frame digitals.

Technical Data
Pentax *ist-D ISO 1600 shutter 1/10sec
Vemer Fish-eye ultra-wideangle 1:8 f=12mm @ f8

As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored.
===
I like it. I think the fisheye works this way. And I like her better in this 
venue. The context gives me more oomph.

Marnie aka Doe  

Re: PESO - Jet Trail

[David S]

Excellent shot Bruce. Totally irrelevant question,  What sort of tree is that?


Dave S


On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:57:38 -0800, Bruce Dayton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where I live (Sacramento, California), we don't get beautiful snowy
> winters - mostly just fog and rain.  But sometimes, the clouds and sun
> work together to provide some really nice sunsets.
> 
> I was playing baseball with my son as the son was starting to go down.
> I ran in the house and got the camera and two lenses.  This shot was
> taken with the *istD and Tokina ATX 400/5.6 AF handheld - working on
> those techniques that "Steady Stenquist" shared with us.
> 
> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1130.htm
> 
> ISO 400, 1/1500 @ f9.5 - Converted in C1 to Tiff and sized/sharpened
> for web.
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> Bruce
> 
>

Re: PESO: Bizarre Architecture...

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/2/2005 5:17:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Albano Garcia wrote:
> > Hi gang,
> > This is a building built in the 30s by a freak
> > architect called Salamone. He came to Argentina
> and
> > convinced government to build several public
> buildings
> > in very small towns (3000 inhabitants). He built
> > cemetaries entries, cityhalls and slaughterhouses.
> All
> > were huge and pastiche, out of scale in their
> > enviroments.
> > This is a cityhall:
> > 
> > http://www.flaneur.com.ar/18.htm
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > 
> > =
> > Albano Garcia
===
I am playing catch up with PDML. Whew, what a building! Thanks for sharing.

I wonder what he smoked?

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 9:50:15 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi, Godfrey,

Bruce Dayton and Marnie have proposed a NorCal PDML gathering on Saturday,
March 5th. Location still TBD.
See http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss%40pdml.net/msg227872.html

Pat in SF
=
Although those two people are disagreeing hotly (in such a muted mutually 
respectful way that you'd never know) about where to go.

Marnie aka Doe ;-)

Re: PESO - Jet Trail

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 8:59:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was playing baseball with my son as the son was starting to go down.
I ran in the house and got the camera and two lenses.  This shot was
taken with the *istD and Tokina ATX 400/5.6 AF handheld - working on
those techniques that "Steady Stenquist" shared with us.

http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1130.htm

ISO 400, 1/1500 @ f9.5 - Converted in C1 to Tiff and sized/sharpened
for web.


-- 
Best regards,
Bruce
=
I like it. It's... different.

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Pat K]

Hi, Godfrey,

Bruce Dayton and Marnie have proposed a NorCal PDML gathering on Saturday,
March 5th. Location still TBD.
See http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss%40pdml.net/msg227872.html

Pat in SF
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm in Cupertino. 
> I was away for a few days ... what's this "norcal outing" going
> to be? 
> 
> Godfrey



__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. 
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

Re: PAW PESO - Oddity & Fear

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/3/2005 9:43:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/odd1.html

And here's the fear:

http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/fear.html

Comments welcome ... 

Shel 
=
Well, I like fear, even if it is quite soft. Oddity is just too odd -- 
doesn't say a thing to me.

Even if you are spoofing us. :-)

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

> Mission San Jose contact info:
> 43300 Mission Blvd
> Fremont, CA 94539
> 510-657-1797
> http://www.missionsofcalifornia.org/missions/mission14.html

Hmm. I've heard of it many times, but never been there. 

> I also suggest the Egyptian Museum (Rosicrucian museum) as a
> backup, before/after lunch. Haven't researched where it is in
relation
> to mission and when it is open, but it looks interesting.
> http://www.egyptianmuseum.org/

The Egyptian Museum is about 30-40 minutes from Mission Blvd in
Fremont (assuming traffic isn't totally crunched up). It's in a
nice surburban area just outside San Jose central distract, on
Naglee near The Alameda. 

I don't know about doing photography there ... It's a museum,
after all, and they likely require permits and such ... but the
neighborhood and along The Alameda nearby is one of my favorite
areas in San Jose to do street photography. There are quite a
number of small shops, restaurants, cafes and also industrial
stuff in the area. It's a 20 minute walk from The Alameda and
Race Street to the heart of San Jose downtown too ... Downtown
by Market and San Carlos, Santa Clara is another great area for
street photography.

Godfrey



__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Re: PESO: After the floods

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/2/2005 9:29:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since my recent shootings are not much interesting, just commercial,
and I feel that PAWs should be (to me) recent photographs, I dug
something out of the archive to post it as PESO.

"After the floods"

Military keeps watch on ruins of house taken down by the 2002 Prague
floods, which hit most of Central Europe, and flooded several
historical quarters of Czech Republic capital Prague.

http://3web.dkm.cz/fotof/peso/

Comments of all kinds welcome :)

Good light!
   fra
===
Bit dark on my monitor, so I can't tell it's a soldier. But that really 
doesn't matter. Very powerful shot.

Marine aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 9:36:25 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Before I make any suggestions, where has the group already gone in the past?

Pat in SF
(hmmm, make that Patsy Kong in SF)

Pt. Reyes last year. The time before that I think it was Muir Woods. But 
Bruce would know.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: teleconverters

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 9:30:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also have a Canon 10D system. I have a Canon 1.4x Extender II,
a 70-200/4L and a 300/4L IS. Fitting the 1.4x Extender II to
either of those lenses results in so little degradation of
quality, it would be virtually impossible to tell that they were
in use if you didn't know already. 

Godfrey
=
Cool. Good to know. I've eyed the 1.4. I don't have any L glass, but I do 
have the 28-135 IS.

Thanks!

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Pat K]

Before I make any suggestions, where has the group already gone in the past?

Pat in SF
(hmmm, make that Patsy Kong in SF)

=
Bruce Dayton wrote (in the digest, since I didn't get it from the real time
list):
Those who have responded so far are:
Bruce Dayton - Sacramento
Shel Belinkoff - Berkeley
Marnie Parker - Walnut Creek
John Francis - San Jose
Pat ? - San Francisco
John Mullan - Sonoma

If any of you have other suggested places to shoot, please speak up.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce




__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 

Re: PESO -- Circular Waterfall Revisited

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 8:48:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Original:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_CircWater.html

Technical information:
Pentax LX @ 1/30sec  [Kodak ISO 400 Gold]
SMC-Pentax 17mm f4.0 @ f8.0.

Revisited:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_CircWaterRev.html

Technical information:
Pentax *ist-D ISO 400 @ 0.3sec
Vemar 12mm f8.0 @ f16.

At f16 the Color fringing is much less noticeable on the Vemar.

Well, IMHO, the second shot is not nearly as good as the first. Or the second 
is a very bad scan.

Don't know if I am telling you what you want to hear. :-)

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I'm in Cupertino. 
I was away for a few days ... what's this "norcal outing" going
to be? 

Godfrey

--- John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Pat K mused:
> > 
> > Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
> > Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the
> South Bay?
> > 
> > Pat in SF
> 
> Correct - I'm actually in San Jose.  Then there's Shel
> (Berkely?),
> Marnie, and a fairly recent list addition in the Walnut Creek
> area;
> I hope she stuck around and is considering attending.
> 
> 

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: teleconverters

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I'm not familiar with Pentax zooms and teleconverters. But ...

I also have a Canon 10D system. I have a Canon 1.4x Extender II,
a 70-200/4L and a 300/4L IS. Fitting the 1.4x Extender II to
either of those lenses results in so little degradation of
quality, it would be virtually impossible to tell that they were
in use if you didn't know already. 

Godfrey

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Just a general sort of question to anyone willing to answer.
> 
> I have mainly zooms. It's sort of useless exercise in futility
> to put a 
> teleconverter on a zoom, right? Or not?
> 
> Marnie aka Doe  
> 
> 



__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Raimo K]

There´s no Acra Swiss either - it´s Arca Swiss.
Porst never made anything - so what´s the REAL Porst?
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message - 
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 1:07 AM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


Many brand names have been reused as names for products that have nothing 
to
do with the original brand/manufacturer. Trading companiers, that have no
production anymore or have no real realations with the original brand buy
old names. Exakta, Contax, Voigtländer - are examples - to mention a few. 
I
believe ther's a market for just "names". When a manufacturer closes down,
they can make a profit by selling or licensing their name/brand.

A Cosina named Porst is still not a Porst, just a Cosina with "borrowed"
name tag.
BTW, I may be confusing Alpha (made by Zeiss) with Acra Swiss, a large
format Swiss camera - portable large format, great for landscapes etc. I 
was
reviewed in Outdoor Photographer a couple of years back.

Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 22:30
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
I wrote: "IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons." Do you have
difficulties in reading?
And by "later" I do not mean fifties SLRs which were indeed made in DDR 
like
the pictures clearly show. Try to find some info concerning the eighties,
for
instance. Here is one sample:
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4702&item=3872139519&r
d=1
Looks like the still later ones were made by Cosina - and maybe by some
others as well. Porst filed for bankruptcy in 2002.
And there was no Swiss camera by the name Alpha, it was the prestigious
Alpa, made by Pignons SA, no connection with Porst whatsoever.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho

- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 10:18 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

Rebadged Chinons - in the GDR (German Democratic Republic) in the 
fifties?
Come on! I seriously doubt it!
They were from Dresden:

http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
d=1
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
d=1
In this last add it actually says it's baugleich (built like/the same as)
a
Praktica (Pentacon, Dresden, DDR)!
This one even has a Praktica lens!
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 20:52
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
No, it is just a trading company, rebadging only, no manufacturing
facilities anywhere (?). IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:32 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

Yes, German company. I seem to remember a connection with Swiss "Alpha",
but
I'm not shure.
Perhaps realated to DDR kameras from the Dresden manufacturers, 
Pentacon,
Ihagee, Zeiss Ikon etc
Anyway, look:
http://www.praktica-collector.de/134_Porst_reflex_FX2.htm
http://www.praktica-collector.de/162_Porst_FX4.htm



http://search.ebay.de/porst_Porst_W0QQcatrefZC12QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentryp

ageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR2QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsaatsZ77QQ
sacatZ4702
All the best
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Wilko Bulte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 08:36
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 08:44:44PM -0500, Larry Cook wrote..
I have run across a 135/1.8 lens for Pentax K mount that I have never
heard of. It is a Porst. Porst I believe is a German camera company and
the lens was actuallt made by a Japanese company named Tomioka. Does
anyone know anything about this Porst/Tomioka lens or about the brand 
in
general?
Porst is indeed a German company.  To the best of my knowledge they
never had manufacturing capability, rather they sold OEM-ed stuff under
their own name.  Most likely different OEMs as well.
Around here (the Netherlands) the Porst stuff does not fetch any real
money at used-camera markets. For what that means..
Wilko

Re: teleconverters

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 9:05:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you have an especially good zoom, and an exceptional 
converter your combination may do the same.
(Even though you're on the dark side).
===
Hehehehe. I have been wondering if a Canon 1.4X or 2X teleconverter would be 
worth it. And, yes, I do have a fairly good zoom. 

I had a fairly cheap Tamron 70-300 zoom once that came with a Tamron 
teleconverter (both for Pentax, ZX-5n), that I sold together on this list. I 
was never 
able to get anything out of it with the teleconverter on.

Thanks. I guess one can't really know without testing (or find someone who 
has tested that particular combination).

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: PESO - Falls

[Bruce Dayton]

Thanks.  Location is South Fork of the Yuba River on the Independence
Trail - near Grass Valley.

Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 9:00:56 PM, you wrote:

Eac> In a message dated 2/7/2005 10:55:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
Eac> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Eac> took my daughter, Erin, out shooting Saturday afternoon.  We went
Eac> somewhere that neither of us had been before.  Quite a pretty area and
Eac> we had a good time.  I'll try to post some of hers soon (have to scan
Eac> them - she is shooting film with an MX).

Eac> Pentax *istD, ISO 400, FA 135/2.8, tripod
Eac>1/4 sec @ f32

Eac> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1114.htm


Eac> Converted to TIFF in C1 - converted to jpg and sized/sharpened for web - no
Eac> other post processing.

Re: PESO -- Circular Waterfall Revisited

[Bruce Dayton]

Well, there certainly is a sharpness difference.  The ice and snow
also make it a bit harder to compare.  I remember the shot and rather
liked it.  One of those "obvious" fisheye shots that is fun to look
at and works quite well.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 9:00:28 PM, you wrote:

PJA> Some time ago I posted a  PAW of a dam in a local State Park using the
PJA> SMC-Pentax 17mm f4.0 fisheye.  The results were fairly good and I
PJA> decided to see if I could replicate the shot with my new Vemar 12mm.
PJA> I've decided to post the original and the new version just in case
PJA> anyone is interested in comparing them. 
PJA> As a side note both required some cropping to center up the dam, I have
PJA> a very hard time shooting curved horizons and keeping them straight.
PJA> (Yes I know that doesn't make much sense but I can't think of any better
PJA> way to describe it). 

PJA> A few comments first.  The film didn't scan as well as I would have
PJA> hoped and I had a bit of trouble getting the white balance neutral, I
PJA> wasn't really able to and I've left it with a pinkish cast. The *ist-D
PJA> rendition seems to be a bit more neutral.  The other differences stem
PJA> mostly from the lenses, the SMC Pentax is quite a bit sharper, and the
PJA> image was captured at a higher shutter speed with a wider aperture, to
PJA> get even close to the same sharpness from the Vemer I had to use it's
PJA> minimum aperture which necessitated a somewhat longer shutter speed.
PJA> Over all the softer rendition of the digital shot isn't particularly
PJA> objectionable in this case.  Both underwent some post processing to
PJA> minimize "noise" and a touch of USM are about the only actions taken,
PJA> except for the attempt at color balance.

PJA> The Original:
PJA> http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_CircWater.html

PJA> Technical information:
PJA> Pentax LX @ 1/30sec  [Kodak ISO 400 Gold]
PJA> SMC-Pentax 17mm f4.0 @ f8.0.

PJA> Revisited:
PJA> http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_CircWaterRev.html

PJA> Technical information:
PJA> Pentax *ist-D ISO 400 @ 0.3sec
PJA> Vemar 12mm f8.0 @ f16.

PJA> At f16 the Color fringing is much less noticeable on the Vemar.

Re: teleconverters

[Bruce Dayton]

Marnie,

The general rule of thumb is that teleconverters work best when the
lens is quite high optical quality and relatively fast (4.0 or
faster).  That usually leaves out most of the zooms.  The one
exception is the pro grade 80-200's.  They can be used on any lens,
but you have to watch out for loss of speed, loss of AF (due to speed
loss), image degradation, vignetting, contrast loss, etc.

Sometimes a manufacturer will make a "matched" converter for a
particular lens (even zooms).  These usually work quite well.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 8:51:49 PM, you wrote:

Eac> In a message dated 2/7/2005 6:09:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
Eac> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> I suggest considering a 1.4x. One of those will give better 
>> results than 
>> a 2x.

Eac> Thanks for all the great input, everyone! I want to do some more research,
Eac> but I'm starting to lean towards a 7-element Kenko. I think when I get my D
Eac> back from the shop, I might buy the 1.4x and the 2x and test them both with
Eac> the zoom I plan to use them with. I'm going to ask around but my lens might
Eac> be too new for anyone to have tested it much.

Eac> Thanks,
Eac> Amita
Eac> ===
Eac> Just a general sort of question to anyone willing to answer.

Eac> I have mainly zooms. It's sort of useless exercise in futility to put a
Eac> teleconverter on a zoom, right? Or not?

Eac> Marnie aka Doe  

Re: teleconverters

[Peter J. Alling]

That depends, some converters and zooms may be good enough together.  
I've gotten good results with
the SMC-Pentax F 70-210 f4.0~5.6 with the 1.7 F converter.  The 
combination exceeded the resolution of
the film I was using when stopped down a bit.  I assume that they would 
also exceed the resolution of the *ist-d
sensor.  If you have an especially good zoom, and an exceptional 
converter your combination may do the same.
(Even though you're on the dark side).

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 2/7/2005 6:09:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 

I suggest considering a 1.4x. One of those will give better 
results than 
a 2x.
   

Thanks for all the great input, everyone! I want to do some more research,
but I'm starting to lean towards a 7-element Kenko. I think when I get my D
back from the shop, I might buy the 1.4x and the 2x and test them both with
the zoom I plan to use them with. I'm going to ask around but my lens might
be too new for anyone to have tested it much.
Thanks,
Amita
===
Just a general sort of question to anyone willing to answer.
I have mainly zooms. It's sort of useless exercise in futility to put a 
teleconverter on a zoom, right? Or not?

Marnie aka Doe  

 


--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Bruce Dayton]

Those who have responded so far are:
Bruce Dayton - Sacramento
Shel Belinkoff - Berkeley
Marnie Parker - Walnut Creek
John Francis - San Jose
Pat ? - San Francisco
John Mullan - Sonoma

If any of you have other suggested places to shoot, please speak up.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 8:42:06 PM, you wrote:

Eac> In a message dated 2/7/2005 8:08:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
Eac> writes:
Eac> Pat K mused:
>> 
>> Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
>> Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?
>> 
>> Pat in SF

Eac> Correct - I'm actually in San Jose.  Then there's Shel (Berkely?),
Eac> Marnie, and a fairly recent list addition in the Walnut Creek area;
Eac> I hope she stuck around and is considering attending.
Eac> ===

Eac> So far, those speaking up:

Eac> Bruce Dayton -- Sacramento
Eac> Marnie Parker -- Walnut Creek
Eac> John Francis -- San Jose
Eac> Shel Belinkoff -- Berkeley
Eac> Pat in SF -- San Francisco
Eac> kd2l? -- Sonoma

Eac> There are also two recent additions to PDML:  Phantom Queen 
(Berkeley/Oakland
Eac> border), and John Celio (Walnut Creek), who have not yet made any comment.

Eac> So, yes, we are all in Northern California, but fairly widely scattered, so
Eac> it makes it a bit hard to figure out where to meet.

Eac> http://missions.bgmm.com/

Eac> Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: PESO - Falls

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 10:55:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
took my daughter, Erin, out shooting Saturday afternoon.  We went
somewhere that neither of us had been before.  Quite a pretty area and
we had a good time.  I'll try to post some of hers soon (have to scan
them - she is shooting film with an MX).

Pentax *istD, ISO 400, FA 135/2.8, tripod
   1/4 sec @ f32

http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1114.htm


Converted to TIFF in C1 - converted to jpg and sized/sharpened for web - no
other post processing.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce
===
Whoa. Lovely shot, Bruce. Very, very nice. Like the shutter speed used on the 
falls.

Where is that?

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: PESO -- "Cat Portrait"

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 11:16:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just in case some of you thought I only shot portraits of girls and 
dogs, here's something a little
different, or not depending on your point of view...

http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_catportrait.html

Technical Information:

Pentax *ist-D ISO 800 shutter speed 1/30th
SMC-Pentax M 85mm f2.0 @ f2.0

A. Good shot.

Marnie aka Doe  I actually sort of dislike cats. Or they dislike me, same 
difference.

PESO - Jet Trail

[Bruce Dayton]

Where I live (Sacramento, California), we don't get beautiful snowy
winters - mostly just fog and rain.  But sometimes, the clouds and sun
work together to provide some really nice sunsets.

I was playing baseball with my son as the son was starting to go down.
I ran in the house and got the camera and two lenses.  This shot was
taken with the *istD and Tokina ATX 400/5.6 AF handheld - working on
those techniques that "Steady Stenquist" shared with us.

http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_1130.htm

ISO 400, 1/1500 @ f9.5 - Converted in C1 to Tiff and sized/sharpened
for web.


-- 
Best regards,
Bruce

Re: teleconverters

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 6:09:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I suggest considering a 1.4x. One of those will give better 
> results than 
> a 2x.

Thanks for all the great input, everyone! I want to do some more research,
but I'm starting to lean towards a 7-element Kenko. I think when I get my D
back from the shop, I might buy the 1.4x and the 2x and test them both with
the zoom I plan to use them with. I'm going to ask around but my lens might
be too new for anyone to have tested it much.

Thanks,
Amita
===
Just a general sort of question to anyone willing to answer.

I have mainly zooms. It's sort of useless exercise in futility to put a 
teleconverter on a zoom, right? Or not?

Marnie aka Doe  

PESO -- Circular Waterfall Revisited

[Peter J. Alling]

Some time ago I posted a  PAW of a dam in a local State Park using the 
SMC-Pentax 17mm f4.0 fisheye.  The results were fairly good and I 
decided to see if I could replicate the shot with my new Vemar 12mm.  
I've decided to post the original and the new version just in case 
anyone is interested in comparing them. 
As a side note both required some cropping to center up the dam, I have 
a very hard time shooting curved horizons and keeping them straight.  
(Yes I know that doesn't make much sense but I can't think of any better 
way to describe it). 

A few comments first.  The film didn't scan as well as I would have 
hoped and I had a bit of trouble getting the white balance neutral, I 
wasn't really able to and I've left it with a pinkish cast.  The *ist-D 
rendition seems to be a bit more neutral.  The other differences stem 
mostly from the lenses, the SMC Pentax is quite a bit sharper, and the 
image was captured at a higher shutter speed with a wider aperture, to 
get even close to the same sharpness from the Vemer I had to use it's 
minimum aperture which necessitated a somewhat longer shutter speed.  
Over all the softer rendition of the digital shot isn't particularly 
objectionable in this case.  Both underwent some post processing to 
minimize "noise" and a touch of USM are about the only actions taken, 
except for the attempt at color balance.

The Original:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_CircWater.html
Technical information:
Pentax LX @ 1/30sec  [Kodak ISO 400 Gold]
SMC-Pentax 17mm f4.0 @ f8.0.
Revisited:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_CircWaterRev.html
Technical information:
Pentax *ist-D ISO 400 @ 0.3sec
Vemar 12mm f8.0 @ f16.
At f16 the Color fringing is much less noticeable on the Vemar.
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 8:08:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
Pat K mused:
> 
> Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
> Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?
> 
> Pat in SF

Correct - I'm actually in San Jose.  Then there's Shel (Berkely?),
Marnie, and a fairly recent list addition in the Walnut Creek area;
I hope she stuck around and is considering attending.
===

So far, those speaking up:

Bruce Dayton -- Sacramento
Marnie Parker -- Walnut Creek
John Francis -- San Jose
Shel Belinkoff -- Berkeley
Pat in SF -- San Francisco
kd2l? -- Sonoma

There are also two recent additions to PDML:  Phantom Queen (Berkeley/Oakland 
border), and John Celio (Walnut Creek), who have not yet made any comment.

So, yes, we are all in Northern California, but fairly widely scattered, so 
it makes it a bit hard to figure out where to meet.

http://missions.bgmm.com/

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Bruce Dayton]

It looks like John Mullan in the Sonoma area is planning to attend
also.  That is 5 who have responded so far.  Guess we better nail down
the plan quickly.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 8:07:14 PM, you wrote:

JF> Pat K mused:
>> 
>> Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
>> Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?
>> 
>> Pat in SF

JF> Correct - I'm actually in San Jose.  Then there's Shel (Berkely?),
JF> Marnie, and a fairly recent list addition in the Walnut Creek area;
JF> I hope she stuck around and is considering attending.

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 2:43:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's not the worst idea, Marnie -- that's the site of the Unexpected PDML 
Meeting In San Antonio (when I met Mark Stringer).


ERNR
=
Cool, looks like a cool mission. Wish it was here.

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[John Francis]

Pat K mused:
> 
> Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
> Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?
> 
> Pat in SF

Correct - I'm actually in San Jose.  Then there's Shel (Berkely?),
Marnie, and a fairly recent list addition in the Walnut Creek area;
I hope she stuck around and is considering attending.

RE: teleconverters

[Doug Franklin]

On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 18:42:03 -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:

> Does anyone know where to get the new Kenko/Tamron teleconverters in the 
> U.S.? Adorama has the 1.4x in Pentax mount/Tamron brand. None of the 
> others seems to be available. Are they available in Europe or Asia?

I have a used but very good condition 2X Kenko 7-element in Pentax KAF
mount I could be convinced to part with.  Contact me off list at
franklin at shootingshark dot com if you're interested.

TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[John Francis]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] mused:
> 
> In a message dated 2/7/2005 11:48:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Mission San Jose contact info:
> 43300 Mission Blvd
> Fremont, CA 94539
> 510-657-1797
> http://www.missionsofcalifornia.org/missions/mission14.html
> 
> I still don't have a good handle on what's been restored for viewing. I did
> find a site with some photos for an idea. 
> http://www.thecaliforniamissions.com/sanjos/sanjos
> 
> Pat in SF
> =
> I have finally found some decent shots of it. I will be posting them shortly. 
> Evidently they do weddings in the chapel, so found some interior shots too.
> 
> I also suggest the Egyptian Museum (Rosicrucian museum) as a backup, 
> before/after lunch. Haven't researched where it is in relation to mission and 
> when it 
> is open, but it looks interesting.
> 
> http://www.egyptianmuseum.org/
> 
> Marnie aka Doe 

The San Jose Mission doesn't look that great from what I can see in
the photographs I've found on the web.  I'll see if I can find out
anything about the Santa Clara Mission.

The grounds outside the Rosicrucian museum are a wonderful photo site;
I've been there a couple of times, and I'm sure that it looks splendid
now that spring is here.

Fairly close at hand is the San Jose history park (mildly interesting)
and the Japanese Friendship Garden - another wonderful photo location.


Quite honestly I'd suggest that those two or three locations are far
more likely to yield good photo opportunities than either mission.

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[John Francis]

No idea.   Sorry.


Bruce Dayton mused:
> 
> John,
> 
> Have you been there?  Is it worth an outing?
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> Monday, February 7, 2005, 11:31:04 AM, you wrote:
> 
> 
> JF> It's in Fremont.  That's not "Fremont-the-district-of-San-Jose",
> JF> it's "Fremont-the-town-just-a-little-north-of-San-Jose" on the
> JF> East side of the SF Bay (about 10 miles N of 101, on 680).
> 
> 
> JF> The church & museum are open 10-5.  More information can be
> JF> obtained by sending a (legal-sized) SASE to:
> 
> JF> OLD MISSION SAN JOSE
> JF> P.0. Box 3159
> JF> Fremont, CA  94539
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JF> Bruce Dayton mused:
> >> 
> >> How far is the Mission in San Jose?  It seems like the next best
> >> choice based on restoration.  Would that one work to everyone's
> >> satisfaction concerning distance/time?
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Best regards,
> >> Bruce
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Monday, February 7, 2005, 12:23:57 AM, you wrote:
> >> 
> >> PK> Mission San Juan Bautista would be almost 2 hours drive away from San
> >> PK> Francisco. A little bit far for me also. Will keep my ears open to the 
> >> plans as
> >> PK> they form.
> >> 
> >> PK> Pat in SF
> >> 
> >> PK> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >> Probably too far for me to drive, because I seem to have developed 
> >> >> sciatica
> >> >> or something. Don't really want to drive for over two hours. It takes 
> >> >> me 1
> >> >> hour 
> >> >> 15 minutes about to get to the top of San Jose. So I have a sneaking
> >> >> suspicion it would take over two hours for me to drive to San Juan 
> >> >> Bautista.
> >> >> Even two 
> >> >> hours would be pushing it for me.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Actually, the only mission I remember is San Juan Bautista. I've never 
> >> >> seen
> >> >> the San Jose Mission, so can't speak for it, or Mission Delores, or any 
> >> >> of
> >> >> the 
> >> >> others, as matter of fact.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Or maybe someone can give me a lift to whatever the consensus is. Over 
> >> >> two
> >> >> hours of driving and I will have to bow out.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Marnie aka Doe 
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>
> >> PK> __ 
> >> PK> Do you Yahoo!? 
> >> PK> Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
> >> PK> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[ernreed2]

Quoting "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> I think that someone is reading copyright law incorrectly.

I doubt the people using "copyright's name in vain" so to speak are reading a 
damn thing -- incorrectly or otherwise.

ERNR

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[ernreed2]

Quoting William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> It's the same mechanism that makes dogs bark at people on the other 
> side of a fence.


And ANOTHER one for the quote file!

ERNR

RE: Photo lab recommendation / NYC / Medium format ?

[Amita Guha]

Hi Jerry,

I've taken my 120 film to a place called Cameraland on Lexington Ave.
between 51st and 52nd on the east side of the street.
http://www.cameralandny.com/

The only problem is that they print doubles whether you want them to or not,
but the prints were fine.

I've used CLab down in the Village but they wouldn't do square prints. Last
I knew, Adorama wouldn't develop 120 film.

Hope that helps,
Amita

> -Original Message-
> From: Jarek Dabrowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 6:33 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Photo lab recommendation / NYC / Medium format ?
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've just started my adventure with medium format 
> photography... yes, it 
> is big fun :) But, as I don't have any darkroom equipment yet, I am 
> going to stay with the C-41/E-6 processes. Can anyone 
> recommend a photo 
> lab that will develop my film, and will make prints from it ? (square 
> prints preferred, but I assume it can be a problem). The best 
> solution 
> would be traditional mail-in service (I send the film, they 
> send me the 
> prints), but of course I can drop-off the film and pick up the prints 
> (Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn locations preferred).
> 
> Thanks in advance
> Jerry
> 

Re: teleconverters

[Bruce Dayton]

Hello Amita,

I have the Tamron 28-75/2.8 DI lens and both kenko converters.  What
kind of test would you like done?

Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 6:07:37 PM, you wrote:

>> I suggest considering a 1.4x. One of those will give better 
>> results than 
>> a 2x.

AG> Thanks for all the great input, everyone! I want to do some more research,
AG> but I'm starting to lean towards a 7-element Kenko. I think when I get my D
AG> back from the shop, I might buy the 1.4x and the 2x and test them both with
AG> the zoom I plan to use them with. I'm going to ask around but my lens might
AG> be too new for anyone to have tested it much.

AG> Thanks,
AG> Amita

RE: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Anthony Farr]

I'll echo Cotty and say that the photographer was unwise to set up his
camera on a tripod.  Having worked in a museum where I sometimes had to
adjudicate on the permissibility of photography in what is after all a
public building, it mostly comes down to the impression of either amateurism
or professionalism that the photographer's equipment conveys. 

You'll probably find that the city park involved is administered by some
sort of statutory authority, and is not quite the 'public domain' that the
street outside the gates is.  Sydney residents would be familiar with
similar restrictions on photography in the precincts of the Sydney Opera
House, to protect the building from uncontrolled commercial exploitation of
its image.  Similarly, Uluru (formerly Ayer's Rock) is not in the public
domain but is under traditional native ownership.  It would be unwise to
flaunt the professionalism of one's gear there, too.

I guess we shouldn't worry.  All we need say to the person in uniform is,
"This is a Pentax, and everybody knows that Pentax doesn't make professional
cameras."

regards,
Anthony Farr 

> -Original Message-
> From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I'm behind on my list reading so I don't know whether this has
> already been discussed, but just in case it hasn't ... :
> 
>

> 
>   "The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist
>   Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's
>   sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean').
>   When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the
>   sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that
>   they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that
>   it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to
>   photograph public art in a city-owned park."
> 
> The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes
> some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
> to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.
> 
> 
>   -- Glenn

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: Copyrighting Public Space?


RULE # 1:
NEVER TAKE A 'NO' ANSWER FROM SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE 
AUTHORITY TO SAY 'YES'.

Words to live by, people.
William Robb 

RE: teleconverters

[Amita Guha]

> I suggest considering a 1.4x. One of those will give better 
> results than 
> a 2x.

Thanks for all the great input, everyone! I want to do some more research,
but I'm starting to lean towards a 7-element Kenko. I think when I get my D
back from the shop, I might buy the 1.4x and the 2x and test them both with
the zoom I plan to use them with. I'm going to ask around but my lens might
be too new for anyone to have tested it much.

Thanks,
Amita

Re: teleconverters

[Bruce Dayton]

Hello Joe,

Here you go:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=search&Q=&b=197&b=29&a=65_437&shs=&ci=278&ac=&Submit.x=16&Submit.y=9&Submit=Go

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 5:42:03 PM, you wrote:

JT> Jens wrote:

JT> Kenko's (Tamron) are supposed to be very good, according to tests done
JT> by FotoMagazin in Germany. They gave the old (MF) MC7  the highest
JT> (SUPER) grade.

JT> Take a look at:
JT> http://www.nikonlinks.com/articles_teleconverter_review.htm

JT> --

JT> Jens, when was the fotoMagazin test done? Did it include the new 
JT> Kenko/Tamron teleconverters referenced in the link?

JT> Does anyone know where to get the new Kenko/Tamron teleconverters in the
JT> U.S.? Adorama has the 1.4x in Pentax mount/Tamron brand. None of the
JT> others seems to be available. Are they available in Europe or Asia?

JT> Thanks,

JT> Joe

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Tom C]

RULE # 1:
NEVER TAKE A 'NO' ANSWER FROM SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SAY 
'YES'.

WOOF.
Tom C.

From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: Re: Copyrighting Public Space?
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:37:14 -0600
It's what happens when you give a small mind an equally small bit of 
authority.
Sadly, people will shut up and go away rather than exercising their rights. 
No one wants a confrontation, and so the small minds get bolder.
It's the same mechanism that makes dogs bark at people on the other side of 
a fence.

William Robb

RE: teleconverters

[Joseph Tainter]

Jens wrote:
Kenko's (Tamron) are supposed to be very good, according to tests done 
by FotoMagazin in Germany. They gave the old (MF) MC7  the highest 
(SUPER) grade.

Take a look at: http://www.nikonlinks.com/articles_teleconverter_review.htm
--
Jens, when was the fotoMagazin test done? Did it include the new 
Kenko/Tamron teleconverters referenced in the link?

Does anyone know where to get the new Kenko/Tamron teleconverters in the 
U.S.? Adorama has the 1.4x in Pentax mount/Tamron brand. None of the 
others seems to be available. Are they available in Europe or Asia?

Thanks,
Joe

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Bob Sullivan]

Glenn,
This is a pretty bogus article you quote.  Here are the pictures I
took of 'the bean' on opening day at Millenium Park in Chicago.

http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/ship1.jpg
http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/ship2.jpg
http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/ship3.jpg

In the posted comments on the web page you referenced, it is pointed
out that you cannot legally copyright a building's image - no real
estate broker could take a picture of it!  Bill Robb had the right
idea, small minded people impressed with their uniforms trying to
impose their 'authority' on the public at large.

Regards,  Bob S.

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:13:48 -0500 (EST), D. Glenn Arthur Jr.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> I'm behind on my list reading so I don't know whether this has
> already been discussed, but just in case it hasn't ... :
> 
> 
> 
>"The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist
>Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's
>sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean').
>When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the
>sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that
>they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that
>it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to
>photograph public art in a city-owned park."
> 
> The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes
> some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
> to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.
> 
> 
>-- Glenn
> 
>

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Joseph Tainter]

"It's what happens when you give a small mind an equally small bit of 
authority."

Wheatfield's got it right. It is much the same with transportation 
screeners (whom I encounter a lot). What happens when you give 
uneducated, unintelligent people the opportunity to exercise arbitrary 
authority? They do!

Joe

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Peter J. Alling]

I think that someone is reading copyright law incorrectly.
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
Folks,
I'm behind on my list reading so I don't know whether this has 
already been discussed, but just in case it hasn't ... :


	"The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist 
	Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's 
	sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean'). 
	When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the 
	sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that 
	they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that 
	it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to 
	photograph public art in a city-owned park."

The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes 
some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.

-- Glenn
 


--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke

Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Keith Whaley]

On the other hand, maybe you wre thinking of ALPA?
http://www.alpa.ch/
The only Alpha of which I know is the Near Infra Red camera.
keith
Jens Bladt wrote:
Many brand names have been reused as names for products that have nothing to
do with the original brand/manufacturer. Trading companiers, that have no
production anymore or have no real realations with the original brand buy
old names. Exakta, Contax, Voigtländer - are examples - to mention a few. I
believe ther's a market for just "names". When a manufacturer closes down,
they can make a profit by selling or licensing their name/brand.
A Cosina named Porst is still not a Porst, just a Cosina with "borrowed"
name tag.
BTW, I may be confusing Alpha (made by Zeiss) with Acra Swiss, a large
format Swiss camera - portable large format, great for landscapes etc. I was
reviewed in Outdoor Photographer a couple of years back.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
[...]

Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Nick Clark"
Subject: Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer


Only true in automatic mode.
The LX is a bit tricky this way because of the way the meter 
integrates into the exposure control.
In all manual exposures the metered exposure is taken through the 
lens.
In automatic exposure higher than sync (1/75th second) the automatic 
exposure is finalized off the leading shutter curtain after the 
mirror raises, although the indicated exposure is still taken off TTL 
metering.

When the shutter speed falls below the sync speed, automatic 
exposures are indicated via TTL metering, the initial exposure is 
finalized off the leading curtain, but the exposure will be modified 
by light reflecting off the film.

Consequently, using a linear polarizer can cause incorrect exposures 
under the following conditions: manual exposure, and can cause 
metering errors, but not exposure errors in automatic.

Hope this muddifies things a bit. I believe I have contradicted my 
previous post, I am thinking a bit more clearly now.
(shut up, Tom.)

William Robb

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[William Robb]

It's what happens when you give a small mind an equally small bit of 
authority.
Sadly, people will shut up and go away rather than exercising their 
rights. No one wants a confrontation, and so the small minds get 
bolder.
It's the same mechanism that makes dogs bark at people on the other 
side of a fence.

William Robb

Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer

[Peter J. Alling]

That's assuming he's using the automatic setting, I usually use manual 
adjustments.  I guess I should have made that clear.

keller.schaefer wrote:
Only the speed indication in the finder will be off (depending on the
position of the filter). The actual exposure will be fine, as it is not
affected by the half-transparent mirror (it is only determined after
the mirror has moved up).
Regards,
Sven
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Februar 2005 19:57
An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Betreff: Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer
The metering will be off depending on the position of the polarizer by
up to 1 1/2 stops if I remember correctly.
It's not impossible to work with a liner polarizer on an LX but the
circular are much easier.
Reg Wiest wrote:
 

It¹s slipped my mind . . . Does the metering system in my LX require the
   

use
 

of a circular polarizer or will a linear one work nicely.
Thanks,
RW

   


 


--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke

Re: [Looking for]

[Peter J. Alling]

Gonz wrote:

Wilko Bulte wrote:
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 03:44:26PM +0100, Thibouille wrote..
* SuperA Grip:  Sometimes I'd like to use it without the MotorA and
without the grip, it is a pain. Anybody having a spare one?
* MX MotorDrive: I have no idea about the price but I understand they
are quite rare and expensive. I still need an idea of the price. MX
winders are everywhere however.

There is one on eBay Germany at the moment.  I think they ask EUR 245.
Too expensive for my taste.  Heh!  But I was lucky last week:
I picked up a very nice MX with 1.7/50 in excellent condition
for (no typo...) EUR 12.50   (that is roughly US$ 15)
I hate you.
rg
I think I we all hate him now...
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Juan Buhler]

People are already doing something like that. Check out this boingboing post:

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/02/07/please_add_photos_of.html

and the Flickr tag:

http://flickr.com/photos/search/tags:cloud+gate/tagmode:any/

j


On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 00:05:34 +, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > 
> 
> >   "The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist
> >   Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's
> >   sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean').
> >   When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the
> >   sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that
> >   they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that
> >   it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to
> >   photograph public art in a city-owned park."
> 
> > The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes
> > some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
> > to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.
> 
> People should resist this sort of nonsense. Not easy, I know. Still,
> how about a mass snapshot - get as many people as possible to go there,
> set up their tripods and take photographs while sticking 2 fingers up
> at the jobsworths.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
>  Bob
> 
> 


-- 
Juan Buhler
http://www.jbuhler.com
blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog

RE: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Tom C]

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that you cannot stop someone from 
photographing outside in a public area.  If it were truly on private 
grounds, that's another matter.

I also don't see what copyright is being protected.  Were I to make a 3-d 
replica of the sculpture and then try to sell  it, that's one matter.  But I 
don't understand how a photograph would impinge on copyright.  I assume the 
sculptor wishes the item to be seen... he erected it in a public park.  I 
assume he knew it would be photographed as well.  I don't see how capturing 
reflected photons from the item is harmful to copyrights.

What about any piece of architecture, building, etc.?  They were all 
designed by someone...

More politically correctness BS.
Tom C.

From: "D. Glenn Arthur Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Copyrighting Public Space?
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:13:48 -0500 (EST)
Folks,
I'm behind on my list reading so I don't know whether this has
already been discussed, but just in case it hasn't ... :

"The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist
Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's
sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean').
When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the
sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that
they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that
it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to
photograph public art in a city-owned park."
The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes
some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.
-- Glenn

RE: Pentax ME SE

[Don Sanderson]

As Cotty would say: "Good On You!".
Glad you got it working, they're sweet cameras.

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: Brian Walters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 4:44 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: Pentax ME SE
> 
> 
> G'day Don (and Bob)
> 
> Thanks for the advice.
> 
> I had previously checked the stop down coupler and it moved very
> freely (much more so that with my ME Super!).  However, after
> receiving your posts I had a closer look and also compared the
> location of the coupler with its position on other bodies.  This
> showed that the coupler was definitely closer to the edge of the
> mount on the SE than on the other bodies, although it didn't look to
> be bent in any way.
> 
> Short story - after gently prising the coupler away from the mount
> edge and trying with a lens mounted again, all worked OK!!
> 
> Despite the fact that the coupler moved freely, it must have been
> forced against the edge of the mount when the lens was mounted,
> causing it to drag.
> 
> So thanks again - problem (hopefully) solved!
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> +
> 
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney, Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > Howdy Brian, if you take the lens off and face the front of
> > the camera:
> > At about the 1 o'clock position, inside the lens mount ring,
> > is a lever that comes flush with the surface of the lens
> > mount ring.
> > Rotate this lever clockwise (push down) with a fingernail
> > until it is fully down/clockwise.
> > Release the lever, it should quickly and freely return to
> > the CCW position.
> > This is the linkage that tells the camera where the lens
> > is set. (F-Stop)
> > Three things can happen, most common is the lubrication on
> > the lever getting "gummy" and slowing it's return.
> > It is also possible the lever is bent and rubbing on the
> > lens mount ring or the back of the lens, look for "bright"
> > marks, dead givaway.
> > Third is that the resistor that this lever moves is dirty,
> > this is unlikely give your description of the symptoms.
> > 
> > Hope This Helps
> > Don
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Brian Walters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 6:01 PM
> > > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > > Subject: RE: Pentax ME SE
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi Don
> > > 
> > > Quoting Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > 
> > > > I've seen no differences other than the color and diag.
> > > > prism in the ones I've owned.
> > > > What is your meter 'anomaly'?
> > > > 
> > >  
> > > > > I recently picked up a nice SE (Special Edition?) version of
> > the
> > > > ME on
> > > > > Ebeagh.  It's in great condition apart from an exposure
> > meter
> > > > anomaly
> > > > > which I can live with for now.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Basically the meter reads OK when the lens is first attached but
> > > subsequently underexposes.  
> > > 
> > > For example, if I fit the lens with its aperture set at f22 it
> > reads
> > > OK and continues to read OK as I move the aperture ring up to
> > f1.7
> > > with shutter speeds becoming faster as the lens opening is
> > increased.
> > >  If I then move the ring back towards f22, shutter speeds remain
> > far
> > > too fast.  The only way to get reasonable readings again is to
> > take
> > > the lens off and start again with a small aperture.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Cheers
> > > 
> > > Brian
> > > 
> > > ++
> > > 
> > > Brian Walters
> > > Western Sydney, Australia
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 

Re: PUG's Blue Notes

[Bob W]

Hi,

Monday, February 7, 2005, 11:56:51 PM, Doug wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:51:26 -, Steve Morphet wrote:

>> I think the best way to get a similar effect would be to genetically
>> engineer a version of myself that is competent in Photoshop, and do
>> the colour change there.

> I think that may be the best (indirect) comment I've ever seen on the
> deficiencies with current computer user interfaces.

it's a bit like a great line in a Martin Amis story (can't remember
which one). He describes a road that's so busy "if you want to get to
the other side you have to be born there".

-- 
Cheers,
 Bob

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Bob W]

Hi,

> 

>   "The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist 
>   Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's 
>   sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean'). 
>   When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the 
>   sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that 
>   they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that 
>   it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to 
>   photograph public art in a city-owned park."

> The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes 
> some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
> to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.

People should resist this sort of nonsense. Not easy, I know. Still,
how about a mass snapshot - get as many people as possible to go there,
set up their tripods and take photographs while sticking 2 fingers up
at the jobsworths.

-- 
Cheers,
 Bob

RE: PUG's Blue Notes

[Doug Franklin]

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:51:26 -, Steve Morphet wrote:

> I think the best way to get a similar effect would be to genetically
> engineer a version of myself that is competent in Photoshop, and do
> the colour change there.

I think that may be the best (indirect) comment I've ever seen on the
deficiencies with current computer user interfaces.

TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: Copyrighting Public Space?

[Cotty]

On 7/2/05, D. Glenn Arthur Jr., discombobulated, unleashed:

>I'm behind on my list reading so I don't know whether this has 
>already been discussed, but just in case it hasn't ... :
>
>
>
>   "The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist 
>   Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's 
>   sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean'). 
>   When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the 
>   sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that 
>   they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that 
>   it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to 
>   photograph public art in a city-owned park."
>
>The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes 
>some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
>to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.

In London I have been stopped from filming in city parks by attendants
proclaiming that I needed permission to film on the private property of
[such-n-such] park etc etc. I aplogise for not contacting their press and
public relations person, and promptly move 25 feet away  out of the gate
onto the street, where I set up my tripod and continue filming. Now when
they accost me and tell me not to film, I inform them that they are now
in 'my office' and to go away. They say they will call the police and I
offer the use of my phone.

I haven't been arrested.

The photographer referred to above was daft to set up his tripod - if
he's shot hand-held, nobody would have batted an eyelid. get away with
what you can - publish and be damned!




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Photo lab recommendation / NYC / Medium format ?

[Jarek Dabrowski]

Hi,
I've just started my adventure with medium format photography... yes, it 
is big fun :) But, as I don't have any darkroom equipment yet, I am 
going to stay with the C-41/E-6 processes. Can anyone recommend a photo 
lab that will develop my film, and will make prints from it ? (square 
prints preferred, but I assume it can be a problem). The best solution 
would be traditional mail-in service (I send the film, they send me the 
prints), but of course I can drop-off the film and pick up the prints 
(Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn locations preferred).

Thanks in advance
Jerry

Re: PESO - Waning Light

[Bruce Dayton]

Thanks, Tom - it turned out better than I thought it would at the
time.  I couldn't really see the clear outline of the sun until after.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Monday, February 7, 2005, 2:57:50 PM, you wrote:

TC> Beautiful Bruce.  Glad you saw it.  I like everything about it.

TC> Tom C.

Copyrighting Public Space?

[D. Glenn Arthur Jr.]

Folks,

I'm behind on my list reading so I don't know whether this has 
already been discussed, but just in case it hasn't ... :



"The Reader recounts the experience of photojournalist 
Warren Wimmer's attempts to photograph Anish Kapoor's 
sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as 'the Bean'). 
When Wimmer set up his tripod and camera to shoot the 
sculpture, security guards stopped him, demanding that 
they show him a permit. Wimmer protested, replying that 
it's absurd that one needs to pay for a permit to 
photograph public art in a city-owned park."

The explanation (they're protecting the _artist's_ copyright) makes 
some sense to me as well, but the "guards will stop you if you try
to take photos in public" aspect still feels ... troublingly odd.


-- Glenn

Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer

[Nick Clark]

Only true in automatic mode.

Nick

-Original Message-
From: "keller.schaefer"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Only the speed indication in the finder will be off (depending on the
position of the filter). The actual exposure will be fine, as it is not
affected by the half-transparent mirror (it is only determined after
the mirror has moved up).

Regards,

Sven

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Februar 2005 19:57
An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Betreff: Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer


The metering will be off depending on the position of the polarizer by
up to 1 1/2 stops if I remember correctly.
It's not impossible to work with a liner polarizer on an LX but the
circular are much easier.

RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Jens Bladt]

Many brand names have been reused as names for products that have nothing to
do with the original brand/manufacturer. Trading companiers, that have no
production anymore or have no real realations with the original brand buy
old names. Exakta, Contax, Voigtländer - are examples - to mention a few. I
believe ther's a market for just "names". When a manufacturer closes down,
they can make a profit by selling or licensing their name/brand.

A Cosina named Porst is still not a Porst, just a Cosina with "borrowed"
name tag.

BTW, I may be confusing Alpha (made by Zeiss) with Acra Swiss, a large
format Swiss camera - portable large format, great for landscapes etc. I was
reviewed in Outdoor Photographer a couple of years back.

Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 22:30
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


I wrote: "IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons." Do you have
difficulties in reading?
And by "later" I do not mean fifties SLRs which were indeed made in DDR like
the pictures clearly show. Try to find some info concerning the eighties,
for
instance. Here is one sample:
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4702&item=3872139519&r
d=1
Looks like the still later ones were made by Cosina - and maybe by some
others as well. Porst filed for bankruptcy in 2002.
And there was no Swiss camera by the name Alpha, it was the prestigious
Alpa, made by Pignons SA, no connection with Porst whatsoever.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho


- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 10:18 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


> Rebadged Chinons - in the GDR (German Democratic Republic) in the fifties?
> Come on! I seriously doubt it!
> They were from Dresden:
>
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
> d=1
>
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
> d=1
> In this last add it actually says it's baugleich (built like/the same as)
> a
> Praktica (Pentacon, Dresden, DDR)!
>
> This one even has a Praktica lens!
>
> Jens Bladt
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
>
>
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sendt: 7. februar 2005 20:52
> Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
>
>
> No, it is just a trading company, rebadging only, no manufacturing
> facilities anywhere (?). IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons.
> All the best!
> Raimo K
> Personal photography homepage at:
> http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:32 PM
> Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
>
>
>> Yes, German company. I seem to remember a connection with Swiss "Alpha",
>> but
>> I'm not shure.
>> Perhaps realated to DDR kameras from the Dresden manufacturers, Pentacon,
>> Ihagee, Zeiss Ikon etc
>> Anyway, look:
>> http://www.praktica-collector.de/134_Porst_reflex_FX2.htm
>> http://www.praktica-collector.de/162_Porst_FX4.htm
>>
>>
>
http://search.ebay.de/porst_Porst_W0QQcatrefZC12QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentryp
>
ageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR2QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsaatsZ77QQ
>> sacatZ4702
>>
>> All the best
>> Jens Bladt
>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
>>
>>
>> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
>> Fra: Wilko Bulte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sendt: 7. februar 2005 08:36
>> Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>> Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 08:44:44PM -0500, Larry Cook wrote..
>>> I have run across a 135/1.8 lens for Pentax K mount that I have never
>>> heard of. It is a Porst. Porst I believe is a German camera company and
>>> the lens was actuallt made by a Japanese company named Tomioka. Does
>>> anyone know anything about this Porst/Tomioka lens or about the brand in
>>> general?
>>
>> Porst is indeed a German company.  To the best of my knowledge they
>> never had manufacturing capability, rather they sold OEM-ed stuff under
>> their own name.  Most likely different OEMs as well.
>>
>> Around here (the Netherlands) the Porst stuff does not fetch any real
>> money at used-camera markets. For what that means..
>>
>> Wilko
>>
>
>

RE: PESO - Waning Light

[Tom C]

Beautiful Bruce.  Glad you saw it.  I like everything about it.
Tom C.

Archiving PEFs

[Derby Chang]

My collection of PEFs is rapidly growing, and I need to get a process 
together to archive these properly. My system for scanned negs is to 
have each roll on a subfolder (labelled with the date of processing), 
and then I burn them onto a single session CD or DVD as 16bit PSDs. I'd 
like to do something similar with the digital files.

Naturally, the untouched PEFs will be archived. Now, Photoshop seems to 
remember custom settings I've appled to each individual PEF while they 
are still on my hard-disk. I gather these are stored in the cache, which 
can be exported for each subfolder from the file browser. That's cool, 
but in the future, if I need to reopen the PEF with the original 
settings I applied to them, how to I reload it?

I know I can export individual .xmp files that will store the settings, 
but these aren't necessarily tied to the PEF themselves; they can be 
applied to any other file.

I suppose I could just have the .xmp given the same name as the PEF, and 
then reload it manually. But is there a more automated way to do this?

Does anyone include a JPG version of the file with their archives?
D
(PS, added a few more pics on my homepage)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~derbyc

RE: Pentax ME SE

[Brian Walters]

G'day Don (and Bob)

Thanks for the advice.

I had previously checked the stop down coupler and it moved very
freely (much more so that with my ME Super!).  However, after
receiving your posts I had a closer look and also compared the
location of the coupler with its position on other bodies.  This
showed that the coupler was definitely closer to the edge of the
mount on the SE than on the other bodies, although it didn't look to
be bent in any way.

Short story - after gently prising the coupler away from the mount
edge and trying with a lens mounted again, all worked OK!!

Despite the fact that the coupler moved freely, it must have been
forced against the edge of the mount when the lens was mounted,
causing it to drag.

So thanks again - problem (hopefully) solved!


Cheers

Brian


+

Brian Walters
Western Sydney, Australia




Quoting Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Howdy Brian, if you take the lens off and face the front of
> the camera:
> At about the 1 o'clock position, inside the lens mount ring,
> is a lever that comes flush with the surface of the lens
> mount ring.
> Rotate this lever clockwise (push down) with a fingernail
> until it is fully down/clockwise.
> Release the lever, it should quickly and freely return to
> the CCW position.
> This is the linkage that tells the camera where the lens
> is set. (F-Stop)
> Three things can happen, most common is the lubrication on
> the lever getting "gummy" and slowing it's return.
> It is also possible the lever is bent and rubbing on the
> lens mount ring or the back of the lens, look for "bright"
> marks, dead givaway.
> Third is that the resistor that this lever moves is dirty,
> this is unlikely give your description of the symptoms.
> 
> Hope This Helps
> Don
> 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Brian Walters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 6:01 PM
> > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > Subject: RE: Pentax ME SE
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Don
> > 
> > Quoting Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 
> > > I've seen no differences other than the color and diag.
> > > prism in the ones I've owned.
> > > What is your meter 'anomaly'?
> > > 
> >  
> > > > I recently picked up a nice SE (Special Edition?) version of
> the
> > > ME on
> > > > Ebeagh.  It's in great condition apart from an exposure
> meter
> > > anomaly
> > > > which I can live with for now.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Basically the meter reads OK when the lens is first attached but
> > subsequently underexposes.  
> > 
> > For example, if I fit the lens with its aperture set at f22 it
> reads
> > OK and continues to read OK as I move the aperture ring up to
> f1.7
> > with shutter speeds becoming faster as the lens opening is
> increased.
> >  If I then move the ring back towards f22, shutter speeds remain
> far
> > too fast.  The only way to get reasonable readings again is to
> take
> > the lens off and start again with a small aperture.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > Brian
> > 
> > ++
> > 
> > Brian Walters
> > Western Sydney, Australia
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[ernreed2]

Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> Well, that was dumb, that was San Jose in San Antonio. 

It's not the worst idea, Marnie -- that's the site of the Unexpected PDML 
Meeting In San Antonio (when I met Mark Stringer).


ERNR

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[John Mullan]

Well,  I'm in Sonoma County and hope attend if I don't have a work conflict.
- Original Message - 
From: "Pat K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: NorCal PDML Outing


See comments in line
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, here are some decent shots, admittedly it's not as nice as San Juan
Bautista, but it's a LOT closer.
The photos of the grounds don't make it appear as attractive as Mission 
Carmel
or Mission San Juan Capistrano that I've had the opportunity to visit (if 
we
end up at a mission, I should bring those photos for comparison)

I don't like that it is so close to the road, but I see possibilities. 
And I
don't want to drive six hours on a day trip (3 hours down, 3 back). Or 
even
five.

Unless Mission Santa Clara is better.
I believe that Mission Santa Clara is now part of the Santa Clara 
University
campus. It may be closer to San Francisco than Fremont (no bridges to 
cross),
but I could be wrong. Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds 
like
Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?

Pat in SF
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Marco Alpert]

On Feb 7, 2005, at 1:21 PM, Pat K wrote:
Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?
Looks like I decided to buy an *ist Ds (and join the list) just in 
time. I'm down in the Santa Cruz area and can vouch for the appeal of 
San Juan Bautista. However, driving to any of the other suggested 
options would be no problem.

I haven't been to the Egyptian Museum in years, but my memory is that 
it would also be an intriguing locale. Keep in mind that no flash or 
tripods are allowed inside, so bring those fast primes.

   - Marco

Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Raimo K]

I wrote: "IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons." Do you have
difficulties in reading?
And by "later" I do not mean fifties SLRs which were indeed made in DDR like 
the pictures clearly show. Try to find some info concerning the eighties, 
for
instance. Here is one sample:
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4702&item=3872139519&rd=1
Looks like the still later ones were made by Cosina - and maybe by some 
others as well. Porst filed for bankruptcy in 2002.
And there was no Swiss camera by the name Alpha, it was the prestigious 
Alpa, made by Pignons SA, no connection with Porst whatsoever.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho

- Original Message - 
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 10:18 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


Rebadged Chinons - in the GDR (German Democratic Republic) in the fifties?
Come on! I seriously doubt it!
They were from Dresden:
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
d=1
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
d=1
In this last add it actually says it's baugleich (built like/the same as)
a
Praktica (Pentacon, Dresden, DDR)!
This one even has a Praktica lens!
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 20:52
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
No, it is just a trading company, rebadging only, no manufacturing
facilities anywhere (?). IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:32 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

Yes, German company. I seem to remember a connection with Swiss "Alpha",
but
I'm not shure.
Perhaps realated to DDR kameras from the Dresden manufacturers, Pentacon,
Ihagee, Zeiss Ikon etc
Anyway, look:
http://www.praktica-collector.de/134_Porst_reflex_FX2.htm
http://www.praktica-collector.de/162_Porst_FX4.htm

http://search.ebay.de/porst_Porst_W0QQcatrefZC12QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentryp
ageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR2QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsaatsZ77QQ
sacatZ4702
All the best
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Wilko Bulte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 08:36
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 08:44:44PM -0500, Larry Cook wrote..
I have run across a 135/1.8 lens for Pentax K mount that I have never
heard of. It is a Porst. Porst I believe is a German camera company and
the lens was actuallt made by a Japanese company named Tomioka. Does
anyone know anything about this Porst/Tomioka lens or about the brand in
general?
Porst is indeed a German company.  To the best of my knowledge they
never had manufacturing capability, rather they sold OEM-ed stuff under
their own name.  Most likely different OEMs as well.
Around here (the Netherlands) the Porst stuff does not fetch any real
money at used-camera markets. For what that means..
Wilko

Re: [Looking for]

[Wilko Bulte]

On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 01:16:08PM -0600, Gonz wrote..
> 
> 
> Wilko Bulte wrote:
> >On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 03:44:26PM +0100, Thibouille wrote..
> >
> >>* SuperA Grip:  Sometimes I'd like to use it without the MotorA and
> >>without the grip, it is a pain. Anybody having a spare one?
> >>
> >>* MX MotorDrive: I have no idea about the price but I understand they
> >>are quite rare and expensive. I still need an idea of the price. MX
> >>winders are everywhere however.
> >
> >
> >There is one on eBay Germany at the moment.  I think they ask EUR 245.

http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=3871159164&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT

I was EUR 4 off, they are asking EUR 249.

> >Too expensive for my taste.  Heh!  But I was lucky last week:
> >I picked up a very nice MX with 1.7/50 in excellent condition
> >for (no typo...) EUR 12.50   (that is roughly US$ 15)
> >
> I hate you.

Hihi.. Yeah, I drew my wallet in 0.02 ms when I saw the price tag
and got verbal confirmation that it was no typo.  Remains the question
why one would want to own 3 MX' but hey..

These are really neat pieces of camera work, I had my first MX (dates back
to 1977 I think) on the shuttertester recently.  All timing is within 15%
of nominal.

For fun the EUR 12.50 body went onto the same tester and shows similar
results.

Impressive.

Wilko

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Pat K]

See comments in line

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Okay, here are some decent shots, admittedly it's not as nice as San Juan 
> Bautista, but it's a LOT closer. 

The photos of the grounds don't make it appear as attractive as Mission Carmel
or Mission San Juan Capistrano that I've had the opportunity to visit (if we
end up at a mission, I should bring those photos for comparison)

> I don't like that it is so close to the road, but I see possibilities. And I 
> don't want to drive six hours on a day trip (3 hours down, 3 back). Or even 
> five.
> 
> Unless Mission Santa Clara is better.

I believe that Mission Santa Clara is now part of the Santa Clara University
campus. It may be closer to San Francisco than Fremont (no bridges to cross),
but I could be wrong. Where abouts are the NorCal people situated? Sounds like
Bruce is in the Sacramento area and John somewhere in the South Bay?

Pat in SF

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Jan van Wijk]

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 21:18:07 +0100, Jens Bladt wrote:

>Rebadged Chinons - in the GDR (German Democratic Republic) in the fifties?
>Come on! I seriously doubt it!

Well, I don't know about the fifties, but "Porst" is a relatively well known
and widespread chain of photo stores that carry the 'cheaper' brands
including a lot of rebadged stuff.

All the ones I know off are located it what used to be WESTERN 
Germany, not the former DDR. I think they did/do mail-order as well.
They did have Practica's (maybe rebadged) and they certainly had
rebadged stuff from the far east like Chinon.

Regards, JvW





--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery

Re: Day at the beach.Funny Paw

[Jostein]

The real reason salt "melts" ice is that the affinity of water to salt 
ions is greater than the affinity towards other water molecules. So 
the salt grabs the water away from the ice crystal grid.

So there...:-)
Jostein
- Original Message - 
From: "Frantisek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: Day at the beach.Funny Paw


Eac> It melts the stuff. In many places, it is common to sprinkle 
vast
Eac> amounts of salt on the highways to keep them free of ice.
Eac> We have a potash mine not far from here, and they are now 
selling one
Eac> of their tailings materials (potassium chloride, I believe) as 
both
Eac> an ice melter and as a salt replacement for water softeners.

Eac> William Robb
Eac> 
Eac> Whew. NOT a senior moment. Thanks.
Eac> You can tell I've never lived in snow.
Hi Marnie, it apparently lowers the temperature snow and ice melts, 
as
IIRC salt water has lower freezing point. Apart from that, it 
damages water
reserves, is not much good for the environment and destroys your
leather shoes in no time ;-) That's why I dislike having to be in a
city during the winter with its melting snow slush... Not mentioning
that is looses all the beauty of snow filled streets ;-)

Good light!
  fra

Re: LX/circular or linear polarizer

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Reg Wiest"
Subject: LX/circular or linear polarizer


It¹s slipped my mind . . . Does the metering system in my LX 
require the use
of a circular polarizer or will a linear one work nicely.
In manual exposure, it can be a problem, in auto exposure, it can be 
a problem when shutter speeds exceed the sync speed.
Best is to use a circular polariser.

William Robb 

RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Jens Bladt]

Rebadged Chinons - in the GDR (German Democratic Republic) in the fifties?
Come on! I seriously doubt it!
They were from Dresden:
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
d=1
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=8275&item=3871653324&r
d=1
In this last add it actually says it's baugleich (built like/the same as) a
Praktica (Pentacon, Dresden, DDR)!

This one even has a Praktica lens!

Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 20:52
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


No, it is just a trading company, rebadging only, no manufacturing
facilities anywhere (?). IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho


- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:32 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


> Yes, German company. I seem to remember a connection with Swiss "Alpha",
> but
> I'm not shure.
> Perhaps realated to DDR kameras from the Dresden manufacturers, Pentacon,
> Ihagee, Zeiss Ikon etc
> Anyway, look:
> http://www.praktica-collector.de/134_Porst_reflex_FX2.htm
> http://www.praktica-collector.de/162_Porst_FX4.htm
>
>
http://search.ebay.de/porst_Porst_W0QQcatrefZC12QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentryp
ageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR2QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsaatsZ77QQ
> sacatZ4702
>
> All the best
> Jens Bladt
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
>
>
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: Wilko Bulte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sendt: 7. februar 2005 08:36
> Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 08:44:44PM -0500, Larry Cook wrote..
>> I have run across a 135/1.8 lens for Pentax K mount that I have never
>> heard of. It is a Porst. Porst I believe is a German camera company and
>> the lens was actuallt made by a Japanese company named Tomioka. Does
>> anyone know anything about this Porst/Tomioka lens or about the brand in
>> general?
>
> Porst is indeed a German company.  To the best of my knowledge they
> never had manufacturing capability, rather they sold OEM-ed stuff under
> their own name.  Most likely different OEMs as well.
>
> Around here (the Netherlands) the Porst stuff does not fetch any real
> money at used-camera markets. For what that means..
>
> Wilko
>

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

Okay, here are some decent shots, admittedly it's not as nice as San Juan 
Bautista, but it's a LOT closer. 

exterior:

http://www.museumoflocalhistory.org/msj_home/

http://www.msjchamber.org/about_msj.html

wedding in interior:

http://www.msjchamber.org/about_msj.html

I don't like that it is so close to the road, but I see possibilities. And I 
don't want to drive six hours on a day trip (3 hours down, 3 back). Or even 
five.

Unless Mission Santa Clara is better.

Also the Egyptian Museum again, in case, the last post was lost.

http://www.egyptianmuseum.org/

My .02 cents.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 2/7/2005 11:48:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mission San Jose contact info:
43300 Mission Blvd
Fremont, CA 94539
510-657-1797
http://www.missionsofcalifornia.org/missions/mission14.html

I still don't have a good handle on what's been restored for viewing. I did
find a site with some photos for an idea. 
http://www.thecaliforniamissions.com/sanjos/sanjos

Pat in SF
=
I have finally found some decent shots of it. I will be posting them shortly. 
Evidently they do weddings in the chapel, so found some interior shots too.

I also suggest the Egyptian Museum (Rosicrucian museum) as a backup, 
before/after lunch. Haven't researched where it is in relation to mission and 
when it 
is open, but it looks interesting.

http://www.egyptianmuseum.org/

Marnie aka Doe 

RE: PUG's Blue Notes

[Steve Morphet]

Henk Terhell wrote:

>Lemon: perhaps blue lemons are almost easier made by GMO techniques than
>painted so smoothly like this one. Looks to be a good shot (with the
>right caption) for a magazine advertisement.

Thanks Henk.  I think the best way to get a similar effect would be
to genetically engineer a version of myself that is competent in Photoshop,
and do the colour change there.  I'm not entirely happy with the way that
the paint has smoothed out the texture of the lemon skin.

It was quite fun to do though.  I may have been the first person to ask
my local paint emporium to recommend a primer suitable for citrus.  Tom C
asked how I masked the stem bit (calyx?).  I just pulled it off, and
glued it back on after the paint had dried.

Thanks to everyone who commented on the PUG.

Steve.

Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?

[Raimo K]

No, it is just a trading company, rebadging only, no manufacturing
facilities anywhere (?). IIRC the later SLRs were rebadged Chinons.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message - 
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:32 PM
Subject: RE: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?


Yes, German company. I seem to remember a connection with Swiss "Alpha",
but
I'm not shure.
Perhaps realated to DDR kameras from the Dresden manufacturers, Pentacon,
Ihagee, Zeiss Ikon etc
Anyway, look:
http://www.praktica-collector.de/134_Porst_reflex_FX2.htm
http://www.praktica-collector.de/162_Porst_FX4.htm
http://search.ebay.de/porst_Porst_W0QQcatrefZC12QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentryp
ageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR2QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsaatsZ77QQ
sacatZ4702
All the best
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Wilko Bulte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. februar 2005 08:36
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Have you ever heard of Porst lenses?
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 08:44:44PM -0500, Larry Cook wrote..
I have run across a 135/1.8 lens for Pentax K mount that I have never
heard of. It is a Porst. Porst I believe is a German camera company and
the lens was actuallt made by a Japanese company named Tomioka. Does
anyone know anything about this Porst/Tomioka lens or about the brand in
general?
Porst is indeed a German company.  To the best of my knowledge they
never had manufacturing capability, rather they sold OEM-ed stuff under
their own name.  Most likely different OEMs as well.
Around here (the Netherlands) the Porst stuff does not fetch any real
money at used-camera markets. For what that means..
Wilko

Re: NorCal PDML Outing

[Pat K]

Mission San Jose contact info:
43300 Mission Blvd
Fremont, CA 94539
510-657-1797
http://www.missionsofcalifornia.org/missions/mission14.html

I still don't have a good handle on what's been restored for viewing. I did
find a site with some photos for an idea. 
http://www.thecaliforniamissions.com/sanjos/sanjos

Pat in SF

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> In a message dated 2/7/2005 8:52:19 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> How far is the Mission in San Jose?  It seems like the next best
> choice based on restoration.  Would that one work to everyone's
> satisfaction concerning distance/time?
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Bruce
> =
> It works for me. 
> 
> But we do need to find out if it *has* been restored and when it is open. The
> 
> link I posted earlier was for one in Texas (stupid mistake). However, the web
> 
> page for California missions says it has been restored. There must be a phone
> 
> number somewhere where we could call and get information. Or have them send a
> 
> pamphlet or something.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe 
> 
> 




__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail