Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Bruce Dayton]

Hello Christian,

The reality of the situation is that because of the deep pockets and
powerful marketing of Canon, no other manufacturer can really compare
the way you are wanting to.  Frankly, Nikon doesn't hold up very well
either.  They have an aging D70 and the D2x.  Really nothing in
between.  Yes there is the D2h but it is a more specialized camera
that has too small of a pixel count.

So, in answer to your question, there are no major compelling reasons
to buy the Pentax over the Canon (hope you feel better with that
answer).  However, given an even playing field (no salesman pressure,
in stock, etc), the new user may choose the Pentax based on build,
ergonomics, viewfinder, etc.

Not being a very fair environment, few will get the opportunity to
even try/compare the Pentax offerings.  I can tell you that a friend
of mine was ready to buy her first DSLR - coming from a Nikon N50 and
one 28-80 zoom.  She was all set to buy the D70 and then talked to me.
I asked her what she really intended to do with the camera and she
indicated that she mostly wanted to work into portraiture.  I told her
that she should be considering manual focus control allowing her to
compose and focus exactly where she wanted without having the AF get
in the way.  I had her go to several stores to look at the Nikon D70,
Pentax *istDS, Canon RebelXT and Olympus 300D.  After handling them
all and focusing with them the way she would actually work, she chose
the Pentax over all the others.

The sad thing about this is, that Pentax has to be WAY better than
Canon or Nikon to be able to get any attention.  There is no way for
any other manufacturer to be WAY better than Canon.  They can be a
little bit better all the way around, but it won't matter much.

It would be a sad day indeed, if we ended having only one or two
choices of cameras in the long run.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Wednesday, June 1, 2005, 8:27:10 PM, you wrote:


C> - Original Message - 
C> From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


>> I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
>> loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
>> inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
>> Can the other two make a similar claim?

C> There's nothing wrong with your reasons.  I stayed with Pentax for 20 years
C> for the inexpensive (used), quality glass.  And I'm assuming you are
C> refering to the used market here.  Correct me if I'm wrong.  Of course,
C> there seems to be a run on A*, F* and FA* lenses recently as well as the
C> better A, F and FA lenses.  The days of eBay bargains are over.

C> But loyalty wasn't the question.  :-)  disqualified!

C> My new experience with Canon in the realm of backwards compatability is
C> almost non-existent.  I still own some nice SMC Taks that work on the 20D
C> just as well as on the D or Ds.  I do know that some Sigmas (like the EF
C> mount 300/4 AF Macro I had in K-mount, need to be "re-chipped" to function
C> on the Canon DSLRs (whatever "re-chipped" means).  Other third party EF
C> mount lenses apparently suffer the same problems.  I choose now to buy new
C> lenses... because I can. :-)

>> Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
>>  side' was really like.)

C> I used to lust after F3-HPs until I held and used an LX.

C> Christian

Re: PESO PAW - Modern Art

[Bruce Dayton]

Don't care for #2 at all - #1 was much better

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Wednesday, June 1, 2005, 7:08:12 PM, you wrote:

SB> http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wall2f.html

SB> Another interpretation of the same wall at the SFMOMA


SB> Shel 

Re: PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[Shel Belinkoff]

Thanks for commenting Bruce.  Based on what I know about your monitor, and
how different I think it is from mine, I can't help but wonder how you're
seeing this one.  Still, perhaps the shapes are strong enough that some
variation in color won't make a lot of difference in the feel of the photo.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Bruce Dayton 

> Comes across as an interesting abstract to me.  The frame around the
> image is important for me to have some kind of boundaries.
>
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Bruce
>
>
> Wednesday, June 1, 2005, 5:37:21 PM, you wrote:
>
> SB> http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html
>
> SB> San Francisco Museum of Modern Art has a striped wall.  It's boring,
but
> SB> yet there was something within the design that was intriguing.  Here's
> SB> interpretation Number One.
>
>
> SB> Shel 
>
>
>

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Rob Studdert]

On 2 Jun 2005 at 0:01, John Francis wrote:

> Anyone who finds this news in any way astonishing just hasn't been
> paying attention.  Pentax stated their future path, loud and clear,
> in the interview given at about the time the *ist-DS was released.
> First the DL, then the MF digital, and then the *ist-D follow-on.
> But the ostriches don't want to hear the facts - they'd rather
> keep their head buried in the sand, then piss and moan when Pentax
> don't release the *ist-Dn camera those folks just happen to want.

I can see what they are attempting to do, I don't know if it will work for them 
but I can tell you it's not the camera I want. Nor do I wish to have to wait 
until the MF Digital is brought to market and fails miserably before being told 
that they can't now afford to produce a better spec'd *ist D replacement.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: PESO PAW - Modern Art

[Shel Belinkoff]

I agree, but there's still something I like about it.  The framing is
pretty bad - that was just an experiment because I couldn't figure out
anything I liked better.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Boris Liberman 

> > http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wall2f.html
> > 
> > Another interpretation of the same wall at the SFMOMA
>
> This is one is good but the first one is better. The first one is 
> sharper (not in photography sharpness pov), clearer, stronger...

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Rob Studdert]

On 1 Jun 2005 at 23:14, color wrote:

> speaking of cars. people do all kinds of things to make their cars UNIQUE. 
> they
> put 27" rims on them, custom paint jobs, crate engines, lowered or raised
> suspension, etc. etc. and then they buy all those rebels and 300D's.
> 
> it's kind of like everybody dreams of driving a beige toyota corolla.
> 
> conclusion: if you want to be original and unique - buy f...n' Pentax, you 
> won't
> see the same one every five feet walking down the street...

It's not about being original, it's about being associated with or linked to 
the best. Using your car analogy some people also buy their new car with all 
the factory options and just leave it at that, just like buying a top line 
camera.

The fact that Pentax don't have a visible upper level body doesn't help their 
position in the market.


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[Shel Belinkoff]

Thanks Boris ... the idea of working with the original photo of the dull,
stripped wall just caught my attention this afternoon.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Boris Liberman 

> > http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html

> Shel, that would serve as an excellent book cover for MOMA catalogs or 
> exhibition promotions... I mean this as a compliment.
>
> I should say that to me this is one of your more successful non-people 
> works...
>
> Boris

Re: PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hi Peter ... I meant that the original wall was boring.  Perhaps this is
less so ;-))

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: P. J. Alling 

> I wouldn't call it boring, exactly.  More strange.  You've rendered very 
> well as usual.

> >http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html
> >
> >San Francisco Museum of Modern Art has a striped wall.  It's boring, but
> >yet there was something within the design that was intriguing.  Here's
> >interpretation Number One.

Re: Good things about *istDL

[color]

speaking of cars. people do all kinds of things to make their cars UNIQUE. 
they put 27" rims on them, custom paint jobs, crate engines, lowered or 
raised suspension, etc. etc.

and then they buy all those rebels and 300D's.

it's kind of like everybody dreams of driving a beige toyota corolla.

conclusion: if you want to be original and unique - buy f...n' Pentax, you 
won't see the same one every five feet walking down the street...


:)
color


Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 15:08:34 -0400
From: Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Good things about *istDL



. Strangely car companies who have a winning race team sell more cars than 
companies who do not, even though the race cars are nothing like the ones 
you can buy. All along same same cameras.


graywolf

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[John Francis]

On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 10:53:15PM -0400, Christian wrote:
> 
> Once again, Pentax has not even thrown us a bone.  "Hey check it out guys!
> a new DSLR!  (oh yeah, not the one our loyal, salivating customers have been
> begging for, it's another downgrade.  even LOWER spec-ed than the previous
> release)"

Anyone who finds this news in any way astonishing just hasn't been
paying attention.  Pentax stated their future path, loud and clear,
in the interview given at about the time the *ist-DS was released.
First the DL, then the MF digital, and then the *ist-D follow-on.
But the ostriches don't want to hear the facts - they'd rather
keep their head buried in the sand, then piss and moan when Pentax
don't release the *ist-Dn camera those folks just happen to want.

> I'm not bashing the new camera. . . .
> But I'm wondering what it offers that the others do not.

At present, the price looks pretty good.  But it doesn't really
need to offer what the others don't - it just has to be able to
compete on an equal footing. The low end of the market is almost
entirely price driven - come in $25 cheaper and you'll probably
get the sale.


> If Pentax want to be a niche player, great!  But their niche should be
> advanced amateurs such as myself who are willing to pay for a steady stream
> of "professional-grade" cameras, lenses and accessories.  They shouldn't
> waste their time (and mine; my dissatisfaction with their product strategy
> has been voiced) with entry-level cameras that - in spite of build quality,
> features, size and ergonomics - cannot compete with current offerings from
> other companies based on marketing and brand recognition.

Pentax have been going broke trying to play to that niche for years.
They don't have a viable future continuing along that line - there
just aren't enough "loyal, salivating customers" today.  Of course
they might not have a viable future anyway, but at least they're
doing what is necessary to try and stay in business.

Re: PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[Bruce Dayton]

Hello Shel,

Comes across as an interesting abstract to me.  The frame around the
image is important for me to have some kind of boundaries.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Wednesday, June 1, 2005, 5:37:21 PM, you wrote:

SB> http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html

SB> San Francisco Museum of Modern Art has a striped wall.  It's boring, but
SB> yet there was something within the design that was intriguing.  Here's
SB> interpretation Number One.


SB> Shel 

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Christian]

- Original Message - 
From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
> loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
> inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
> Can the other two make a similar claim?

There's nothing wrong with your reasons.  I stayed with Pentax for 20 years
for the inexpensive (used), quality glass.  And I'm assuming you are
refering to the used market here.  Correct me if I'm wrong.  Of course,
there seems to be a run on A*, F* and FA* lenses recently as well as the
better A, F and FA lenses.  The days of eBay bargains are over.

But loyalty wasn't the question.  :-)  disqualified!

My new experience with Canon in the realm of backwards compatability is
almost non-existent.  I still own some nice SMC Taks that work on the 20D
just as well as on the D or Ds.  I do know that some Sigmas (like the EF
mount 300/4 AF Macro I had in K-mount, need to be "re-chipped" to function
on the Canon DSLRs (whatever "re-chipped" means).  Other third party EF
mount lenses apparently suffer the same problems.  I choose now to buy new
lenses... because I can. :-)

> Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
>  side' was really like.)

I used to lust after F3-HPs until I held and used an LX.

Christian

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Christian]

- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Maybe will see a new OP camera Olympus-Pentax. :)

I wonder if Pentax could make a K to 4/3 adapter. :-)

Christian

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Christian]

- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> What swayed his decision?
>
> He got the Pentax because he already had a KX and Super-A, and a few
> lenses. He liked the idea of hanging onto those, if for nothing but
> sentimental reasons. The fact they would work on his *ist Ds was a big
bonus.

My original hypothetical was for a new consumer who didn't have any previous
lenses.  BU, sorry!  Previous brand ownership is a no-brainer in making
the decision.  I bought the D (a great camera, thankfully) because I already
had bags-o-gear.  Your response has been disqualified! :-)

Christian

Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Scott Loveless]

That's not quite right.  Lithium batteries maintain a more constant
voltage for a longer time and then drop off suddenly, whereas
alkalines and rechargeable NiMH batteries tend to have a gradual drop
off in voltage.


On 6/1/05, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes but voltage is higher than usual AA batteries AFAIR
> That may be the problem.
> 
> 2005/6/1, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Never noticed them getting even warm in the D or
> > its AA battery pack.
> > Not even when using the flash or LCD constantly.
> > And the life of Lithiums is nothing short of amazing.
> > Seems to me that of all of the newer digis that use a
> > "special" battery pack, that pack is Lithium.
> >
> > Don
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:43 PM
> > > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > > Subject: Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
> > >
> > >
> > > I found this in the technical FAQ section:
> > >
> > > "4. Never use manganese or lithium batteries, as these battery types
> > > may overheat in the camera."
> > >
> > > Do the new lithium AA batteries (and so many other lithium photo
> > > batteries) really get hotter than other types?
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > >- Original Message - From: "Joe Wilensky" Subject: OT:
> > > >Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
> > > >
> > > >>I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), and it
> > > >>takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines and
> > > >>recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a word
> > > >>about using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly current camera
> > > >>(2004, discontinued this year). Is there any reason I can't use
> > > >>lithium AA batteries in this camera?
> > > >
> > > >no.
> > > >
> > > >William Robb
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Joe Wilensky
> > > Editor, Cornell Chronicle
> > > Cornell News Office
> > > 312 College Ave.
> > > Ithaca, NY 14850
> > >
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail
> > > (607) 255-5373 fax
> > >
> > > http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> --
> Thibouille
> --
> Z1,SuperA,KX,MX,P30t and KR-10x ...
> 
> 


-- 
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman

Re: PESO PAW - Modern Art

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wall2f.html

Another interpretation of the same wall at the SFMOMA


This is one is good but the first one is better. The first one is 
sharper (not in photography sharpness pov), clearer, stronger...


Boris

Re: PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!


http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art has a striped wall.  It's boring, but
yet there was something within the design that was intriguing.  Here's
interpretation Number One.


Shel, that would serve as an excellent book cover for MOMA catalogs or 
exhibition promotions... I mean this as a compliment.


I should say that to me this is one of your more successful non-people 
works...


Boris

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Tom C]

I think Pentax may have found it's new niche, and it may not be the one we 
wish it to be.


I think it's quickly becoming a forgotten brand.   Sort of like the Ricoh 
and Konica that preceded it.


Maybe will see a new OP camera Olympus-Pentax. :)

Tom C.



If Pentax want to be a niche player, great!  But their niche should be
advanced amateurs such as myself who are willing to pay for a steady stream
of "professional-grade" cameras, lenses and accessories.  They shouldn't
waste their time (and mine; my dissatisfaction with their product strategy
has been voiced) with entry-level cameras that - in spite of build quality,
features, size and ergonomics - cannot compete with current offerings from
other companies based on marketing and brand recognition.

Re: Off to GFM!

[Scott Loveless]

Fortunately, he's not staying long.  

On 6/1/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should we pity Pittsburgh...
> 
> Mark Roberts wrote:
> 
> >Knarf just called on his cell phone from somewhere just outside
> >Pittsburgh. That means I'll be departing soon.
> >Full report later :)
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
> --Groucho Marx
> 
> 


-- 
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman

Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow

[Scott Loveless]

Thanks for the feedback, Tom.  J and C describes the Efke and Adox
films as thin emulsion, high silver content.  I would guess that
they're not much like the older films, either.

On 6/1/05, Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hum..? GRIN!
> 
> So, you think they still make it exactly like they did pre-WWII?
> 
> Not a chance. CP-400 has extended red sensitivity. CP-200 may be a thick 
> emulsion film (I like the 4x5) but it is not a 1939 film, nor is it Super-XX. 
> Classic Pan is made by Forte, as is Freestyles Arista-EDU. They and Forte Pan 
> 200 & 400 are all the same. The French stuff does not seem to be the same, at 
> lease it seems to be coated on different film stock (sheet film sizes).
> 
> The Efke from J&C Photo (supposedly the same as Adox) may have old style 
> emulsions. I have not used it so could not say. If you are looking for slow 
> films it seems to be about the only thing generally available now.
> 
> You can find out a lot about these and other B&W films over on the Analog 
> Photography Users Group 
> 
> graywolf
> http://www.graywolfphoto.com
> "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
> ---
> 
> 
> Scott Loveless wrote:
> > In a nutshell, I asked the folks at J and C this question:  How will
> > Classic Pan 200 and 400 compare to the spectral response of older
> > films like Super XX or early Tri-X?
> >
> > Their response, verbatim:  Similar, the base technology of these films
> > is from an old Kodak factory in Eastern Europe.
> >
> > There you have it, folks.  I guess we'll see.
> >
> >
> > On 5/31/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>I'd certainly be interested in knowing how that works for you.  Do you know
> >>if J&C brand film mimicks the color response of older film?  It's been
> >>suggested elsewhere that a very light blue filter can be used to emulate
> >>the spectral response of older stocks.  What developer were you thinking of
> >>using?
> >>
> >>Shel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>[Original Message]
> >>>From: Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>To: 
> >>>Date: 5/30/2005 9:42:30 PM
> >>>Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow
> >>>
> >>>Shel,
> >>>
> >>>The propaganda at J and C suggests that their Classic Pan 200 is
> >>>similar to the old Super XX.  I emailed them yesterday asking about
> >>>film that might be similar to the older, grainier Tri-X.  They replied
> >>>today suggesting the Classic Pan 400.  So I ordered five rolls of
> >>>each.  I suppose it could just be a marketing ploy on their part, but
> >>>I'm hopeful.  I'll let you, and everyone else, know how they work out
> >>>as soon as I can.
> >>>
> >>>On 5/29/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> Hi,
> 
> I've never tried the J&C labeled films, but have used Formapan and
> >>
> >>Bergger
> >>
> (which I understand are similar).  I only use water stop when I've run
> >>
> >>out
> >>
> of regular acidic stop bath - which is, essentially, never   Never
> >>
> >>had
> >>
> a problem with acidic stop bath, however, I use it diluted a little more
> than called for and as a one-shot.  I forget the proportions now (5 or
> >>
> >>10
> >>
> cc to 15oz water, perhaps), and I use a graduated hypodermic syringe to
> >>
> >>add
> >>
> the stop to the water.
> 
> Shel
> 
> 
> 
> >[Original Message]
> >From: Scott Loveless
> 
> >J and C claims their JandC Classic Pan 200 and 400 films are thick
> >emulsions and high silver content.  I've never tried these, but have
> >been thinking about buying a few rolls to test.
> >
> >Going off on a tangent, have you ever had any problems using an acidic
> >stop bath on thick emulsion films?  Do you think a water stop would be
> >a better option?
> >
> >On 5/29/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Scott,
> >>
> >>Plus-X is a modern film, relatively speaking.  I use older-style
> 
> emulsions
> 
> >>most of the time with my B&W work, but they have all been
> >>
> >>modernized.
> >>
> Have
> 
> >>used some of what J&C sells - Efke, and others.  Still not getting
> >>
> >>what
> >>
> I
> 
> >>want, but will keep experimenting and trying.  Thanks.
> >>
> >>Shel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>[Original Message]
> >>>From: Scott Loveless
> >>>
> >>>Is it necessary to use a modern film?  Plus-X, or perhaps
> >>
> >>something
> >>
> >>>from JandCphoto.com, might give you that glow.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >Scott Loveless
> >http://www.twosixteen.com
> >
> >--
> >"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
> 
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>Scott Loveless
> >>>http://www.twosixteen.com
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by 

Re: OT: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Scott Loveless]

Lithium batteries should be fine.  This link
http://dpfwiw.com/batteries.htm#lithium2 is to an article recommending
NiMH rechargeables, but also says good things about lithium.  The only
drawback - they're not rechargeable.

On 6/1/05, Joe Wilensky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), and it
> takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines and
> recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a word about
> using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly current camera (2004,
> discontinued this year). Is there any reason I can't use lithium AA
> batteries in this camera?
> 
> Joe
> --
> 
> Joe Wilensky
> Editor, Cornell Chronicle
> Cornell News Office
> 312 College Ave.
> Ithaca, NY 14850
> 
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail
> (607) 255-5373 fax
> 
> http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
> 
> 


-- 
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Christian]

- Original Message - 
From: "DagT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> So, who cares about the answers to your question?

I think you, the loyal Pentax user, should care if you are at all interested
in products more geared to the advanced amateur or (dare I write it?)
professional user who wish to use some of that awesome SMC glass (which is
remarkably hard to get new, but still available on the used market).

Once again, Pentax has not even thrown us a bone.  "Hey check it out guys!
a new DSLR!  (oh yeah, not the one our loyal, salivating customers have been
begging for, it's another downgrade.  even LOWER spec-ed than the previous
release)"

I'm not bashing the new camera.  The D is a great camera.  The Ds is a great
camera, marketed and priced competitively against the Rebel and D70.  I'm
sure the DL will turn out to produce great images and have the small size
and ergonomics that Pentax is famous for.  I understand wanting to capture
new users who do not own an SLR yet.  But I'm wondering what it offers that
the others do not.  And I'm wondering how Pentax expect to out-compete (and
you KNOW they have to out-compete) the other two manufacturers who have
their names in lights and who advertise, market, and offer incentives to
salespeople.  We've read it here many times: You go in a store and ask for
Pentax and the salespeople immediately push the two big brands at you.
Sure, you and I and the other PDMLers can hold our own and get what we want,
but the average, uneducated consumer will walk out of the store with a Canon
or Nikon without even knowing about a brand called Pentax.

If Pentax want to be a niche player, great!  But their niche should be
advanced amateurs such as myself who are willing to pay for a steady stream
of "professional-grade" cameras, lenses and accessories.  They shouldn't
waste their time (and mine; my dissatisfaction with their product strategy
has been voiced) with entry-level cameras that - in spite of build quality,
features, size and ergonomics - cannot compete with current offerings from
other companies based on marketing and brand recognition.

Re: PESO: Lights & shadows

[Scott Loveless]

Luben,

I like the composition and exposure except for the window.  I think if
it weren't quite so blown out this would be a really wonderful
photograph.  Otherwise, great!

On 6/1/05, luben karavelov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello to all,
> Last I was participating in a conference in Plovdiv (one of the biggest
> towns in Bulgaria). It was organized in a house dating from the end of
> 18th century in the ancient part of the town. The conference took part
> in the yard, thanks the good weather, but I was amazed from the stairs
> in the house. I took the picture with 19mm Vivitar lens on Fuji 100ss
> at about 4am. I shoot it with the electric lights switched on in order
> to compensate the scene contrast and was underexposed by 1 or 2 stops
> because I was trying to present the dark and sombre atmosphere of the
> house. The film was over-developed later by mistake - it is my first
> roll of Neopan100ss that I am shooting and developping - but it is one
> of the successful images on the film because the image was underexposed.
> 
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00COZc&photo_id=3415443&photo_sel_index=0
> 
> I would like to hear all your comments, critics and advices.
> 
> Best regards
> luben
> 
> 


-- 
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com

--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman

PESO PAW - Modern Art

[Shel Belinkoff]

http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wall2f.html

Another interpretation of the same wall at the SFMOMA


Shel 

Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future

[Herb Chong]

the name has no OEM cost.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future



Hell, I thought that the "Name" made up half the cost on a Leica.

Herb Chong wrote:

the Leica with a 10MP sensor and less components lists for $9K. since 
Kodak also makes the 645D sensor, there no chance that the 645D sensor 
will cost substantially less than the one used in the Leica. the 
sensor makes up easily half the OEM cost of the camera.

Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future

[Herb Chong]

yield doesn't depend on volume. that is the determining factor.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future


I think you'll find that the prices of sensors, like the prices of several 
other things, are quite closely related to volume. I don't recall anybody 
suggesting that Leica is a high volume camera maker. A manufacturer who 
was able to commit to rather higher volumes than Leica would find the 
price of the sensor to be correspondingly lower.

Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Herb Chong]

i can't find them in the US anymore.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Leon Mlakar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?




Why don't you try rechargable alkaline AA's? I've been using them for some
time in my (seldom used) flash. They have the shelf life of ordinary AA's 
so

I know that it'll work when picked up, even though I didn't recharge
batteries last week. Unlike NiMh that work at 1.2V they work at 1.5V of
ordinary alkalines. True, rechargable alkalines are only good for a 100 or
so recharge cycles but that, I suppose, should not be an issue.

Re: Zooms (was Re: Looking for a lense)

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "John Forbes"

Subject: Re: Zooms (was Re: Looking for a lense)


Many people find it hard to distinguish between a zoom lens and a 
"telescopic" lens.  :-)


One Ebay hopeful was offering a 135mm wide-angle last week.  And, yes, the 
picture showed a genuine 135mm, not a 35mm.


Hopefully it had a large image circle.

William Robb 

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Mishka"

Subject: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?



i am just curious: all this time i have been hearing about
"inexpensive excellent pentax lenses". what are they
(i mean, both, inexpensive AND excellent)?


Prices are on an upswing at the moment. I have, in the past, gotten some 
very excellent deals on good Pentax glass.


William Robb

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Don Sanderson"

Subject: RE: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?



Just found a Nikon compatibility chart:
http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/bodylens.htm

It's a bit complicated for sure.
Glad I bought an FM though. ;-)


Interestingly, Nikon does have very good forward compatability..
I suppose that as long as the lens has an aperture ring, a set of rabbit 
ears can be attached, thereby giving full function with the F Photomic 
through EL/ELW.
A person who is smart with a metal file can modify non AI lenses to work on 
a lot of bodies as well.


William Robb 

Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Herb Chong]

a lawyer's "may" and a users "may" are two different things.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?



I found this in the technical FAQ section:

"4. Never use manganese or lithium batteries, as these battery types 
may overheat in the camera."


Do the new lithium AA batteries (and so many other lithium photo 
batteries) really get hotter than other types?

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Herb Chong]

most in sales volume, nearly least in profits.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 3:04 PM
Subject: Good things about *istDL


It just occurred to me - Pentax is *actually* competing with Nikon and 
Canon on "*istD and lower" market segment. It is probably where the most 
money is w.r.t. DSLR sales...

Re: *ist DL now on dpreview

[P. J. Alling]

Actually I think it was the ME variants that sold in record numbers that 
made the LX possible, though the K1000 sales certainly helped keep it alive.


William Robb wrote:



- Original Message - From: "Tom C"
Subject: RE: *ist DL now on dpreview



Sounds like their next top of the line P&S to me.

Actually I appreciate that they are competing in the lower price 
range strata of DSLR's.  It's what they likely have to do. 
Unfortunately it also likely means they're ingnoring me and others 
that are interested in the higher end.



Any idea how many K1000s they sold to make the LX possible?

William Robb





--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[P. J. Alling]

I wouldn't call it boring, exactly.  More strange.  You've rendered very 
well as usual.


Shel Belinkoff wrote:


http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art has a striped wall.  It's boring, but
yet there was something within the design that was intriguing.  Here's
interpretation Number One.


Shel 




 




--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: Predictable Pentax

[Herb Chong]

expanding the base works only if you are not losing a lot of money while 
doing it. if you do, there's no money left for when the demand curve 
flattens and prices drop. in the case of the DSLR market, the price 
competition is going to get much worse in the next couple of years and 
profit margins are going to drop further. that is why delivering a high end 
body now makes sense. Fuji, Olympus, and Konica-Minolta have made 
indications that this is their strategy. large market share at razor thin 
margins or small market share at large margins? playing at the low end is a 
good way to go out of business.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Village Idiot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax


I have to complete agree with Pål on this.  Pentax had a shrinking SLR base 
prior to the DS, so expanding the SLR customer base makes a lot of sense. 
I know the hard core Pentaxians want a pro DSLR, but expanding the customer 
base is a smart thing to do, especially while they are working on 
(hopefully) a pro version.  I know my first camera was an ME Super, but 
that led to buy an LX later.

Re: Predictable Pentax

[Herb Chong]

at 1-5% profit margin, it's not going to work. they need a high end camera 
with high end specs and price and long useful market life.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax



The only way Pentax is going to stay in business is by building
inexpensive cameras. The MZ-S was never the company's profit-maker, it
was the ZX-L, etc.

Re: Predictable Pentax

[Herb Chong]

lower prices is a good way to lose money. prices are dropping so fast that a 
camera has to make back its development costs in about 4 or 5 months tops, 
with DSLRs having maybe a year to do it. at that point, the camera is 
obsolete compared to its competition, whether or not it is functionally 
obsolete, and has little remaining sales potential.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax


The main struggle for DSLR's at present is lower price. Lower prices means 
higher volumes particularly for Pentax. As Pentax are about to increase 
their customer base for DSLR such a move is hardly surprising. In fact, 
all manufacturers most important arena are in the lower price segments. A 
difference from the last 15 years for Pentax is that they now intend SLR's 
to become their main target area making comparisons to the 90's not very 
relevant.

RE: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Don Sanderson]

28/3.5, 35/3.5, 135/3.5, 200/4, 50/1.7, just to name a few.
All inexpensive, all very good to excellent.
For all 5 of the above I paid less than $150.00, I'm very
pleased with all of them.

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 7:26 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
> 
> 
> i am just curious: all this time i have been hearing about
> "inexpensive excellent pentax lenses". what are they
> (i mean, both, inexpensive AND excellent)?
> 
> from my personal experience, on average, excellent
> older pentax glass costs either same or more than the competition
> 
> not that i am complaining: i am very happy with the lenses I have.
> but they have been nowhere close to "inexpensive" (well, by 
> "35mm japanese" standards anyway)
> 
> best,
> mishka
> 
> On 6/1/05, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
> > loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
> > inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
> > Can the other two make a similar claim?
> > 
> > Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
> >  side' was really like.)
> 

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[P. J. Alling]

You can also use the best of the 3rd party lenses that are unusable on 
current competitors offerings.  Many of these lenses can be had for a 
song, I just picked up for instance a Vivitar Series 1 35-85 f2.8, 
considered a cult classic for it's sharpness, relative light weight, and 
high build quality.  I paid about $50.00 including shipping.  You can't 
use the FD version of this lens on a current Canon, or the MC version of 
this lens on a current Minolta or ...


I've gotten very good results on the *ist-D with this lens, it makes a 
nice normal to short-med. telephoto and at f2.8 it's as fast as you're 
going to find in this range.


Mishka wrote:


i am just curious: all this time i have been hearing about
"inexpensive excellent pentax lenses". what are they
(i mean, both, inexpensive AND excellent)?

from my personal experience, on average, excellent
older pentax glass costs either same or more than the competition

not that i am complaining: i am very happy with the lenses I have.
but they have been nowhere close to "inexpensive" (well, by 
"35mm japanese" standards anyway)


best,
mishka

On 6/1/05, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
Can the other two make a similar claim?

Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
side' was really like.)
   




 




--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: *ist DL now on dpreview

[Tom C]

No, but is there a direct correlation between selling hundreds of thousands 
of K1000's and the advent of the LX.


Lot's of people wanted a low end model and lots of people wanted a high end 
model.


Tom C.




From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: 
Subject: Re: *ist DL now on dpreview
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 17:21:27 -0600


- Original Message - From: "Tom C"
Subject: RE: *ist DL now on dpreview



Sounds like their next top of the line P&S to me.

Actually I appreciate that they are competing in the lower price range 
strata of DSLR's.  It's what they likely have to do. Unfortunately it also 
likely means they're ingnoring me and others that are interested in the 
higher end.


Any idea how many K1000s they sold to make the LX possible?

William Robb

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR

[P. J. Alling]

Kodak was using a custom sensor, Pentax is using a comodity sensor.

Herb Chong wrote:

it means that selling more cameras than Pentax at $4K per camera 
wasn't making enough money for Kodak to stay in the business.


Herb
- Original Message - From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 2:26 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR



Somehow I think the discontinuation of Kodak cameras means slightly
more than just a line in DPReview newscast...








--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future

[P. J. Alling]

Hell, I thought that the "Name" made up half the cost on a Leica.

Herb Chong wrote:

the Leica with a 10MP sensor and less components lists for $9K. since 
Kodak also makes the 645D sensor, there no chance that the 645D sensor 
will cost substantially less than the one used in the Leica. the 
sensor makes up easily half the OEM cost of the camera.


Herb
- Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future


There's a world of price differentiation between and F3 and the 645D. 
Yeah, hobbyists will use a 645 system that they purchased for a grand 
or so. But will they come up with close to 10K for a digital body? 
Some say it will be much more. I doubt it. If there's no pro market 
for a 645D, it will be dead on arrival.

Paul








--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams

[Butch Black]

Shel Belinkoff wrote on 01.06.05 1:34:




Camera bodies are discontinued.   Kodak will continue to develop CCD and
CMOS image sensors.

Here's the part that's most discouraging: Kodak will only support the
cameras through 2008.  So, the cameras are what, about a year or so old,
making it that Kodak will only support what is arguably their flagship
camera for a total of four or five years.

That's today's digital world, I guess.



I have a friend who has the Kodak DCSc who does not seem overly concerned 
over this, According to him, support for the earlier Canon pro models ended 
soon after the into of their replacements.


Butch 

PESO PAW - The Wall: Number One

[Shel Belinkoff]

http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/wall1s.html

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art has a striped wall.  It's boring, but
yet there was something within the design that was intriguing.  Here's
interpretation Number One.


Shel 

PDML Mini-FAQ

[Graywolf]

http://www.graywolfphoto.com/pentax/pdml-faq.html
Link posted weekly (if I remember).






--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.4.0 - Release Date: 6/1/2005

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Mishka]

i am just curious: all this time i have been hearing about
"inexpensive excellent pentax lenses". what are they
(i mean, both, inexpensive AND excellent)?

from my personal experience, on average, excellent
older pentax glass costs either same or more than the competition

not that i am complaining: i am very happy with the lenses I have.
but they have been nowhere close to "inexpensive" (well, by 
"35mm japanese" standards anyway)

best,
mishka

On 6/1/05, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
> loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
> inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
> Can the other two make a similar claim?
> 
> Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
>  side' was really like.)

Re: Zooms (was Re: Looking for a lense)

[John Forbes]

Many people find it hard to distinguish between a zoom lens and a  
"telescopic" lens.  :-)


One Ebay hopeful was offering a 135mm wide-angle last week.  And, yes, the  
picture showed a genuine 135mm, not a 35mm.


John

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 23:27:00 +0100, John Dallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


It seems to come from people who think that the singular of "lenses" is
"lense". However, it is definitely a misspelling by British standards.


A word that isn't misspelt often, but is definitely misapplied often, is
"zoom". The non-working K2 I have came with a "zoom" lens that looked  
like

a 100-200 zoom in the eBay photo but proved to be the SMCP-M 100/4.0
macro. I didn't complain, because I preferred the macro.

However, it does seem that people with no clue about photography often
described any lens much physically large than a standard lens as a  
"zoom";

I think this stems from watching television, where any narrow-angle shot
is thought of as "zoomed".





--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.3.3 - Release Date: 31/05/2005

Re: digital zoom?

[Herb Chong]

i don't like the 24-90 on the *istD. not sharp enough. the 16-45 is sharper, 
but not as long.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: digital zoom?



Amita, will 24-90 do?

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams

[Herb Chong]

Kodak managed to sell more full frame DSLRs than Pentax did APS-C ones.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams



Who really knows? For now it seems unlikely that FF will ever be popular.
Demand is low and thus production too hence price high... And it seems 
that

pros prefere cameras as good photographics tools - that's why APS-C sensor
based D2X is and was selling much better than FF Kodaks even though their
price was very similar.

Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future

[John Forbes]

Herb,

I think you'll find that the prices of sensors, like the prices of several  
other things, are quite closely related to volume. I don't recall anybody  
suggesting that Leica is a high volume camera maker. A manufacturer who  
was able to commit to rather higher volumes than Leica would find the  
price of the sensor to be correspondingly lower.


John



On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:36:59 +0100, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

the Leica with a 10MP sensor and less components lists for $9K. since  
Kodak also makes the 645D sensor, there no chance that the 645D sensor  
will cost substantially less than the one used in the Leica. the sensor  
makes up easily half the OEM cost of the camera.


Herb
- Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future


There's a world of price differentiation between and F3 and the 645D.  
Yeah, hobbyists will use a 645 system that they purchased for a grand  
or so. But will they come up with close to 10K for a digital body? Some  
say it will be much more. I doubt it. If there's no pro market for a  
645D, it will be dead on arrival.

Paul











--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.3.3 - Release Date: 31/05/2005

RE: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Don Sanderson]

Just found a Nikon compatibility chart:
http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/bodylens.htm

It's a bit complicated for sure.
Glad I bought an FM though. ;-)

Don


> -Original Message-
> From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 6:43 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Don Sanderson"
> Subject: RE: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
>
>
> >I don't know Canon or Nikon at all.
> > How "backward compatible" are they compared to Pentax
> > as far as glass?
>
> Nikon is a minefield. They have made numerous small changes to
> their mount
> over the years, each time making old equipment obsolete.
> Canon completely obsolesced the FD mount when they put the EOS
> system on the
> market, and made it very plain that this was the way they were going, so
> suck it up.
> They did support the FD mount for a few years, so people had the
> opportunity
> to buy new glass for a while.
>
> From the point of view of lens compatability, Pentax is, by far, the best
> SLR manufacturer.
> The other day, I had a 40 year old lens on a 30 year old bellows on a 20
> year old extension tube, on my istD.
> That works for me.
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: Lights & shadows

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "luben karavelov"

Subject: PESO: Lights & shadows





http://photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00COZc&photo_id=3415443&photo_sel_index=0

I would like to hear all your comments, critics and advices.


I like it.
It looks like a great place to shoot nudes.

William Robb 

Re: *ist DL now on dpreview

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Tom C"

Subject: RE: *ist DL now on dpreview



Sounds like their next top of the line P&S to me.

Actually I appreciate that they are competing in the lower price range 
strata of DSLR's.  It's what they likely have to do. Unfortunately it also 
likely means they're ingnoring me and others that are interested in the 
higher end.


Any idea how many K1000s they sold to make the LX possible?

William Robb 

Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Joe Wilensky" 
Subject: Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?




I found this in the technical FAQ section:

"4. Never use manganese or lithium batteries, as these battery types 
may overheat in the camera."


Well slap my face.
May I rephrase my answer?

William Robb

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Don Sanderson"

Subject: RE: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?



I don't know Canon or Nikon at all.
How "backward compatible" are they compared to Pentax
as far as glass?


Nikon is a minefield. They have made numerous small changes to their mount 
over the years, each time making old equipment obsolete.
Canon completely obsolesced the FD mount when they put the EOS system on the 
market, and made it very plain that this was the way they were going, so 
suck it up.
They did support the FD mount for a few years, so people had the opportunity 
to buy new glass for a while.


From the point of view of lens compatability, Pentax is, by far, the best 

SLR manufacturer.
The other day, I had a 40 year old lens on a 30 year old bellows on a 20 
year old extension tube, on my istD.

That works for me.

William Robb

Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?

[Herb Chong]

the cost of the sensor.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Pentax Discuss" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 3:17 AM
Subject: Full Frame - What's the problem?


Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame 
(35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely 
one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked?

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR

[Herb Chong]

it means that selling more cameras than Pentax at $4K per camera wasn't 
making enough money for Kodak to stay in the business.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 2:26 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR



Somehow I think the discontinuation of Kodak cameras means slightly
more than just a line in DPReview newscast...

Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future

[Herb Chong]

the Leica with a 10MP sensor and less components lists for $9K. since Kodak 
also makes the 645D sensor, there no chance that the 645D sensor will cost 
substantially less than the one used in the Leica. the sensor makes up 
easily half the OEM cost of the camera.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future


There's a world of price differentiation between and F3 and the 645D. 
Yeah, hobbyists will use a 645 system that they purchased for a grand or 
so. But will they come up with close to 10K for a digital body? Some say 
it will be much more. I doubt it. If there's no pro market for a 645D, it 
will be dead on arrival.

Paul

PESO: Lights & shadows

[luben karavelov]

Hello to all,
Last I was participating in a conference in Plovdiv (one of the biggest 
towns in Bulgaria). It was organized in a house dating from the end of 
18th century in the ancient part of the town. The conference took part 
in the yard, thanks the good weather, but I was amazed from the stairs 
in the house. I took the picture with 19mm Vivitar lens on Fuji 100ss 
at about 4am. I shoot it with the electric lights switched on in order 
to compensate the scene contrast and was underexposed by 1 or 2 stops 
because I was trying to present the dark and sombre atmosphere of the 
house. The film was over-developed later by mistake - it is my first 
roll of Neopan100ss that I am shooting and developping - but it is one 
of the successful images on the film because the image was underexposed.


http://photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00COZc&photo_id=3415443&photo_sel_index=0

I would like to hear all your comments, critics and advices.

Best regards
luben

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Bob Blakely]

It just occurred to me that the "*" symbol comes from aster (from Greek, 
star), isk (characterized by a specified trait or quality). Perhaps *ist 
D[igital] camera actually translates to "star quality digital" camera. Well, 
perhaps it is "star quality", but it won't get the "star" parts if it 
doesn't get the name recognition. The best recognition comes from product 
placement. If the product placement works, the product used to create the 
fame for the name doesn't actually have to make money. The brand itself is 
recognized by more people, and recognized as synonymous with quality.


Regards,
Bob...

"A picture is worth a thousand  words,
but it uses up three thousand times the  memory."

From: "Sylwiusz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


On 2005-06-01, at 21:04, Boris Liberman wrote:

It just occurred to me - Pentax is *actually* competing with Nikon and 
Canon on "*istD and lower" market segment. It is probably where the most 
money is w.r.t. DSLR sales...


Thumbs up, Pentax!
Good for them! They'll earn money needed to create *istD successor for all 
Pentax enthusiasts :-)

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[P. J. Alling]

Pentax backward compatibility is un-surpassed.  You better not even 
think of mounting a
TX lens on an EOS body, (though you can mount an M42 lens, with an 
adapter), with Nikon you
need a lens body compatibility chart.  I've seen one somewhere it's, how 
shall I put it, yes, it's interesting.
With Pentax you can even use most new lenses on old bodys, which is 
mostly impossible with Canon, and once

again you better not lose that Nikon chart.

Don Sanderson wrote:


I don't know Canon or Nikon at all.
How "backward compatible" are they compared to Pentax
as far as glass?
I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
Can the other two make a similar claim?

Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
side' was really like.)


 


-Original Message-
From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 4:13 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?


   


[EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/01/05 1:08 PM >>>
   


Just a hypothetical question:

If you did NOT own any Pentax or k-mount lenses, why would you choose
the *ist DL over the Nikon D50 or Canon 350D (RebelXT)? (price 
 


being equal
or
   


near-enough; I believe the D50 is supposed to be much less than the
350D,
but let's ignore that right now)

 

- Original Message - 
From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



   


if you showed someone all three cameras and they did not already have a
Canon/Nikon brand bias, then I think the *ist DS or DL could do OK.  I
like small camera bodies, and it has just as nicer fell to it than the
Rebel (IMHO).

 


Ok so one reason to choose the DL would be ergonomics/size.  Good reason.

Any others?

I compared the Ds next to a RebelXT.  The Ds viewfinder was WAY 
better, but,

let's play entry-level user here: the Canon offers "more" megapixels
(remember, new users are interested in pixel count; why else would
manufacturers be cramming 8mp into teeny digicams?).  and we 
don't know how

the DL's viewfinder will compare.

I'm just curious how the pdmlers would sway a new entry-level consumer.

Christian


   




 




--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Zooms (was Re: Looking for a lense)

[John Dallman]

> It seems to come from people who think that the singular of "lenses" is 
> "lense". However, it is definitely a misspelling by British standards. 

A word that isn't misspelt often, but is definitely misapplied often, is 
"zoom". The non-working K2 I have came with a "zoom" lens that looked like 
a 100-200 zoom in the eBay photo but proved to be the SMCP-M 100/4.0 
macro. I didn't complain, because I preferred the macro.

However, it does seem that people with no clue about photography often 
described any lens much physically large than a standard lens as a "zoom"; 
I think this stems from watching television, where any narrow-angle shot 
is thought of as "zoomed". 

-- 
PDML means I get more e-mail than spam!

Re: Canon PIXMA iP600D printer

[John Dallman]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cotty) 
wrote:

> try this site for inks and paper:
> 

Looks promising! However, it doesn't list any ink as being compatible with 
the iP6000. Some poking in the manual which says it takes BCI6-series ink 
tanks, and searching of the site reveals those. 

-- 
PDML means I get more e-mail than spam!

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Cotty]

On 1/6/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:

> It
>doesn't have appeared to done the company much harm.

Gak.

It doesn't appear to have done the company any harm.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Cotty]

On 1/6/05, Don Sanderson, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I don't know Canon or Nikon at all.
>How "backward compatible" are they compared to Pentax
>as far as glass?
>I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
>loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
>inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
>Can the other two make a similar claim?
>
>Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
> side' was really like.)

Canon changed the lens mount back in the 1980s and ditched the FD series
of lenses. Canonites seemed split between betrayal and a brave new world.
The EOS (Electro-Optical System) certainly polarised opinion, a lot of it
was negative. Canon saw the future and took the bull by the horns. It
doesn't have appeared to done the company much harm.

As for backwards compatibility, the old FD lenses, with many excellent
performers, can be used on the EOS cameras, but need an adapter. Like
trying to thread a needle with spaghetti - fiddly and time-consuming, but
an achievement if successful.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

RE: PESO: Repairs delayed

[Leon Mlakar]

Thank you, good people, for your comments. You helped me realize that the
reason for my reservations about this photographs was not the DOF but the
tonality. So the specific part of the question was wrong after all.

I like this shot so I'll play with it a bit before making a print. I believe
it should be possible to get it lighter a bit without loosing details on the
white paint or getting the wood planks in front to bright.

Cheers,

Leon


>-Original Message-
>From: Leon Mlakar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 12:19 AM
>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>Subject: PESO: Repairs delayed
>
>
>These days I was browsing through some old photos I didn't 
>scan yet. This one was taken quite some time ago, in summer 
>2002. What do you think in general and regarding one specific 
>question: is DOF too shallow? 
>
>http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3400464
>
>
>I also seem to be unable to find a good English title for it.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Leon
>
>

RE: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Don Sanderson]

I don't know Canon or Nikon at all.
How "backward compatible" are they compared to Pentax
as far as glass?
I hate to say this but the only things that have kept me
loyal to Pentax are the viewfinders and the abundance of
inexpensive yet excellent lenses.
Can the other two make a similar claim?

Don (Who just bought a Nikon FM to see what the 'other
 side' was really like.)


> -Original Message-
> From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 4:13 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
> 
> 
> > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/01/05 1:08 PM >>>
> > Just a hypothetical question:
> >
> > If you did NOT own any Pentax or k-mount lenses, why would you choose
> > the *ist DL over the Nikon D50 or Canon 350D (RebelXT)? (price 
> being equal
> or
> > near-enough; I believe the D50 is supposed to be much less than the
> > 350D,
> > but let's ignore that right now)
> >
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> > if you showed someone all three cameras and they did not already have a
> > Canon/Nikon brand bias, then I think the *ist DS or DL could do OK.  I
> > like small camera bodies, and it has just as nicer fell to it than the
> > Rebel (IMHO).
> >
> 
> Ok so one reason to choose the DL would be ergonomics/size.  Good reason.
> 
> Any others?
> 
> I compared the Ds next to a RebelXT.  The Ds viewfinder was WAY 
> better, but,
> let's play entry-level user here: the Canon offers "more" megapixels
> (remember, new users are interested in pixel count; why else would
> manufacturers be cramming 8mp into teeny digicams?).  and we 
> don't know how
> the DL's viewfinder will compare.
> 
> I'm just curious how the pdmlers would sway a new entry-level consumer.
> 
> Christian
> 
> 

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Cotty]

When a good friend was deciding which DSLR to get, he looked closely at
the 300D (this was before the 350 came out), the D70, and the *ist Ds.

Out of their boxes, he instantly liked the *ist Ds build quality,
although he was also impressed with the Nikon.

He liked the Canon because he would have access to an impressive
selection of lenses - not that he would be able to afford the top
performers, but the choice was available. Ditto the Nikon. He was totally
ignorant of Pentax's top performers. He had never heard of a Limited lens.

He liked the Pentax because the viewfinder image was so much bigger and
seemingly brighter.

He was aware all three would provide a similar quality of final image.

What swayed his decision?

He got the Pentax because he already had a KX and Super-A, and a few
lenses. He liked the idea of hanging onto those, if for nothing but
sentimental reasons. The fact they would work on his *ist Ds was a big bonus.

In fact, I snagged an M 20mm f/2.8 for him as well (thanks - you know who
you are!), and he *loves* that lens on the Ds and raves about it
endlessly. The Ds came with the 18-55 which he considers fine as a point
and shoot style lens, but if he wants to enjoy his photography, he uses
the 20mm.

I'm visiting on Friday and am keen to have a look at this combo myself.



Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[DagT]

På 1. jun. 2005 kl. 23.12 skrev Christian:


Ok so one reason to choose the DL would be ergonomics/size.  Good 
reason.


Any others?

I compared the Ds next to a RebelXT.  The Ds viewfinder was WAY 
better, but,

let's play entry-level user here: the Canon offers "more" megapixels
(remember, new users are interested in pixel count; why else would
manufacturers be cramming 8mp into teeny digicams?).  and we don't 
know how

the DL's viewfinder will compare.

I'm just curious how the pdmlers would sway a new entry-level consumer.


I never try.  I ask entry level users to go to a shop having all the 
relevant models, to look at them, try them and choose the one they 
like.  I also say that you can make good pictures with all of them, but 
they have different features that may or may not be relevant depending 
on the intended use.  And then  I tell them that my experience with 
Pentax over the last 27 years has been good.


It´s not the end of the world if they don´t choose Pentax, many may 
have good reasons not to.  If they choose it because they like it they 
will be happy with it and loyal users.  If they choose it only because 
I persuaded them they may be unhappy and buy something else later. 
Pentax loose them anyway and maybe we have some dissatisfied people 
complaining about Pentax and telling others not to buy Pentax (or 
listen to me).


So, who cares about the answers to your question?

DagT

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Shel Belinkoff]

Today, it seems, flash and image sells more than quality and practicality.

"Bling Bling" Belinkoff 


> [Original Message]
> From: Toralf Lund 

> However, I think what you are saying here may be used as an argument if 
> you want to convince someone to buy a Pentax (in reference to another 
> post.) As in "Canon is all image, you know, why not try a brand that's 
> more about good products."

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR

[Cotty]

>>On 1/6/05, E.R.N. Reed, discombobulated, unleashed:
>>
>>>Perhaps you are odd, Cotty; I haven't met you so I can't say -- but in 
>>>*this* case, perhaps it's because you are BIG?
>
>
>At 07:40 AM 01/06/2005 , Cotty wrote:
>
>>Why Eleanour that's the best compliment I've had from a lady in a long
>>time :-)
>
>
>I think she was talking about your hands Cotty and they do not necessarily
>correlate.  :^}
>
>Powell (running for cover)


Actually she was referring to my sense of humour which isn't just big,
it's HUGE!

:-)


Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Toralf Lund]

Graywolf wrote:


BUT!
The top-end camera is what people compare to. It is the one that shows 
your capability. If Nikon and Canon did not have that top-end camera 
their low-end sales would be much curtailed. As are Pentax's. 
Strangely car companies who have a winning race team sell more cars 
than companies who do not, even though the race cars are nothing like 
the ones you can buy. All along same same cameras.


Having the cheapest low-end camera does nothing for your image. Before 
Canon decided to try and whoo the PJ market with giveaways, they were 
considered a second rate manufacturer even Pentax was rated higher. 
Unfortunately in sales figures image is everything.


I believe you are right. I nearly added a post saying essentially the 
same thing when someone talked about how the "pro" models often aren't 
very profitable. The point with these products is often not to make a 
profit *as such*, I think.


However, I think what you are saying here may be used as an argument if 
you want to convince someone to buy a Pentax (in reference to another 
post.) As in "Canon is all image, you know, why not try a brand that's 
more about good products."


- Toralf

RE: Pentax *ist-DL

[Bob W]

They printed one without Wales last year. Everything looked so much tidier.
So ... harmonised.

--
Yakky Da!
 Bob 

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 01 June 2005 19:34
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: Pentax *ist-DL
> 
> On 1/6/05, DagT, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >It´s only fair, since the EU often print maps of Europe 
> without Norway.
> 
> After the Netherlands votes no, the EU can print maps with no 
> countries on it at all!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: RSE 1.1.3

[Derby Chang]

Frantisek wrote:


DC> There is a teaser of Rawshooter Premium. I wonder what it could contain.

Levels and curves. Without it, it's only an "amateur" program. I don't
need all the other features like fill-light and similar. They make the
image too artificial.

And if they could improve the noise reduction, say by licensing
NeatImage/NoiseNinja technology or making their own, that would be a
_real_ boon. And IPTC editor, that's for sure. If it doesn't have
curves and IPTC, it's not a "pro" program. Cropping too, probably. And
they should drop the fill-light feature, or at least untie it from
autoexposure button. The "AE" button always enables fill-light which
makes the image fughly...

That's not guessing, that's just what is grossly missing right now for
a true "pro" raw converter.

Frantisek



 



From the Pixmantec site:

*May 20, 2005*

Pixmantec And Imagenomic Team Up To Promote RawShooter And Noiseware To 
Digital Photographers Worldwide


*Copenhagen, Denmark and Alexandria, Virginia, USA - May 20, 2005 *- 
Danish and U.S. digital imaging software specialists Pixmantec ApS and 
Imagenomic, LLC announce that they will be jointly marketing their 
respective software products, RawShooter | essentials 2005 and 
Noiseware. Working in synchrony, these two highly sophisticated and 
complementary "tool sets" extend RAW conversion and noise removal to an 
elevated level of workflow performance and convenience The companies 
will initially cross-promote RawShooter | essentials 2005 and Noiseware 
as a precursor to joint marketing and distribution. Pixmantec and 
Imagenomic also intend to explore the potential to forge closer 
cooperation through joint product and technology development.



http://www.pixmantec.com/pdf/pixmantec_press_release_200505.pdf



--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc

Re:That Old Fashioned Glow

[Shel Belinkoff]

Sounds like it's worth a go 'round.  I'll take a look next week ;-))

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Bill Lawlor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 6/1/2005 1:58:57 PM
> Subject: Re:That Old Fashioned Glow
>
> Shel, I have a possible answer. Try my Ernst Leitz Wetzlar VAROO 50/3.5
> uncoated enlarging lens with T-Stops. It came with an early Focomat
enlarger
> ca 1937. It had plenty of "glow". When using the original Leitz enlarging
> light bulb pics really glowed.
>
> Wilhelm

Re: RSE 1.1.3

[Derby Chang]

P. J. Alling wrote:


URL??

Derby Chang wrote:



Rawshooter has gone to 1.1.3. I notice the speed in the conversion is 
a bit faster, which is nice. Haven't really played with it in depth 
yet. And it's still a free download. I do wish they'd stop putting 
their simple basic text readme's into PDF format.


There is a teaser of Rawshooter Premium. I wonder what it could contain.






Oh, right. :)

http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.html


and the What's New link:
http://www.pixmantec.com/pdf/RawShooter_essentials_2005_113_readme.pdf

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc

RE: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Leon Mlakar]

Why don't you try rechargable alkaline AA's? I've been using them for some
time in my (seldom used) flash. They have the shelf life of ordinary AA's so
I know that it'll work when picked up, even though I didn't recharge
batteries last week. Unlike NiMh that work at 1.2V they work at 1.5V of
ordinary alkalines. True, rechargable alkalines are only good for a 100 or
so recharge cycles but that, I suppose, should not be an issue.

Cheers,

Leon

>-Original Message-
>From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 3:21 PM
>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>Subject: OT: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
>
>I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), 
>and it takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines 
>and recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a 
>word about using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly 
>current camera (2004, discontinued this year). Is there any 
>reason I can't use lithium AA batteries in this camera?
>
>Joe
>-- 
>
>Joe Wilensky
>Editor, Cornell Chronicle
>Cornell News Office
>312 College Ave.
>Ithaca, NY 14850
>
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail
>(607) 255-5373 fax
>
>http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
>

Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?

[Christian]

> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/01/05 1:08 PM >>>
> Just a hypothetical question:
>
> If you did NOT own any Pentax or k-mount lenses, why would you choose
> the *ist DL over the Nikon D50 or Canon 350D (RebelXT)? (price being equal
or
> near-enough; I believe the D50 is supposed to be much less than the
> 350D,
> but let's ignore that right now)
>


- Original Message - 
From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> if you showed someone all three cameras and they did not already have a
> Canon/Nikon brand bias, then I think the *ist DS or DL could do OK.  I
> like small camera bodies, and it has just as nicer fell to it than the
> Rebel (IMHO).
>

Ok so one reason to choose the DL would be ergonomics/size.  Good reason.

Any others?

I compared the Ds next to a RebelXT.  The Ds viewfinder was WAY better, but,
let's play entry-level user here: the Canon offers "more" megapixels
(remember, new users are interested in pixel count; why else would
manufacturers be cramming 8mp into teeny digicams?).  and we don't know how
the DL's viewfinder will compare.

I'm just curious how the pdmlers would sway a new entry-level consumer.

Christian

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

On 2005-06-01, at 19:52, Jostein wrote:

I haven't read the article you refer to yet, but I have discussed the 
matter with a guy who usually test Canon gear for a Norwegian photo 
journal. He was embarrassed about Bjørn's test because it showed, as 
he said, that "Canon has no really good wide-angle zoom". He ventured 
on to test the D1s mkII with an off-brand WA to prove Bjørn wrong on 
the camera part. The results from his test hasn't appeared in print 
yet because the journal is delayed in print, but he says his results 
show there's nothing wrong with the camera...:-)
That's interesting :-) So it seems that if you want to have the same 
brand of camera and decent WA zoom, you just can't go with Canon ;-) 
BTW - which third-party zoom has used your friend? That would be 
valuable information for us  :-)


--
Best regards
Sylwek

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams

[Sylwiusz]

On 2005-06-01, at 20:58, Jostein wrote:

Pretty much confirmed my friend's view that there is no top notch WA 
zoom from Canon, imo.
That's why Nikon was always considered as better in this regard... I 
saw samples from 16-35 and 1Ds and it showed the same kind of 
vignetting as 17-40. I am curious which third party WA zoom was better 
than both Ls in your's friend tests?


--
Best regards
Sylwek

Re: SMC pentax 1:3.5 100 mm macro

[Margus Männik]

Hi,

Pentax version has genuine Pentax SMC coating and FA-series electronics 
inside. Cosina doesn't.

Only bad thing is that Pentax version doesn't include 1:1 adapter (lens)

BR, Margus


Hans Imglueck wrote:


Hi Toralf,

yes, it ist built by Cosina (also one can buy the lens labeled 
Cosina). It goes down to 1:2. I own one and it performes well.

It is very light and small. Price? Something above 100 Euros (in Germany)
depending on state for the Pentax version - below 100 Euros for the Cosina
version (though only the label is changed).

Best regards, Hans.


 


--- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
Von: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Betreff: SMC pentax 1:3.5 100 mm macro
Datum: Tue, 31 May 2005 22:37:43 +0200

What would you pay for it? (See subject)? Is this a lense built by 
Cosina or whatever? And *not* an 1:1 macro?


- Toralf

   



 

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Sylwiusz]

On 2005-06-01, at 21:04, Boris Liberman wrote:

It just occurred to me - Pentax is *actually* competing with Nikon and 
Canon on "*istD and lower" market segment. It is probably where the 
most money is w.r.t. DSLR sales...


Thumbs up, Pentax!
Good for them! They'll earn money needed to create *istD successor for 
all Pentax enthusiasts :-)



--
Best regards
Sylwek

Re:That Old Fashioned Glow

[Bill Lawlor]

Shel, I have a possible answer. Try my Ernst Leitz Wetzlar VAROO 50/3.5
uncoated enlarging lens with T-Stops. It came with an early Focomat enlarger
ca 1937. It had plenty of "glow". When using the original Leitz enlarging
light bulb pics really glowed.

Wilhelm

Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Thibouille]

Yes but voltage is higher than usual AA batteries AFAIR
That may be the problem.

2005/6/1, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Never noticed them getting even warm in the D or
> its AA battery pack.
> Not even when using the flash or LCD constantly.
> And the life of Lithiums is nothing short of amazing.
> Seems to me that of all of the newer digis that use a
> "special" battery pack, that pack is Lithium.
> 
> Don
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:43 PM
> > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> > Subject: Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
> >
> >
> > I found this in the technical FAQ section:
> >
> > "4. Never use manganese or lithium batteries, as these battery types
> > may overheat in the camera."
> >
> > Do the new lithium AA batteries (and so many other lithium photo
> > batteries) really get hotter than other types?
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > >- Original Message - From: "Joe Wilensky" Subject: OT:
> > >Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
> > >
> > >>I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), and it
> > >>takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines and
> > >>recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a word
> > >>about using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly current camera
> > >>(2004, discontinued this year). Is there any reason I can't use
> > >>lithium AA batteries in this camera?
> > >
> > >no.
> > >
> > >William Robb
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Joe Wilensky
> > Editor, Cornell Chronicle
> > Cornell News Office
> > 312 College Ave.
> > Ithaca, NY 14850
> >
> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail
> > (607) 255-5373 fax
> >
> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
> >
> 
> 


-- 
--
Thibouille
--
Z1,SuperA,KX,MX,P30t and KR-10x ...

Re: Pentax *ist-DL

[Thibouille]

Right, but EU constitution is different than a country constitution
and does not replace it.
As most European country likely have stupidely complicated consitution
it is just not surprising the EU consitution is itself complicated.

2005/6/1, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I don't think anyone actually read the new EU constitution, it's the
> size of the New York phone book.  Citizens of the US can carry their
> entire constitution and all amendments to it in a small pamphlet,
> Canadians, though their constitution is a bit more complicated, can at
> least carry the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  It makes it easy to
> quote your rights to government functionaries while they're violating
> them.  If you tried to do that with the proposed EU constitution you'd a
> hand truck.
> 
> Jostein wrote:
> 
> >
> > - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >>
> >> After the Netherlands votes no, the EU can print maps with no countries
> >> on it at all!
> >
> >
> > LOL.
> > I bet the new constitution has been promoted by the Pentax advertising
> > department.
> >
> > Jostein
> >
> 
> --
> A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
> --Groucho Marx
> 
> 


-- 
--
Thibouille
--
Z1,SuperA,KX,MX,P30t and KR-10x ...

Re: Pentax *ist-DL on USA website!

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Christian wrote:

> http://www.pentaximaging.com/products/product_details/digital_camera--*ist_Dl/
>
> HEHEHEHE
>
> silly pentax...  posting pages before product releases

Nah, just getting ready.

Kostas

Re: Good things about *istDL

[Graywolf]

BUT! 


The top-end camera is what people compare to. It is the one that shows your 
capability. If Nikon and Canon did not have that top-end camera their low-end 
sales would be much curtailed. As are Pentax's. Strangely car companies who 
have a winning race team sell more cars than companies who do not, even though 
the race cars are nothing like the ones you can buy. All along same same 
cameras.

Having the cheapest low-end camera does nothing for your image. Before Canon 
decided to try and whoo the PJ market with giveaways, they were considered a 
second rate manufacturer even Pentax was rated higher. Unfortunately in sales 
figures image is everything.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---


Boris Liberman wrote:

Hi!

It just occurred to me - Pentax is *actually* competing with Nikon and 
Canon on "*istD and lower" market segment. It is probably where the most 
money is w.r.t. DSLR sales...


Thumbs up, Pentax!

Boris





--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.4.0 - Release Date: 6/1/2005

Re: street shooting lens

[P. J. Alling]

I didn't say it wasn't smooth, it's very smooth, just more like 90 
weight oil, now the 100mm that's like butter.


Shel Belinkoff wrote:


Mine was smooth as butter ... a real jewel to use and focus ;-))

Shel 



 


[Original Message]
From: P. J. Alling 
   



 

It's about a 8/10 revolution from closest focus to infinity, and it is 
one of the stiffest focusing rings on any lens I own.  
   





 




--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax *ist-DL

[P. J. Alling]

I don't think anyone actually read the new EU constitution, it's the 
size of the New York phone book.  Citizens of the US can carry their 
entire constitution and all amendments to it in a small pamphlet, 
Canadians, though their constitution is a bit more complicated, can at 
least carry the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  It makes it easy to 
quote your rights to government functionaries while they're violating 
them.  If you tried to do that with the proposed EU constitution you'd a 
hand truck.


Jostein wrote:



- Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



After the Netherlands votes no, the EU can print maps with no countries
on it at all!



LOL.
I bet the new constitution has been promoted by the Pentax advertising 
department.


Jostein




--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?

[Graywolf]

True. The price of an IC goes up pretty much by the square of the area.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---


John Francis wrote:

On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 09:17:49AM +0200, Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III wrote:


Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) 
sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of 
these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked?



It's not difficult - just expensive.

An APS-C sensor costs perhaps $500.  A so-called  "full frame"
sensor, of about twice the area, doesn't cost $1000 - it's more
like $2500. And the larger sensor for the MF digital is perhaps
closer to $6000.

Nobody in their right mind is going to put a $6000 sensor in a
camera, and then mask it down so it acts like a $2500 sensor.





--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.4.0 - Release Date: 6/1/2005

Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams

[Jostein]

- Original Message - 
From: "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


- Original Message - 
From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


So which WA-zoom from Canon is "top-notch"? 16-35/2.8 L??? Read 
then this -

from long time Canon user:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml


I haven't read the article you refer to yet, [...]


So now I've read the article.
Pretty much confirmed my friend's view that there is no top notch WA 
zoom from Canon, imo.


Jostein 

Re: street shooting lens

[Shel Belinkoff]

Mine was smooth as butter ... a real jewel to use and focus ;-))

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: P. J. Alling 

> It's about a 8/10 revolution from closest focus to infinity, and it is 
> one of the stiffest focusing rings on any lens I own.  

Re: Pentax *ist-DL

[Jostein]

EU equals Europe to countries within the union.
Which isn't much of a mistake to make anymore, really.
Probably good for the tourist business; it makes us more exotic. :-)
Jostein

- Original Message - 
From: "keithw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax *ist-DL



Cotty wrote:


On 1/6/05, DagT, discombobulated, unleashed:


It´s only fair, since the EU often print maps of Europe without 
Norway.


I'm tempted to say, "You're kidding, right?!"

keith whaley

After the Netherlands votes no, the EU can print maps with no 
countries

on it at all!

Cheers,
  Cotty

RE: street shooting lens

[Shel Belinkoff]

I recall your frustration with the number of degrees it took to focus from
close to infinity.  You're mistaken about the lens needing to go through
more than one revolution (we discussed that point at one time and you
realized the error), although you are correct that the lens required a
large degree of twisting.  However, this drawback for you and others that
need quick, short focusing for certain types of photography is an attribute
in a portrait lens, as focusing, while slower, can be more deliberate and
precise.  I liked mine a lot and regret that it was stolen ... 

Shel 


> From: Bob W 

> I used to have an M 85/2 years ago, which several people have recommended.
> It's a very nice size of lens, but it didn't work very well for my way of
> shooting. The problem was that the focusing barrel was not quick enough. I
> seem to remember that it also took more than a single revolution to go
> through the full focus range, rather like a macro lens; however, people
have
> told me since that this is not the case, so it must bound up with my
> frustration at how slow it was to focus. Perhaps I just had a bad sample.

RE: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Don Sanderson]

Never noticed them getting even warm in the D or
its AA battery pack.
Not even when using the flash or LCD constantly.
And the life of Lithiums is nothing short of amazing.
Seems to me that of all of the newer digis that use a
"special" battery pack, that pack is Lithium.

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:43 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
> 
> 
> I found this in the technical FAQ section:
> 
> "4. Never use manganese or lithium batteries, as these battery types 
> may overheat in the camera."
> 
> Do the new lithium AA batteries (and so many other lithium photo 
> batteries) really get hotter than other types?
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> >- Original Message - From: "Joe Wilensky" Subject: OT: 
> >Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
> >
> >>I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), and it 
> >>takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines and 
> >>recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a word 
> >>about using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly current camera 
> >>(2004, discontinued this year). Is there any reason I can't use 
> >>lithium AA batteries in this camera?
> >
> >no.
> >
> >William Robb
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Joe Wilensky
> Editor, Cornell Chronicle
> Cornell News Office
> 312 College Ave.
> Ithaca, NY 14850
> 
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail
> (607) 255-5373 fax
> 
> http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
> 

Re: Pentax *ist-DL

[Jostein]

- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


After the Netherlands votes no, the EU can print maps with no 
countries

on it at all!


LOL.
I bet the new constitution has been promoted by the Pentax advertising 
department.


Jostein 

Re: Pentax *ist-DL

[keithw]

Cotty wrote:


On 1/6/05, DagT, discombobulated, unleashed:



It´s only fair, since the EU often print maps of Europe without Norway.


I'm tempted to say, "You're kidding, right?!"

keith whaley


After the Netherlands votes no, the EU can print maps with no countries
on it at all!

Cheers,
  Cotty

Re: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?

[Joe Wilensky]

I found this in the technical FAQ section:

"4. Never use manganese or lithium batteries, as these battery types 
may overheat in the camera."


Do the new lithium AA batteries (and so many other lithium photo 
batteries) really get hotter than other types?


Joe


- Original Message - From: "Joe Wilensky" Subject: OT: 
Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?


I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), and it 
takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines and 
recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a word 
about using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly current camera 
(2004, discontinued this year). Is there any reason I can't use 
lithium AA batteries in this camera?


no.

William Robb



--

Joe Wilensky
Editor, Cornell Chronicle
Cornell News Office
312 College Ave.
Ithaca, NY 14850

mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail
(607) 255-5373 fax

http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html

Re: street shooting lens

[P. J. Alling]

It's about a 8/10 revolution from closest focus to infinity, and it is 
one of the stiffest focusing rings on any
lens I own.  However it's also one of the least intimidating.  The M-100 
is also a fine lens but with the 1.5x
multiplier it's a bit long for portraits IMHO, and I say that as someone 
who's original lens kit consisted of
a SMCT 35 f3.5, SMCT 55 f1.8 and ST 150mm f4.0.  The last lens in the 
list served me as a portraits as well
as my nature lens for years, (which explains my lack of portraits and 
nature shots in my portfolio from that period).


Bob W wrote:


35mm and 85mm working as a pair has been good focal lengths for me.

I used to have an M 85/2 years ago, which several people have recommended.
It's a very nice size of lens, but it didn't work very well for my way of
shooting. The problem was that the focusing barrel was not quick enough. I
seem to remember that it also took more than a single revolution to go
through the full focus range, rather like a macro lens; however, people have
told me since that this is not the case, so it must bound up with my
frustration at how slow it was to focus. Perhaps I just had a bad sample.

--
Cheers,
Bob 

 


-Original Message-
From: Amita Guha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 01 June 2005 13:24

To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: street shooting lens

While I was in London this past week, I tried to do some 
street portraits, but I wasn't very successful. I think part 
of the problem was that my zoom was too obvious when extended 
to 75mm. Also, 75mm didn't reach quite far enough. Nate got 
some good candids  with his Canon 85mm prime. The barrel is 
pretty short, so it's nice and unobtrusive. I think I would 
like something comparable. 

I don't really feel like springing for the FA 85mm (and it's 
backordered anyway). Can anyone suggest an alternative lens 
or focal length or whatever?

I'd love to hear what works for different people.

Thanks,
Amita





   




 




--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx

Re: Good things about *istDL

[David Oswald]

Boris Liberman wrote:

Hi!

It just occurred to me - Pentax is *actually* competing with Nikon and 
Canon on "*istD and lower" market segment. It is probably where the most 
money is w.r.t. DSLR sales...


Thumbs up, Pentax!



I have to agree here.  Pentax will draw more people into their brand 
with a lower priced DSLR than they would with a higher priced one. 
Those people may not be buying $10,000 glass, but some percentage of 
them will buy other lenses, and once that happens, a percentage of those 
people will be hooked.  The more demand Pentax can muster for Pentax 
lenses, the better the outlook becomes for all of us.  Sufficient sales 
in DSLR bodies will provide a foundation upon which Pentax will be able 
to rebuild its lineup of lenses.


We need the *ist-DL to be a success for our sake. Its success will grab 
immediate DSLR sales, will drive upgrade sales, will reestablish brand 
loyalty, and will create a customer base to stimulate demand for (and 
thus rationalle for the production of) a broad assortment of lenses, 
flashes, and other add-on gear.  We should support this endeavor with a 
positive attitude.  What we think and say makes up a part of 
word-of-mouth advertising.