Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Jostein]

I think the one stop difference is due to the way the multi-segment metering
works. Notice the person in the highlight area on the the right-hand side of
the lady. In the upper shot, the camera tries to compensate for the higher
contrast, and thus selects a shorter exposure time.

This is a typical situation where using spot metering would give you much more
consistent results.

Jostein

Quoting Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg
> 
> Just nine seconds separate these two pics.  They are almost identical
> shots.  Both were made with the istDs, both at a rating of 3200 ISO, both @
> 70mm, both at an aperture of 5.6, both using multi-segment metering, both
> using auto focus (more on that later!), both on one of the automatic modes,
> yet they are a stop apart, with the top pic made @ 1/30 sec and the bottom
> @ 1/15.
> 
> What crummy results these are.  The pics, imo, should have an identical
> exposure.  They would were a funky old manual camera body being used.  Is
> this the kind of  erratic results one can expect from high-tech cameras, or
> is there some sort of failure to communicate or understand on my part?  Why
> would these pics be so far apart in their results?
> 
> 
> Shel 
> 
> 
> 





This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

I saw that and thought that might have something to do with it.  But look
at the left side of the subject where the lower shot has a much larger
bright area on the left than the upper shot.  I guess the intelligent,
multi-segment meter decided that bright area was of no importance 

BTW, had I adjusted the camera to use the way I'd usually use an in camera
meter, I may have used spot metering, or just used the thing in complete
manual mode and determined my own exposures.  However, the point was to
learn how the camera reacts to different variables.
That said, the results of this "learning experience" prove, or certainly
lends credence to, what I've always said about built-in meters, and that is
that often small changes in the frame will have a large effect upon the way
a scene is rendered, and that for the most a built-in meter cannot be
trusted to provide consistent and accurate results.

Further, I was always of the idea the multi-segment or matrix metering
relied upon highly complex algorithms that consider all the details in the
way a frame is light and apply that information in such a way as to give
consistently more accurate results.  Feh!  I guess I bought into another
marketing maven's fairy tale.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Jostein 

> I think the one stop difference is due to the way the multi-segment
metering
> works. Notice the person in the highlight area on the the right-hand side
of
> the lady. In the upper shot, the camera tries to compensate for the higher
> contrast, and thus selects a shorter exposure time.
>
> This is a typical situation where using spot metering would give you much
more
> consistent results.
>
> Jostein
>
> Quoting Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg
> > 
> > Just nine seconds separate these two pics.  They are almost identical
> > shots.  Both were made with the istDs, both at a rating of 3200 ISO,
both @
> > 70mm, both at an aperture of 5.6, both using multi-segment metering,
both
> > using auto focus (more on that later!), both on one of the automatic
modes,
> > yet they are a stop apart, with the top pic made @ 1/30 sec and the
bottom
> > @ 1/15.
> > 
> > What crummy results these are.  The pics, imo, should have an identical
> > exposure.  They would were a funky old manual camera body being used. 
Is
> > this the kind of  erratic results one can expect from high-tech
cameras, or
> > is there some sort of failure to communicate or understand on my part? 
Why
> > would these pics be so far apart in their results?
> > 
> > 
> > Shel 
> > 
> > 
> > 
>
>
>
>
> 
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

Ordinarily I would.  In this case I was learning how the camera reacts to
certain situations, trying different things with it.  I expected more from
this metering system than it's capable of, I suppose.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Paul 

> why not just use the camera like a "funky old manual camera body" if you 
> dont like the autoexposure?
>
>
> Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> >http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hi Rob - I was always of the impression that multi-segment metering was
"smarter" than that.  I guess it's just some more marketing hype, or
perhaps the differences in the scene were such that it could fool the
meter.  It's results like these that consistently keep me skeptical of
in-camera meters.  Another fine example of how "technology is my friend." 
Usually I just eyeball a scene or make a quick scan using a hand-held
meter, set the exposure, and start shooting, never changing the exposure
unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results even
in manual mode is disheartening.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Rob Studdert 

> I think that's multi-segment metering working as designed. I suspect some
glint 
> in the background affected the metering. If you want the metering to
behave 
> more like traditional centre weighted then don't use multi-segment
metering. 
> That said I don't find that my *ist D provides 100% repeatable results
when I 
> use it in modes that automatically stop down the aperture even in manual
mode.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

That's so reassuring, Bill. 

This is my first time using multi-segment metering.  Never again!

It's nice to know that the meter in these cameras can't be relied upon.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: William Robb 

> Pretty amazing ain't it?
> I find it to be pretty common on the D if I shoot many shots 
> quickly.  It just goes erratic for some reason.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

Nothing new in your comments about the metering.  However, note the large
bright spot on the left side of the lower photo.  Based on your surmise,
that big, bright area should have given the camera reason to stop down
some, and I'd expect the exposures of the face to be a lot closer in the
two photos.

Don't know which AF mode I was in.  This was the first time I picked up the
camera, and one of the very first shots I took with it.  IAC, I'll not be
relying on any automatic features in these cameras any time soon.  For
example, a friend loaned me her MZ-5n and today I was playing with the auto
focus confirmation light.  Were I to have relied on the light to establish
when the focus was correct, it wouldn't have been in many instances. 
Focusing on a small object (a vase that stood about seven inches high and
which was about 3.5 inches wide at the base) that had a strongly different
color than the background (green v white, giving what I assumed was the
needed contrast), the zone of acceptable focus according to the camera, was
greater than six inches, which is just too great a variation for an object
only about three or four feet away while using a 50mm lens.  Relying on my
eye alone gave better, i.e., more consistent results.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: John Coyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 7/19/2005 10:56:51 PM
> Subject: Re: The Nine Second Difference
>
> Shel, I would suspect the change in subject matter.  In the second shot,
the 
> person in the background has moved so that his head cuts off a very
bright 
> background, probably quite enough to alter the exposure by one stop. 
With 
> such a subject, I would be tending towards centre-weighted metering to
avoid 
> the potential problem.
>
> HTH
>
> As for the focusing, were you using AF-C or AF-S?  In the first shot the 
> focus seems about right, but the second is way off, to such an extent
that 
> to my eye, there is nothing in focus.

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Cotty]

On 19/7/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Buy a small can of my patented Photon Grease (TM).  It'll increase the flow
>of light through the lens, prevent premature aperture degeneration, lube
>all light sensitive internal parts to prevent corrosion, and effectively
>help maintain, and in some instances, even INCREASE, film or sensor speed. 
>The NEW! IMPROVED! Photon Grease Plus (In the blue tin with the yellow
>lightning bolt design) was formulated specifically for lens/camera setups
>where an adapter is used to allow mating of components from different
>manufacturers.
>
>Serendipitous in Sussex

Har! Love it. Thanks.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Stage photography

[Cotty]

On 20/7/05, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Hi Cotty
>Would you trust the integrated light meter here or underexpose a bit like -1
>?

Like others have said, spot meter the faces. If you can't, definitely
underexpose a bit. You're shooting neg, so you'll have plenty of
latitude. Stage lighting creates very contrasty situations, and although
Mark uses flash, I wouldn't consider it unless it was a rehearsal
scenario with no audience. When I go to a concert as a paying customer, I
want to see the band without flash, thanks.

You'll enjoy yourself and shoot far too much ;-)




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Herb Chong wrote:

the investment would be a mistake if you think you ever want to upgrade 
camera bodies.


Now, you have to give us some facts as to why Pentax will go belly up 
before the -D successor comes out (next spring, is the timeline?), or 
the above is mere shite.


Kostas

Re: Re: The Nine Second Difference

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/07/20 Wed AM 08:02:31 GMT
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: The Nine Second Difference
> 
> I saw that and thought that might have something to do with it.  But look
> at the left side of the subject where the lower shot has a much larger
> bright area on the left than the upper shot.  I guess the intelligent,
> multi-segment meter decided that bright area was of no importance 
> 
> BTW, had I adjusted the camera to use the way I'd usually use an in camera
> meter, I may have used spot metering, or just used the thing in complete
> manual mode and determined my own exposures.  However, the point was to
> learn how the camera reacts to different variables.
> That said, the results of this "learning experience" prove, or certainly
> lends credence to, what I've always said about built-in meters, and that is
> that often small changes in the frame will have a large effect upon the way
> a scene is rendered, and that for the most a built-in meter cannot be
> trusted to provide consistent and accurate results.


The meter will give consistent and accurate results.  You just have to learn to 
interpret them.  8-)  In complex cases, an incident meter will be easier to 
interpret.

But that would mean carrying two pieces of photographic gear and, for most 
people, they just want to "Shoot and Go"
8-)


m


-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Powell Hargrave wrote:

There is usually some change in the image which causes the difference.  In
this image I would suggest the bright area to the right of her eyes caused
the first to cut back the exposure as the camera attempts to keep some
detail there.  In the second this is blocked.  Both images are usable and
you can always operate the camera in manual or with centre weighted metering.


Absolutely, particularly the last sentence.

Kostas (I did not, chop off Shel's headers below)


http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg

Just nine seconds separate these two pics.  They are almost identical
shots.  Both were made with the istDs, both at a rating of 3200 ISO, both @
70mm, both at an aperture of 5.6, both using multi-segment metering, both
using auto focus (more on that later!), both on one of the automatic modes,
yet they are a stop apart, with the top pic made @ 1/30 sec and the bottom
@ 1/15.

What crummy results these are.  The pics, imo, should have an identical
exposure.  They would were a funky old manual camera body being used.  Is
this the kind of  erratic results one can expect from high-tech cameras, or
is there some sort of failure to communicate or understand on my part?  Why
would these pics be so far apart in their results?


Shel

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42% (for the 1st quarter)

[John Forbes]

Herb,

Whilst a lot of what you say makes sense from a marketing perspective,  
your financial analysis is much less convincing.


I have a small client with branches around the UK.  The smallest branch,  
in Scotland, lost £30,000 last year.  (Not big money, but it's the  
principle that matters!)


The immediate reaction in the boardroom was to close the branch, until I  
pointed out that although they had made a loss, the branch had nonetheless  
contributed £80,000 towards overheads.  If the branch hadn't existed, the  
company would have been £50k worse off.


It's probably much the same with Pentax.  You and I have no idea how the  
internal financial arrangements work, but it is highly likely that closing  
the imaging division would have disastrous consequences for the cost  
structure of the company generally.


Not to mention the marketing synergy from a brand name that is still  
widely known, and is associated with cameras.


As you have pointed out, Pentax as a company makes money.  I don't believe  
they can viably get out of photography without hurting the rest of the  
company, and therefore they will stay in it.


In the past couple of years they have had to revise their imaging division  
forecasts downwards several times.  In such circumstances, it is not  
perhaps surprising that they are now forecasting rather more  
conservatively.


They have said they will bring out three new models a year.  That's a big  
increase on the present situation.  It is unlikely that they are all going  
to be low-end models, and an *ist D Mk II without IS but with a much  
bigger buffer and better RAW files would be easy and cheap to produce.   
I've no idea where they are with a sensor for a larger pixel count, but no  
doubt it's part of the plan.


As for IS, who knows?  I'm sure it's on the cards because I think it's  
something that people now expect in a camera range, whether or not they  
need it themselves.  It'll come, because it has to.


Pentax lost a huge amount of ground when they had to abandon their FF  
DSLR.  They ARE catching up, but the fact that their figures look a bit  
ropey meanwhile is hardly surprising.  Thankfully, they have the support  
of their other divisions during this period.


For those who haven't studied the actual figures, but prefer to simply  
regurgitate the outpourings of journalists and "analysts", Pentax's sales  
for the last full financial year were flat, but margins IMPROVED.   
However, the effect was offset by higher marketing costs.  Personally, I  
am glad that Pentax is spending more on marketing.  Let's hope there's  
some market research going on, too!


Herb, as you still have Pentax gear, you would surely be much better  
employed trying to build Pentax up again, rather than continually trying  
to undermine it.


John

PS:  I don't know which John you were referring to, but I have owned  
Pentax gear since 1973.  Thirteen film cameras, and two DSLRs.  After 32  
years, I'm prepared to give them a little longer.  If you can't afford to  
wait, that's fair enough.



On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 01:34:04 +0100, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


as i see it, there are five market segments for Pentax DSLRs:

1) new SLR buyers who have never owned any SLR before - i think this  
market is negligible, even though John recently bought one this way and  
found his way here


2) Pentax film SLR owners who want to go digital - most of us here,  
especially because many in this group have a large investment in Pentax  
lenses they want to continue to use.


3) non-Pentax film SLR owners who are interested in going digital and  
have no requirement to be compatible with their older equipment - Canon  
and Nikon have mindshare and Pentax doesn't. it takes really  
knowledgeable sales people and buyers with an open mind to move them to  
a Pentax DSLR.


4) current Pentax DSLR owners who want an upgrade to a more capable body  
because they know that they need the capability and that other vendors  
offer it, so it exists somewhere. that's me, Rob, and some others here.


5) non-Pentax DSLR owners who want a Pentax instead - sorry, but i think  
Godfrey is probably the only such person that will ever exist.


Pentax offers the entry level *istDL and *istDS to groups 1 and 3, and  
some of 2. the *istD covers most of group 2. according to Pål, the  
Pentax 645D meets the needs of group 4 and some of group 2.


the *istDL and *istDS are the bottom of the food chain and both sell for  
very little and make very little. of the three groups that buy these  
two, most come from group 2 and not 1 and 3. posing the 645D as the  
answer to group 4 is a non-starter. if someone has to replace all their  
lenses, buying a body that will cost at best the same as a Canon 1DsMk2  
and probably over 10K, what is the advantage? the difference between 16  
and 18 megapixels isn't worth mentioning, especially because the well  
sizes are not too different in size. i can use 645 lens

Re: Fanatics

[danilo]

On 7/8/05, Bob Blakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are soccer fans, we have football, hockey, basketball and baseball
> fans. Fan, as I'm sure you're aware, is simply short for fanatic.

Wow, there's something new to learn every day!! 
Yes I didn't realize it before, thank you!!

beside this, I don't think this list is made of fanatics.
I see, indeed, a lot of people who drool after a lens, going crazy for
that shiny new jewell just released by the most customer-friendly
camera maker of all the time ( f**k  Ca**N Nik** et alia for made
unusable tons of old glasses) and at the same time blame it to not be
the most advanced in R&D.
I wouldn't call them fanatics, maybe just crazy ;) 

Danilo
( I'm joking, uh? After all, that's just *why* I love this list :)

Re: Trying the 77 Limited

[Mishka]

very pretty girl. and a nice picture.
thanks,
mishka

On 7/19/05, John Coyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Boris it very nearly is a terrific shot.  I do love the close-up framing,
> and your daughter gets more beautiful every day, but:  the eyes need a
> highlight to bring them to life, and the high-key effect is a little
> overdone.  I would prefer to see more delineation of the nose, cheek and
> chin than you have - i.e. almost none!
> 
> 
> HTH, and not too brutal
> 
> John Coyle
> Brisbane, Australia
> - Original Message -
> From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 4:03 AM
> Subject: PAW: Trying the 77 Limited
> 
> 
> > Hello!
> >
> > Well, you know, the major reason for buying a portrait lens in our family
> > is shooting portraits of our child... So here goes:
> >
> > http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=952383
> >
> > It also my first attempt in such kind of processing. PS Elements 3 was
> > used...
> >
> > All comments, including brutal, honest, and constructive will be greatly
> > appreciated.
> >
> > Boris
> >
> 
>

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Paul Stenquist]

It appears that a reflected background highlight was momentarily much 
brighter in the upper shot. That changed the exposure. If I'm shooting 
against a background like this, I frequently use spot metering. Of 
course either of these exposures could be dialed in quite nicely if 
they were shot RAW.

Paul

On Jul 19, 2005, at 11:43 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg

Just nine seconds separate these two pics.  They are almost identical
shots.  Both were made with the istDs, both at a rating of 3200 ISO, 
both @
70mm, both at an aperture of 5.6, both using multi-segment metering, 
both
using auto focus (more on that later!), both on one of the automatic 
modes,
yet they are a stop apart, with the top pic made @ 1/30 sec and the 
bottom

@ 1/15.

What crummy results these are.  The pics, imo, should have an identical
exposure.  They would were a funky old manual camera body being used.  
Is
this the kind of  erratic results one can expect from high-tech 
cameras, or
is there some sort of failure to communicate or understand on my part? 
 Why

would these pics be so far apart in their results?


Shel

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Herb Chong]

i think Pentax is going to have trouble delivering an upgrade. announcing it 
at PMA next year isn't when they are going to deliver one. the 645D isn't 
visible yet and i don't think they are going to make their schedule, which 
is going to be around PMA next year. Mamiya isn't. i think next summer is 
the earliest and probably more like fall before anyone can get their hands 
on one. while that is happening, that's effort diverted from the *istD line. 
building a new 35mm-type body with more real features is a lot harder than 
taking one and removing them. if all Pentax does is take the best specs of 
each of the *istD series and put an 8MP sensor on, it's hardly worth it to 
anyone that already has a current body. it needs quite a bit better AF, more 
like a 10MP sensor, much larger memory buffer, and faster FPS.


Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 5:10 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%



On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Herb Chong wrote:

the investment would be a mistake if you think you ever want to upgrade 
camera bodies.


Now, you have to give us some facts as to why Pentax will go belly up 
before the -D successor comes out (next spring, is the timeline?), or the 
above is mere shite.

Re: RAW file processing

[Mark Roberts]

Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>DNG Converter v3.1 preserves all the standard EXIF metadata tags,  
>Paul, as far as I can tell. It might not save the Pentax private  
>metadata, but the only application that uses that is the Pentax Lab  
>software which I don't use.

Part of the metadata that I definitely want to keep is the lens used for
each shot. Thumbs Plus reads all EXIF metadata , including the Pentax
private data, BTW.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Tom Reese]

Pål Jensen wrote:
Tom wrote: 



In any case, we all have the choice to acquire information and decide 
whether what we think we're hearing is BS and ignore it, or find it to be 
plausible and use it in futher decisions.


The point is how you interpret the facts. I can't see anything dramatic

> in the numbers. Pentax is also in the middle of a costly developing
> schedule of coming DSLR's. No wonder profit decreases...

They will always be in a costly developing schedule of coming DSLR's. 
It's not going to get any easier. I don't think the camera bodies will 
ever make them any money. They're too costly to develop and manufacture, 
they go out of date too quickly and they can't move enough units to 
recover their costs.


They'd be doing well to break even on camera sales and make money on 
their lenses which have a much longer shelf life.


Tom Reese

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Tom Reese]

Herb Chong wrote:

Pentax has not signaled in any way that it has a coherent, even if 
hidden, picture of the future of its camera lineup. announcing the 645D 
to me was representing a huge diversion of effort for a company not 
making much money and knowing that developing such a system is not 
cheap, even if only one more lens needs to be designed. 


I think the 645D could turn into something good for the company. Digital 
medium format is a market with very little competition. They could make 
a lot of money per unit. The trick will be to sell enough units.


Tom Reese

Photoblogs on BBC web site

[Mark Roberts]

A worthwhile alternative for those who are more interested in
photography than arguing about Pentax profit margins:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/05/entertainment_the_photobloggers/html/1.stm

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[dagt]

I remember reading something very similar to this a few years ago when some 
people tried to prove that Pentax would never make a dslr.

DagT
 
> fra: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> i think Pentax is going to have trouble delivering an upgrade. announcing it 
> at PMA next year isn't when they are going to deliver one. the 645D isn't 
> visible yet and i don't think they are going to make their schedule, which 
> is going to be around PMA next year. Mamiya isn't. i think next summer is 
> the earliest and probably more like fall before anyone can get their hands 
> on one. while that is happening, that's effort diverted from the *istD line. 
> building a new 35mm-type body with more real features is a lot harder than 
> taking one and removing them. if all Pentax does is take the best specs of 
> each of the *istD series and put an 8MP sensor on, it's hardly worth it to 
> anyone that already has a current body. it needs quite a bit better AF, more 
> like a 10MP sensor, much larger memory buffer, and faster FPS.
> 
> Herb
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 5:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
> 
> 
> > On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Herb Chong wrote:
> >
> >> the investment would be a mistake if you think you ever want to upgrade 
> >> camera bodies.
> >
> > Now, you have to give us some facts as to why Pentax will go belly up 
> > before the -D successor comes out (next spring, is the timeline?), or the 
> > above is mere shite.
> 
> 
> 

RE: Philly PDML GESO

[Tim Øsleby]

Nice pictures, but way to small. I understand your scanning problems, but I
would really like to have a closer look at
http://twosixteen.com/gallery/index.php?id=114
... (?)

Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian.)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)


-Original Message-
From: Scott Loveless [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 19. juli 2005 15:46
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Philly PDML GESO

Thanks, Bruce.  You are most certainly correct that the photos are too
small.  My original scans were low res.  These were edited slightly
(crop, shadows, highlights, saved for the web) and then uploaded.  I
tried enlarging them to at least 600 pixels on the longest side, but
they look pretty bad.  Regardless, you can find them here:
http://twosixteen.com/gallery/index.php?list=18

I'll try to do a proper scan sometime soon.  Thanks for looking.

On 7/19/05, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Scott,
> 
> There appears to be some nice shots in there.  I sure wish they were
> just a little bigger.  On my monitor, 19", it is really hard to see
> the details that I think are there.  Any way to show some bigger ones?
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> Bruce
> 
> 


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

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

OT: UK tourist questions

[Paul Ewins]

Just a few questions for those who have toured the UK recently and those
living there, as I will be spending August and most of September touring
through Scotland and England.

There are a variety of passes (e.g. National Trust) that give discounted
entry to various attractions. If you used one, which was it and how useful
was it?

I'm planning to copy my CF cards to a portable hard drive (PD70X) and burn
DVDs when I can. Should I be going to internet cafés or computer shops or
camera shops to get the DVDs burnt? 

I'm also dragging along my homemade MF panoramic camera so I'll have 120 E6
film to be developed before I go home. The last stops are 13 days in London
followed by a week in Paris, so I'm assuming that London would be the best
place to get it done. Can anyone recommend a processor in London with a
reasonable turn around, say 3 - 4 days, and reasonable cost? 

What is the deal with booking a couple of tickets on the London Eye? I've
been told to book the day before, do I just turn up and queue or is there
somewhere else that it can be done.

Finally, if you've been on Eurostar recently are there any special
precautions to take to avoid hassles? I'm traveling on an Australian
passport so I expect I'll be subject to the full range of checks and customs
etc.

Regards,

Paul Ewins
Melbourne, Australia 

Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/07/20 Wed AM 11:15:36 GMT
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
> 
> Pål Jensen wrote:
> > Tom wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> >>In any case, we all have the choice to acquire information and decide 
> >>whether what we think we're hearing is BS and ignore it, or find it to be 
> >>plausible and use it in futher decisions.
> > 
> > The point is how you interpret the facts. I can't see anything dramatic
>  > in the numbers. Pentax is also in the middle of a costly developing
>  > schedule of coming DSLR's. No wonder profit decreases...
> 
> They will always be in a costly developing schedule of coming DSLR's. 
> It's not going to get any easier. I don't think the camera bodies will 
> ever make them any money. They're too costly to develop and manufacture, 
> they go out of date too quickly and they can't move enough units to 
> recover their costs.
> 
> They'd be doing well to break even on camera sales and make money on 
> their lenses which have a much longer shelf life.
> 
> Tom Reese

That doesn't seem to be how it works to me.  You make one body, then cut off a 
number of "features" to provide cheaper models, thereby getting three or so 
sets of sales for one level of R&D.  You _might_ pick up some lens sales but 
many of the SLR buyers will already have lenses, even the budget level ones.

mike


-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Jostein]

In my experience the algorithms have never properly learned to handle situations
like this one in a consistent way. Most likely, the camera will have suggested
that you use fill-flash instead. Do you remember if there was a little blinking
zigzag icon in the viewfinder?
 
The way the multi-segment meterings respond to different light distributions is
less transparent compared to centre-weight and spot, so it could take more time
to figure it out, but they are every bit as predictable as the others.

I remember being in your situation when coming to the Z-1 from the centre-weight
meter in the P50. It confused the hell out of me until I learned to know it.
:-)

IMHO, the real strength of multi-segment metering is that when it goes amiss, it
usually does so by a lesser amount than other metering methods. Thus, it is
better than the others at supporting autopilot photography. It's more of a
shot-saver than a perfect tool. At least to the exposure connoiseur. :-)

Cheers,
Jostein



Quoting Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> I saw that and thought that might have something to do with it.  But look
> at the left side of the subject where the lower shot has a much larger
> bright area on the left than the upper shot.  I guess the intelligent,
> multi-segment meter decided that bright area was of no importance 
> 
> BTW, had I adjusted the camera to use the way I'd usually use an in camera
> meter, I may have used spot metering, or just used the thing in complete
> manual mode and determined my own exposures.  However, the point was to
> learn how the camera reacts to different variables.
> That said, the results of this "learning experience" prove, or certainly
> lends credence to, what I've always said about built-in meters, and that is
> that often small changes in the frame will have a large effect upon the way
> a scene is rendered, and that for the most a built-in meter cannot be
> trusted to provide consistent and accurate results.
> 
> Further, I was always of the idea the multi-segment or matrix metering
> relied upon highly complex algorithms that consider all the details in the
> way a frame is light and apply that information in such a way as to give
> consistently more accurate results.  Feh!  I guess I bought into another
> marketing maven's fairy tale.
> 
> Shel 
> 
> 



This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[brooksdj]

> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Shel Belinkoff"
> Subject: The Nine Second Difference
> 
> 
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg
> >
> > Just nine seconds separate these two pics.  They are almost identical
> > shots.  Both were made with the istDs, both at a rating of 3200 ISO, both 
> > @
> > 70mm, both at an aperture of 5.6, both using multi-segment metering, both
> > using auto focus (more on that later!), both on one of the automatic 
> > modes,
> > yet they are a stop apart, with the top pic made @ 1/30 sec and the bottom
> > @ 1/15.
> >
> > What crummy results these are.  The pics, imo, should have an identical
> > exposure.  They would were a funky old manual camera body being used.  Is
> > this the kind of  erratic results one can expect from high-tech cameras, 
> > or
> > is there some sort of failure to communicate or understand on my part? 
> > Why
> > would these pics be so far apart in their results?
> 
> Pretty amazing ain't it?
> I find it to be pretty common on the D if I shoot many shots quickly.
> It just goes erratic for some reason.
> 
> William Robb 

All 3 Dslr's i have will, at some time, do this.

Dave

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Jostein]

"Both images usable" is a truth that probably only holds for posting on the web.
Remember that the shots are made at ISO3200. High ISO images from digital tend
to show a lot of colour noise when the shadows are lifted by post-processing,
so getting exposure the way you want it is important.

Jostein

Quoting Powell Hargrave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> There is usually some change in the image which causes the difference.  In
> this image I would suggest the bright area to the right of her eyes caused
> the first to cut back the exposure as the camera attempts to keep some
> detail there.  In the second this is blocked.  Both images are usable and
> you can always operate the camera in manual or with centre weighted
> metering.
> 
> Powell
> 
> From Shel:
> 
> >http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg
> >



This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: OT: UK tourist questions

[Cotty]

On 20/7/05, Paul Ewins, discombobulated, unleashed:

>What is the deal with booking a couple of tickets on the London Eye? I've
>been told to book the day before, do I just turn up and queue or is there
>somewhere else that it can be done.

Paul, of all the questions you asked, I'm afraid I can only help out with
this one. You can easily book online if you know you're going to be at
the London Eye at a certain day and time, and this will save a bit of
hassle. August is a busy month, and you may find that if you turn up and
get a ticket ad hoc, that the earliest available slot is several hours
later that day.

To turn up ad hoc, you simply walk into the ticket office, a building
right next to the Eye, purchase a ticket, then walk outside and join the
line (assuming your ticket is for shortly after you purchased it - the
time will be stamped on it). The line takes 45 minutes.

Highly recommend you book in advance.



HTH

I'll be popping into London to meet up with Boris the spider and maybe
Bob W on either 16/17/18th August. If you're around, you should come
along. I think we're just gonna goof off down by the river somewhere.

This is assuming I'm not moving house, and we've just found what could be
the right one - so I'm polishing off the starting blocks...


Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Jostein]

Quoting Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On 19/7/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >It's been said that the "... Linebaugh will penetrate deeply enough to take
> >any game animal on Earth."
> 
> Have you met my wife?
> 

Well, to generalise from Mike's description of "English Wife", maybe the main
problem is to shoot after moving target?  :-)

Cheers,
Jostein






This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[K.Takeshita]

On 7/20/05 7:17 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I remember reading something very similar to this a few years ago when some
> people tried to prove that Pentax would never make a dslr.

And now Pentax is the (distant) #3 maker of DSLRs next to N/C.  Management
changed over the years and so did their attitude.  They have been for a long
time a closely held family company, which has changed when the new CEO was
from the engineering.
It's not easy for Pentax (or anybody else for that matter) to keep the
competitive edge but they know they have no choice.
Pentax are always a conscientious company, not too swayed by flashy
marketing blitz (hence the criticism :-), and their products may not look so
stand out on the spec sheet, but when you actually use them, you realize
that they are well thought out, giving the best bang for the money consumers
spent.  A lot of people appreciate this attitude and wish Pentax keep this
unique attitude and the position in the market place.  Plus, Pentax produce
superb lenses, of course.
They probably start going for somewhat more flashy products soon :-).

I am not a blind Pentax fan, but there is something which attracts me.
It's easy for anybody to switch to Canon for example any time and I was
tempted more than once, as I have more than a few of their lenses.  But
their compact and superb lens line up, solid and more than adequate bodies
did not convince me to jump the ship.  If I get into sport photography or
certain bird shooting frequently enough, then I might buy something suitable
for that dedicated purpose which may not be Pentax's.  But until then..
:-).

Cheers,

Ken

Re: OT: UK tourist questions

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: "Paul Ewins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> There are a variety of passes (e.g. National Trust) that give discounted
> entry to various attractions. If you used one, which was it and how useful
> was it?

If you plan on going to many NT properties, join it.  £60 for a year for a 
couple and you will be suprsed how quickly you will recoup that cost in entry 
fees.

> 
> I'm planning to copy my CF cards to a portable hard drive (PD70X) and burn
> DVDs when I can. Should I be going to internet cafés or computer shops or
> camera shops to get the DVDs burnt? 

I think Jessops (in many town centres) provide this service.  Internet cafes 
will do the same.  You might have to purchase their media.

> 
> I'm also dragging along my homemade MF panoramic camera so I'll have 120 E6
> film to be developed before I go home. The last stops are 13 days in London
> followed by a week in Paris, so I'm assuming that London would be the best
> place to get it done. Can anyone recommend a processor in London with a
> reasonable turn around, say 3 - 4 days, and reasonable cost? 

BobW used Joe's Basement, the last I heard.  Think it's got a web presence.  
13days?  What sort of masochist are you?  8-)

> Finally, if you've been on Eurostar recently are there any special
> precautions to take to avoid hassles? I'm traveling on an Australian
> passport so I expect I'll be subject to the full range of checks and customs

It's pretty much the same as airlines, for obvious reasons.

How are you travelling about?

mike


-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/

RE: Stage photography

[Tim Øsleby]

It is sayd before, but don't use flash. Another thing. Since it’s a local
band, and their asking you to photograph, tell them not to wear anything
white. White shirts and black backgrounds ruined many of my shots at Førde
Folkemusikk Festival :-(


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian.)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)


-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 20. juli 2005 10:53
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: Stage photography

On 20/7/05, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Hi Cotty
>Would you trust the integrated light meter here or underexpose a bit like
-1
>?

Like others have said, spot meter the faces. If you can't, definitely
underexpose a bit. You're shooting neg, so you'll have plenty of
latitude. Stage lighting creates very contrasty situations, and although
Mark uses flash, I wouldn't consider it unless it was a rehearsal
scenario with no audience. When I go to a concert as a paying customer, I
want to see the band without flash, thanks.

You'll enjoy yourself and shoot far too much ;-)




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/07/20 Wed PM 12:01:30 GMT
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
> 
> Quoting Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > On 19/7/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
> > 
> > >It's been said that the "... Linebaugh will penetrate deeply enough to take
> > >any game animal on Earth."
> > 
> > Have you met my wife?
> > 
> 
> Well, to generalise from Mike's description of "English Wife", maybe the main
> problem is to shoot after moving target?  :-)

8-))
Justified today.  She's got a job interview this afternoon and we pick up her 
new car after over a week of (in my opinion) unjustifiable delays.  I've been 
sending her "calm" texts for the last three hours.  If I don't, I suspect she 
will just appear as a pink tornado to the interviewers.

m


-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/

Re: Is PUG Still Down?

[frank theriault]

On 7/20/05, Lucas Rijnders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Frank,
> 
> I used http://oksne.net/autopug/PUGform.asp. It was linked from the 'backup'
> pug requirements page Adelheid mailed a link to a couple of days ago (see:
> http://www.kirschten.de/PUG/general/autosubmit.html). It seemed up to date
> and happily devoured my jpg, so I assume it works...
> 
> Hope this helps,
> Regards, Lucas

Thanks, Lucas,

It helped a lot.  I must have missed Adelheid's post, but thanks to
you, I've now submitted for August.

cheers,
frank

-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Jostein]

If high model turnover is a problem, then making a MedF digital may make the
best signal effect of dedication to serious digital with the least R&D effort.

I bet Pentax will be careful not to repeat the mistakes that Mamiya has made
with their introduction. They've been through that already with the MZ-D.

Jostein



Quoting Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Pål Jensen wrote:
> > Tom wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> >>In any case, we all have the choice to acquire information and decide 
> >>whether what we think we're hearing is BS and ignore it, or find it to be 
> >>plausible and use it in futher decisions.
> > 
> > The point is how you interpret the facts. I can't see anything dramatic
>  > in the numbers. Pentax is also in the middle of a costly developing
>  > schedule of coming DSLR's. No wonder profit decreases...
> 
> They will always be in a costly developing schedule of coming DSLR's. 
> It's not going to get any easier. I don't think the camera bodies will 
> ever make them any money. They're too costly to develop and manufacture, 
> they go out of date too quickly and they can't move enough units to 
> recover their costs.
> 
> They'd be doing well to break even on camera sales and make money on 
> their lenses which have a much longer shelf life.
> 
> Tom Reese
> 
> 
> 





This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: PAW - Textures

[frank theriault]

On 7/19/05, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> May I be so bold as to post to PAW images at once? This is a part of my
> street shooting "Project"...
> 
> Your comments are appreciated.
> 
> http://www.photoforum.ru/rate/photo.php?photo_id=203301
> 

Wow!  Great detail.  I like the composition, the way the apparently
helter-skelter jumble of bricks comes together in such a pleasing way.
 I also like that there are different size and shaped bricks (or
blocks or whatever) in the pile - makes for nice variety and different
geometries.

I like this a lot.

cheers,
frank

-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Jostein]

Quoting Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> if you already have a raft of 645 lenses, there isn't much choice, 
> but there aren't going to be a lot of people like that left in another 
> year's time.

You mean, they're dying out and have their lenses buried with them, right?

C'mon, Herb! The lenses just change owners. What makes the 645D less interesting
for the buyers?

Jostein


This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: PESO - MV Sunset

[frank theriault]

On 7/19/05, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After shooting the Mittens at dusk, We were able to turn around and
> look out of the valley at this last display of light.  MV, by the way,
> is Monument Valley.
> 
> 
> Pentax *istD, DA 16-45/4, Handheld
> ISO 800, 1/250 sec @ f/6.7
> Converted from Raw using Capture One LE
> 
> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/monumentvalley_0470.htm
> 
> Comments Welcome
> 

Stunning.

Gorgeous.

Beautiful

Pull out a thesaurus, and keep going. 

cheers,
frank

-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Rick Womer]

Gosh, Shel, give the poor camera a break!

This is a very, very tough shot for a little
microchip.  You've got background highlights, a very
bright background highlight on the left, a midtone
face, and a black hat.

This is what they put spot meters in cameras for.

Rick


--- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg
> 
> Just nine seconds separate these two pics.  They are
> almost identical
> shots.  Both were made with the istDs, both at a
> rating of 3200 ISO, both @
> 70mm, both at an aperture of 5.6, both using
> multi-segment metering, both
> using auto focus (more on that later!), both on one
> of the automatic modes,
> yet they are a stop apart, with the top pic made @
> 1/30 sec and the bottom
> @ 1/15.
> 
> What crummy results these are.  The pics, imo,
> should have an identical
> exposure.  They would were a funky old manual camera
> body being used.  Is
> this the kind of  erratic results one can expect
> from high-tech cameras, or
> is there some sort of failure to communicate or
> understand on my part?  Why
> would these pics be so far apart in their results?
> 
> 
> Shel 
> 
> 
> 




__ 
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 

Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Jostein]

Quoting mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 8-))
> Justified today.  She's got a job interview this afternoon and we pick up her
> new car after over a week of (in my opinion) unjustifiable delays.  I've been
> sending her "calm" texts for the last three hours.  If I don't, I suspect she
> will just appear as a pink tornado to the interviewers.

As I've said before;

Beware of pink! :-)


Cheers,
Jostein 



This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Dave Kennedy]

On 7/19/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> 5) non-Pentax DSLR owners who want a Pentax instead - sorry, but i think
> Godfrey is probably the only such person that will ever exist.
> 

Perhaps, but I'm not so certain.  I talked to some good friends this
past weekend who currently only have a Kodak DP&S. She had love to get
a DSLR, and their comment toward Pentax was "I had a Pentax back in
the 70s, and I loved it. If/when we look at getting a DSLR, Pentax
would be the first camera I'll look at".

Has that translated to a sale? No. Will it? Perhaps.  Nostalgia can be
a powerfull selling tool. Look at the NA car market.


dk

Re: OT: UK tourist questions

[John Forbes]

Paul,

The various interesting properties that you might want to visit are owned  
by a variety of different organisations.  Grand country houses in England  
are often the property of the National Trust, but not invariably.  Many of  
the most important buildings in Britain are government-owned and operated  
(often through English Heritage - in England).  In Scotland, there is the  
Scottish National Trust and Historic Scotland.


In my view you would be well advised to make a short-list of the places  
you really want to see, and then check who runs them.  It would be a pity  
to shell out for a NT membership and then never use it.


If, whilst in London, you want to visit, say, Kew Gardens, Buckingham  
Palace, the Tower of London, Tate Modern (or Ancient) and St Paul's  
Cathedral (to name a few), the National Trust won't help you.


However, it's great for big country houses, and certain bits of what  
people in Britain call wilderness.


John



On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 12:38:53 +0100, Paul Ewins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:



Just a few questions for those who have toured the UK recently and those
living there, as I will be spending August and most of September touring
through Scotland and England.

There are a variety of passes (e.g. National Trust) that give discounted
entry to various attractions. If you used one, which was it and how  
useful

was it?

I'm planning to copy my CF cards to a portable hard drive (PD70X) and  
burn

DVDs when I can. Should I be going to internet cafés or computer shops or
camera shops to get the DVDs burnt?

I'm also dragging along my homemade MF panoramic camera so I'll have 120  
E6
film to be developed before I go home. The last stops are 13 days in  
London
followed by a week in Paris, so I'm assuming that London would be the  
best

place to get it done. Can anyone recommend a processor in London with a
reasonable turn around, say 3 - 4 days, and reasonable cost?

What is the deal with booking a couple of tickets on the London Eye? I've
been told to book the day before, do I just turn up and queue or is there
somewhere else that it can be done.

Finally, if you've been on Eurostar recently are there any special
precautions to take to avoid hassles? I'm traveling on an Australian
passport so I expect I'll be subject to the full range of checks and  
customs

etc.

Regards,

Paul Ewins
Melbourne, Australia










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

Persistingly OT Re: Fanatics

[Jostein]

LOL.
Woe the ones to Manor Born.

Btw, anyone remember the TV series with Penelope Keith?

Jostein

Quoting Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> as one of a civilized gentiles (ie, goyim),  i protest against
> abusing language in this manor. and highly recommend a spell-checker
> to a  pissed native speakers.
> 
> mishka
> 
> On 7/19/05, Bob Blakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > You're right, of course. I am angry though. And I demand retribution -
> what
> > is justly deserved, recompense. And I demand it from both those who do,
> > those who teach, those who finance and also those who give aid, comfort or
> > safe haven to these barbarians. Dealing with such people in the manor
> > necessary has always been distasteful and repugnant to a civilized people.
> > Nevertheless, it must be done, lest the barbarians come to dictate to and
> > rule harshly over the gentile people of the world. I don't want my country
> > to do this, but I see no one else with a solution that has ever been shown
> > to work at any time in the sorry history of this planet. I will not be
> harsh
> > to judge those who stand on the wall and watch and who offer themselves up
> > to stand in harm's way for people they don't even know.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Bob...
> 
> 





This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[frank theriault]

On 7/19/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/2up.jpg
  Is
> this the kind of  erratic results one can expect from high-tech cameras, or
> is there some sort of failure to communicate or understand on my part?  Why
> would these pics be so far apart in their results?

Well, I'm not a user of high-tech auto everything cameras, so maybe
I'm not the best person to answer, but I'll throw in my two cents
anyway.

Two thoughts:  maybe the camera's meter sensed that the exposure was
right on the cusp between 1/30th and 1/15th, so it might have taken a
miniscule change in light to make the camera decide between these two
speeds.

That being said (and I know this is obvious, but I'll say it anyway),
the more automation, the less control for the user.  Since you didn't
have control, you let the machine decide for you, and I guess one has
to live with those results, for better or worse...

cheers,
frank
-- 
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: OT: UK tourist questions

[Chris Stoddart]

> > From: "Paul Ewins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> > There are a variety of passes (e.g. National Trust) that give discounted
> > entry to various attractions. If you used one, which was it and how useful
> > was it?

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, mike wilson wrote:

> If you plan on going to many NT properties, join it.  £60 for a year 
> for a couple and you will be suprsed how quickly you will recoup that 
> cost in entry fees.

I agree with Mike; you need to visit about 6-10 NT properties to be in 
profit (normal entry varies from free to five quid-ish. All is free to 
members). Can anyone confirm/deny that NT membership allows you into 
National Trust for Scotland properties? 

Chris

PESO: Dog's life

[Albano Garcia]

Hi gang,
http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar/?p=116#comments

Comments here and there welcome...


Albano Garcia
Photography & Graphic Design
http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar
http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar
 
 

 




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

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results even
in manual mode is disheartening.


How can you not get repeatable results in manual mode?

Kostas

re: RAW file processing

[Cory Papenfuss]

I agree with Paul here: archive the PEF files, for sure. They are the 
original data.


	Absolutely... no question of compatibility, everything is there, 
etc.  If storage space is an issue, one thing to consider would be a 
lossless compression, though.  Pentax's brain-dead, no-compression RAW 
files (*especially* bad on the -D) are bigger than they need to be. 
Zipping each file would help.  On my -DS files, they only tended to 
compress to 80%-90% of the original (even with bzip2 -9), so I haven't 
bothered.  With all the zeros in a -D file, it might do better.


	I would think that a lossless compression *intended* for RAW 
images would be a good thing.  Something like FLAC or APE for music.  I 
have yet to find one, though.


-Cory

--

*
* Cory Papenfuss*
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student   *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University   *
*

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Tom Reese]

Rick Womer wrote:


Gosh, Shel, give the poor camera a break!

This is a very, very tough shot for a little
microchip.  You've got background highlights, a very
bright background highlight on the left, a midtone
face, and a black hat.

This is what they put spot meters in cameras for.


I was thinking this so now I might as well say it:

Shel,

I think you might find the ZX-5N spotmeter capability to be extremely 
useful. I use it far more than autofocus, autobracketing and all the 
other whiz-bang modern features. I find it indispensable for checking 
tonal ranges in my compositions and setting my exposure.


This might make for an interesting thread. Features I use the most in 
descending order:


used a lot:

spotmeter
mirror lock-up
ttl flash

less often:

double exposure
auto exposure lock

much less often:

autofocus
multisegment autoexposure
exposure compensation

hardly ever:

autobracketing
Tv mode

not at all:

program mode

I'm interested in how others rate their cameras features.

Tom Reese

Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/07/20 Wed PM 12:41:29 GMT
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
> 
> Quoting mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > 8-))
> > Justified today.  She's got a job interview this afternoon and we pick up 
> > her
> > new car after over a week of (in my opinion) unjustifiable delays.  I've 
> > been
> > sending her "calm" texts for the last three hours.  If I don't, I suspect 
> > she
> > will just appear as a pink tornado to the interviewers.
> 
> As I've said before;
> 
> Beware of pink! :-)

Noted.
8-)

mike 


-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/

Late afternoon walk

[Jim Hemenway]

From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond:
http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/

Pentax isDS

Jim

Re: Best equipment for harsh conditions?

[wendy beard]

--- Jon M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Yeah, I meant that the harsh conditions would be
> primarily jarring and shaking.
> 
> Another question that was posed in my original email
> was how would you transport the equipment? I'll have
> a
> Camelbak, so no backpacks... I *could* add a cargo
> rack to the bike, but I don't know how well that
> would
> hold up, and I'm not too sure I'd even want the
> camera
> fastened to the bike. Is there not any kind of
> camera
> bag made for "extreme" usage? I might have to
> engineer
> something myself. 
> 

When I used to go out mountain biking I'd take just an
MX with 40mm lens stuffed in a normal fabric bum bag.

Wendy

Wendy Beard
Ottawa, Canada

A late afternoon walk

[Jim Hemenway]

From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond:
http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/

Pentax isDS

Jim

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I rely upon the multisegment metering a good bit of the time and it  
does pretty well, and consistently, in 85th percentile lighting  
situation. Just like learning to meter manually, you have to learn  
how to use it to best effect. There are times when it is  
inconsistent ... a backlit portrait being made at ISO 3200 is often a  
time which will exacerbate any problems or inconsistency.


There's a reason that the camera has more than one metering mode  
*AND* exposure compensation controls, in other words. I think the  
problem is in your assumptions, not in the camera's operation. Just  
like relying upon autofocus to be perfect is probably inappropriate ...


Godfrey


On Jul 20, 2005, at 1:17 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


That's so reassuring, Bill.

This is my first time using multi-segment metering.  Never again!

It's nice to know that the meter in these cameras can't be relied  
upon.


Shel




[Original Message]
From: William Robb





Pretty amazing ain't it?
I find it to be pretty common on the D if I shoot many shots
quickly.  It just goes erratic for some reason.

Re: GESO

[wendy beard]

--- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Some nice shots here. I love the look on the dog's
> face in 8341. It's 
> like, "You want me to do what?" Fun stuff, Bill.
> Paul

You have no idea how much I yearn for a performance
like the aussie in 8341 :-s

Not a bad album, Bill. You could have upped the
shutter speed a bit on some of them, but you've gone
in nice and tight. I'm guessing these aren't novice
dogs/handlers as the handlers seem to be nicely out of
the way. 

Wendy

Wendy Beard
Ottawa, Canada

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Bill Owens]

3) non-Pentax film SLR owners who are interested in going digital and have 
no requirement to be compatible with their older equipment - Canon and 
Nikon have mindshare and Pentax doesn't. it takes really knowledgeable 
sales people and buyers with an open mind to move them to a Pentax DSLR.


This is also true of the Joe and Jane Sixpacks who are making their first 
foray into digital imaging.  A large majority of our customers looking for 
their first digicam want to buy Kodak.  Why you ask?  Because it has the 
name Kodak on it.  These are the same people who also want to buy the Kodak 
printer dock.  When they discover that these prints are about 60 cents each 
(including paper, ink and sales tax),  they often opt for the Fuji Kiosk at 
19 cents per print.


BTW, the latest issue of Consumer Reports magazine rates the Fui Aladdin 
kiosk considerably better than the Kodak Picture Maker.


Bill 

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Rob Studdert]

On 20 Jul 2005 at 13:58, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> 
> > unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results even in
> > manual mode is disheartening.
> 
> How can you not get repeatable results in manual mode?

Because the when the aperture is set via the body the cameras stop down 
mechanism doesn't pre-set the taking aperture as accurately as the mechanical 
stop enforced when using the physical lens based aperture setting.



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: Stage photography

[Doug Brewer]

I'm starting to think I missed the memo that said "All Stage Photography 
Must Be Done With Grainy B/W Film."


Rob Studdert wrote:

Do you really need to shoot B&W at all? Are you going to be personally printing 
the B&W or will they be sent out for print? All my stage work I now shoot using 
the *ist D with great success. Some images I post process as B&W others the 
colour makes the shot and I don't have to fart about with two cameras in the 
heat of the action.



Rob Studdert

Re: Stage photography

[Scott Loveless]

Yes, you did.Since the band I'm photographing is a fairly loud
rock and roll outfit, I had planned on using grainy black and white
anyway.  But I suppose it depends on the performance, venue, etc.  If
I was photographing an orchestra, I might use something a bit more
refined.

On 7/20/05, Doug Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm starting to think I missed the memo that said "All Stage Photography
> Must Be Done With Grainy B/W Film."
> 
> Rob Studdert wrote:
> 
> > Do you really need to shoot B&W at all? Are you going to be personally 
> > printing
> > the B&W or will they be sent out for print? All my stage work I now shoot 
> > using
> > the *ist D with great success. Some images I post process as B&W others the
> > colour makes the shot and I don't have to fart about with two cameras in the
> > heat of the action.
> >
> >
> > Rob Studdert
> 
> 


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

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

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Rob Studdert]

On 20 Jul 2005 at 1:12, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

> Hi Rob - I was always of the impression that multi-segment metering was
> "smarter" than that.  I guess it's just some more marketing hype, or
> perhaps the differences in the scene were such that it could fool the
> meter.  It's results like these that consistently keep me skeptical of
> in-camera meters.  Another fine example of how "technology is my friend." 
> Usually I just eyeball a scene or make a quick scan using a hand-held
> meter, set the exposure, and start shooting, never changing the exposure
> unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results even
> in manual mode is disheartening.

It's actually pretty smart but you have to be aware of what it's actually doing 
in order to take full advantage of it. Remember digital capture is much like 
shooting slide film, highlights are a problem and things can get quite messy 
with gross over-exposure. Multi-segment metering looks across the whole frame 
and attempts to keep the highlights within a reasonable range and in balance 
with the remainder of the frame. It definitely didn't suite your needs given 
the shot you used it for but I bet it taught you a lesson or two :-)

Where multi-segment metering shines is when capturing images in RAW format, it 
most often produces the most broad and versatile exposure. Unfortunately 
sometimes these excellent exposures look like crap before post processing. With 
in camera JPG you have no choice but to get the exposure right given that a 
goodly chunk of the captured data is discarded in the in-camera RAW transform.

IMHO a DSLR won't really start working for you until you stop treating it like 
a film camera.

Cheers,


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

Re: Stage photography

[Rob Studdert]

On 20 Jul 2005 at 10:10, Doug Brewer wrote:

> I'm starting to think I missed the memo that said "All Stage Photography 
> Must Be Done With Grainy B/W Film."

That was back in the days that it was a virtual necessity because fast colour 
film was such crap beyond  ISO800 :-)




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: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

No, Rick, I'm not going to be easy on the camera, and I'll tell you why. 
First, camera makers have been touting their technologies as a panacea for
all sorts of situations, which of course I know is just a pile of horse
pucky.  Also, a bunch of people here over the years have been critical of
my suggestion that no matter how smart built-in meters can be, they are not
as accurate as someone who knows how to read light and make proper
exposures.  I know how to make exposures, and believe that I can do better
than what this meter can do.  When I look at the background of this scene,
in both pics, I don't see much difference except in the way the bright
areas are distributed.  One has a big bright area on the left, the other on
the right,  The face is pretty well centered.  I'd have thought that with
all the magical abilities these cameras have been credited with, a simple
backlighted shot would be easy for it to meter, and the exposures would
have been a lot closer.  I guess I was wrong about that and right in my
original assumption that these newer cameras are no better than the older
ones.

If I were metering the scene, I'd have taken one reading, and put the
camera on manual exposure, leaving the aperture and shutter speed alone. 

Anyway, this was just a learning experience to see what the metering system
on the istDs could do.  Looking at the other 94 photos, er, images, made
with this camera on that day, I am not impressed with it's automatic
metering skills.  But in all fairness to the pea-brained computer that
lives within this attractive little body, it's probably no worse than most
other metering systems, and I will no longer trust it  generate good,
consistent results when set in any automatic mode.  

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Rick Womer 

> Gosh, Shel, give the poor camera a break!
>
> This is a very, very tough shot for a little
> microchip.  You've got background highlights, a very
> bright background highlight on the left, a midtone
> face, and a black hat.
>
> This is what they put spot meters in cameras for.

Re: Stage photography

[Rob Studdert]

On 20 Jul 2005 at 10:15, Scott Loveless wrote:

> Yes, you did.Since the band I'm photographing is a fairly loud
> rock and roll outfit, I had planned on using grainy black and white
> anyway.  But I suppose it depends on the performance, venue, etc.  If
> I was photographing an orchestra, I might use something a bit more
> refined.

I've used this technique to grunge up some pretty sedate DSLR shots, works a 
treat and looks great printed large.

http://www.marcjutras.com/epseudolith.html


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: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

Someone else said that and I was repeating it. Find out who said it and ask
them.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
>
> > unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results
even
> > in manual mode is disheartening.
>
> How can you not get repeatable results in manual mode?

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[pnstenquist]

Hi Shel,
As Rod noted in another message, the multi-segment metering is most valuable 
when shooting RAW. In that mode, it seems to be weighted toward avoiding 
excessively bright highlights. In RAW conversion it's easy to brighten the 
midtones, but you can't save a highlight that's out of range. To refer to Rod's 
remarks again, you can't think in terms of film. I was very disappointed with 
my digital results, until I learned to work in a different way: shooting RAW 
and post-processing to get the results I want. On those rare occassions that I 
shoot film, I have to adopt a completely different mindset. It's a different 
medium that calls for different methods.


> No, Rick, I'm not going to be easy on the camera, and I'll tell you why. 
> First, camera makers have been touting their technologies as a panacea for
> all sorts of situations, which of course I know is just a pile of horse
> pucky.  Also, a bunch of people here over the years have been critical of
> my suggestion that no matter how smart built-in meters can be, they are not
> as accurate as someone who knows how to read light and make proper
> exposures.  I know how to make exposures, and believe that I can do better
> than what this meter can do.  When I look at the background of this scene,
> in both pics, I don't see much difference except in the way the bright
> areas are distributed.  One has a big bright area on the left, the other on
> the right,  The face is pretty well centered.  I'd have thought that with
> all the magical abilities these cameras have been credited with, a simple
> backlighted shot would be easy for it to meter, and the exposures would
> have been a lot closer.  I guess I was wrong about that and right in my
> original assumption that these newer cameras are no better than the older
> ones.
> 
> If I were metering the scene, I'd have taken one reading, and put the
> camera on manual exposure, leaving the aperture and shutter speed alone. 
> 
> Anyway, this was just a learning experience to see what the metering system
> on the istDs could do.  Looking at the other 94 photos, er, images, made
> with this camera on that day, I am not impressed with it's automatic
> metering skills.  But in all fairness to the pea-brained computer that
> lives within this attractive little body, it's probably no worse than most
> other metering systems, and I will no longer trust it  generate good,
> consistent results when set in any automatic mode.  
> 
> Shel 
> 
> 
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Rick Womer 
> 
> > Gosh, Shel, give the poor camera a break!
> >
> > This is a very, very tough shot for a little
> > microchip.  You've got background highlights, a very
> > bright background highlight on the left, a midtone
> > face, and a black hat.
> >
> > This is what they put spot meters in cameras for.
> 
> 

Re: GESO - Agility trial

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "wendy beard"

Subject: Re: GESO




You have no idea how much I yearn for a performance
like the aussie in 8341 :-s


That one was really quick too.


Not a bad album, Bill. You could have upped the
shutter speed a bit on some of them, but you've gone
in nice and tight. I'm guessing these aren't novice
dogs/handlers as the handlers seem to be nicely out of
the way.


Most of the handlers (and dogs) were pretty experienced.
One Jack Russell decided there were better things to do and bugged out as 
soon as he could (I don't think he hit any equipment before leaving the 
field).

Jacks are like that though.
Most of the shots were done with the 300/4.5 in programmed exposure mode.
Next time, I'll put it in shutter preferred, to keep the speed up.
Everything seemed to be shot in the 1/800 to 1/1000 second range with 
f/stops varying between about f/8 to f/11.
I find this sort of stuff quite a challenge, most of my subject matter is 
tied down and not moving.

Thanks for looking, and commenting.
William Robb 

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis"

Subject: Re: The Nine Second Difference



On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results even
in manual mode is disheartening.


How can you not get repeatable results in manual mode?


Putting blind faith in a light meter guarantees non repeatable results.

William Robb 

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Owens" 
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%





BTW, the latest issue of Consumer Reports magazine rates the Fui Aladdin 
kiosk considerably better than the Kodak Picture Maker.


What criteria are they using for their rating of the two?
Is the Aladdin a dye syb?

William Robb

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Shel Belinkoff"

Subject: Re: The Nine Second Difference



That's so reassuring, Bill.

This is my first time using multi-segment metering.  Never again!

It's nice to know that the meter in these cameras can't be relied upon.



I tend to just use center weighted metering. I still get the occasional 
wonky exposures.


William Robb

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

Well, when Bruce loaned me his istD for a day, we discussed the best way to
expose with the digi.  However, this past weekend was a different
situation.  The owner of the istDs was shooting JPEG for a couple of good
and understandable reasons (although I am on a small crusade to move her in
the direction of RAW).  Plus, the original purpose of her bringing the
digi, as far as i was concerned, was to compare the results of one lens
used on that camera to the results of another used on a film camera.

In the camera's favor, I was a bit overwhelmed with all the things I had to
think about when using the digi, and i was there primarily not to learn
about the istDs, but to grab the MZ-5n.  My camera of choice that day, for
my own photography, was a humble Pentax K-body and an old K28/3.5 lens ... 

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Rob Studdert 

> On 20 Jul 2005 at 1:12, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> > Hi Rob - I was always of the impression that multi-segment metering was
> > "smarter" than that.  I guess it's just some more marketing hype, or
> > perhaps the differences in the scene were such that it could fool the
> > meter.  It's results like these that consistently keep me skeptical of
> > in-camera meters.  Another fine example of how "technology is my
friend." 
> > Usually I just eyeball a scene or make a quick scan using a hand-held
> > meter, set the exposure, and start shooting, never changing the exposure
> > unless the light has changed.  That you can't get repeatable results
even
> > in manual mode is disheartening.
>
> It's actually pretty smart but you have to be aware of what it's actually
doing 
> in order to take full advantage of it. Remember digital capture is much
like 
> shooting slide film, highlights are a problem and things can get quite
messy 
> with gross over-exposure. Multi-segment metering looks across the whole
frame 
> and attempts to keep the highlights within a reasonable range and in
balance 
> with the remainder of the frame. It definitely didn't suite your needs
given 
> the shot you used it for but I bet it taught you a lesson or two :-)
>
> Where multi-segment metering shines is when capturing images in RAW
format, it 
> most often produces the most broad and versatile exposure. Unfortunately 
> sometimes these excellent exposures look like crap before post
processing. With 
> in camera JPG you have no choice but to get the exposure right given that
a 
> goodly chunk of the captured data is discarded in the in-camera RAW
transform.
>
> IMHO a DSLR won't really start working for you until you stop treating it
like 
> a film camera.

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Shel Belinkoff]

The 5n has mirror lock up?  I don't think I saw that in the manual or on
the camera body.

Of all the features you've mentioned, the only one that I might use
consistently would be spot metering, and MLU when shooting certain
situations.  I use a spot meter when using a hand held meter.

Coincidentally, I started compiling a compendium of things I like/dislike
about the 5n.  I'm going to take the camera into San Francisco today and
see how it works.  The light weight is nice.

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Tom Reese 

> I think you might find the ZX-5N spotmeter capability to be extremely 
> useful. I use it far more than autofocus, autobracketing and all the 
> other whiz-bang modern features. I find it indispensable for checking 
> tonal ranges in my compositions and setting my exposure.
>
> This might make for an interesting thread. Features I use the most in 
> descending order:
>
> used a lot:
>
> spotmeter
> mirror lock-up
> ttl flash
>
> less often:
>
> double exposure
> auto exposure lock
>
> much less often:
>
> autofocus
> multisegment autoexposure
> exposure compensation
>
> hardly ever:
>
> autobracketing
> Tv mode
>
> not at all:
>
> program mode
>
> I'm interested in how others rate their cameras features.
>
> Tom Reese

Re: Stage photography

[E.R.N. Reed]

Doug Brewer wrote:

I'm starting to think I missed the memo that said "All Stage 
Photography Must Be Done With Grainy B/W Film." 


Doug, it came out right after the memo that said "All Street Photography 
Must Be Done With Grainy B&W Film" and just before the one that said 
"Serious Photography Is Never Done With Colo(u)r Negative Film."

I'm sure I *must* have seen those somewhere.
;-)

ERNR

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Mark Roberts]

"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Putting blind faith in a light meter guarantees non repeatable results.

Don't worry Cotty, I got it! ;-)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[P. J. Alling]

Actually Shel, the meter can be relied on, it proves that the 
photographers brain is superior to the cameras brain, it the former is 
engaged.


Shel Belinkoff wrote:

That's so reassuring, Bill. 


This is my first time using multi-segment metering.  Never again!

It's nice to know that the meter in these cameras can't be relied upon.

Shel 



 


[Original Message]
From: William Robb 
   



 


Pretty amazing ain't it?
I find it to be pretty common on the D if I shoot many shots 
quickly.  It just goes erratic for some reason.
   





 




--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[E.R.N. Reed]

Shel Belinkoff wrote:


The 5n has mirror lock up?  I don't think I saw that in the manual or on
the camera body.
 

Not that I know of -- nor double exposure. I guess Tom Reese must've 
been talking about features in general, not 5n features in particular. 
(The *istD, for what it's worth, in case you get to play with one 
sometime, has both of those. The PZ-1, the WR-90, and the Optio 550 have 
double/multiple-exposure capability. Just to keep talking about cameras 
you don't have :-)



Of all the features you've mentioned, the only one that I might use
consistently would be spot metering, and MLU when shooting certain
situations.  I use a spot meter when using a hand held meter.

Coincidentally, I started compiling a compendium of things I like/dislike
about the 5n.  I'm going to take the camera into San Francisco today and
see how it works.  The light weight is nice.

Shel 



 


[Original Message]
From: Tom Reese 
   



 

I think you might find the ZX-5N spotmeter capability to be extremely 
useful. I use it far more than autofocus, autobracketing and all the 
other whiz-bang modern features. I find it indispensable for checking 
tonal ranges in my compositions and setting my exposure.


This might make for an interesting thread. Features I use the most in 
descending order:


used a lot:

spotmeter
mirror lock-up
ttl flash

less often:

double exposure
auto exposure lock

much less often:

autofocus
multisegment autoexposure
exposure compensation

hardly ever:

autobracketing
Tv mode

not at all:

program mode

I'm interested in how others rate their cameras features.

Tom Reese
   





 

Most and least-used features--WAS: The Nine Second Difference

[Rick Womer]

In my (P)Z-1 and (P)Z-1p,

Use a lot:
multisegment metering in HyperProgram mode
exposure compensation
spot meter with meter lock

Use less:
mirror lock-up
TTL flash (especially for fill)with compensation
auto-bracketing
continuous film advance with servo AF (not much sports
shooting)

Use rarely or never:
the other 723 features of these cameras



--- Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> This might make for an interesting thread. Features
> I use the most in 
> descending order:
> 
> used a lot:
> 
> spotmeter
> mirror lock-up
> ttl flash
> 
> less often:
> 
> double exposure
> auto exposure lock
> 
> much less often:
> 
> autofocus
> multisegment autoexposure
> exposure compensation
> 
> hardly ever:
> 
> autobracketing
> Tv mode
> 
> not at all:
> 
> program mode
> 
> I'm interested in how others rate their cameras
> features.
> 
> Tom Reese
> 
> 


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

Re: Late afternoon walk

[Rick Womer]

Beautiful, Jim.  They make me want to get onto Horn
Pond with my canoe, today (just this small problem
having a job...).  Where is it?

Rick

--- Jim Hemenway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond:
> http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/
> 
> Pentax isDS
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> 


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

Features I use (formerly the Nine Second Difference)

[E.R.N. Reed]

[Original Message]

From: Tom Reese 



This might make for an interesting thread. 


OK -- here's a new thread for it.

Features I use the most in 
descending order:


used a lot:

spotmeter
mirror lock-up
ttl flash

less often:

double exposure
auto exposure lock

much less often:

autofocus
multisegment autoexposure
exposure compensation

hardly ever:

autobracketing
Tv mode

not at all:

program mode

I'm interested in how others rate their cameras features.


My list:
Use a lot --
Multisegment metering and program (or Hyper Program, depending on the 
camera) for grabbing shots quickly
Exposure compensation (especially with the digitals, to reproduce 
low-light scenes as darker than average)
Spotmeter and Centre-weighted metering for those trickier metering 
situations

Av mode

Less often --
Autobracketing
Tv mode
TTL flash
Autofocus

Rarely --
Autoexposure lock (prefer manual exposure in those situations because it 
has no time limit)

Mirror lockup
Self timer for reasons other than mirror prefire

Even more rarely --
Multiple exposure

Never so far in spite of having three or four cameras that can do it --
Intervalometer

OT: Magnifying eyepiece for DSLRs

[Frantisek]

Hi,
   my wishes came true, although for a different camera than most of
   PDML uses ;-)

   Somebody (nikon) finally introduced an accessory that was due to be
   released 5 years ago... 1.2x magnifier eyepiece for their DSLRs.
   Exact ergonomics are yet to be seen (my local nikon rep doesn't yet
   have any), but it is something I have even thought of doing mysel
   as a DIY thing. So much I miss the view trough good olf FF
   high-magnification SLRs. Of course it's better with Pentax, whose
   DSLRs are among the best wrt viewfinder magnification, but perhaps
   even these could benefit from it (after a proper Cotty-hack to
   adapt it to Pentax viewfinders), after all even at 0.95x
   magnification the 1.5x crop factor view is still very small
   compared to LX.

Frantisek

Re: Best equipment for harsh conditions?

[Frantisek]

I have (ab)used my LX quite a lot, and it held well against everything I threw
at it (or vice versa ). The moisture and dust resistance is great.
I have had spilled beer and wine over it //usually at concerts, when
you photograph in the front row and rock fans start throwing beer at
the band, most of it is bound to end up on you, the same with the
#$%#$^# bastard icehockey stars when they celebrate a victorious return from 
World
Championchip by spraying every one around with sticky champagne//. I
just washed it with clear water afterwards (beer is really ugly to get
into cameras, it sticks to everything). I have had problems with LX
and flash, due to the tiny contacts which connect the prism and
body (which are inadequate, look at contacts in F4 for better ones),
which can get separated with heavy hotshoe flash. That's the only
problem I have ever had with it. And I am not gentle to my cameras.

Frantisek

RE: Features I use (formerly the Nine Second Difference)

[Shel Belinkoff]

In my case:

Focus
Shutter speed
Aperture adjustment

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: E.R.N. Reed 

> My list:
> Use a lot --
> Multisegment metering and program (or Hyper Program, depending on the 
> camera) for grabbing shots quickly
> Exposure compensation (especially with the digitals, to reproduce 
> low-light scenes as darker than average)
> Spotmeter and Centre-weighted metering for those trickier metering 
> situations
> Av mode
>
> Less often --
> Autobracketing
> Tv mode
> TTL flash
> Autofocus
>
> Rarely --
> Autoexposure lock (prefer manual exposure in those situations because it 
> has no time limit)
> Mirror lockup
> Self timer for reasons other than mirror prefire
>
> Even more rarely --
> Multiple exposure
>
> Never so far in spite of having three or four cameras that can do it --
> Intervalometer
>
>

OT: photon grease & other patent medicines

[Bob Sullivan]

Turned on the TV in Shanghi last night and scrolled thru the channels.
I found the Kung Fu equivalent of the WW Wrestling Federation,
Various soaps (w/good production values)
The shopping channel, and
Ads with advertising a breast enhancement cream.
...Just rub it on for graphic enlargement.  
Wow, I havent seen those since the '60's.
Regards,  Bob S.

On 7/19/05, Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Serendipitous
> 
> I recently used some of your Photon Grease as I reasoned that it might
> improve my eyesight.  Unfortunately I disliked the taste.  Does it
> come in peppermint?
> 
> Nauseous of Newcastle
> 
> 
> ++
> 
> Quoting Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > Dear Worried,
> >
> > Buy a small can of my patented Photon Grease (TM).  It'll increase
> > the flow
> > of light through the lens, prevent premature aperture degeneration,
> > lube
> > all light sensitive internal parts to prevent corrosion, and
> > effectively
> > help maintain, and in some instances, even INCREASE, film or sensor
> > speed.
> > The NEW! IMPROVED! Photon Grease Plus (In the blue tin with the
> > yellow
> > lightning bolt design) was formulated specifically for lens/camera
> > setups
> > where an adapter is used to allow mating of components from
> > different
> > manufacturers.
> >
> > Serendipitous in Sussex
> >
> 
> 
>

RE: Photoblogs on BBC web site

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Mark
I consider all of them high quality photos and indeed preferred watching
them instead of reading financial stuff about Pentax.
thanks for the link!
greetings
Markus


>>-Original Message-
>>From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 1:11 PM
>>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
>>Subject: Photoblogs on BBC web site
>>
>>
>>A worthwhile alternative for those who are more interested in
>>photography than arguing about Pentax profit margins:
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/05/entertain
ment_the_photobloggers/html/1.stm

--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Features I use (formerly the Nine Second Difference)

[Mark Roberts]

Used almost constantly (virtually every shoot):
Multisegment metering
Centerweighted metering
Exposure compensation
Depth-of-field preview
Hyper-program exposure mode
Manual exposure mode
Autofocus (single shot mode)

Often:
TTL flash
Mirror lock-up/pre-fire
Built-in (pop-up) flash

Rarely:
IR Remote
Auto exposure lock
Spot metering
AV exposure mode
TV exposure mode
Autofocus (continuous/servo mode)
Wireless off-camera TTL flash

Never:
Multiple exposure
Autobracketing
Program mode
Red-eye reduction flash
Automatic AF point selection

Most if this has remained pretty much constant over the years, but DOF
preview use went from "rarely" to "almost all the time" when I got my
MZ-S. Now I can't bear to *think* of living without it. One of the main
reasons I sold my PZ-1p was than I couldn't use DOF preview with the
lens set in the "A" position (as it must be for hyper-program, another
one of my "must have" features).

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Re: Stage photography

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: Doug Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/07/20 Wed PM 02:10:19 GMT
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Stage photography
> 
> I'm starting to think I missed the memo that said "All Stage Photography 
> Must Be Done With Grainy B/W Film."

I don't know of a source of 1000+ASA slide film any more. 8-((

> 
> Rob Studdert wrote:
> 
> > Do you really need to shoot B&W at all? Are you going to be personally 
> > printing 
> > the B&W or will they be sent out for print? All my stage work I now shoot 
> > using 
> > the *ist D with great success. Some images I post process as B&W others the 
> > colour makes the shot and I don't have to fart about with two cameras in 
> > the 
> > heat of the action.
> > 
> > 
> > Rob Studdert
> 
> 


-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/

Re: PESO - MV Sunset

[Bruce Dayton]

Thanks for the comment Frank.

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Wednesday, July 20, 2005, 5:30:40 AM, you wrote:

ft> On 7/19/05, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> After shooting the Mittens at dusk, We were able to turn around and
>> look out of the valley at this last display of light.  MV, by the way,
>> is Monument Valley.
>> 
>> 
>> Pentax *istD, DA 16-45/4, Handheld
>> ISO 800, 1/250 sec @ f/6.7
>> Converted from Raw using Capture One LE
>> 
>> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/monumentvalley_0470.htm
>> 
>> Comments Welcome
>> 

ft> Stunning.

ft> Gorgeous.

ft> Beautiful

ft> Pull out a thesaurus, and keep going. 

ft> cheers,
ft> frank

Re: Persistingly OT Re: Fanatics

[keithw]

Jostein wrote:


LOL.

>

Woe the ones to Manor Born.

Btw, anyone remember the TV series with Penelope Keith?

Jostein


"To The Manor Born," with Peter Bowles. ca 1979.

Keith Whaley

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Pål Jensen]

Herb wrote:


> 1) new SLR buyers who have never owned any SLR before - i think this market 
> is negligible, even though John recently bought one this way and found his 
> way here

I think you're wrong. Digital have recruited many more people into photography 
that wasn't into in the film era. Many of those comes from digital P&S and want 
something more advanced.  

> 5) non-Pentax DSLR owners who want a Pentax instead - sorry, but i think 
> Godfrey is probably the only such person that will ever exist.

Well, at least there are some over at Photo.net who replaced their Canon D20 
with a Pentax.

> it's about time Pentax realizes that most of its market is current Pentax 
> SLR owners, many with film bodies that they have used for years, and 
> covering the entire range from casual to pro. 

I don't think there are enough of those to really matter. Pentax needs to make 
atractive cameras for everyone. 


Pål

Re: Features I use (formerly the Nine Second Difference)

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

lol ... Stick with an MX then. And leave the battery at home...  ;-)

Or just set the DS into Manual exposure mode, turn off Image Review,  
and use your hand held meter and your eye. Unless you actually want  
to learn how to use the features provided, that is.


Godfrey


On Jul 20, 2005, at 8:32 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:


In my case:

Focus
Shutter speed
Aperture adjustment

Shel




[Original Message]
From: E.R.N. Reed





My list:
Use a lot --
Multisegment metering and program (or Hyper Program, depending on the
camera) for grabbing shots quickly
Exposure compensation (especially with the digitals, to reproduce
low-light scenes as darker than average)
Spotmeter and Centre-weighted metering for those trickier metering
situations
Av mode

Less often --
Autobracketing
Tv mode
TTL flash
Autofocus

Rarely --
Autoexposure lock (prefer manual exposure in those situations  
because it

has no time limit)
Mirror lockup
Self timer for reasons other than mirror prefire

Even more rarely --
Multiple exposure

Never so far in spite of having three or four cameras that can do  
it --

Intervalometer

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Pål Jensen]

Tom wrote: 

> I think the 645D could turn into something good for the company. Digital 
> medium format is a market with very little competition. They could make 
> a lot of money per unit. The trick will be to sell enough units.


Pentax have the potential to be the first "affordable" MF based digital 
solution. The digital MF market is wide open. It will boost Pentax image. In 
addition a pro Pentax will then yield better image quality than a pro Canon or 
Nikon. In the future, company image will be more based on this fact than in the 
past. The days when photo journalists needs represented the benchmark for "pro" 
cameras and image may be numbered.


Pål

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Pål Jensen]

Dag wrote:


> I remember reading something very similar to this a few years ago when some 
> people tried to prove that Pentax would never make a dslr.
> 


Quote from 23/9-02:

"I have no idea why anyone seriously thought, as opposed to wished, that Pentax 
would sell a DSLR"

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Pål Jensen]

Herb wrote: 


> it's a sign that either Pentax wanted terms that Sony didn't like, that Sony 
> found more willing support in KM, or that Sony was never interested in 
> Pentax.

...or most likely; Pentax wasn't interested in Sony.


Pål

Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%

[Pål Jensen]

Godfrey wrote:

> That's the key. For me the bottom line is: Make products that are  
> compelling. If the cameras and lenses are compelling ... and to most  
> people interested in taking pictures rather than comparing feature  
> sets, the Pentax DSLRs are compelling ... there will be a market for  
> them unless Pentax totally cocks up the distribution chain.


I agree, except I think Pentax needs to make cameras more compelling than the 
*istD's. Tough cameras of small size is the way foreward in my opinion. 


Pål

A nice suprise today

[brooksdj]

Hey gang.

I helped a student in our print room  last week in regards to looking into and 
aquiring an
inexpensive MF 
camera and meter.

He won an auction for a Y-M and a Weston and something else light meters.

When i ran some plans into the print room this morning he gave me a roll of 
Scala he
had.(Long story 
here)
S, hopefully in the next week or two i can run some shots off and see what 
the fuss is
all 
about.

There is a place in Toronto that develops this so i'm reasonably ok.

Dave

Re: PAW: Trying the 77 Limited

[Shel Belinkoff]

I agree with Bruce ... more details are needed to make the technique work. 
BTW, it's kind of a shame to "waste" the 77's capabilities on this. 
Perhaps a more typical portrait is coming soon ;-))

Shel 


> [Original Message]
> From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Boris Liberman 
> Date: 7/19/2005 10:54:03 AM
> Subject: Re: PAW: Trying the 77 Limited
>
> Boris,
>
> I like the concept that you are trying here.  I just think it is a
> little overdone on the processing.  There needs to be a visible
> closure of her cheek and chin.  As it stands, it seems incomplete or
> erased in that area.
>
> Tell us what you did to process it - I am curious.
>
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Bruce
>
>
> Tuesday, July 19, 2005, 11:03:37 AM, you wrote:
>
> BL> Hello!
>
> BL> Well, you know, the major reason for buying a portrait lens in our
> BL> family is shooting portraits of our child... So here goes:
>
> BL> http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=952383
>
> BL> It also my first attempt in such kind of processing. PS Elements 3 was
> BL> used...
>
> BL> All comments, including brutal, honest, and constructive will be
greatly
> BL> appreciated.
>
> BL> Boris
>
>

Re: The Nine Second Difference

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Interesting idea, Tom. Using a DSLR is quite different from using a  
film camera, however, as you can use the facilities of the camera to  
ensure that you have gotten what you want immediately, and don't have  
to work "into the unknown", as it were. I have spent so many years  
with CW Averaging metering cameras that my metering techniques are  
nicely tuned to that way of seeing a reflected light meter; I only  
use partial area (or incident light) metering occasionally.  With my  
film SLRs that supported AE, I have mostly used manual and Av  
exposure automation, and spent a lot more time in manual and zone  
focus. With a DSLR, I can use the image review immediately in  
questionable circumstances and allow the AF/AE systems a bit more  
reign since in most circumstances I can check and reshoot without  
stepping away from the scene.


 my uses with the DS and notes ...

used a lot:
AF Pattern-Matrix Meter-AF+AE linked *
Manual Focus
EV Compensation (1/3 ev steps)
Av, P, M exposure modes (in that order of priority) %
AE-Lock

less often:
   mirror pre-fire %%
   spot pattern metering
   CW Averaging pattern metering **
   ttl flash ***

hardly ever:
   autobracketing 
   Tv mode *

* This is the default configuration my camera is set to, and usually  
with Av exposure mode selected. I use EV compensation and AE-Lock  
often in combination with this configuration. Note that then AF does  
not lock in on what I consider important or when I do zone focus  
street shooting, I flip the switch and focus manually, which has  
second order affects ... see **.


% I usually use Av exposure mode since I usually am working on focus  
zone control. I use Program when I'm grab shooting in average  
lighting. And I use Manual when I'm working with stable lighting and  
want to ensure consistent exposure setting, reflecting local  
differences in exposure.


%% Very useful with macro and exposures when using long telephoto  
lenses, shutter times between 1/2 and 1/60 second. I just don't do  
these sorts of things very frequently. Similar for the use of the IR  
Remote.


** Any time you fit a manual focus lens to the DS, the AF pattern is  
locked to the center sensor for focus indication and the Pattern  
Matrix metering mode operates almost indistinguishably from CW  
Averaging pattern.


*** Usually when I use flash, I fit my non-dedicated Sunpak 383 flash  
unit and operate the camera in manual exposure mode. I do look  
forward to purchasing a Pentax-dedicated flash unit one of these days  
so as to use rear-curtain sync and HSS.


 Rather than using autobracketing, I normally have image review  
on and set to 3 second display with highlight saturation indicators.  
If I'm working on a chancy lighting situation, I check the review and  
adjust the EV compensation rather than blindly bracket. Once I know  
what's going to make the right exposure for the scene dynamics, I  
turn off the review entirely so as not to be distracted.


* I rarely need to lock in a shutter speed range, but did when I  
was shooting motorcycle racing on my trip. I tested the Sports mode  
preset (only way to obtain C-AF on the DS) vs Tv+manual focus and  
found that generally Tv+manual focus returned images more to my  
desires: faster sequences, more exposure control. I haven't found  
much need for




Godfrey

On Jul 20, 2005, at 6:26 AM, Tom Reese wrote:

I think you might find the ZX-5N spotmeter capability to be  
extremely useful. I use it far more than autofocus, autobracketing  
and all the other whiz-bang modern features. I find it  
indispensable for checking tonal ranges in my compositions and  
setting my exposure.


This might make for an interesting thread. Features I use the most  
in descending order:


used a lot:

spotmeter
mirror lock-up
ttl flash

less often:

double exposure
auto exposure lock

much less often:

autofocus
multisegment autoexposure
exposure compensation

hardly ever:

autobracketing
Tv mode

not at all:

program mode

I'm interested in how others rate their cameras features.

Tom Reese

Re: Late afternoon walk

[Jim Hemenway]

Thanks Rick.

It's in Woburn Massachusetts.

http://www.winchestermass.org/hornpond.html

Jim

Rick Womer wrote:


Beautiful, Jim.  They make me want to get onto Horn
Pond with my canoe, today (just this small problem
having a job...).  Where is it?

Rick

--- Jim Hemenway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond:
http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/

Pentax isDS

Jim

Re: PESO: Dog's life

[Bruce Dayton]

I like it.  Fun photo!

-- 
Bruce


Wednesday, July 20, 2005, 5:58:46 AM, you wrote:


AG> Hi gang,
AG> http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar/?p=116#comments

AG> Comments here and there welcome...


AG> Albano Garcia
AG> Photography & Graphic Design
AG> http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar
AG> http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar
 
 

 




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

Re: OT: Magnifying eyepiece for DSLRs

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Don't know what you mean.

I use the Pentax 2x Magnifier FB, which provides a 2x magnification  
of the central portion of the viewfinder on the DS for critical  
focusing needs. It works very well. I can see the whole focusing  
screen with it, although the periphery is a bit distorted and it's  
easier to see the whole viewfinder for framing by flipping the  
magnifier out of the way.


I can only guess that you don't wear glasses. The view through the D/ 
DS viewfinder eyepiece is perfect for my eyes: I can see the entire  
frame, clearly and easily, without shifting my eye around. Just like  
my favorite Nikon viewfinder: the F3/T's high eyepoint finder. The MX  
is like my old FM: I have to shift my eye around to see the whole  
frame and ancillary data.


Godfrey


On Jul 20, 2005, at 8:25 AM, Frantisek wrote:


Hi,
   my wishes came true, although for a different camera than most of
   PDML uses ;-)

   Somebody (nikon) finally introduced an accessory that was due to be
   released 5 years ago... 1.2x magnifier eyepiece for their DSLRs.
   Exact ergonomics are yet to be seen (my local nikon rep doesn't yet
   have any), but it is something I have even thought of doing mysel
   as a DIY thing. So much I miss the view trough good olf FF
   high-magnification SLRs. Of course it's better with Pentax, whose
   DSLRs are among the best wrt viewfinder magnification, but perhaps
   even these could benefit from it (after a proper Cotty-hack to
   adapt it to Pentax viewfinders), after all even at 0.95x
   magnification the 1.5x crop factor view is still very small
   compared to LX.

Frantisek

Re: Late afternoon walk

[Bruce Dayton]

Hello Jim,

I fancy the second one the best.  You were able to get very good
detail in the tree and the composition feels right.  Nice shot!

-- 
Best regards,
Bruce


Wednesday, July 20, 2005, 6:18:08 AM, you wrote:

JH>  From a late afternoon walk around a nearby pond:
JH> http://www.hemenway.com/HornPond-Summer2005/

JH> Pentax isDS

JH> Jim