re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Jens Bladt wrote: FF was an issue as long as many consumers/photographers had very large amounts of money invested in expensive glass for 35mm film. This segment is getting smaller every day. No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Certainly not Pentax. Hi Jens, Respectfully, I don't think that segment is getting smaller. The number of film users, yes. But not the number of people with large investments in 35mm glass. I have thought since day 1 of DSLR's, that the APS form factor was largely a short term tactic to get consumers to buy new lenses to go with those fancy new DSLR's. Sell APS DSLR's in the short term and 'digital' glass to go with them. When FF sensors get low enough in price, get all those new customers to upgrade to FF and sell more FF lenses. Obviously Canon thinks there are enough people in that segment, that they're releasing a somewhat affordable FF body. Tom C.
RE: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
I disagree with this assessment. The reason is that lenses can only put out so many lines per mm and once the sensors become dense enough the only way to increase captured resolution is to increase the sixe of the sensor and use longer lenses with bigger image circles at same lines/mm lens resolution. If the sensors were to get smaller AND denser at the same time the lenses would have to get exponentially better in order to utilize the much greater density and they are not going to. jco -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 1:47 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: re: 36mm x 36mm sensor? Wrong answer. Sensores don't get bigger and bigger, I believe. They get smaller and smaller, better, faster, cheaper - and have more MP's - just like everything else electronic. Today 15,7 X 23,5mm (APS size) seems to be a rather large sensor. The 8 MP SONY sensor is only 8.8 x 6.6 mm - a 2/3 sensor. The Olympus E-1 is a 4/3 sensor system (5.7 MP) - using a 15-18mm sensor. There's many good things to be said about small sensors. Less glass (weight and cost) is one of them. I guess the next generations of cameras will have smaller sensors making larger image files. Small sensors are the future, not ff. FF was an issue as long as many consumers/photographers had very large amounts of money invested in expensive glass for 35mm film. This segment is getting smaller every day. No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Certainly not Pentax. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Pat White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. august 2005 07:09 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor? What, doesn't everybody want 8x12 or 13.5x20 enlargements? I used to pay extra for them (got some on the wall, looking good), but now I just shoot with extra room for cropping. Much simpler for frames and mats. Pat White
Re: Are Pentax compact digitals really that bad?
Very interesting. Are there no really independent review sites? Peter Youthinks? I wish it were common knowledge that sites like DPReview are partly owned (or at least, in some cases, heavily sponsored by) Canon. Alas, more and more people are duped every day by such sites. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement.
Defishing the Zenitar
I have developed three PhotoShop actions to make rectilinear images from the Zenitar 16mm fisheye when used on the ist D/Ds. The actions require Panorama Tools and PTLens, both free downloads. PTLens is a Windows program. The actions use PTLens to defish the image. PTLens correction for the Zenitar simply chops off the extra image size which converting to rectilinear creates. The first action 'Zenitar Defish' expands the canvas to the correct size to retain the extra image size which is created defishing the Zenitar image. 'Zenitar Spherize' Uses PhotoShop's Spherize tool to squeeze the image back into the original frame size. Works well with distant objects, verticals and horizontals but messes up if there is a diagonal close to the camera. 'Modified Zenitar Spherize' will make some images with close diagonals better. I created a modified PTLens Zenitar lens profile to over correct the fisheye distortion. Compressing the image back to the original frame size with Spherize straitens the diagonals. PTLens must be pre loaded with the correct lens profile before running each actions. This is a pain and I wish there was a way around it. I think the two actions work well but will not give perfectly straight lines in all images. If you have the Zenitar 16mm, an ist D/Ds, PhotoShop and Windows please give these actions a try. Contact me and I will send the actions and instructions. I plan on putting up a web page but I would like to get some feedback first. The actions should also work with the Pentax or Sigma 15mm fisheyes. Powell
Re: Are Pentax compact digitals really that bad?
I've found few sites or magazines that did not exhibit a great amount of a priori bias. Whether Canon/Nikon are funding them or otherwise have a nudge-nudge-wink-wink relationship with them is irrelevant to me. The fact is that they sometimes present good data and then draw absurd conclusions from it, with even more absurd explanations as to why those conclusions were drawn. So what else is new? Consumer Reports, which does try to present objectively, is just a bad at reviewing and making recommendations as the biased sites. Them through an utterly utilitarian attitude which places the more for less aphorism at the top of their value chain. The only way to really get to know what a particular camera can do is to own it, use it, work with it. Godfrey On Aug 23, 2005, at 11:48 PM, Peter Smekal wrote: Very interesting. Are there no really independent review sites? Peter Youthinks? I wish it were common knowledge that sites like DPReview are partly owned (or at least, in some cases, heavily sponsored by) Canon. Alas, more and more people are duped every day by such sites. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement.
RE: The Photographer's Rights (please behave)
Heh! Gautam -Original Message- From: P. J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 8:33 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights (please behave) You ain't been here long enough to know what bubbin' over is son... Gautam Sarup wrote: Aw c'mon, this is brewing nicely. Brewing nicely? This pot bubbleth over. Obviously it hasn't been watched very intently. Gautam -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
RE: The Photographer's Rights
Bob Blakely wrote: The notion of requiring some sort of moral ground for one nation or one person to object to the brutal actions of another is absurd. Surprisingly some people don't care for hypocricy. (Though hypocracy is not reason enough to necessarily having to restrain oneself from an action like entering a war.) Yup, your kin brutalized, but thank God that felonious neighbor didn't intervene and attempt to assert some moral ground that you, judge of such things, has determined he doesn't have. False example. A better one would be of a man pinching wallets in the street objecting to a mugger. We were not speaking of someone who had been a felon in the past but was one in the moment. Man: Officer, I was mugged. Policeman: What were you doing when you were mugged? Man: I was trying to pinch a wallet. That won't go over very well. that you, judge of such things, has determined he doesn't have. That's right, I _do_ judge such things. I do my best though I haven't reached the status of being the VOICE OF REASON. 'Nuff said. Regards, Gautam End of topic for me -Original Message- From: Bob Blakely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 8:57 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights The notion of requiring some sort of moral ground for one nation or one person to object to the brutal actions of another is absurd. Should you be burglarized, your kin be brutalized and your neighbor witness it, perhaps he should not intervene in as much he's only been out 5 years after a 7 year stint for assault himself. Yup, your kin brutalized, but thank God that felonious neighbor didn't intervene and attempt to assert some moral ground that you, judge of such things, has determined he doesn't have. Regards, Bob... -- -- By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates From: Gautam Sarup [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Bob Blakely wrote: The United States and the United Kingdom reacted to Japanese military actions Those actions as you called them were Imperialism and brutality on a grand scale. On what possible moral ground could the United Kingdom in the 1940's object to Imperialism and brutality on a grand scale? Today's world is of course different.
Film scanner question
From: Peter Smekal [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/08/24 Wed AM 06:48:41 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Are Pentax compact digitals really that bad? Very interesting. Are there no really independent review sites? Peter Youthinks? I wish it were common knowledge that sites like DPReview are partly owned (or at least, in some cases, heavily sponsored by) Canon. Alas, more and more people are duped every day by such sites. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Film scanner question
Hi, Anyone used one of these? Any opinions? http://www.morgancomputers.co.uk/shop/detail.asp?ProductID=2101 mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
RE: The Photographer's Rights
Gautam Sarup wrote: That's right, I _do_ judge such things. I do my best though I haven't reached the status of being the VOICE OF REASON. Well SOMEBODY has to be it. :) I don't agree with Bob on everything and I suspect that he does not *expect* everyone, or anyone in particular, to agree with him on any given issue. Tom C.
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? Please expound. A. I dont know. I think part of what I try to do when I photograph is to find something unusual, or at least something it is unusual to photograph. So most of my pictures of birds are of dead birds, most of the pictures of my children show them without a smile, my landscapes are disturbed etc... This is a little weird: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=124704 and maybe this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=140546 while this is funny (think): http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=68660 and this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=47077 this is just a little unusual: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=87403 and maybe this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=87116 OK, I'll stop now .-) DagT
Re: metrics question
Here's a link to a handy little conversion program I use at work a lot. http://tinyurl.com/it7n Dave On 8/24/05, Butch Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The sigma is GN 50m @ 100ASA, 105mm zoom reflector setting. The Pentax one is GN 54m @ 100ASA, doesn't say what zoom that's at. If you multiply by 3 do you roughly get your guide numbers in feet? Butch
Pentax in San Francisco
Dear Pentax users, I live in Russia and will be in San Francisco/Sunnyvale in September. I'd like to find a M50/1.4 or K50/1.4 lens and (maybe) LX body. Are there any place to buy? Please assist. -- Sincerely, Anatoly Andrusevich Moscow, Russia
Re: Defishing the Zenitar
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 11:46:00PM -0700, Powell Hargrave wrote: [...] If you have the Zenitar 16mm, an ist D/Ds, PhotoShop and Windows please give these actions a try. Contact me and I will send the actions and instructions. I plan on putting up a web page but I would like to get some feedback first. Can you give some examples? I also have a Zenitar, and did some experiments with wideangle filter in Gimp. Results were not perfect, but not so bad even. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], IRC:[EMAIL PROTECTED], /bin/zsh. C|NK Linux moria 2.6.11 #1 Wed Mar 9 19:08:59 CET 2005 i686 10:12:35 up 28 days, 2:45, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.28, 0.27 A daj, i ja sam skoro pa starac... (c) Vid - Krba '98
Re: When Pentax DSLR with better crop level?
Herb Chong wrote on 24.08.05 6:23: Nikon doubled their expected sales of the D2X and that helped them make more money than they thought they would, but that was still less than Canon. On the other side sales of D2X are much higher than of Canon's flagship - 1Ds mkII. Nikon needs an update for slightly obsolete D100, and rumours are saying that D200 should be shown on 1 september. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: istDS Flash Question
On 24/8/05, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed: My unofficial photo slogan is Flash is for sissies. Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: cars on film
On 24/8/05, wendy beard, discombobulated, unleashed: A small diversion for me. Actually shot some ~film~ this weekend. Even more of a diversion, it wasn't of dogs either! Went down to Kingston on Sunday to take part in a British Cars in the Park day. OK, wasn't entirely dogless. Boris came too. http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48047114 Nice pics Wend. You have a Stag? V8? Nice. It is entirely in my Life Plan to acquire a good old-fashioned sports car before I push up the daisies. An Austin Healey would be good. Tell me, have you come across any Ginettas in your British car meanderings? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On 23/8/05, Powell Hargrave, discombobulated, unleashed: My first digital is 10 years old. It works fine. I don't use it. http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/qt.htm Snap. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
[Original Message] LET'S DO A SURVEY!!! Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? I've photographed so many odd and unusual things and situations that, for me, they've become more or less commonplace. I think the first photos that fit into this category were for Art Jim Mitchell (http://tinyurl.com/a44ox), owners and operators of the O'Farrell Theater in San Francisco, during the late summer or early fall of 1969, shortly after the theater opened for business. The O'Farrell Theater showed porn movies, most of which Artie and Jim made upstairs in the big room behind the projection booth. I was up there for a party one night (my girlfriend's brother was the janitor and he suggested I come to the party) and was photographing the band (which featured a one-handed guiutarist), when Artie called me over and asked that I make some photos for him. We went into another room where they were shooting some scenes for a rudimentary porn movie. In those early days things were pretty simple - production values were minimal, the lights were bright and omni-directional, the set was just a bed in the middle of the room, and the actors were usually college kids, a boy friend and girl friend, looking to make a spare $50.00 or so. Artie and Jim wanted some close ups of certain body parts and a few specific acts of perversion has Jim jokingly called them. I got paid $50.00 for my efforts and received a small bonus as well. Soon after that I moved to Berkeley and got a job processing baby pictures. The deal was that I'd make the rounds of local hospitals with a cheap camera and film provided by the company for which I worked. I'd give the loaded camera to the nurses who'd take pics of the new born babies, and would return home with the camera and exposed film, which I'd then develop and print. I'd return to the hospitals the next day with small proof prints - 5x7 I believe - which the nurses would then present to the parents. If they made a sale, I'd then print up some better quality pics and the nurses and I would split a commission. I much preferred making photos for Art and Jim. There were many more interesting photo assignments and opportunities I had over the years. Most recently (a couple of years ago, and perhaps, in some ways, the most unusual), I was asked to photograph feet for a very unusual woman who lived in an exclusive part of San Francisco. This woman would have what I called foot fetish parties about once a month and I was hired to photograph the bare feet of her guests. She'd choose the ones she liked and have them framed and hung around her house, which was a huge place on upper Broadway. This went on for about four or five months, and then the parties stopped, or so I was told, and my services were no longer needed. I got to meet some verrry interesting people ... Shel
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Toralf Lund wrote: Since the full-frame discussion re-emerged yet another time earlier today, I thought maybe I'd ask, how about a 36x36 mm sensor? Wouldn't that be the ultimate size for a 35mm body and lens? I mean, the elements being circular, surely the lens should handle the same size along both axes? Of if you simply like rectangles, how does 31 x 36 sound? (Same ratio as 6x7, more or less...) 36x36mm would be too large for the image circle of a lens designed to cover 36x24mm - 30x30mm would work though. You could get better performance than a 36x24mm sensor for crops squarer than an aspect ratio of 5:4, but you'd lose quality for anything wider than that. S
Re: Film scanner question
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:21 PM, mike wilson wrote: Anyone used one of these? Any opinions? http://www.morgancomputers.co.uk/shop/detail.asp?ProductID=2101 A friend of mine has one of these and is very pleased with it. At the time he purchased it he was able to evaluate both Nikon and Canon's offerings as well, both of which left him unsatisfied. I have the big brother of that model - the Multi Pro. I think it's fantastic, but I am biased by how much I spent on it :( However much memory your computer has, double it. No, triple it. Trust me. The 5400 apparently has the Scanhancer (a hardware grain diffuser) built in and at 5400ppi that would be indispensable. I ordered the set for my Multi Pro and now I won't scan without it. Cheers, - Dave
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
On Aug 24, 2005, at 5:09 PM, Pat White wrote: What, doesn't everybody want 8x12 or 13.5x20 enlargements? I used to pay extra for them (got some on the wall, looking good), but now I just shoot with extra room for cropping. Much simpler for frames and mats. I used to ask for full-frame prints. The image came out a bit smaller but I appreciated having the entire frame. Lately I've been playing with roll paper in the inkjet printer. It's a bit of a pain to handle but you just size the pic to the width of the roll and print the exact length you need. I need to get around to printing some more panoramas... if only I had the wall space to hang them! - Dave
Re: Re: Film scanner question
From: David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/08/24 Wed AM 09:28:26 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Film scanner question On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:21 PM, mike wilson wrote: Anyone used one of these? Any opinions? http://www.morgancomputers.co.uk/shop/detail.asp?ProductID=2101 A friend of mine has one of these and is very pleased with it. At the time he purchased it he was able to evaluate both Nikon and Canon's offerings as well, both of which left him unsatisfied. I have the big brother of that model - the Multi Pro. I think it's fantastic, but I am biased by how much I spent on it :( That's the one I'm aiming for but my wallet keeps crying, wailing and gnashing its cards. However much memory your computer has, double it. No, triple it. Trust me. I can't fit three gigs in. I think. The 5400 apparently has the Scanhancer (a hardware grain diffuser) built in and at 5400ppi that would be indispensable. I ordered the set for my Multi Pro and now I won't scan without it. Hmmm. Even though I'll have to buy a USB2 card, this seems like an excellent deal. I've even got nine months interest free on a new card, so I don't need to pay for it all at once. The only problem is that I _know_ the Multi Pro (III? - one of the eralier ones is already there) will appear the moment I order this one. Any idea of accessory multi slide feeders? That will be the clincher. mike - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Large Print Quality From 6mp Cameras (was: )
On 23/8/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Next year at Grandfather Mountain I'm going to be giving a presentation on this topic. I'll bring along some big prints of 18-25 megapixel images taken with the ist-D and 31mm Limited. Front row, centre, please! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On 23/8/05, Graywolf, discombobulated, unleashed: I had a stunning photograph once. It was a matted and framed 16x24 hanging over the sofa. The nail kept pulling out of the wall. Everyone whom it fell on said it was really stunning. GRIN LOL. Love it. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On 24/8/05, Kevin Waterson, discombobulated, unleashed: This one time, at band camp, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll upgrade as soon as I can get ten or twelve megapixels for less than $2500 That will be in 18 months from now. I'll keep this mail for 18 months, I have entered a cron job to remind me then. Kevin No problem. Won't be a Pentax tho Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Film scanner question
mike wilson wrote on 24.08.05 9:21: Anyone used one of these? Any opinions? http://www.morgancomputers.co.uk/shop/detail.asp?ProductID=2101 Mike, I didn't use this model, but I have and use its predecessor - Elite II and it is great machine, certainly giving much faster and better qquality scanning results than most of flatbed scanners. Mine has only 2800 dpi resolution, but it is more than enough for my film scanning needs ;-) From what I've read here and there, 5400 is even better (5400 dpi resolution!) and faster. I'd just recommand you buying firewire card for use with this scanner. Here is one review: http://photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Scanners/Minolta/page_1.htm -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Tom C wrote on 24.08.05 8:35: When FF sensors get low enough in price, get all those new customers to upgrade to FF and sell more FF lenses. Wishful thinking I'm afraid. 5D is not going to sell in very large quantities (for every 1 sold 5D there'll be 100 sold APS-C DSLRs) and there is no competition from any other company in this area. And there's absolutely no situation like in D1 and D30 era, when compatition was higher and there was no cheaper alternative at all, that's why introductory price of these DSLRs fell quite quickly. These two factors won't allow for price drop of FF in the near future. Thus C 5D will remain a class for itself. And don't forget that so far many APS-C sensor sized DSLR users invested their money in APS-C dedicated ultra wide angle lenses, which usually provides better results than wide FF lenses on FF body... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Wideangle enablement :)
At last, russian post has done it's deed... :) My long wanted MIR-47 2.5/20 is here, at last. For those not in the know, here it is: http://rugift.com/photocameras/mir_47_k_lens.htm Lately, there was a thread here, that speculated problems with the rear lens assortment with this lens. I just put it on my ME Super, and did a few shots (I will do more, ofcourse). No such problems, this lens is a Pentax-modified version, and does not intersect with the camera mirror not in the least. I made some close-up pictures of the lens with my digital (sorry, not Pentax) and will be putting them on the web in the day or two. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], IRC:[EMAIL PROTECTED], /bin/zsh. C|NK Linux moria 2.6.11 #1 Wed Mar 9 19:08:59 CET 2005 i686 10:15:07 up 28 days, 2:48, 4 users, load average: 0.44, 0.38, 0.30 Sysop nema Y2K bug. (C) Domchi 1999.
Re: slide slam ... Report
Godfrey: Thanks for the report, sounded like a good time. I predict that if you really want to keep future events to an hour, that you'll drop the manual remote control idea. :-) Jim - Photographers will be given a time period and required to talk through their presentation, with manual remote control of the projection equipment
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
On 24/8/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: I was asked to photograph feet for a very unusual woman who lived in an exclusive part of San Francisco. This woman would have what I called foot fetish parties about once a month and I was hired to photograph the bare feet of her guests. She'd choose the ones she liked and have them framed and hung around her house, which was a huge place on upper Broadway. This went on for about four or five months, and then the parties stopped, or so I was told, and my services were no longer needed. I got to meet some verrry interesting people ... Excellent. My vote goes to Shel. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: cars on film
wendy beard wrote: A small diversion for me. Actually shot some ~film~ this weekend. Even more of a diversion, it wasn't of dogs either! Went down to Kingston on Sunday to take part in a British Cars in the Park day. OK, wasn't entirely dogless. Boris came too. http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48047114 Anyway, decided to try out my new-to-me-lens. Posted a couple of shots here: http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48139645 http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48139820 http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48139939 Due to the wonders of modern science (MZ-S), we also have technical data! And finally, not a film shot (sorry) but thought it was amusing http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48047029 Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com All very nicely done, Wendy! Nostalgia time for me! Is that your Stag? Lovely shape! keith whaley
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
I'll look for it tonight. I at least have the cover, which I could scan. But I might have the transparancy as well. All my transparencies from those days are buried in a box in the basement, but I at least know where to look :-). Paul On Aug 23, 2005, at 11:39 PM, Tom C wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote: I'm game. I've shot a lot of weird things and attempted some rather difficult shots, but one comes to mind immediately. It was almost 25 years ago, and I was working for Hearst Magazines in New York. We were running an article about Ford's propane engine cars in Motor Magazine, and the editor decided we had to have a picture of a propane flame for the cover. I bought a propane torch and various tips. I found that the paint scraper tip gave me a nice looking, broad flame. To record the flame on film, I obviously had to eliminate all other light, so I set the torch up in my garage after dark. I tried to shoot all our covers on 4x5 in those days, so I set up my Speed Graphic and loaded ten film holders with ektachrome 64. To get the flame large in frame, I had to extend the bellows beyond the 1:1 position, so that increased exposure considerably. My meter reading and teh macro correction indicated a very long exposure, so I had a reciprocity failure to factor in as well. My calculations with the Kodak Photoguide wheels indicated an exposure of about 10 minutes. To bracket in half stops, I'd half to do 2.5 minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, and 20 minutes. Unfortunately, my cable release had no lock mechanism, so I had to hold the shutter open, while standing in the pitch dark garage. I did exactly that for over ah hour. The 20 minute exposure was best: a nice blue flame above a glowing red metal nozzle. A difficult and tedious job, but well worth the effort. Got a scannable transparenciy of that? I'd like to see it! Tom C.
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
You're right. I've experienced that myself. The two longest exposures end up being almost identical. I believe that was the case with this shoot, although it was so long ago I can't remember clearly. However, I remember what happened 25 years ago better than I remember what happened yesterday :-). Paul On Aug 23, 2005, at 11:59 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: sounds cool. One thing to remember though is that once you get into the reciprocal failure mode of a film and want to use time bracketing, you wont get linear time progressions for equivilant exposure changes. ( i.e. the 2.5, 5, 10, 20 sequence will not yield equal steps in exposure change). This varies from film to film but in general the longer the time, the even longer the time you will need for the same change (increase) in exposure. For example I used to do some LF lens tests across the house indoors at night with tungsten room lighting, my exposures were typically 20 second at f16, 60 seconds at F22, and 5 minutes at f32 for exact same density (exposures). As you can see the time increases arent linear. I think this was on TMAX400 if I recall correctly and I am sure it will vary from film to film... I had to find this out by trial and error sort like what you did...But once I knew the correct compensation times it was easy to repeat. jco -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 11:30 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot I'm game. I've shot a lot of weird things and attempted some rather difficult shots, but one comes to mind immediately. It was almost 25 years ago, and I was working for Hearst Magazines in New York. We were running an article about Ford's propane engine cars in Motor Magazine, and the editor decided we had to have a picture of a propane flame for the cover. I bought a propane torch and various tips. I found that the paint scraper tip gave me a nice looking, broad flame. To record the flame on film, I obviously had to eliminate all other light, so I set the torch up in my garage after dark. I tried to shoot all our covers on 4x5 in those days, so I set up my Speed Graphic and loaded ten film holders with ektachrome 64. To get the flame large in frame, I had to extend the bellows beyond the 1:1 position, so that increased exposure considerably. My meter reading and teh macro correction indicated a very long exposure, so I had a reciprocity failure to factor in as well. My calculations with the Kodak Photoguide wheels indicated an exposure of about 10 minutes. To bracket in half stops, I'd half to do 2.5 minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, and 20 minutes. Unfortunately, my cable release had no lock mechanism, so I had to hold the shutter open, while standing in the pitch dark garage. I did exactly that for over ah hour. The 20 minute exposure was best: a nice blue flame above a glowing red metal nozzle. A difficult and tedious job, but well worth the effort. Paul On Aug 23, 2005, at 10:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, I am kind of tired of the large print discussion (and thank goddess the political thread has died), so LET'S DO A SURVEY!!! Also, it might provide me with some inspiration since I am sort of uninspired photography-wise these days. I do realize I still owe people the results of the exposure survey and I've got it around here somewhere, but I have to get a new cartridge for my laser printer so I can print out all the answers so I can tally them. But I will do that, I promise. Maybe when this survey is done. Well, this isn't so much a survey, actually, as just a sharing thing. Because I don't imagine that that many answers will be the same. But if they are, I will tally them. :-) I hope people like it and want to participate. It's sort of like where is the weirdest place you have ever done it... Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? Please expound. A. TIA, Marnie aka Doe
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
8x12 and 11x17 precut mats are fairly common these days. I buy them all the time at the local camera store. Paul On Aug 24, 2005, at 1:09 AM, Pat White wrote: What, doesn't everybody want 8x12 or 13.5x20 enlargements? I used to pay extra for them (got some on the wall, looking good), but now I just shoot with extra room for cropping. Much simpler for frames and mats. Pat White
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, keithw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does everyone measure prints, to make sure they get their money's worth? Or, am I missing something... I measure mine as mostly they need to be 8x10 Most people who get large prints do so to put them into off-the-shelf frames in stock sizes - 8 x 10, 11 x 14, etc. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: OT: Need help with flower identification. Urgently!
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Stan Halpin wrote: On Aug 23, 2005, at 7:45 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Okay, Pentaxian gardeners. I need an ID. I'm finishing up a garden article for a sunday supplement mag. I have one flower pic I want to use, but I can't find the little bloom in any of my reference book. It's tiny, only about a centimeter or so across. I put it up on PhotoNet. Hope someone here can identify it. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3663172size=lg Some form of lily, possibly a star lily variant... Not sure about that. The stamens don't look right to me; I think it looks closer to an orchid. Here is a picture of the one in my living room; sorry I don't have a picture of its leaves. http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/Orchid.jpg Have you tried http://images.google.com? Kostas
Re: PESO - Northumbrian series - 1
John, Yes, very perceptive. I think your comments help me understand why I like the photo. Boris, you are getting too good! Regards, Bob S. On 8/23/05, John Likes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love this for what I call--for lack of a better term--geometric irony. The three people form a tri-angle, but the two adults are faced away from the child, not toward her, The shadows all face left but the foot steps trail off right. The triangle is very linear, but the horizon is curved. I just love it. J. - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 11:12 PM Subject: PESO - Northumbrian series - 1 Hi! http://www.photoforum.ru/rate/photo.php?photo_id=211000 More to come. Special thanks to Mike who generously let me use his Zenitar fish eye lens... Boris
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Mark Roberts wrote: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, keithw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does everyone measure prints, to make sure they get their money's worth? Or, am I missing something... I measure mine as mostly they need to be 8x10 Most people who get large prints do so to put them into off-the-shelf frames in stock sizes - 8 x 10, 11 x 14, etc. Sure. Should have known. I custom matte (mat, matt?) when necessary, and don't often buy pre-cut, so I had my blinders on... But, that's for personal use, not for sale prints. Thanks, keith
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll upgrade as soon as I can get ten or twelve megapixels for less than $2500 That will be in 18 months from now. I'll keep this mail for 18 months, I have entered a cron job to remind me then. I'll be surprised if it takes that long. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: OT: Need help with flower identification. Urgently!
It looks like a Passion Flower (Passiflora) to me. There are over 500 species, so a specific ID would be tough. The stamen and pistil anatomy is pretty characteristic of Passiflora. I did a quick Google and found this page: http://www.passionflow.co.uk/species.htm You can go through the species list at the top and see if you find this exact one. Bob On Wednesday, August 24, 2005, at 07:20 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Stan Halpin wrote: On Aug 23, 2005, at 7:45 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Okay, Pentaxian gardeners. I need an ID. I'm finishing up a garden article for a sunday supplement mag. I have one flower pic I want to use, but I can't find the little bloom in any of my reference book. It's tiny, only about a centimeter or so across. I put it up on PhotoNet. Hope someone here can identify it. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3663172size=lg Some form of lily, possibly a star lily variant... Not sure about that. The stamens don't look right to me; I think it looks closer to an orchid. Here is a picture of the one in my living room; sorry I don't have a picture of its leaves. http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/Orchid.jpg Have you tried http://images.google.com? Kostas
Re: Re: OT: Need help with flower identification. Urgently!
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/08/24 Wed AM 11:20:16 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Need help with flower identification. Urgently! On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Stan Halpin wrote: On Aug 23, 2005, at 7:45 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Okay, Pentaxian gardeners. I need an ID. I'm finishing up a garden article for a sunday supplement mag. I have one flower pic I want to use, but I can't find the little bloom in any of my reference book. It's tiny, only about a centimeter or so across. I put it up on PhotoNet. Hope someone here can identify it. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3663172size=lg Some form of lily, possibly a star lily variant... Although it's much simpler than most species, it reminds me most of a passion flower. Not sure about that. The stamens don't look right to me; I think it looks closer to an orchid. Here is a picture of the one in my living room; sorry I don't have a picture of its leaves. http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/Orchid.jpg Have you tried http://images.google.com? Kostas - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wrong answer. Sensores don't get bigger and bigger, I believe. They get smaller and smaller, better, faster, cheaper - and have more MP's - just like everything else electronic. Today 15,7 X 23,5mm (APS size) seems to be a rather large sensor. The 8 MP SONY sensor is only 8.8 x 6.6 mm - a 2/3 sensor. The Olympus E-1 is a 4/3 sensor system (5.7 MP) - using a 15-18mm sensor. There's many good things to be said about small sensors. Less glass (weight and cost) is one of them. I guess the next generations of cameras will have smaller sensors making larger image files. Small sensors are the future, not ff. Both theory and experience argue against this. For equal pixel size, a larger sensor will always yield higher resolution; or for equal pixel count a larger sensor will larger (lower noise) pixels. And these factors are in addition to the greater information gathering capability related directly to size itself. Simple observation shows an inexorable trend toward larger sensors: The first Kodak DSLR's had a 2.7 crop factor! Then came the 1.6 and 1.5 crop factor cameras, followed by the 1.3 crop and 1:1 (full frame). Then came medium format sensors. At first these cropped the image as well but now full-frame 645-size sensors are available. The *only* reason crop factor DSLR's ever existed was price. The new Canon 5D is whittling away at this factor. Of course, we know full-frame sensors will never be any less expensive than the one in the 5D g -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Wideangle enablement :)
Vid Strpic wrote: My long wanted MIR-47 2.5/20 is here, at last. Lately, there was a thread here, that speculated problems with the rear lens assortment with this lens. I just put it on my ME Super, and did a few shots (I will do more, ofcourse). No such problems, this lens is a Pentax-modified version, and does not intersect with the camera mirror not in the least. I think there's some sample-to-sample variation in this - my (also Pentax-specific) MIR-47 with a filter mounted interferes with the mirror on every camera I've tried it on, including the ME Super and *istDS. I'll be interested to see your photos. :-) S
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
J. C. O'Connell wrote: I disagree with this assessment. The reason is that lenses can only put out so many lines per mm and once the sensors become dense enough the only way to increase captured resolution is to increase the sixe of the sensor and use longer lenses with bigger image circles at same lines/mm lens resolution. Yes, and there is a theoretical limit to how small you can make a sensor element, too. It's quantum mechanics; a CCD/CMOS sensor element (and I guess a grain on film, too) is essentially a device that counts photons hitting an area, and there's a limit to how small you can make that area and still catch enough photons to be able to distinguish between different colour levels. I've read that the smallest sensors today are pretty close to those limits, but I'm not sure if that information is actually correct. - Toralf
Re: Wideangle enablement :)
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 01:03:48PM +0100, Steve Jolly wrote: Vid Strpic wrote: My long wanted MIR-47 2.5/20 is here, at last. Lately, there was a thread here, that speculated problems with the rear lens assortment with this lens. I just put it on my ME Super, and did a few shots (I will do more, ofcourse). No such problems, this lens is a Pentax-modified version, and does not intersect with the camera mirror not in the least. I think there's some sample-to-sample variation in this - my (also Pentax-specific) MIR-47 with a filter mounted interferes with the mirror on every camera I've tried it on, including the ME Super and *istDS. Correction. With rear filter mounted, it DOES interfere with the mirror ;) Without the filter the situation is normal, and it seems that unlike Zenitar, this lens does not NEED to have filter mounted to focus properly. But, we'll see when I develop this roll ;) I'll be interested to see your photos. :-) Me too ;) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], IRC:[EMAIL PROTECTED], /bin/zsh. C|NK Linux moria 2.6.11 #1 Wed Mar 9 19:08:59 CET 2005 i686 14:10:45 up 28 days, 6:43, 4 users, load average: 0.51, 0.47, 0.29 GOTO $BAR; INPUT $SOME_BEERS; TALK($PEOPLE); MAKE $FRIEND; WHILE $FRIEND != MALE DO; GET $LAID,$FRIEND WEND
Paw: My horsey di good today
Hi Gang This is from what is called the Lead Line class from the Collingwood show. Its for kids ages 0-5. They are led around by a compitant handler on a safe horse. I don't know were they get these little riding out fits, but they are all so cute. They make a big fuss over how hard it is to judge, so they all get a 1st place ribbon and in this case,Kubota tractors sponserd the classes,a scale model toy. http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/Collingwood%202005/?action=viewcurrent=LL_9079.jpg This is my daughter's coaches daughter(17 months )on one of the large ponies we brought to the show.Blue mountain ski resort in the back ground. Nothing fancy or artistic, just kinda cute. Comments welcome Dave BTW i just found out Collingwood is twinned with Boone NC. Hey Tom, we're related. LOL
Re: Wideangle enablement :)
Vid Strpic wrote: Correction. With rear filter mounted, it DOES interfere with the mirror ;) Without the filter the situation is normal, and it seems that unlike Zenitar, this lens does not NEED to have filter mounted to focus properly. But, we'll see when I develop this roll ;) If you examine the filters carefully, you can see that they're slightly concave lenses rather than plain glass. (This is most obvious if you look at the reflection of a light source in them - you can see two images, one bigger than the other). I found the lens very soft (on film, at least), and have been wondering whether the filters are in fact an important part of the lens's optics. S
Re: OT: Photographing insects
Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday, August 21, 2005, at 09:35 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: My SO and I moved to Pittsburgh 3 years ago. Every summer, beginning in August, we've heard (but not seen) what we have taken to calling a clickety bug. It makes an click-click-click-click-click noise (from 5 to 25 clicks) and then pauses for a minute or more. Unlike crickets, for example, these bugs don't seem to exist in great numbers, as we can usually detect no more than 4-5 of them in the immediate area. Any suggestions as to what it might be? Just curious - and we have been for 3 years ;-) Indoors or outdoors? Outdoors. Here's what they sound like: http://www.robertstech.com/temp/clickety.mp3 I think there are two of them going in this recording. You can hear the click-click-click-click noise in the background behind all the crickets and traffic noise, etc. :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
In a message dated 8/23/2005 10:32:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tuesday, August 23, 2005, at 10:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? Weirdest was two weeks in my studio photographing dead cats for an anatomy and physiology textbook. I thought I would never get the stink of formaldehyde out of the place! Bob LOL. Marnie aka Doe
Re: PESO: cars on film
wendy beard wrote: http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48139645 http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48139939 Sweet! These are the kinds of shots I try to get in the paddock at race meetings, but never seem to pull off quite to my satisfaction. Isn't chrome the coolest thing? ;-) Thanks for sharing, Stephen
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 8:26 PM Subject: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? Please expound. A. In a message dated 8/24/2005 3:25:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 24/8/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: I was asked to photograph feet for a very unusual woman who lived in an exclusive part of San Francisco. This woman would have what I called foot fetish parties about once a month and I was hired to photograph the bare feet of her guests. She'd choose the ones she liked and have them framed and hung around her house, which was a huge place on upper Broadway. This went on for about four or five months, and then the parties stopped, or so I was told, and my services were no longer needed. I got to meet some verrry interesting people ... Excellent. My vote goes to Shel. Whoa! That *is* weird. But, hey, Cotty, it's not a contest. :-) It's more like a fish story. One's biggest or toughest or weirdest fish... that one didn't get away. I am also sort of expecting a wildlife story from someone. Marnie aka Doe
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
In a message dated 8/24/2005 12:47:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? Please expound. A. I dont know. I think part of what I try to do when I photograph is to find something unusual, or at least something it is unusual to photograph. So most of my pictures of birds are of dead birds, most of the pictures of my children show them without a smile, my landscapes are disturbed etc... This is a little weird: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=124704 and maybe this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=140546 while this is funny (think): http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=68660 and this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=47077 this is just a little unusual: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=87403 and maybe this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=87116 OK, I'll stop now .-) DagT == Uh. Maybe most of what you shoot is unusual. Hehehehe. They all fit the bill, certainly. Personally, I really the first one. Marnie
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am also sort of expecting a wildlife story from someone. I think Shel's qualifies ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On 24/8/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll upgrade as soon as I can get ten or twelve megapixels for less than $2500 That will be in 18 months from now. I'll keep this mail for 18 months, I have entered a cron job to remind me then. I'll be surprised if it takes that long. Just to clarify: Someone said: 'll upgrade as soon as I can get ten or twelve megapixels for less than $2500 I said: That will be in 18 months from now. Kevin said: I'll keep this mail for 18 months, I have entered a cron job to remind me then. Mark said: I'll be surprised if it takes that long. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
PESO - (OT) Captive
I found this quite poignant. http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/reportage/images/pic39.html (marked OT as no Pentax equipment used, unfortunately) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: cars on film
Cool shots. Um, is The Club in the Stag to keep Boris from going for a joyride? wendy beard wrote: some stuff I snipped
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just to clarify: Someone said: 'll upgrade as soon as I can get ten or twelve megapixels for less than $2500 I said: That will be in 18 months from now. Kevin said: I'll keep this mail for 18 months, I have entered a cron job to remind me then. Mark said: I'll be surprised if it takes that long. BTW: My 18 months figure applies to Pentax. Nikon will be much sooner. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On 24/8/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: BTW: My 18 months figure applies to Pentax. Nikon will be much sooner. Actually I was thinking FF 10 or 12MP for $2500 street price. Not Pentax. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
Among my most unusual: Bombs exploding in Viet Nam: http://www.aohc.it/vintage/danmat14.jpg The ground zero building in the Hiroshima Peace Park: http://www.aohc.it/vintage/danmat18.jpg Both shot with my (then new) Asahi Pentax Spotmatic.
Re: OT: Photographing insects
If it's outside, perhaps it is a cicada? On Aug 22, 2005, at 7:50 AM, Bob Shell wrote: On Sunday, August 21, 2005, at 09:35 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: My SO and I moved to Pittsburgh 3 years ago. Every summer, beginning in August, we've heard (but not seen) what we have taken to calling a clickety bug. It makes an click-click-click-click-click noise (from 5 to 25 clicks) and then pauses for a minute or more. Unlike crickets, for example, these bugs don't seem to exist in great numbers, as we can usually detect no more than 4-5 of them in the immediate area. Any suggestions as to what it might be? Just curious - and we have been for 3 years ;-) Indoors or outdoors? There is something called the Deathwatch Beetle, a wood borer that is sometimes found in old houses. It makes a clicking sound that people used to think sounded like a pocket watch or clock ticking. There was a superstition that this was the countdown to someone in the house's death. The beetle makes the sound by banging its head against the wall of its tunnel in the wood. If outdoors, I'm not sure. Probably something in the grasshopper or cricket clan. My specialty was butterflies, and they're not very noisy! Bob
Re: slide slam ... Report
Possibly. But if you set up a timer and give everyone an allocated slot, it think it can be worked. Worth a try at least! :-) Godfrey On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:23 AM, Jim Hemenway wrote: Thanks for the report, sounded like a good time. I predict that if you really want to keep future events to an hour, that you'll drop the manual remote control idea. - Photographers will be given a time period and required to talk through their presentation, with manual remote control of the projection equipment
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
Cotty wrote on 24.08.05 15:28: Actually I was thinking FF 10 or 12MP for $2500 street price. Not Pentax. I wouldn't be so sure about 12MP FF for 2500$ in 18 months. 5D has no rival DSLR to compete with so there is no reason for Canon to lower price that much if the demand would meet their expectations for this model (and I bet it will). But it seems that on 1 september 2005 Nikon will show D200 with 2 digits megapixel sensor - probably for 2500$ or less. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
- Original Message - From: Herb Chong Subject: Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax three almost indistinguishable DSLRs in production at the same time doesn't make retailers happy. this strategy has been tried before. I recall Canon making our life difficult with the Rebel film camera. I think they had 3 different versions in about a year and a half. Every time the new one came out, the old one had to be really deeply discounted, or else it wouldn't sell. Twice, the company I worked for fell for a discount offer from Canon when they wanted to blow a camera out of their warehouse because the replacement model was on it's way, and twice, we ended up selling that camera body below our (discounted) cost just to get it out of ours. The buyers smartened up and didn't fall for the ruse the third time, so Canon just made sure our orders were always backordered for the replacement Rebel. William Robb
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
- Original Message - From: keithw Subject: Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor? But, that's for personal use, not for sale prints. And that's about 97.4% of the prints made. William Robb
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
- Original Message - From: keithw Subject: Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor? Ten make him an 11 X 13 1/4, or 11 X 12 3/4. It's a custom print anyhow, isn't it? Does everyone measure prints, to make sure they get their money's worth? Or, am I missing something... No one wants to pay custom, and photo labs tend to produce stock print sizes, left to their own devices. With film, the problem was not being able to fit the ends of a 35mm frame into an 8x10, which wasn't so much of a problem, since it was a low volume product. With digital, the problem is cropping the top and bottom off the image to fit a 4x6 print. This is a problem, since it is a high volume product. William Robb
Re: A couple of PESOs
- Original Message - From: Herb Chong Subject: Re: A couple of PESOs something else to consider is that heat haze has much more effect than you would guess from what you can see through the viewfinder. i figure that the working range of my setup of a 400/2.8 with the 1.7X extender is really only up to about 500ft. much more than that on a warm day and air currents become too much for good sharpness. i prefer to work at no more than 200 ft if i can help it. for small bird work, i prefer 30-40ft. Thanks for this. That shot of the radar tower was probably at a distance of a mile, perhaps even a bit more, and I was shooting just about straight down the airport's main runway. William Robb
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
Marnie: I love your disturbed landscapes. The first one, which you describe as a little wierd, is may favorite. It is truely fascinating and a unique point of view. I also like the funny one very much, but they are all great. Dan M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont know. I think part of what I try to do when I photograph is to find something unusual, or at least something it is unusual to photograph. So most of my pictures of birds are of dead birds, most of the pictures of my children show them without a smile, my landscapes are disturbed etc... This is a little weird: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=124704 and maybe this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=140546 while this is funny (think): http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=68660 and this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=47077 this is just a little unusual: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=87403 and maybe this: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=87116 OK, I'll stop now .-) DagT == Uh. Maybe most of what you shoot is unusual. Hehehehe. They all fit the bill, certainly. Personally, I really the first one. Marnie
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Smaller size sensors with higher receptor densities lead to higher inherent noise. It's a fact of physics, (or life since life is physics). To counter that you use software to remove the noise... About No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Tell that to Canon, they seem to be making a lot of money these days. Jens Bladt wrote: Wrong answer. Sensores don't get bigger and bigger, I believe. They get smaller and smaller, better, faster, cheaper - and have more MP's - just like everything else electronic. Today 15,7 X 23,5mm (APS size) seems to be a rather large sensor. The 8 MP SONY sensor is only 8.8 x 6.6 mm - a 2/3 sensor. The Olympus E-1 is a 4/3 sensor system (5.7 MP) - using a 15-18mm sensor. There's many good things to be said about small sensors. Less glass (weight and cost) is one of them. I guess the next generations of cameras will have smaller sensors making larger image files. Small sensors are the future, not ff. FF was an issue as long as many consumers/photographers had very large amounts of money invested in expensive glass for 35mm film. This segment is getting smaller every day. No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Certainly not Pentax. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Pat White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. august 2005 07:09 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor? What, doesn't everybody want 8x12 or 13.5x20 enlargements? I used to pay extra for them (got some on the wall, looking good), but now I just shoot with extra room for cropping. Much simpler for frames and mats. Pat White -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 24/8/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: BTW: My 18 months figure applies to Pentax. Nikon will be much sooner. Actually I was thinking FF 10 or 12MP for $2500 street price. Not Pentax. No one mentioned full frame at this price. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: OT: Photographing insects
Illinois Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's outside, perhaps it is a cicada? I thought it might be an odd sort of cicada, or one making a different sound, but I found a lot of cicada sound samples on the net and none like this. More data: This insect appears (or starts making its sound) in early August and generally continues through September here in Pittsburgh. It seems to only make its sound around dusk - from just after sunset until around 9:30-10:00. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those suggested....
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those suggested I agree. Which one do you want? William Robb
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
- Original Message - From: P. J. Alling Subject: Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor? About No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Tell that to Canon, they seem to be making a lot of money these days. I think Canon actually made a small investment in APS C sensors, and are now moving towards where they wanted to be now that the technology is becoming realisticaly affordable. William Robb
Re: Re: OT: Photographing insects
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/08/24 Wed PM 02:49:47 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Photographing insects Illinois Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's outside, perhaps it is a cicada? I thought it might be an odd sort of cicada, or one making a different sound, but I found a lot of cicada sound samples on the net and none like this. More data: This insect appears (or starts making its sound) in early August and generally continues through September here in Pittsburgh. It seems to only make its sound around dusk - from just after sunset until around 9:30-10:00. It's your neighbour trying to light the barbecue with the piezo-electric spark thingie. He doesn't know the cylinder's empty. Better tell him. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
P. J. Alling wrote on 24.08.05 16:35: About No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Tell that to Canon, they seem to be making a lot of money these days. Not on FF DSLRs though... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P. J. Alling wrote on 24.08.05 16:35: About No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Tell that to Canon, they seem to be making a lot of money these days. Not on FF DSLRs though... They *made* a lot of money on FF DSLR's. The pool of people willing and able to meet the $8000 asking price is drying up so they've (reluctantly) moved down the pricing ladder. They'll make lots of money on this one too. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? Please expound. A. I think it has to be this guy. http://www.muddypawz.net/other_port/img_0002.htm He was sort of sprung upon me. I had gone to a lady's house to photograph her two dogs and ended up taking photos of not only the dogs, but her horse, rabbit and lizard too! Wasn't quite sure what to do with him. Luckily I had a swag of black velour in my bag and there happened to be this plant stand in her dining room so I hauled it over and stuck mr.lizard on top. Came out quite well, I thought :-) Wendy Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
Mark Roberts wrote on 24.08.05 17:17: They *made* a lot of money on FF DSLR's. The pool of people willing and able to meet the $8000 asking price is drying up so they've (reluctantly) moved down the pricing ladder. They'll make lots of money on this one too. So far it seems that D2X sells much better than 1Ds, probably due to quite large difference in price (about 3500$). That's probably one of the reasons Canon released 5D so soon - beat the price of D2X and lower its sales this way... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
PESO - Veins II
Based on Kenneth's comment on removing the clutter to the right of the leaf, I have done some rework of this image. http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2145a.htm Original: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2145.htm -- Best regards, Bruce
Could this be my next purchase?
This looks _very_ enticing... http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/hasselblad_h2_and_h2d_announced/ enjoy Kevin -- Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
Re: PESO - Veins II
In a message dated 8/24/2005 8:10:19 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Based on Kenneth's comment on removing the clutter to the right of the leaf, I have done some rework of this image. http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2145a.htm Original: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2145.htm -- Best regards, Bruce === Yes, I like it better. Less busy, simpler, more impact. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: 36mm x 36mm sensor?
The high end sells the low end. Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: P. J. Alling wrote on 24.08.05 16:35: About No sane company will invest a lot in making new camera systems for a 35mm sensor. Tell that to Canon, they seem to be making a lot of money these days. Not on FF DSLRs though... -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Paw: My horsey di good today
Dave, It is a cute moment. I suspect there are quite a few opportunities for this sort of shot while the little ones are being led around. I do with that we could see some interaction between the little girl and the handler. Thanks for sharing the moment. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, August 24, 2005, 5:18:00 AM, you wrote: bcin Hi Gang bcin This is from what is called the Lead Line class from the bcin Collingwood show. Its for kids bcin ages 0-5. bcin They are led around by a compitant handler on a safe bcin horse. I don't know were they get bcin these little bcin riding out fits, but they are all so cute. bcin They make a big fuss over how hard it is to judge, so bcin they all get a 1st place ribbon and bcin in this bcin case,Kubota tractors sponserd the classes,a scale model toy. bcin http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/Collingwood%202005/?action=viewcurrent=LL_9079.jpg bcin This is my daughter's coaches daughter(17 months )on one bcin of the large ponies we brought to bcin the bcin show.Blue mountain ski resort in the back ground. bcin Nothing fancy or artistic, just kinda cute. bcin Comments welcome bcin Dave bcin BTW i just found out Collingwood is twinned with Boone NC. bcin Hey Tom, we're related. bcin LOL
Re: PESO - (OT) Captive
The softness of the glass does lend something to the image. Almost helps humanify the eyes and expression on the face. I rather like it. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, August 24, 2005, 6:11:18 AM, you wrote: C I found this quite poignant. C http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/reportage/images/pic39.html C (marked OT as no Pentax equipment used, unfortunately) C Cheers, C Cotty C ___/\__ C || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche C ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com C _
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
In a message dated 8/24/2005 8:03:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it has to be this guy. http://www.muddypawz.net/other_port/img_0002.htm He was sort of sprung upon me. I had gone to a lady's house to photograph her two dogs and ended up taking photos of not only the dogs, but her horse, rabbit and lizard too! Wasn't quite sure what to do with him. Luckily I had a swag of black velour in my bag and there happened to be this plant stand in her dining room so I hauled it over and stuck mr.lizard on top. Came out quite well, I thought :-) Wendy = Hehehehe. Yes it did come out well. Very old fashioned kind of portrait shot. Effective. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
In a message dated 8/24/2005 7:23:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marnie: I love your disturbed landscapes. The first one, which you describe as a little wierd, is may favorite. It is truely fascinating and a unique point of view. I also like the funny one very much, but they are all great. Dan M = Er, the photographer of the disturbed landscapes was DagT, of course. But he got the compliment anyway. :-) Marnie
Re: PESO: cars on film
--- keithw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is that your Stag? Lovely shape! Yep, well, it's Paul's actually. I'm lucky if I'm even allowed to ride in it, let alone drive it :-) It's quite a handsome looking car (If you don't look under the bonnet) http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48142289 http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/48047031 It would have been nice to take the car to a clutter-free spot in the park and get some better pics but there was also a craft fair and band on at the park that day so the place was heaving! Wendy Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
In a message dated 8/24/2005 6:09:25 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am also sort of expecting a wildlife story from someone. I think Shel's qualifies ;-) -- Mark Roberts LOL. You're right. Marnie
Re: Feedback on FA 28-70 F4.0 AL
- Original Message - From: John Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Does anyone have experience, opinions and/or samples for the FA 28-70/ f4 AL? I just picked up a used copy for $75 and will not have a chance to test it out until I get back home from travel for work. The lens appears to be in great shape, but the focus ring seems pretty loose at least off the camera. Is this normal? I'll be using this on my *istDS since I can't yet afford the F2.8 model. I used one a lot on my *ist D. Images were kinda soft until well stopped-down. The manual focus feel was utter crap very loose as you described. I sold it for $75.00 a few months back... Christian
Re: OT: Photographing insects
On Wednesday, August 24, 2005, at 08:46 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: Outdoors. Here's what they sound like: http://www.robertstech.com/temp/clickety.mp3 I think there are two of them going in this recording. You can hear the click-click-click-click noise in the background behind all the crickets and traffic noise, etc. :) Must be my ears or the computer speakers but I can't hear it in your sound recording. I just hear the usual crickets and such. Bob
Re: OT: Photographing insects
- Original Message - From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 10:49 AM Subject: Re: OT: Photographing insects Illinois Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's outside, perhaps it is a cicada? I thought it might be an odd sort of cicada, or one making a different sound, but I found a lot of cicada sound samples on the net and none like this. More data: This insect appears (or starts making its sound) in early August and generally continues through September here in Pittsburgh. It seems to only make its sound around dusk - from just after sunset until around 9:30-10:00. It really sounds like a couple of isolated dogday cicadas. Not to be confused with the periodical 17-year/13-year cicadas. The dogday cicadas have been chirping up a storm in my neighborhood this year. We get dozens of them in chorus which is much louder and you can't really pick out individuals. This is a sound of a different type of cicada that sounds like yours: http://insects.ummz.lsa.umich.edu/fauna/Michigan_Cicadas/Michigan/WAVsounds/vitIL72.WAV Christian
Re: Defishing the Zenitar
VS I also have a Zenitar, and did some experiments with wideangle filter in VS Gimp. Results were not perfect, but not so bad even. Try the PTLens. Newest version has customisable defishing function (as well as chromatic aberration control), and it also has a profile exactly for the Zenitar on 1.5x crop cameras. Works quite well from when I tried it on some sample fisheye photos. Good light! fra
Re: Pentax in San Francisco
It's very hard to know when and where the right used gear will show up. In SF, Adolph Gasser is the store that I've most often found good used equipment like this. In Palo Alto, there's Keeble Shuchat with a similar selection. Beyond that, it's a hunt and hope kinda thing. Godfrey On Aug 24, 2005, at 1:00 AM, Anatoly Andrusevich wrote: Dear Pentax users, I live in Russia and will be in San Francisco/Sunnyvale in September. I'd like to find a M50/1.4 or K50/1.4 lens and (maybe) LX body. Are there any place to buy? Please assist. -- Sincerely, Anatoly Andrusevich Moscow, Russia
Re: Film scanner question
On Aug 24, 2005, at 12:21 AM, mike wilson wrote: Anyone used one of these? Any opinions? http://www.morgancomputers.co.uk/shop/detail.asp?ProductID=2101 Reports on the MInolta 5400 have been good, but reports on the 5400 II have not been. I know at least two people who were disappointed enough in the 5400 II model that they returned it and took home the corresponding Nikon unit of similar price. I'm still using the ancient Minolta Scan Dual II and it's still serving well. Godfrey
Re: Could this be my next purchase?
On Aug 24, 2005, at 8:17 AM, Kevin Waterson wrote: This looks _very_ enticing... http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ hasselblad_h2_and_h2d_announced/ I had the pleasure of experimenting with the H1 shortly after it was announced, when it was still in prototype/first run release. It's a delightful camera, if you can afford the tariff. A bit thicker than my blood will allow, unfortunately. Godfrey
Re: Film scanner question
That's one of the reasons I bought the Nikon. Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi Reports on the MInolta 5400 have been good, but reports on the 5400 II have not been. I know at least two people who were disappointed enough in the 5400 II model that they returned it and took home the corresponding Nikon unit of similar price
Re: Feedback on FA 28-70 F4.0 AL
Popular Photo found the lens to be very fine but they noted than at 28mm its vignetting was caused, they tought, by a circle not wide enough for 24X36. Don't know it this makes sense. Maybe someone could check out the exact words they used. Andre
RE: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
This went on for about four or five months, and then the parties stopped, or so I was told, and my services were no longer needed. Stepped on a toe? 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: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24. august 2005 10:57 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot [Original Message] LET'S DO A SURVEY!!! Q. What is the most unusual subject matter you have ever shot? The most unique? Or the weirdest? Or simply the subject matter that you have had the hardest time capturing (either because it was hard to get to, or timing, or movement, or whatever)? I've photographed so many odd and unusual things and situations that, for me, they've become more or less commonplace. I think the first photos that fit into this category were for Art Jim Mitchell (http://tinyurl.com/a44ox), owners and operators of the O'Farrell Theater in San Francisco, during the late summer or early fall of 1969, shortly after the theater opened for business. The O'Farrell Theater showed porn movies, most of which Artie and Jim made upstairs in the big room behind the projection booth. I was up there for a party one night (my girlfriend's brother was the janitor and he suggested I come to the party) and was photographing the band (which featured a one-handed guiutarist), when Artie called me over and asked that I make some photos for him. We went into another room where they were shooting some scenes for a rudimentary porn movie. In those early days things were pretty simple - production values were minimal, the lights were bright and omni-directional, the set was just a bed in the middle of the room, and the actors were usually college kids, a boy friend and girl friend, looking to make a spare $50.00 or so. Artie and Jim wanted some close ups of certain body parts and a few specific acts of perversion has Jim jokingly called them. I got paid $50.00 for my efforts and received a small bonus as well. Soon after that I moved to Berkeley and got a job processing baby pictures. The deal was that I'd make the rounds of local hospitals with a cheap camera and film provided by the company for which I worked. I'd give the loaded camera to the nurses who'd take pics of the new born babies, and would return home with the camera and exposed film, which I'd then develop and print. I'd return to the hospitals the next day with small proof prints - 5x7 I believe - which the nurses would then present to the parents. If they made a sale, I'd then print up some better quality pics and the nurses and I would split a commission. I much preferred making photos for Art and Jim. There were many more interesting photo assignments and opportunities I had over the years. Most recently (a couple of years ago, and perhaps, in some ways, the most unusual), I was asked to photograph feet for a very unusual woman who lived in an exclusive part of San Francisco. This woman would have what I called foot fetish parties about once a month and I was hired to photograph the bare feet of her guests. She'd choose the ones she liked and have them framed and hung around her house, which was a huge place on upper Broadway. This went on for about four or five months, and then the parties stopped, or so I was told, and my services were no longer needed. I got to meet some verrry interesting people ... Shel
Re: Survey: Your Most Unusual Shot
Spent a couple 100 degree hours at Sacramento 's Land Park Zoo awhile back. I envied a polar bear which kept diving into its pool (probably refrigerated) and spinning to the surface. Finally occurred to me to try for a shot. Didn't get a solid freeze, but a different image. Jack http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=86 --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 8/24/2005 8:03:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it has to be this guy. http://www.muddypawz.net/other_port/img_0002.htm He was sort of sprung upon me. I had gone to a lady's house to photograph her two dogs and ended up taking photos of not only the dogs, but her horse, rabbit and lizard too! Wasn't quite sure what to do with him. Luckily I had a swag of black velour in my bag and there happened to be this plant stand in her dining room so I hauled it over and stuck mr.lizard on top. Came out quite well, I thought :-) Wendy = Hehehehe. Yes it did come out well. Very old fashioned kind of portrait shot. Effective. Marnie aka Doe :-) Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
BW Filter in DS2
Does anyone have an idea how the BW filter in the istDS2 might work? The various Sony cameras I've used allows for BW, but the results seem to be little more than desaturated RGB - in fact, the files show up as RGB type files when edited in PS, and the BW results aren't particularly good, showing a rather poor tonality and range. Are there different ways of generating a BW photo with digi cameras? Might the BW results in the istDS2 be RAW files, or something other? I realize all this may require some speculation ... Kodak had a camera specifically designed for BW, but I never saw any unretouched results from that one. Shel
