Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Actually the thing that gets me is wh Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I hope you're talking about the same lens I am. I have a lens in front of me marked TAKUMAR (BAYONET) 1:2.5 135mm 5568860 ASAHI OPTICAL CO. No mention of SMC. That's the one I'm referring to. It's an inexpensive lens for sure. I think there might be a bit of confusion here between the K mount f2.5 135 mm (inexpensive) Takumar lens and the earlier screw mount f2.5 135mm Takumars which existed in both SMC and non-SMC forms. I've never used any of them so can't comment on the quality. Cheers, Brian + Brian Walters Western Sydney, Australia
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Actually the thing that gets me is wh Couldn't agree more.. Cheers, Brian + Brian Walters Western Sydney, Australia
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
At 02:27 AM 9/14/2005, Brian Walters wrote: I think there might be a bit of confusion here between the K mount f2.5 135 mm (inexpensive) Takumar lens and the earlier screw mount f2.5 135mm Takumars which existed in both SMC and non-SMC forms. I've never used any of them so can't comment on the quality. For what it's worth, the lens I was asking about is the K-mount version. I'm not sure what difference that might make, other than the SMC coating. take care, Glen
Re: Re: What Ever Happened to Chrome? was: Being There
From: Glen [EMAIL PROTECTED] When one door closes, another is opened. ;) Avoiding the splinters sticking out of the door frame is the trick. m - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: 360 degree software
This one time, at band camp, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stitcher Express has a few more useful features but costs more. i find that the nodal point is negligibly important using these three programs if you don't have architectural features near to the camera. that is why i stopped using all of my special panorama heads and just use an L-bracket on a Really Right Stuff panorama clamp. i still have a Kaidan Kiwi-L head that is looking for a good home, and a have a Manfrotto 300N clickstop panorama base that i am not ready to part with yet. I have been looking at the 300N and it looks good at AUD$350.00 from Kayell. Although Adorama has them at US$167.00 which is far cheaper. On talking to the folks at Kayell they recommended the 303 panoramic kit, at AUD$968.00 or US$324.00 from Adorma and bh. As I am looking at architectural photo's I was thinking of using a panoramic head to limit paralax errors when stitching. I guess the extra dollars spent on a head is soon made up in time stitching. Also, are there and recommeded lenses folks are use for this type of photography using Pentax? Kind regards 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: Uh what happened to the *ist DS
On 2005-09-13 20:17, Glen wrote: At 05:06 AM 9/13/2005, you wrote: On 2005-09-12 18:09, Adam Maas wrote: The DS creates poor JPEG images? What's wrong with them? Check e.g. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistds/page18.asp - they had to compare RAW since JPEG was surprisingly poor. Image quality issues? Yes - with the default setup File size issues? No - file size is a matter for RAW since the DS does not compress the files, as others do. Are there any comparions around about different JPEG settings? - Martin
Travel (and shopping?) to Vienna
Hi! Next week I'll be in Austria, mostly with business (but I hope I'll have some personal time). It seems I'll pass through Vienna and I'll stay a while around Graz. Some time ago I wasn't sure if I should go for the DS or wait for the (first) next model with more MPs. I've made the mistake to ask for 'help' on this list, and as usual you've been very helpfull grin That means I'm looking for a new DS, and since I'm not willing to pay over 1000 euro body-only, maybe this trip is just what I need for my 'enablement'. So: do you know any reliable stores in those cities? (I think Vienna is the best bet). Warranty is an important issue, I don't think I'll be able to travel often to Austria - and, even if we (Romanians) have a Pentax authorized service, they won't accept the international warranty. Thanks! -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-13 12:45, Shel Belinkoff wrote: LONG URL's: Perhaps those posting messages with long URL's can use Tiny Url to shorten these addresses Please: http://tinyurl.com/ I prefer long URLs instead of a redirect via tinyurl where I don't know where I'll end up. However many URLs could be limited. For ebay the item number alone is sufficient. BOTTOM POSTING: many listers post their replies to the bottom of original messages, or at the bottom of a series of replies and threads. Often the post is just a simple me too type post, or something simple and short. How about posting such responses ABOVE the messages, and, while you're at it, perhaps trimming the messages to reflect just the relevant comments to which you're responding. No. It's a much discussed problem. But when you prefer Top Postings - then the best is to delete the complete full quote. It won't make any difference whether it's top or bottom ;-) Instead of your full quote you should use References/In-Reply-To instead: (maybe you never noticed them: they are hidden within the header lines) This is required by the standards and should be included by every email software as soon as you reply to a message. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting is a good overview of pro/con TRIMMING MESSAGES: How about taking a moment to delete some earlier messages in a thread instead of just automatically including huge amounts of text that has to be waded through to finally get to the most recent post. Exactly. Some people discussed archives recently. Archives could be improved and compressed significantly by omitting all those fullquotes. Those quotes are very important for forwarding messages to other people. However, for replies they mainly show that the poster either did not understand how email should operate or he does not mind about his readers. JM2C Martin
Southwest: itinerary
Hello there, that's me again. This is the last mail regarding the subject from me. I'd like to thank Marnie, Godfrey, Jack, Dan, Bill, Gautam, David, Shel and P.J. (hope I didn't forgot anyone) for their valuable recommendations and comments. This is more or less our itinerary: Thu, Sep 15, 05arrival to SFO Fri, Sep 16, 05Yosemite Sat, Sep 17, 05Yosemite (Glacier Point) Sun, Sep 18, 05Yosemite/Mono Lake Mon, Sep 19, 05Bryce Canyon Tue, Sep 20, 05Bryce Canyon Wed, Sep 21, 05Zion Thu, Sep 22, 05Zion (Angels Landing) Fri, Sep 23, 05Zion Sat, Sep 24, 05Grand Canyon (North Rim) Sun, Sep 25, 05Mesa Verde Mon, Sep 26, 05Mesa Verde Tue, Sep 27, 05Monument Valley Wed, Sep 28, 05Monument Valley Thu, Sep 29, 05Flagstaff/Route 66 Fri, Sep 30, 05Boulder City/Las Vegas Sat, Oct 1, 05Death Valley Sun, Oct 2, 05Yosemite (again) Mon, Oct 3, 05San Francisco Tue, Oct 4, 05Silicon Valley Tour Wed, Oct 5, 05San Francisco Thu, Oct 6, 05departure from SFO Of course, this is the rough version. For example on Sep. 18th we plan to drive through Yosemite/Tioga Pass to Mono Lake at the morning, stay there for a while and then continue driving through Nevada in direction Bryce Canyon. When the night comes we'll sleep somewhere along the way, perhaps on Extraterrestrial Highway, who knows. ;-) And so on... Silicon Valley Tour - we'd like to see some of the most important computer companies, namely Apple Computer, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard and of course Palo Alto Research Center where all this began. Yes indeed, we are something like computer geeks. :-) For those interested to meet two PDMLers from Slovakia: we should be available on Mon, Oct 3rd between 4 and 5 PM at the Apple Store, One Stockton Street near Powell St. BART station. Or you can send your phone number to my travel e-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (just please remove the antispam from it) and we'll try to phone you when we are back in SF. So long, Peter (AKA Bedo.)
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: I wonder how the flash actually DOES work, if the light output is indifferent to the ASA setting? The flash quenches when its sensor is happy. If your lens aperture and distance were correct (indicated by the slider and thus affected by the ISO setting), you are OK, if not, you are not OK :-) Or so I think. From Boj: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html Automatic Flash --- An automatic flash is one that can limit the flash duration and therefore the amount of light that it outputs. The control function is performed by electronics contained inside the flash and guided by a light-sensitive sensor located on the front of the flash. When the sensor detects that enough light has returned back to the flash, the control electronics terminate the flash discharge. In the simplest flashes, the flash capacitor is shorted (so the extra charge is lost), but in more advanced ones (those labeled thyristor), the charge is preserved for the next flash discharge. An automatic flash achieves proper exposure not only when GN = d * F, but also when GN d * F. Automatic flash operation achieves correct exposures not only in straight-on applications, but also when the flash head is tilted, swiveled or covered with various gels and reflectors. To perform its calculations, the flash assumes that some F (usually f/4 or f/5.6) is selected on the lens. Failure to match F results in under- or over-exposure. Program Flash - Pentax did not make any purely automatic flashes. Instead, they added another feature, called program flash, and gave the flashes in this category the SA designation. Program flashes solve the problem of the photographer forgetting to set the correct F before every flash exposure. When used in program exposure mode, the flash and the body work together to set F. This capability requires an extra contact, mode, so the flash can tell the body what brightness it will produce. Knowing the film speed, the body calculates and sets F. Some SA flashes have the extra functionality of signaling when proper exposure was achieved. This is done either by lighting up a lamp on the back of the flash or communicating with the body (via the ready contact) and letting it make the flash symbol in the view-finder blink. For the reasons mentioned earlier, I harly ever use a flash in bright daylight. I know PJ's do it all the time. I never understood why. Contrast control. You get even illumination and remove the shadows under the eyes. I believe light looks better comming from above. I agree, it is softer and more diffused, but requires some direct flash as well to eliminate the shadows. Thus the common white card (or diffuser) trick. Kostas
Re: Another quiz!
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: And if I was a woman, I'd be Aphrodite. Interesting... Was she his wife as well? Can't remember. Kostas
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Glen wrote: For what it's worth, the lens I was asking about is the K-mount version. I'm not sure what difference that might make, other than the SMC coating. I think different formula as well, check Boj's site (and compare with the SMC Pentax 135/2.5). Kostas
Re: CC warning: 10 megapixel camera
On 2005-09-13 21:05, Mark Roberts wrote: The CC in CC warning stands for coffee cats. This means that if you are drinking coffee and have a cat in your lap when you visit the following web page, the subsequent convulsions of laughter may result in deep scratches in your thighs and coffee all over your keyboard. You have been warned: http://www.fivefingerdiscount.co.uk/Trupixflip.htm How does a camera with a 2048 x 1536 sensor yield 10 megapixels? ...by using a breakthrough process called interpolation! ;-) Hm... I guess it's really a 3.1 MP sensor only. However, 1) by using a breakthrough process called interpolation, this camera will bring you exceptionally sharp digital images Isn't this true for every* camera? 2) Isn't interpolation used in every* camera, lying by a factor of about 4? When using a sensor with a four pattern matrix +---+---+ |1:R|2:G| +---+---+ |3:G|4:B| +---+---+ ... the green and blue color info of the red pixel 1 are just interpolated from their neighbours. So even RAW data is not RAW but interpolated? Or is there any camera that does output its data as it actually is detected? Are external programs around that can to this interpolation externally - and possibly better than a current internal algorithm? I suppose almost every camera has some kind of test mode where the real sensor data could be read out. However, this feature probably is a hidden business and service secret. *: every means: most of the current cameras. One of the exceptions is the Foveon sensor with pixels staggered on top of each other Other examples sound even worse. Here's a scanner example: http://www.microtekusa.com/smi800_specs.html # Optical Resolution: 4800 x 9600 dpi # Interpolated Resolution (maximum): - 65,535 dpi (PC) - 32,767 dpi (Mac) # Scan Area: - 8.5 x 14 reflective # Image Sensor: 41,300-element tri-linear CCD array Unfortunately there's no standard that pixels, dpi or GB must be given in effective numbers, such as * harddisks: free space (without file system overhead) * displays: real pixels (computer screens count an 'RGB pixel' only once) * scanners: effective resolution * cameras: optical resolution ... - Martin
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, John Francis wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:45:46PM -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote: BOTTOM POSTING: many listers post their replies to the bottom of original messages, or at the bottom of a series of replies and threads. Often the post is just a simple me too type post, or something simple and short. How about posting such responses ABOVE the messages, and, while you're at it, perhaps trimming the messages to reflect just the relevant comments to which you're responding. A. Because it reverses the normal flow of reading messages I read a different meaning in Shel's suggestion. He did not go into futile TB-BP herecy, but recommended TP in the case of a Me too answer, particularly if one cannot be bothered to trim before answering. Sure, there is overlap with the trimming recommendation. Perhaps the above could be phrased as an alternative to trimming in the case of Me toos. Shel will correct me if I misread. Kostas
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
What you really need is a gmail account for the pdml... - It automatically hides quoted text - It shows you the complete thread so you can easily find the previous posted url - It gives you 2.5 Gb of storage so you'll never delete any threads again! I've hundreds of invites to give away, anyone needs it? danilo.
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Hi Shel, your E-Mail software is broken: X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.0.129.0 (Windows) From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:10:45 -0700 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's neither references nor In-Reply-To, such as In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See e.g. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html section 3.6.4 I guess you know what 'SHOULD' in upper case means in RFCs. Is Earthlink aware of this RFC violation? Proper software permits much more efficient methods of threading and navigation through discussions, improving reading, understanding, quoting. Thanks, Martin
Re: Re: Another quiz!
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed AM 10:20:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Another quiz! On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: And if I was a woman, I'd be Aphrodite. Interesting... Was she his wife as well? Can't remember. Kostas Shame on you! 8-))) - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: What Ever Happened to Chrome? was: Being There
my Nikon scanner does oversampling in the driver. every doubling of passes adds about 1 bit of resolution. Herb - Original Message - From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 11:16 PM Subject: Re: What Ever Happened to Chrome? was: Being There On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 10:59:10PM -0400, Herb Chong wrote: doubling the number of frames ought to reduce the noise by a factor of 2 Sqrt(2), shirley?
Re: LED lighting
LEDs are replacing incandescent bulbs in just about every application. because they are cheaper in the long run. Herb - Original Message - From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 12:04 AM Subject: Re: LED lighting This sounds like a solution in search of a problem. Herb Chong wrote: some people figure that by the end of the decade, practical car headlights could be LED arrays.
Re: Note to self
On Sep 13, 2005, at 10:45 PM, Tom Reese wrote: My doing it the hard way comment was in reference to your calculating the exposure compensation for the tubes instead of using in camera metering. I was using my 6x7 at the time, which has no built-in meter. Ah, that makes sense then. You get 1000 points for shooting film, 500 bonus points for shooting medium format and 1500 extra bonus points for manually calculating exposure. Those Enablement points are redeemable at any time and have no expiration date. To cash them in simply start a thread with the phrase Should I buy insert expensive Pentax equipment. The Pentaxian Brotherhood will provide you with several compelling arguments for use on yourself, your spousal unit and/or the Asahi Finance Co. Tom Reese
Re: 360 degree software
Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I am looking at architectural photo's I was thinking of using a panoramic head to limit paralax errors when stitching. I guess the extra dollars spent on a head is soon made up in time stitching. For architectural stuff, I expect you're correct. I do landscapes and just use a normal tripod ballhead. For 3-5 shot panoramas I've even handheld a few times. Also, are there and recommeded lenses folks are use for this type of photography using Pentax? I prefer the 31mm f/1.8 Limited and the FA 28/2.8AL but I've used the Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 a couple of times. Good stitching software helps a lot. I'm using Arcsoft Panorama Maker 3 at the moment. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Re: Another quiz!
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote: From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed AM 10:20:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Another quiz! On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: And if I was a woman, I'd be Aphrodite. Interesting... Was she his wife as well? Can't remember. Shame on you! 8-))) What do you mean shame on me? You think that cartesian products of all people in a set (irrespective of gender) is an Eastenders invention? The real soap opera starred the Olympian Gods! When Zeus fancied a quick one he would turn to rain, or even manure (but not a cricket umpire[1]) to get it! Kostas [1] Sneakily going back on-topic.
Re: CC warning: 10 megapixel camera
When using a sensor with a four pattern matrix +---+---+ |1:R|2:G| +---+---+ |3:G|4:B| +---+---+ ... the green and blue color info of the red pixel 1 are just interpolated from their neighbours. So even RAW data is not RAW but interpolated? Or is there any camera that does output its data as it actually is detected? Are external programs around that can to this interpolation externally - and possibly better than a current internal algorithm? RAW *is* RAW sensor data. No interpolation or other processing done. The external programs are called RAW converters and every one of them does the interpolation. Some better than others. -Cory -- * * Cory Papenfuss* * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * *
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
Glen, f2.5 135mm Takumar K-mount is the cheep and cheerful lens. Things don't look too sharp wide open (see Godfrey example). f2.5 135mm SMC K-mount is the next best thing to the A*135/f1.8. A very nice lens when you can find it, and not too expensive. Regards, Bob S. On 9/14/05, Glen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 02:27 AM 9/14/2005, Brian Walters wrote: I think there might be a bit of confusion here between the K mount f2.5 135 mm (inexpensive) Takumar lens and the earlier screw mount f2.5 135mm Takumars which existed in both SMC and non-SMC forms. I've never used any of them so can't comment on the quality. For what it's worth, the lens I was asking about is the K-mount version. I'm not sure what difference that might make, other than the SMC coating. take care, Glen
Re: Latest eekBay SMCP Shoot-out!
I love it when these things happen, especially when I'm doing the selling. I was lucky enough to sell a K 200mm f/2.5 last year that I'd bought from a dealer for £129. With 10 minutes to go, it was valued at 3170, and when the auction ended it had reached £309!!! VVVBG. - Original Message - From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:43 AM Subject: Latest eekBay SMCP Shoot-out! Sorry to break a PDML Rule, but this has been fun to watch: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7544733537 If anyone *was* watching that auction be advised that I'll GLADLY make it up to you by selling you the same lens at the current price of $305.00! I'll even include free shipping! ;-) Don
Water repelling lens coat?
A friend of my in the UK asked me this question: Was wondering if you could help me. I've recently bought a Pentax Optio WP. Great little camera, even more intuitive than my old Casio and excellent being able to use the camera canoeing, swimming etc. (Not actually taken pics from underwater yet.) One issue though. Once it has been in the water, or if it is raining, the droplets on the lens spoil a lot of the pics. Do you know of anything which would coat the lens, which would repel the water, or break the surface tension without distorting the pics? I have no idea, is there anyone who can advise? RAIN-X? Or the opposite, anti-condensation stuff? -- Frits Wüthrich
Re: CC warning: 10 megapixel camera
On 2005-09-14 07:44, Cory Papenfuss wrote: RAW *is* RAW sensor data. No interpolation or other processing done. The external programs are called RAW converters and every one of them does the interpolation. Some better than others. Thanks! Since I'm still analogue, I never checked RAW files up to now. So I know very little about RAW: - it's not a standard, but proprietary (Sigma is open, Nikon is protected) - it may include a jpeg preview - it may be compressed (while noise at higher ISO will reduce the compressiability) So where does the masking of defective pixels, pixel calibration, white balancing or 'anti-vignetting' occur? Is RAW absolutely uncorrected? Is there some kind of 'golden raw' which may be used by the processing software in order to compensate known errors? If it's not preprocessed into the raw output, is it included within every raw file? Thanks, Martin
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
On 9/14/05, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glen, f2.5 135mm Takumar K-mount is the cheep and cheerful lens. Things don't look too sharp wide open (see Godfrey example). f2.5 135mm SMC K-mount is the next best thing to the A*135/f1.8. A very nice lens when you can find it, and not too expensive. Regards, Bob S. I'll just chime in and say the same as everyone else. The f2.5 135mm Bayonet Takumar is at least a competent performer. At that focal length, with the built-in hood pulled out, I've never had a problem with flare, but then again I don't shoot into the sun too often. I never noticed that it's not sharp until I got an SMC 2.5 135mm, which (even with my focusing skills - or lack thereof) is sharp as a tack. However, for the $30 I paid for it, I thought it had tremendous bang for the buck. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
I'll just chime in and say the same as everyone else. The f2.5 135mm Bayonet Takumar is at least a competent performer. At that focal length, with the built-in hood pulled out, I've never had a problem with flare, but then again I don't shoot into the sun too often. However, for the $30 I paid for it, I thought it had tremendous bang for the buck. Ditto. I think it is rather reasonable and quite nice a lens. -- Boris
Re: Ashes
Wasn't it G.B. Shaw who said that Cricket was invented to show the British people the meaning of eternity? David Mann wrote: On Sep 14, 2005, at 12:51 AM, frank theriault wrote: One day cricket? Each team bats for 50 overs, or until the opposing team gets them all out. The match lasts for one day instead of the usual five, and the teams wear colourful uniforms. I think the most similar American pastime would be fishing. Some people find it exciting but most just enjoy getting drunk and sunburnt. - Dave
Re: Ashes (was: Rob Studdert)
On 9/14/05, David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 14, 2005, at 12:51 AM, frank theriault wrote: One day cricket? Each team bats for 50 overs, or until the opposing team gets them all out. The match lasts for one day instead of the usual five, and the teams wear colourful uniforms. That's illuminating! I think the most similar American pastime would be fishing. Some people find it exciting but most just enjoy getting drunk and sunburnt. Watching fishing on TV is about as interesting as watching poker on the tube (how does poker end up on sports channels, anyway - cards is a sport?). As far as drinking and getting sun, I don't need fishing as an excuse to do those things g. Reminds me of Mark Twain's comment that golf is a lovely nature walk, ruined g. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: CC warning: 10 megapixel camera
On 9/13/05, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The CC in CC warning stands for coffee cats. This means that if you are drinking coffee and have a cat in your lap when you visit the following web page, the subsequent convulsions of laughter may result in deep scratches in your thighs and coffee all over your keyboard. You have been warned: http://www.fivefingerdiscount.co.uk/Trupixflip.htm How does a camera with a 2048 x 1536 sensor yield 10 megapixels? ...by using a breakthrough process called interpolation! ;-) Geez, and Marnie just went out and bought a Pentax. She'll be kicking herself now! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Re: Another quiz!
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed AM 11:27:47 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: Another quiz! On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote: From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed AM 10:20:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Another quiz! On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: And if I was a woman, I'd be Aphrodite. Interesting... Was she his wife as well? Can't remember. Shame on you! 8-))) What do you mean shame on me? You think that cartesian products of all people in a set (irrespective of gender) is an Eastenders invention? The real soap opera starred the Olympian Gods! When Zeus fancied a quick one he would turn to rain, or even manure (but not a cricket umpire[1]) to get it! Sorry, that's all Greek to me. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Water repelling lens coat?
A friend of my in the UK asked me this question: Was wondering if you could help me. I've recently bought a Pentax Optio WP. Great little camera, even more intuitive than my old Casio and excellent being able to use the camera canoeing, swimming etc. (Not actually taken pics from underwater yet.) One issue though. Once it has been in the water, or if it is raining, the droplets on the lens spoil a lot of the pics. Do you know of anything which would coat the lens, which would repel the water, or break the surface tension without distorting the pics? I have no idea, is there anyone who can advise? RAIN-X? Or the opposite, anti-condensation stuff? -- Frits Wüthrich
Re: Latest eekBay SMCP Shoot-out!
On 9/13/05, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry to break a PDML Rule, but this has been fun to watch: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7544733537 If anyone *was* watching that auction be advised that I'll GLADLY make it up to you by selling you the same lens at the current price of $305.00! I'll even include free shipping! ;-) Don 24mm is superwide? What is this, like 1988? g Nice lens, but yeah, it's fun to watch a feeding frenzy (after the fact, in my case). cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 9/14/05, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Shel will correct me if I misread. Do ya think? LOL cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
There are TWO K-mount 135mm/2.5 lenses. One has the better coating, and they are of different optical formulas. The less expensive one is a 4 element design with a 52mm filter thread, the better one is a 6 element design with a 58mm thread. You can go to Boz's site and read about both lenses. I've had both, the SMC Pentax with the 58mm thread is clearly superior in every way (imo), but the Takumar version can be a good value and is certainly a useful optic. Shel [Original Message] From: Glen For what it's worth, the lens I was asking about is the K-mount version. I'm not sure what difference that might make, other than the SMC coating. take care, Glen
Re: Re: Another quiz!
On 9/14/05, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, that's all Greek to me. Yes, and Blessed are the Greeks, for they shall inherit the earth... cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: CC warning: 10 megapixel camera
On Sep 14, 2005, at 5:06 AM, Martin Trautmann wrote: RAW *is* RAW sensor data. No interpolation or other processing done. The external programs are called RAW converters and every one of them does the interpolation. Some better than others. Thanks! Since I'm still analogue, I never checked RAW files up to now. So I know very little about RAW: - it's not a standard, but proprietary (Sigma is open, Nikon is protected) - it may include a jpeg preview - it may be compressed (while noise at higher ISO will reduce the compressiability) A RAW format image file is generally an enclosure file that contains the following: - Camera metadata: all the parameter for JPEG conversion that would have been used in-camera for JPEG format image files plus bits like time/date/manufacturer private data/etc. - typically a JPEG thumbnail and JPEG preview rendering at low resolution (maybe more) - sensor data either uncompressed or losslessly compressed, a simple 2D matrix RAW conversion software reads the metadata and takes the processing parameters from it, reads it's own user settings, and performs transformations on sensor data to transform the bayer matrix data into RGB channel space. Those conversions include mapping the pixel intensities for spatial resolution, interpolating the chroma channels, and doing the linear to gamma-corrected rendering conversion. So where does the masking of defective pixels, pixel calibration, white balancing or 'anti-vignetting' occur? Is RAW absolutely uncorrected? All of that happens in the series of transformations performed by the RAW converter, based on the camera metadata and user input it is supplied with. Is there some kind of 'golden raw' which may be used by the processing software in order to compensate known errors? If it's not preprocessed into the raw output, is it included within every raw file? Some of the parameters are constants fixed by the manufacturer for a particular camera and built into the RAW converter at compile/link time (that's why RAW conversion software usually needs to be revised to accommodate new camera models), the rest are supplied in the camera metadata. There are two RAW standards efforts going on to normalize and regularize the representation of RAW camera data: Adobe's Digital Negative specification and the OpenRAW effort. Both of these propose a standardized enclosure format and a way of representing metadata/ processing parameters such that a generic RAW conversion algorithm can be devised independent of camera specific software development. They are both still young efforts. Godfrey
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
I've not a clue as to what you're talking about ... Shel Am I paranoid or perceptive? [Original Message] From: Martin Trautmann Hi Shel, your E-Mail software is broken: X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.0.129.0 (Windows) From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:10:45 -0700 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's neither references nor In-Reply-To, such as In-Reply-To: 091320051955.20592.43272EA200083B4F507022028887449B9C079A9E020A9B9C029F @comcast.net See e.g. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html section 3.6.4 I guess you know what 'SHOULD' in upper case means in RFCs. Is Earthlink aware of this RFC violation? Proper software permits much more efficient methods of threading and navigation through discussions, improving reading, understanding, quoting. Thanks, Martin
Re: Water repelling lens coat?
On 2005-09-14 13:54, Frits Wüthrich wrote: A friend of my in the UK asked me this question: Was wondering if you could help me. I've recently bought a Pentax Optio WP. Great little camera, even more intuitive than my old Casio and excellent being able to use the camera canoeing, swimming etc. (Not actually taken pics from underwater yet.) One issue though. Once it has been in the water, or if it is raining, the droplets on the lens spoil a lot of the pics. Do you know of anything which would coat the lens, which would repel the water, or break the surface tension without distorting the pics? One idea could be some kind of anti lense fog chemical, used e.g. for glasses. There must be certain lense coating - see e.g. http://www.heliopan.de/startver.html (SH-PMC lense coating on heliopan filters; German text) - Martin
Re: 360 degree software
This one time, at band camp, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I prefer the 31mm f/1.8 Limited and the FA 28/2.8AL but I've used the Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 a couple of times. Good stitching software helps a lot. I'm using Arcsoft Panorama Maker 3 at the moment. I have an Pentax FAJ 18-35 I was thinking of using, came with *istD. One problem I have encountered is iPix having a patent on 360 degree technology, I wanted to write up a stitching application, but it seems this may encroach on the iPix patent. 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: Some Posting Suggestions
I've not a clue as to what you're talking about ... don't know what an RFC is, don't know squat about SHOULD, don't know what Earthlink knows Shel Am I paranoid or perceptive? [Original Message] From: Martin Trautmann Hi Shel, your E-Mail software is broken: X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.0.129.0 (Windows) From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:10:45 -0700 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's neither references nor In-Reply-To, such as In-Reply-To: 091320051955.20592.43272EA200083B4F507022028887449B9C079A9E020A9B9C029F @comcast.net See e.g. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html section 3.6.4 I guess you know what 'SHOULD' in upper case means in RFCs. Is Earthlink aware of this RFC violation? Proper software permits much more efficient methods of threading and navigation through discussions, improving reading, understanding, quoting. Thanks, Martin
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-14 05:53, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I've not a clue as to what you're talking about ...
ok... Let's discuss email headers:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's you, I guess.
Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions
That's the thread you replied to.
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:10:45 -0700
That's when you did it.
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
You answered to this list.
This was obvious? Ok, let's increase the level:
X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.0.129.0 (Windows)
This is your software, isn't it? At least your program claims to be this.
I guess it's a web interface, email frontend?
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your email program created this message id. The program has to ensure that
an ID will never be used twice. Thus this id is a unique identifier of an
email.
This message-id, as well as the other headers where extracted from your
reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
His headers included:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:55:14 +
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You get the idea?
Now, there's a standard how email software should behave. This standard is
very useful - otherwise you would not be able to send emails between
different platforms.
Some programs do support this standard very well - and some do just the
minimum in order not to produce major problems.
This standard suggests (or requests), that a 'reply' to another message
SHOULD contain the message-id of the original message.
It should reuse this message id in a certain way, as you do for
From/To/Date/Subject. The standard explains how this should be done. Use
'References' or 'In-Reply-To'.
('SHOULD' in an RFC means: you should have very good reasons and should
carefully think about your reasons if you won't do so.)
Maybe you've never seen your message-id before. No problem. Maybe you've
never seen References or In-Reply-To. That's ok as well: it's your software
that has to ensure that it's done proberly.
Thus your reply should have included Paul's Message-ID. A simple method is
just to take the Message-ID of the original message and repeat it.
Your reply to the message above takes:
To - from the 'Reply-To'
Subject - from the Subject, typically with one prefix 'Re:'
From- from your setup
Date- from the current date
Message-ID - from your program
In-Reply-To - from the original Message-ID
You see: all those email fields are filled automatically. You should not
have to edit anything here by hand. ok?
As soon as the original Message-ID is available, a good email software can
detect that your message is an answer to the former message. It can build
the thread as a message tree, where your answer is close to the former
message. Example:
flags date time namesize subject
r 09-13 21:45 Shel Belinkoff (3.1K) Some Posting Suggestions
09-13 21:55 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (1.1K)
r 09-13 22:10 Shel Belinkoff (3.8K)
09-13 23:41 Graywolf(4.1K)
F 09-14 12:47 To Pentax Discu (2.6K)
09-14 01:13 Jack Davis (3.8K)
09-13 22:13 Godfrey DiGiorg (3.7K)
09-13 22:24 Shel Belinkoff (3.6K) *
09-13 22:45 Godfrey DiGiorg (1.9K)
09-13 22:56 Christian (2.3K)
So finally: this is the reason why you do not have to include the full
quote. The original article is referenced within your message itself!
You suggested proper handling of URLs. A Message-ID is some kind of URL: You
don't have to quote the full text, but take the URL only.
But unfortunately your email software is broken...
It violates the email standard - I gave the URL before:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html section 3.6.4
Feel free to ask again if this reply was insufficient.
I simplified a little bit - the expert will know the difference, while I'd
welcome corrections where I might have been completely wrong.
Now you could ask earthlink whether they know about their software bug
- or use a better email software which works better.
I'm no Windows expert - but I guess Mozilla works reasonably well both
for web (less security problems than Internet Explorer) and
for email (supports threading and behaves very well).
Maybe others will recommend better solutions.
Have fun,
Martin
Re: Latest eekBay SMCP Shoot-out!
frank theriault wrote: 24mm is superwide? What is this, like 1988? g Nice lens, but yeah, it's fun to watch a feeding frenzy (after the fact, in my case). cheers, frank Sure, a 24mm is superwide... on a 67. -Adam
Re: CC warning: 10 megapixel camera
On 2005-09-14 05:52, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: A RAW format image file is generally an enclosure file that contains the following: - Camera metadata: all the parameter for JPEG conversion that would have been used in-camera for JPEG format image files plus bits like time/date/manufacturer private data/etc. such as the camera's serial number I guess this could include - sensor faults (defective, calibration) - image info (lense model, aperture, time, focal length, distance) I guess it should be a simple task to build a poor lense with strong vignetting or strong distortions - and compensate most of these flaws by software later on? This would require some kind of reasonable characterisation how to compensate those flaws. I guess part of it is the reasons for proprietary raw formats. http://openraw.org/faq/?id=14 does not show that many infos about What is metadata and what is it good for? I don't know how much of this error correcting options are used now and will be used in the future. But I wonder how big this portion of raw info is, the more detailed it becomes. - typically a JPEG thumbnail and JPEG preview rendering at low resolution (maybe more) - sensor data either uncompressed or losslessly compressed, a simple 2D matrix Is there some kind of 'golden raw' which may be used by the processing software in order to compensate known errors? If it's not preprocessed into the raw output, is it included within every raw file? Some of the parameters are constants fixed by the manufacturer for a particular camera and built into the RAW converter at compile/link time (that's why RAW conversion software usually needs to be revised to accommodate new camera models), the rest are supplied in the camera metadata. There are two RAW standards efforts going on to normalize and regularize the representation of RAW camera data: Adobe's Digital Negative specification and the OpenRAW effort. Both of these propose a standardized enclosure format and a way of representing metadata/ processing parameters such that a generic RAW conversion algorithm can be devised independent of camera specific software development. They are both still young efforts. I wonder whether they are sufficient for all the manufacturer's needs. The current abuse of EXIF maker notes is a sign that either the standard is not suited very well, or manufacturers don't mind the standards. - Martin
Re: Latest eekBay SMCP Shoot-out!
On 9/14/05, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, a 24mm is superwide... on a 67. -Adam LOL -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
The software works fine for me - I get the email, I can read it, it can
thread nicely on my system, Earthlink has good built in spam and virus
protection. Most of the techno stuff you're talking about is over my head.
Have no idea, for example, what a web interface email front end is.
I'm sure you mean well to point all this out, but I've no idea what it has
to do with the subject and the thread. My ignorance, probably.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Date: 9/14/2005 6:36:08 AM
Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-14 05:53, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I've not a clue as to what you're talking about ...
ok... Let's discuss email headers:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's you, I guess.
Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions
That's the thread you replied to.
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:10:45 -0700
That's when you did it.
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
You answered to this list.
This was obvious? Ok, let's increase the level:
X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.0.129.0 (Windows)
This is your software, isn't it? At least your program claims to be this.
I guess it's a web interface, email frontend?
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your email program created this message id. The program has to ensure that
an ID will never be used twice. Thus this id is a unique identifier of an
email.
This message-id, as well as the other headers where extracted from your
reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
His headers included:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:55:14 +
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Message-Id:
091320051955.20592.43272EA200083B4F507022028887449B9C079A9E020A9B9C029F
@comcast.net
You get the idea?
Now, there's a standard how email software should behave. This standard is
very useful - otherwise you would not be able to send emails between
different platforms.
Some programs do support this standard very well - and some do just the
minimum in order not to produce major problems.
This standard suggests (or requests), that a 'reply' to another message
SHOULD contain the message-id of the original message.
It should reuse this message id in a certain way, as you do for
From/To/Date/Subject. The standard explains how this should be done. Use
'References' or 'In-Reply-To'.
('SHOULD' in an RFC means: you should have very good reasons and should
carefully think about your reasons if you won't do so.)
Maybe you've never seen your message-id before. No problem. Maybe you've
never seen References or In-Reply-To. That's ok as well: it's your
software
that has to ensure that it's done proberly.
Thus your reply should have included Paul's Message-ID. A simple method
is
just to take the Message-ID of the original message and repeat it.
Your reply to the message above takes:
To - from the 'Reply-To'
Subject - from the Subject, typically with one prefix 'Re:'
From- from your setup
Date- from the current date
Message-ID - from your program
In-Reply-To - from the original Message-ID
You see: all those email fields are filled automatically. You should not
have to edit anything here by hand. ok?
As soon as the original Message-ID is available, a good email software can
detect that your message is an answer to the former message. It can build
the thread as a message tree, where your answer is close to the former
message. Example:
flags date time namesize subject
r 09-13 21:45 Shel Belinkoff (3.1K) Some Posting Suggestions
09-13 21:55 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (1.1K)
r 09-13 22:10 Shel Belinkoff (3.8K)
09-13 23:41 Graywolf(4.1K)
F 09-14 12:47 To Pentax Discu (2.6K)
09-14 01:13 Jack Davis (3.8K)
09-13 22:13 Godfrey DiGiorg (3.7K)
09-13 22:24 Shel Belinkoff (3.6K) *
09-13 22:45 Godfrey DiGiorg (1.9K)
09-13 22:56 Christian (2.3K)
So finally: this is the reason why you do not have to include the full
quote. The original article is referenced within your message itself!
You suggested proper handling of URLs. A Message-ID is some kind of URL:
You
don't have to quote the full text, but take the URL only.
But unfortunately your email software is broken...
It violates the email standard - I gave the URL before:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html section 3.6.4
Feel free to ask again if this reply was insufficient.
I simplified a little bit - the expert will know the difference, while
I'd
welcome corrections where I might have been completely wrong.
Now you could ask earthlink whether they know about their software bug
- or use a better email software which works better.
I'm no
Re: Another quiz!
On 14/9/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: Yes, and Blessed are the Greeks, for they shall inherit the earth... No, no, the cheesemakers. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 14/9/05, danilo, discombobulated, unleashed: What you really need is a gmail account for the pdml... - It automatically hides quoted text - It shows you the complete thread so you can easily find the previous posted url - It gives you 2.5 Gb of storage so you'll never delete any threads again! I've hundreds of invites to give away, anyone needs it? Hi Danilo, hey that's absolutely amazing and astounding! And you have hundreds to give away? Fantastic! If you think you could spare just one of those obviously unmissable offers, I would really appreciate it if you didn't pass it onto me, thanks. ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy?? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Starting to play with RAW
Hey Shel, I've been observing through this forum, that it seems the vast majority of DSLR shooters are now using raw, there must be some real potential here. I tried to open some files in PSE3.0 last night, and I got and incorrect file type error, so I think I have something incorrectly configured in PSE3. I only had about 1/2 hour or so to play, I hope to get that sorted out in the next day or so. Anyhoo, based on comments like this, I'm really looking forward to trying it out. dk On 9/13/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Dave, I started playing around with RAW a little while after loading PS CS. Paul Stenquist and Dave Books were kind enough to send some Pentax and Nikon RAW files to me, and a friend provided some Canon files. That allowed me to play around in RAW just to get a feel for how the converter worked and what could be done with the photos. It was an eye opening experience, even though their exposures were good and not much work needed to be done with the images. Later I used Bruce's D, and purposely (and sometimes not so purposely LOL) made a number of bad exposures with the intent of seeing if they could be saved in RAW. It was really awake-up call - there was so much flexibility in what could be done with the photos. I cannot imagine shooting anything but RAW except in specific circumstances. Glad to hear that you'll at least try it. Shel [Original Message] From: Dave Kennedy I'm not certain how much I'll use RAW yet either (until I try it out anyway).
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Just to affirm what danilo said. I've been lurking off and on the PDML for a good number of years now, and gmail is without a doubt the best tool I've used for it. Since I started PDML on gmail a year or so ago, I have not had to delete anything, and it is extremely easy to read. in other words: Me too dk On 9/14/05, danilo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What you really need is a gmail account for the pdml... - It automatically hides quoted text - It shows you the complete thread so you can easily find the previous posted url - It gives you 2.5 Gb of storage so you'll never delete any threads again! I've hundreds of invites to give away, anyone needs it? danilo.
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-14 06:53, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The software works fine for me - I get the email, I can read it, it can thread nicely on my system, Earthlink has good built in spam and virus protection. You offered suggestions - I offered my opinion. Most of the techno stuff you're talking about is over my head. Have no idea, for example, what a web interface email front end is. So let's keep it simple: I'm sure you mean well to point all this out, but I've no idea what it has to do with the subject and the thread. My ignorance, probably. Using proper software would improve readability, usability etc. Your topic was: use Top Posting. My Answer is:use reasonable quoting styles. Don't use fullquotes. Do you have any reason against removing fullquotes? Thanks, Martin
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
T M I ! Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sep 14, 2005 9:34 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Some Posting Suggestions On 2005-09-14 05:53, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've not a clue as to what you're talking about ... ok... Let's discuss email headers: snip PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-14 15:02, Cotty wrote: On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy?? to discombobulate to unleash ... had to look them up in my dictionary. Thanks for improving my English ;-) Who's me? A lurker who lurks since he's overwhelmed by the mass of postings, where the helpful info is hidden very well in lots of garbage (such as fullquotes).
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-14 10:13, Kenneth Waller wrote: T M I ! SED? Yepp - that's my problem. Sometimes the list looks like an IRC. TM GIGO for a MUG
Re: Ashes
Eternity by example: You're on the checkout line at a supermarket. There are 100 people in front of you at the only checkout counter that is open. They are all at least 80 years old, have four carts full of groceries, and are clutching hundreds of discount coupons apiece. It's the first day on the job for the checkout girl, and she doesn't speak any English. Add 15 minutes to that, and you've got 'eternity. - Emo Phillips Subtract 15 minutes from that and you've got Cricket? Doug Brewer wrote: Wasn't it G.B. Shaw who said that Cricket was invented to show the British people the meaning of eternity? David Mann wrote: On Sep 14, 2005, at 12:51 AM, frank theriault wrote: One day cricket? Each team bats for 50 overs, or until the opposing team gets them all out. The match lasts for one day instead of the usual five, and the teams wear colourful uniforms. I think the most similar American pastime would be fishing. Some people find it exciting but most just enjoy getting drunk and sunburnt. - Dave -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
FWIW, I have never had any problem with the format or legibility of your emails, Shel. As for the content . . .
Re: Water repelling lens coat?
I don't think you'd want to put either Rain-X or a silicon compound on a photographic lens, there might be a reaction with the coating. Frits Wüthrich wrote: A friend of my in the UK asked me this question: Was wondering if you could help me. I've recently bought a Pentax Optio WP. Great little camera, even more intuitive than my old Casio and excellent being able to use the camera canoeing, swimming etc. (Not actually taken pics from underwater yet.) One issue though. Once it has been in the water, or if it is raining, the droplets on the lens spoil a lot of the pics. Do you know of anything which would coat the lens, which would repel the water, or break the surface tension without distorting the pics? I have no idea, is there anyone who can advise? RAIN-X? Or the opposite, anti-condensation stuff? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
None - I do it frequently. Shel [Original Message] From: Martin Trautmann Do you have any reason against removing fullquotes?
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy?? I don't know but his name sounds a little fishy. Tom Reese
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
Well, if the ISO setting on the back doesn't have any effect on the adjustments in the flash unit (if it's just a visual memory indication, as suggested by you) the flash meter will not know when to cut off the flash duration, will it? Regards Jens Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. september 2005 12:18 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings? On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: I wonder how the flash actually DOES work, if the light output is indifferent to the ASA setting? The flash quenches when its sensor is happy. If your lens aperture and distance were correct (indicated by the slider and thus affected by the ISO setting), you are OK, if not, you are not OK :-) Or so I think. From Boj: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html Automatic Flash --- An automatic flash is one that can limit the flash duration and therefore the amount of light that it outputs. The control function is performed by electronics contained inside the flash and guided by a light-sensitive sensor located on the front of the flash. When the sensor detects that enough light has returned back to the flash, the control electronics terminate the flash discharge. In the simplest flashes, the flash capacitor is shorted (so the extra charge is lost), but in more advanced ones (those labeled thyristor), the charge is preserved for the next flash discharge. An automatic flash achieves proper exposure not only when GN = d * F, but also when GN d * F. Automatic flash operation achieves correct exposures not only in straight-on applications, but also when the flash head is tilted, swiveled or covered with various gels and reflectors. To perform its calculations, the flash assumes that some F (usually f/4 or f/5.6) is selected on the lens. Failure to match F results in under- or over-exposure. Program Flash - Pentax did not make any purely automatic flashes. Instead, they added another feature, called program flash, and gave the flashes in this category the SA designation. Program flashes solve the problem of the photographer forgetting to set the correct F before every flash exposure. When used in program exposure mode, the flash and the body work together to set F. This capability requires an extra contact, mode, so the flash can tell the body what brightness it will produce. Knowing the film speed, the body calculates and sets F. Some SA flashes have the extra functionality of signaling when proper exposure was achieved. This is done either by lighting up a lamp on the back of the flash or communicating with the body (via the ready contact) and letting it make the flash symbol in the view-finder blink. For the reasons mentioned earlier, I harly ever use a flash in bright daylight. I know PJ's do it all the time. I never understood why. Contrast control. You get even illumination and remove the shadows under the eyes. I believe light looks better comming from above. I agree, it is softer and more diffused, but requires some direct flash as well to eliminate the shadows. Thus the common white card (or diffuser) trick. Kostas
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
In a message dated 9/13/2005 2:42:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think that and proper attributation are a matter of common sense. In other words putting it into the FAQ won't help much. But if everyone wants it there, I will be glad to update it. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Shel Belinkoff wrote: Yes, I saw your comment about that earlier (yesterday?) and forgot to add that to the list. Since there are times when the original post neither makes it to the list nor into the archives, some people may only have a chance to see the URL in one of the replies to the original message. Is this worthy of putting into the Graywolf FAQ? Shel Yes. I must say most people are pretty good about quoting the original url. But those are people that have been on the list for a while and realize it's a problem. It would be good to put it in for newbies. Mention the reason, that sometimes people do not see the original post and only see the subsequent replies, so they need to see the url in the replies. And that has been a list etiquette that has evolved over time to deal with that. Also, as a reminder too, as sometimes people forget. Other than that, sorry, I am an unrepentant bottom poster. :-) Marnie aka Doe However, when I am just LOLing or something I snip the original post a lot. Yous takes whats yous get. :-)
SIGMA EF500DG SUPERFLASH TTL on sale at Henrys.
N, C and M** versions. Not the Pentax?? What's with that? Ok, it's only $30cdn off, (down to $369) but it's the principle of the thing. Plus it would be nice to replace my Vivitar 840 flash which is currently held together with tape. I sent off an email to them expressing my disappointment. dk
Re: OT: Another quiz!
I'm Artemis. I prefer running through the forest to just about anything else (apparently) Wendy On 9/13/05, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.paleothea.com/quizzes.html Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada
Re: Re: Water repelling lens coat?
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed PM 02:30:41 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Water repelling lens coat? I don't think you'd want to put either Rain-X or a silicon compound on a photographic lens, there might be a reaction with the coating. Not with SMC, that you can famously stub cigarettes out on. Assuming you actually mean silicone products. Silicon/silica products would undoubtedly wipe out the glass, never mind the coating. I was listening to a radio programme yesterday where a gent was expounding the virtues of his selfcleaning and water dispersing glsss. I was driving so not paying complete attention but I did (after checking the date) note that he thought the price increase of 15% was too much. Maybe for industrial use but I would pay that for household glass. Something like that would be good for waterproof cameras. It stopped water beading by some combination of physics, chemistry and satanism. I always carry a Pentax cloth with me for wiping the zoom90wr lens cover when I'm using it. Not perfect but it works for me. Any detergent would help the process if applied in small amounts. mike Frits Wüthrich wrote: A friend of my in the UK asked me this question: Was wondering if you could help me. I've recently bought a Pentax Optio WP. Great little camera, even more intuitive than my old Casio and excellent being able to use the camera canoeing, swimming etc. (Not actually taken pics from underwater yet.) One issue though. Once it has been in the water, or if it is raining, the droplets on the lens spoil a lot of the pics. Do you know of anything which would coat the lens, which would repel the water, or break the surface tension without distorting the pics? I have no idea, is there anyone who can advise? RAIN-X? Or the opposite, anti-condensation stuff? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: Well, if the ISO setting on the back doesn't have any effect on the adjustments in the flash unit (if it's just a visual memory indication, as suggested by you) the flash meter will not know when to cut off the flash duration, will it? It will always cut when its sensor thinks that enough light has reached *it*. That's not always the same as how much light has reached the film/sensor, which is affected by the aperture (which is in turn affected by the ISO setting). It is not just a visual memory indication, (and I never suggested that); as you change the ISO setting on the flash, the aperture *indicators* on it, change too, so you adjust the aperture accordingly. Kostas
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he? Cotty wrote: On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy?? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed PM 02:40:11 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings? Well, if the ISO setting on the back doesn't have any effect on the adjustments in the flash unit (if it's just a visual memory indication, as suggested by you) the flash meter will not know when to cut off the flash duration, will it? Regards Jens Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt Kostas is absolutely right. It is just a calculator. The flash cuts off light by measuring the amount reflected. There are two values, switchable but fixed. You use the calculator to estimate the aperture to use - smaller apertures for nearer objects, larger for further away. All assuming that you are using the maximum synchronisation speed. Later flashes calculate and tell the camera what aperture to use. At the time of the AF280T, there were no cameras that could automatically select aperture. mike -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. september 2005 12:18 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings? On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: I wonder how the flash actually DOES work, if the light output is indifferent to the ASA setting? The flash quenches when its sensor is happy. If your lens aperture and distance were correct (indicated by the slider and thus affected by the ISO setting), you are OK, if not, you are not OK :-) Or so I think. From Boj: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
In a message dated 9/14/2005 7:53:14 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he? Cotty wrote: On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy?? === As versus a camera geek? Hehehehehe. Sorry, couldn't resist. Marnie aka Doe
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
A little harsh, don't you think? P. J. Alling wrote: Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he?
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
C'mon Peter, Martin means well and he was trying to help me understand a few things. No more annoying than some of the other techno-geeks here ... Shel [Original Message] From: P. J. Alling Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he? Cotty wrote: On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy??
Re: Travel (and shopping?) to Vienna
On 2005-09-14 11:33, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: So: do you know any reliable stores in those cities? (I think Vienna is the best bet). Warranty is an important issue, I don't think I'll be able to travel often to Austria - and, even if we (Romanians) have a Pentax authorized service, they won't accept the international warranty. One question is the availability of the DS - or its successor, the DS2. Only few shops in Austria stock Pentax :-( you could check www.geizhals.at (IMHO the best price comparison for Austria and Germany). e.g. http://www.geizhals.at/?a=118975t=abholungv=l http://www.geizhals.at/?a=118977t=abholungv=l (on stock in shop): none The tax in Austria is higher than in Germany - one of the reasons why German prices are lower. See http://www.geizhals.at/?fs=Pentax+ist+dsx=0y=0in= for price comparisions (e.g. from 644 EUR on for body, best price in Austria: 723.10 EUR). European warranty is two years, European return policy from internet orders is two weeks. Be aware of some dealers with overpriced delivery costs - or maybe grey market. Good luck, Martin
Re: Starting to play with RAW
Great. There's nothing to lose and much to gain. Let me know if I can help - although there are others who may be better qualified in that regard. Shel [Original Message] From: Dave Kennedy I've been observing through this forum, that it seems the vast majority of DSLR shooters are now using raw, there must be some real potential here. I tried to open some files in PSE3.0 last night, and I got and incorrect file type error, so I think I have something incorrectly configured in PSE3. I only had about 1/2 hour or so to play, I hope to get that sorted out in the next day or so.
Re: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
The meter in the flash doesn't, with TTL flash the camera uses it's ISO information to decided when to quench the flash, and the flash, when using the flashes internal meter you set the proper aperture for the ISO and the flash just uses a formula. Jens Bladt wrote: Well, if the ISO setting on the back doesn't have any effect on the adjustments in the flash unit (if it's just a visual memory indication, as suggested by you) the flash meter will not know when to cut off the flash duration, will it? Regards Jens Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. september 2005 12:18 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings? On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: I wonder how the flash actually DOES work, if the light output is indifferent to the ASA setting? The flash quenches when its sensor is happy. If your lens aperture and distance were correct (indicated by the slider and thus affected by the ISO setting), you are OK, if not, you are not OK :-) Or so I think. From Boj: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html Automatic Flash --- An automatic flash is one that can limit the flash duration and therefore the amount of light that it outputs. The control function is performed by electronics contained inside the flash and guided by a light-sensitive sensor located on the front of the flash. When the sensor detects that enough light has returned back to the flash, the control electronics terminate the flash discharge. In the simplest flashes, the flash capacitor is shorted (so the extra charge is lost), but in more advanced ones (those labeled thyristor), the charge is preserved for the next flash discharge. An automatic flash achieves proper exposure not only when GN = d * F, but also when GN d * F. Automatic flash operation achieves correct exposures not only in straight-on applications, but also when the flash head is tilted, swiveled or covered with various gels and reflectors. To perform its calculations, the flash assumes that some F (usually f/4 or f/5.6) is selected on the lens. Failure to match F results in under- or over-exposure. Program Flash - Pentax did not make any purely automatic flashes. Instead, they added another feature, called program flash, and gave the flashes in this category the SA designation. Program flashes solve the problem of the photographer forgetting to set the correct F before every flash exposure. When used in program exposure mode, the flash and the body work together to set F. This capability requires an extra contact, mode, so the flash can tell the body what brightness it will produce. Knowing the film speed, the body calculates and sets F. Some SA flashes have the extra functionality of signaling when proper exposure was achieved. This is done either by lighting up a lamp on the back of the flash or communicating with the body (via the ready contact) and letting it make the flash symbol in the view-finder blink. For the reasons mentioned earlier, I harly ever use a flash in bright daylight. I know PJ's do it all the time. I never understood why. Contrast control. You get even illumination and remove the shadows under the eyes. I believe light looks better comming from above. I agree, it is softer and more diffused, but requires some direct flash as well to eliminate the shadows. Thus the common white card (or diffuser) trick. Kostas -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Film for my digital camera
Hey Folks, I've ordered an *ist-DS from Buydig, and will see if my experiences are easier than Shel's. It turns out that I really need to hit the ground running with this digital camera (I've got a very limited time to get a bunch of images together for a book I'm working on), so I apologize for this newbie-ola question...but this listserve is where I turn to when I have pentaxian questions... Are all SD cards more or less equal, given storage volume? (I see BH has some 1Gig Sandisks from $88, which looks ok.) I have downloaded the pdf manual on the DS, and estimate 1Gig would hold about 86 RAW images. If this disk fills up in the field, can I slip in a new one, just like changing film? Thanks all! Barry A. Rice, Ph.D. Invasive Species Specialist Invasive Species Initiative The Nature Conservancy V: 530-754-8891 http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu
Re: Henry's and USPS (Hello Wendy! :-)
Hello Kostas :-) --- Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to Dave Brooks' enablement, I confirmed Henry's shipping policy. The point I recited from memory reads: .. We ship ONLY by Canada Post/USPS Priority Mail. If that is unacceptable, please do not bid. They do clarify it at checkout though We ship via Canada Post's ExpressPost service. Once the shipment crosses into the US, it is handled by the United States Postal Service as Global Priority Mail. So they don't use USPS Directly from Canada which is what it looks like they're saying on the actual auction page. Wendy Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada
Re: SIGMA EF500DG SUPERFLASH TTL on sale at Henrys.
On Sep 14, 2005, at 9:44, Dave Kennedy wrote: N, C and M** versions. Not the Pentax?? What's with that? Ok, it's only $30cdn off, (down to $369) but it's the principle of the thing. Plus it would be nice to replace my Vivitar 840 flash which is currently held together with tape. Ay, caramba! That's about $310 US. The darned thing only costs (did I say only) $240 in the US. How do they justify it being so gosh- darned expensive up in the Great White North? -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org
Re: Water repelling lens coat?
Well yes I meant silicone. I know you can supposedly use an SMC lens as an ashtray, but some chemicals may be displaced by others, there are after all, (and damn I wish I remembered more chemistry), plastics which will happily reside in one solvent and be completely dissolved by others. Rain-x will combine with the smallest amount of oil on your windshield to produce an un-godly mess. Rain-x will combine with anti fogging coatings as well, to the detriment of visibility. mike wilson wrote: From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed PM 02:30:41 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Water repelling lens coat? I don't think you'd want to put either Rain-X or a silicon compound on a photographic lens, there might be a reaction with the coating. Not with SMC, that you can famously stub cigarettes out on. Assuming you actually mean silicone products. Silicon/silica products would undoubtedly wipe out the glass, never mind the coating. I was listening to a radio programme yesterday where a gent was expounding the virtues of his selfcleaning and water dispersing glsss. I was driving so not paying complete attention but I did (after checking the date) note that he thought the price increase of 15% was too much. Maybe for industrial use but I would pay that for household glass. Something like that would be good for waterproof cameras. It stopped water beading by some combination of physics, chemistry and satanism. I always carry a Pentax cloth with me for wiping the zoom90wr lens cover when I'm using it. Not perfect but it works for me. Any detergent would help the process if applied in small amounts. mike Frits Wüthrich wrote: A friend of my in the UK asked me this question: Was wondering if you could help me. I've recently bought a Pentax Optio WP. Great little camera, even more intuitive than my old Casio and excellent being able to use the camera canoeing, swimming etc. (Not actually taken pics from underwater yet.) One issue though. Once it has been in the water, or if it is raining, the droplets on the lens spoil a lot of the pics. Do you know of anything which would coat the lens, which would repel the water, or break the surface tension without distorting the pics? I have no idea, is there anyone who can advise? RAIN-X? Or the opposite, anti-condensation stuff? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: SIGMA EF500DG SUPERFLASH TTL on sale at Henrys.
Charles Robinson wrote: On Sep 14, 2005, at 9:44, Dave Kennedy wrote: N, C and M** versions. Not the Pentax?? What's with that? Ok, it's only $30cdn off, (down to $369) but it's the principle of the thing. Plus it would be nice to replace my Vivitar 840 flash which is currently held together with tape. Ay, caramba! That's about $310 US. The darned thing only costs (did I say only) $240 in the US. How do they justify it being so gosh- darned expensive up in the Great White North? -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org There's always a premium for buying in Canada. Pretty much everything costs more than the exchange rate suggests. -Adam
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Hi all, sorry Cotty, didn't understand well your email, I sent an invitation to you too, if you didn't mean this, please forgive me... for all the others I *had* one hundred (sorry it was also wrong) to give away, which, meantime, became 95 or so... I don't mind to give them all away, (I may just leave the last one for me and have... another 100 invitation, lol ) but please, send me a private e-mail as I may miss your request otherwise... Oh, btw, now all of you I've already inviteted should also have some invitation too. Gmail is always growing... danilo
Re: Starting to play with RAW
I've been observing through this forum, that it seems the vast majority of DSLR shooters are now using raw, there must be some real potential here. I tried to open some files in PSE3.0 last night, and I got and incorrect file type error, so I think I have something incorrectly configured in PSE3. I only had about 1/2 hour or so to play, I hope to get that sorted out in the next day or so. Anyhoo, based on comments like this, I'm really looking forward to trying it out. I purchased PSE 3.0 a couple of months ago (getting ready for my upcoming DS purchase), and, since I now have been using the DS for a couple of weeks (using the Pentax software for RAW files), I just last night finally installed PSE 3.0. However, after installing it, it would not recognize the DS's RAW files (although it did fine with some JPG's that were also on the DS). So, I downloaded and installed both the Adobe DNG Converter and Camera Raw 3.1 update and the Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0.1 update (although I don't think the latter has anything to do with RAW files) from http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=40platform=Windows , and that fixed the problem - my PSE 3.0(1) now handles my DS's RAW files just fine. (By the way, it does seem as if the Camera Raw 3.1 update, without the DNG converter app, has the exact same RAW file plug-in as the Adobe DNG Converter and Camera Raw 3.1 update.) (Also, by the way, DO read the installation instructions on each individual download page - the two RAW update files do not come with self-installers - you have to copy them manually to the correct directory yourself.) So, the bottom line, from my experience, is that you should download and install the Camera Raw 3.1 update to see if that takes care of the problem. Good luck. Fred
Re: Film for my digital camera
Barry Rice wrote: Hey Folks, I've ordered an *ist-DS from Buydig, and will see if my experiences are easier than Shel's. It turns out that I really need to hit the ground running with this digital camera (I've got a very limited time to get a bunch of images together for a book I'm working on), so I apologize for this newbie-ola question...but this listserve is where I turn to when I have pentaxian questions... Are all SD cards more or less equal, given storage volume? (I see BH has some 1Gig Sandisks from $88, which looks ok.) I have downloaded the pdf manual on the DS, and estimate 1Gig would hold about 86 RAW images. If this disk fills up in the field, can I slip in a new one, just like changing film? Thanks all! Barry A. Rice, Ph.D. Invasive Species Specialist Invasive Species Initiative The Nature Conservancy V: 530-754-8891 http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu SD cards were not created equal. You'll want to buy the higher-end cards from a good manufacturer to get the best reliability and write performance. Lexar and SanDisk are the two standards, but ATP and Transcend also make excellent cards. -Adam
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
Fred wrote: I've heard this lens has some sort of problem. How bad is it? What sort of problem. Nope - Fred did not write that. It's not SMC. It's not as good as the A* 135/1.8 or the K 135/2.5. But, if you don't have to pay too much for it, it can be a decent-enuf 135 (200mm effective FL on the D/DS/DL). (I think it's really an f/2.8 lens, but I won't quibble too much here...) Yes, ~that~ was what Fred wrote. Fred
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
--- Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A little harsh, don't you think? P. J. Alling wrote: Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he? Me too. Jack __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
People who endlessly hector others with details they don't want or need to know are annoying. Shel is happy with his e-mail client, it does what he needs. You can top or bottom post, it's up to you. It's a free Internet, (well we all pay for it but you know what I mean). Those of us who understand the technical issues don't need reminding. Those who are simply users don't care. This is a photography list, (with a lot of personality thrown in). I don't think that we need some self appointed traffic cop lecturing us on how to drive, with a side on how the carburetor works thrown in. Some people don't care how it works and it's hard to cause a multi car pile up on the information super highway without using malice. I can't stop our new friend from lecturing but I can let him know he should tone it down. He doesn't have to stop, after all it's a free Internet. Doug Brewer wrote: A little harsh, don't you think? P. J. Alling wrote: Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
Shel, I didn't tell him to stop. Just commented on his style. Shel Belinkoff wrote: C'mon Peter, Martin means well and he was trying to help me understand a few things. No more annoying than some of the other techno-geeks here ... Shel [Original Message] From: P. J. Alling Techno-geek. Annoying isn't he? Cotty wrote: On 14/9/05, Martin Trautmann, discombobulated, unleashed: ok... Let's discuss email headers: Who is this guy?? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
RE: Film for my digital camera
Hi Barry, I hope you don't have any of the hassles I had. My new DS is scheduled for delivery later today BIG smile, fingers crossed SD cards are more or less equal. The biggest difference is the speed in most cases. The DS can take advantage of faster than standard cards up to, I believe, a 45X speed - maybe 60X. That will allow somewhat faster shooting, which can be helpful in some situations. The extra speed (up to 145X) comes about when transferring the images to the computer. Probably a good compromise between cost/efficiamcy is a 60X or 80X card, depending on your patience and how much shooting you do. The biggest factor is using USB 2.0 as opposed to USB 1.1 Yes, when the card is full just remove it and slip in another card. Just like changing film, although perhaps easier ;-)) If you're going to carry a few cards, it might be a good idea, although by no means necessary, to get a little case or pouch for carrying the cards safely. Here's one choice: http://tinyurl.com/bftno http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=; sku=388975is=REGaddedTroughType=categoryNavigation Good luck with your purchase. let us know how things work out. Shel [Original Message] From: Barry Rice I've ordered an *ist-DS from Buydig, and will see if my experiences are easier than Shel's. Are all SD cards more or less equal, given storage volume? If this disk fills up in the field, can I slip in a new one, just like changing film?
Re: Film for my digital camera
Some cards are faster than others. This has some meaning to the Ds. I use a D and haven't noticed an appreciable difference between my fast card and slow one, but the Ds can to a point, (I don't remember how fast however). Yes you can change cards in the field, just be careful, I got to play with a DL the other day and was able to rocket the card across the room, (quite a change from the D and quite embarrassing as well). Barry Rice wrote: Hey Folks, I've ordered an *ist-DS from Buydig, and will see if my experiences are easier than Shel's. It turns out that I really need to hit the ground running with this digital camera (I've got a very limited time to get a bunch of images together for a book I'm working on), so I apologize for this newbie-ola question...but this listserve is where I turn to when I have pentaxian questions... Are all SD cards more or less equal, given storage volume? (I see BH has some 1Gig Sandisks from $88, which looks ok.) I have downloaded the pdf manual on the DS, and estimate 1Gig would hold about 86 RAW images. If this disk fills up in the field, can I slip in a new one, just like changing film? Thanks all! Barry A. Rice, Ph.D. Invasive Species Specialist Invasive Species Initiative The Nature Conservancy V: 530-754-8891 http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
It's not SMC. It's not as good as the A* 135/1.8 or the K 135/2.5. But, if you don't have to pay too much for it, it can be a decent-enuf 135 (200mm effective FL on the D/DS/DL). (I think it's really an f/2.8 lens, but I won't quibble too much here...) Fred Excuse me? The lens says Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. what do you mean It's not SMC? You, of all people, ought to know that it *IS* SMC. Oops - I made the assumption that it was the K-mount Takumar [Bayonet] 135/2.5 that was being referred to. Yes, the screwmount Super-Multi-Coated Takumar is indeed SMC, and it also indeed is a dynamite lens (I believe optically the same as the SMC K 135/2.5, one of my personal favorite lenses, and one of only two of my pre-A lenses - the other being the K 200/2.5 - that I'll keep for use on my DS). In my defense, I was misled by two things: 1. The subject line of How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR? implies that the lens discussed is not a strong performer (e.g., the K-mount Takumar [Bayonet] 135/2.5). I never would have thought that that subject line would have been referring to the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135/2.5. 2. Pentax NEVER should have stooped to applying the once revered Takumar name to many of its budget non-SMC K-mount lenses, which adds an unfortunate ambiguity to the significance of the Takumar name. (shame on you, Pentax.) Fred
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
For what it's worth, the lens I was asking about is the K-mount version. I'm not sure what difference that might make, other than the SMC coating. I think different formula as well, check Boj's site (and compare with the SMC Pentax 135/2.5). The Takumar [Bayonet] 135/2.5 is a ~totally~ different lens from the SMC K 135/2.5 (and its screwmount predecessors). Fred
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
f2.5 135mm SMC K-mount is the next best thing to the A*135/f1.8. A very nice lens when you can find it, and not too expensive. I've often referred to the SMC K 135/2.5 as the poor man's A* 135/1.8. Fred
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On 2005-09-14 11:27, P. J. Alling wrote: People who endlessly hector others with details they don't want or need to know are annoying. Shel is happy with his e-mail client, it does what he needs. You can top or bottom post, it's up to you. Sorry. It's not me who started this thread. I understand that any helpful attempt is not what you want. Never change a running system. We should change over to cat's pictures - a topic I know far less above. ;-) Martin
RE: Film for my digital camera
As a footnote to what Shel said, I can add that firewire card readers are very fast. I paid about $50 US for mine, and it will download a 1 gig 80X card in less than two minutes. Paul Hi Barry, I hope you don't have any of the hassles I had. My new DS is scheduled for delivery later today BIG smile, fingers crossed SD cards are more or less equal. The biggest difference is the speed in most cases. The DS can take advantage of faster than standard cards up to, I believe, a 45X speed - maybe 60X. That will allow somewhat faster shooting, which can be helpful in some situations. The extra speed (up to 145X) comes about when transferring the images to the computer. Probably a good compromise between cost/efficiamcy is a 60X or 80X card, depending on your patience and how much shooting you do. The biggest factor is using USB 2.0 as opposed to USB 1.1 Yes, when the card is full just remove it and slip in another card. Just like changing film, although perhaps easier ;-)) If you're going to carry a few cards, it might be a good idea, although by no means necessary, to get a little case or pouch for carrying the cards safely. Here's one choice: http://tinyurl.com/bftno http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=; sku=388975is=REGaddedTroughType=categoryNavigation Good luck with your purchase. let us know how things work out. Shel [Original Message] From: Barry Rice I've ordered an *ist-DS from Buydig, and will see if my experiences are easier than Shel's. Are all SD cards more or less equal, given storage volume? If this disk fills up in the field, can I slip in a new one, just like changing film?
Re: Opinions on FA 80-200 f2.8 Price
Can anyone tell me if $1580 US is too much to pay for an excellent + FA 80-200 f2.8 zoom lens. I know these are getting to be somewhat rare, but I see that online retailers who were selling them seemed to have them priced about $1350 to $1450. The one I am looking at is supposedly in as new condition. What do others think one of these babies would be worth. I was extremely fortunate to stumble onto one of these critters in EX+++ condition (a wee bit of barrel scuffing was the only defect) at a fantastic price. I grabbed it immediately, since I knew it was already then (maybe that was a year-and-a-half ago) getting scarce, and getting pricey. My opinion is that the price is going to keep going up, due to demand, and in another year $1350 to $1450 will be considered an absolute steal for any FA* 80-200/2.8 in anything close to as new condition. So, my personal opinion is, if do you want one (and such a desire is entirely understandable), grab it !!! Fred
Re: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote: All assuming that you are using the maximum synchronisation speed. Not sure that comes to play (and you mean minimum, no?). It's far longer that the discharge time, so why would it matter? As it's not fixed across cameras, I would expect the flashes to have provisos or sth (or a calculator parameter). Kostas
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
I see. Shel lecturing everyone about how to post is okay, but Martin pointing out how Shel's email client works is annoying. Gotcha. P. J. Alling wrote: People who endlessly hector others with details they don't want or need to know are annoying. Shel is happy with his e-mail client, it does what he needs. You can top or bottom post, it's up to you. It's a free Internet, (well we all pay for it but you know what I mean). Those of us who understand the technical issues don't need reminding. Those who are simply users don't care. This is a photography list, (with a lot of personality thrown in). I don't think that we need some self appointed traffic cop lecturing us on how to drive, with a side on how the carburetor works thrown in. Some people don't care how it works and it's hard to cause a multi car pile up on the information super highway without using malice. I can't stop our new friend from lecturing but I can let him know he should tone it down. He doesn't have to stop, after all it's a free Internet.
Re: Film for my digital camera
All SD cards are more or less equal - Sandisk is good. Yes, once the disk fills up (or, really, at any time if you want a new blank disk for a series of shots which would not fit on the partially-filled disk) just remove it and insert a new one. You can just re-insert the partially-filled disk again at any time. It's just like a floppy. Maris Barry Rice wrote: Hey Folks, I've ordered an *ist-DS from Buydig, and will see if my experiences are easier than Shel's. Are all SD cards more or less equal, given storage volume? (I see BH has some 1Gig Sandisks from $88, which looks ok.) I have downloaded the pdf manual on the DS, and estimate 1Gig would hold about 86 RAW images. If this disk fills up in the field, can I slip in a new one, just like changing film?
