Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On Oct 1, 2005, at 3:31 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Paul ... long ago I was taught to ~never~ count on anything until it happens. Never believe anything until it's been officially denied. - Dave
Re: OT:Markham Fair Contest Update
On 30/9/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: Nice, moody shot. Makes me want to go to GFM. Paul The birth of enablement is a wondrous thing. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
PAW - Otago Gold
Not sure if I'm getting ahead of myself or catching up as it's only been a couple of days since the last one. This is a pretty sunrise I photographed in Dunedin during Easter. We stayed at a beautiful old guest house that was being restored (which is why we could afford to stay there). One morning we got up early and watched the sunrise from the balcony. Otago is the name of the province in which Dunedin is located, and it is known for its gold rush in the late 1800s. There might not be much gold left in the ground, but there's plenty in the sky on the right morning. http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=104t=1 I did take a pic with a wider lens but the band of cloud at the top is quite thin so it wasn't as effective as this one. BTW this is from the same shooting session as a previous PAW of mine: http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=92t=1 As always, comments are welcome. Cheers, - Dave
PUG is late
Hi folks, i am not at home right now. The PUG is sitting on the Komkon server but the one manual submission is missing. I shall add it when i am back home next week. Therefore i did not change the link. Please be patient until thursday when i am back. Thanks Adelheid -- 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail +++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++
RE: A Dancer's Arms
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3755687size=lg Sorry Frank, but I would say it's the work of an artist ;-) I agree; the dancer's definitely an artist! ;-) Frank. I think there are at least four artists involved here. First there is the artists who has created the music. Then the dancer and the choreographer have made a perpetration of the music. And then you have made a perpetration of those artists work, the artistic event. First you have made a very good composition of the event. You have also made a selection of one precise moment. You have also made some artistic choices about the lighting, and so on. All this choices are artistic choices. When the choices are as successful as here, I will say they make you an artist. You are in the full right to disagree with me, Frank. You may disagree in silence, or speak out your disagreement. But, you may also accept the compliment ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 30. september 2005 18:30 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: A Dancer's Arms On 9/30/05, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a very good photograph. I have spent some time watching it. At first glance it is good, after a while it is very good. Sorry Frank, but I would say it's the work of an artist ;-) I agree; the dancer's definitely an artist! ;-) Thanks for your thoughts, Tim. I appreciate it. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Survey results to date.
Download OpenOffice. It's free, good, and does pretty much everything MS Office does, including reading much more complicated spreadsheets than this one. And I know complicated spreadsheets! John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 02:04:15 +0100, Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ?? I have no problems opening and reading the PDF in Preview. i just find it cumbersome. The Excel spreadsheet form is much better. Why not a simple text file that everybody can read, not everyone is using MS. Kevin -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
1175 hits on the web page and 131 submissions so far. Let's try for one more good burst of submissions this weekend. We have a lot of entries but NOT ENOUGH yet! Tell everyone you can think of to go to: http://www.donsauction.com/Pentax and take _THE_ Pentax Wishlist survey. Or, contact me at: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] for comments/suggestions/praise/butt chewing. Thanks! Don
Re: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
Posted in the Pentax forum at Photodotnet.
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DjKE
On 10/1/05, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1175 hits on the web page and 131 submissions so far.
Let's try for one more good burst
of submissions this weekend.
We have a lot of entries but NOT ENOUGH yet!
Tell everyone you can think of to go to:
http://www.donsauction.com/Pentax
and take _THE_ Pentax Wishlist survey.
Or, contact me at:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
for comments/suggestions/praise/butt chewing.
Thanks!
Don
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com
--
You have to hold the button down -Arnold Newman
PESO: On the Board
Shot some more wakeboariding a couple of weeks ago. I used the DA 50-200 for these. Manual focused it,. It has a good feel used that way, and is quite easy to focus in bright sunlight. My friends have a new boat, by the way, which is designed for wakeboarding and creates a bigger wake. That's why this fellow is able to launch himself five feet above the water. Comments are welcome and appreciated. Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770890size=lg http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887
Re: Advice re walk around lens Australian outback
I use the Pentax DA 50-200 extensively. It's a very nice lens. I just posted a couple of PESO pics that I shot with it. These are both at f8. The first is at 200mm, the second at 160mm. I also use this lens for walkarounds when I want a little more reach than a normal length. It autofocuses very nicely and is quite compact for this focal length. I focused it manually here, because the water spray and foreground rope can sometimes fool the autofocus. I've only owned one Sigma lens, a 17-35 and found it no match for any of my Pentax glass. I replaced it with the DA 16-45. However, I don't know anything about the two Sigma lenses you've named here. Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770890size=lg http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887 On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:09 AM, Charles Wilson wrote: I am going on an outback trip in central Australia next year. Unfortunately need to pack light so thought of taking my DA 14 lens F 50 1.4 Now the question of zoom. I think my Tokina 80-200 2.8 is to heavy. So was thinking buying one of these Sigma 50 -200 3.5-5.6 Sigma 55-200 4 - 5.6 or Pentax DA 50-200 4-5.6 Has anyone had any experience of the above lens. Which one would you take? Regards Charles Wilson Sydney Australia
Re: PAW - Otago Gold
Gorgeous. Your pictures of New Zealand make my heart ache for that place. Have to get back there some day. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 5:20 AM, David Mann wrote: Not sure if I'm getting ahead of myself or catching up as it's only been a couple of days since the last one. This is a pretty sunrise I photographed in Dunedin during Easter. We stayed at a beautiful old guest house that was being restored (which is why we could afford to stay there). One morning we got up early and watched the sunrise from the balcony. Otago is the name of the province in which Dunedin is located, and it is known for its gold rush in the late 1800s. There might not be much gold left in the ground, but there's plenty in the sky on the right morning. http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=104t=1 I did take a pic with a wider lens but the band of cloud at the top is quite thin so it wasn't as effective as this one. BTW this is from the same shooting session as a previous PAW of mine: http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=92t=1 As always, comments are welcome. Cheers, - Dave
Re: auto focus body recommendation solicitation
Bob Sullivan wrote: (among other things) The PZ-1p is a bit faster (3.5 frames per sec. vs 2), Shouldn't that be 4 frames per sec. vs. 3? If you've timed them and come up with those numbers, never mind -- I'm going by the published specs. ERNR
RE: PESO: On the Board
I think you can crop a lot off the top and get a greater impact from the photo. Well done, otherwise. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887
RE: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
Thanks Scott, it already shows on the hit counter! (1186) ;-)
I finally put my entry in:
3 In body image stabilisation.
2 Faster, larger buffer. (10 RAW file burst.)
2 Full K/M Compatibility.
1 10+ Megapixel with present low noise level.
2 Battery/Vertical grip availability.
1 Larger, easier to use/locate joystick and buttons.
1 Selection of user interchangable focusing screens.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Scott Loveless [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 7:32 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
Posted in the Pentax forum at Photodotnet.
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DjKE
On 10/1/05, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1175 hits on the web page and 131 submissions so far.
Let's try for one more good burst
of submissions this weekend.
We have a lot of entries but NOT ENOUGH yet!
Tell everyone you can think of to go to:
http://www.donsauction.com/Pentax
and take _THE_ Pentax Wishlist survey.
Or, contact me at:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
for comments/suggestions/praise/butt chewing.
Thanks!
Don
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com
--
You have to hold the button down -Arnold Newman
Re: PESO: On the Board
Excellent pics, Paul. I bet the subject was pleased. It's hard to imagine this sort of shot being done better. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 13:31:46 +0100, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shot some more wakeboariding a couple of weeks ago. I used the DA 50-200 for these. Manual focused it,. It has a good feel used that way, and is quite easy to focus in bright sunlight. My friends have a new boat, by the way, which is designed for wakeboarding and creates a bigger wake. That's why this fellow is able to launch himself five feet above the water. Comments are welcome and appreciated. Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770890size=lg http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: PESO: On the Board
Good observation, Shel. Thanks. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 8:55 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I think you can crop a lot off the top and get a greater impact from the photo. Well done, otherwise. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887
OT - Sizing a photo for publication
I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: GESO: The Parkway Run Walk
Thanks, Scott! No, I was just standing on terra firma. I took a couple of shots with the 24-90, but they seemed dull, so I switched to the 17-28. The fisheye's distortion did the rest! That lens is really fun. Rick --- Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Love the guy on stilts. The perspective is really fun. Were you standing on something? Really neat moment you've captured. On 9/26/05, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As some of you know, I earn my daily crust as a pediatric oncologist at CHOP (Children's Hospital of Philadelphia). Yesterday was the annual Parkway Run Walk, which had a record turnout of over 3000 people and raised about $400,000 for our research program. I walked (saving my knees for hiking) and took pictures. A selection of photos, for your enjoyment and comment, is here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=531296 Technical: PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye and FA 24-90, Kodak Max 400, images taken from the CD I got from Ritz Camera, with some cropping and adjustments to brightness and contrast. Rick __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- You have to hold the button down -Arnold Newman __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:57 AM, Cotty wrote: I think you're wrong! God one knows who of us is really right ;-) (If you want reasons, I gotta think a bit harder - and it's late here - I'll try and come up with something tomorrow. Suffice it to say for now, that leading camera manufacturers *love* to change things and make things better - if they can - and the rest *have* to play catch-up. APS-C is an anomaly IMO and will be consigned to the history books by 2010, 2015 tops. There is no historical basis for APS-C - that part of the market will eventually be dominated by fixed-lens SLRs. There was no historical basis for 35 mm film before II WW too ;-) And look what happened ;-) All 35mm-style DSLRs will all achieve 'full' 24X36mm status within 10 years maximum. And if you want to know why 24X36mm, ask someone in the railway business about track width ;-))) As you can see from our talks we are divided. Some people would love to have FF DSLR, some are just happy with APS-C. Yes, with time FF cameras will get more affordable, but by this time APS-C DSLRs will get even more cheap and affordable than now and will sell 100x better than FF models. Imagine that most consumers who buy now sub $1000 DSLRs are just families, which are sure that SLR camera is just better than compact digicam. And they don't really care whether sensor is FF or APS-C. For them it is good enough that DSLR will get first prize in their favourite magazine and that it would have good technical parameters on paper. And of course price tag. How do you think? What such a consumer will choose in let's say two years from now? 12 MPix APS-C camera for 499$ or 12 MPix FF camera for 1999$ if they look similar physically and in technical parameters??? And that's a reasons why I think FF won't be ever as popular as some advanced shooters like you would like it to happen. -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax Logo DIY
So we are designing the next Pentax SLR (see survey), we are doing proper marketing (this thread)... Now we only need to run a manufacturing plant and then the Japanese can retire. Dario
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
The way the photos appear in PhotoShop is a function of the ppi and the percentage at which they're viewed. The image size is somewhat irrelevant if one doesn't consider the ppi. For Sunday supplement type magazine use, size at about 40 megs, which would be 8x10 inches at 300 ppi. Use bicubic sharper to downsize them from your current dimension. Make sure they're 8-bit. Set the color space to Adobe 98 or as specified by the pub. Then save as jpegs at maximum quality (12). Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 9:15 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Correction to that last post. An 8x10, 300ppi file will be about 20 megs when it's in 8-bit mode. However, you might find this a bit cumbersome to upload from a dial-up. For this type of mag, a file of pub, a file of about 5x7 at 300ppi will be sufficient. That will be about 9 megs. You can save it as a high quality jpeg (9) rather than maximum. Once compressed, the file will be less than 1 meg and reasonably easy to deliver via e-mail from a dial-up. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 9:15 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
You still dont get it. The oversampling is good for removing information that the algorithms put there because they give frequency components that results from the pixel pitch. Yes, they do filter the sensor optically (diffusing) but more pixels may be better because you get better contrast. They may still do this on a 10MP sensor because some lenses has enough resolution to need it, but not to the same extent. This is, by the way, one of the reasons why digital lenses need other qualities than resolution. To some degree resolution make problems. DagT Den 1. okt. 2005 kl. 02.21 skrev Herb Chong: the information isn't there in the first place because it is blocked by the lower quality lens. that is what i said at the beginning. a lower quality lens that is just acceptable on the *istD doesn't benefit from a larger sensor because it is already band limiting the signal to something less than the Nyquist frequency of the *istD sensor. in addition, there is a low pass filter in front of the sensor to greatly reduce the chance of aliasing. i seriously doubt that Pentax is going to omit a band pass filter on a 10MP sensor. raising the sensor resolution without raising the lens resolution to match by using better lenses means that larger prints won't be any sharper on the new sensor. why go to a larger sensor if you aren't going to crop more or enlarge more? Herb... - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 7:24 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... You are wrong. The problem you get without oversampling is the information you dont have, and that is the information between the pixels. The lacking information gives multiple solutions and those produce several harmonic spatial frequencies. That's why DA converters etc use a lot of tricks to avoid folding, to reduce the number of unwanted solutions. Oversampling is a very simple approach, and is what you get if you have more pixels than necessary.
RE: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
I have often had photographs published. Most printers want 250-300 ppi tiff files. The size is maximum 21 x 30 cm A4 (8x12) or (very rare) A3 (12x17). A4 (21 x 30 cm) is by 300 ppi appr. 3600 x 2500 pixel. So, a 6MP picture is (almost) enough for full page print. If you - on the other hand want to scan a 35mm neg for printing, you'll need to scan at 3000 ppi, ORIGINAL, in order to get a 12 print at 300 ppi. They may also tell me which colour profile they want. 4000 ppi is outrageous! If they ask for 4000 ppi it's probably not for printing in the magazines. It may be needed for very special printers, certaily not for normal, photoralistic work. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 15:15 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: OT - Sizing a photo for publication I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On 1 Oct 2005 at 16:16, DagT wrote: You still dont get it. The oversampling is good for removing information that the algorithms put there because they give frequency components that results from the pixel pitch. I would expect that with increased sensor density the manufacturer would simply provide a matched diffusion filter which effectively cuts off spatial frequencies just above the sensors Nyquist frequency. Over-sampling in a simple non-TD system with a matched LPF really makes no sense. Yes, they do filter the sensor optically (diffusing) but more pixels may be better because you get better contrast. They may still do this on a 10MP sensor because some lenses has enough resolution to need it, but not to the same extent. This is, by the way, one of the reasons why digital lenses need other qualities than resolution. To some degree resolution make problems. Better contrast simply translates to higher recorded spatial frequencies or resolution, which as Herb suggested will be lost on a poor performing lens. Digital lenses are marketing hype, most lenses that perform well on film will perform well in a direct digital capture system. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
The files were scanned @ 4000ppi - they will be reduced to a much more manageable size when sent to the magazine. Shel [Original Message] From: Jens Bladt 4000 ppi is outrageous! If they ask for 4000 ppi it's probably not for printing in the magazines. It may be needed for very special printers, certaily not for normal, photoralistic work. -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Shel Belinkoff I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Thanks Paul ... you've been very helpful. The first batch of pix have been sent. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist Correction to that last post. [big snip]
RE: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
On 1 Oct 2005 at 7:35, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The files were scanned @ 4000ppi - they will be reduced to a much more manageable size when sent to the magazine. The publishers really should spec the print resolution (PPI) and colour space that the file should be saved in, it's not something that you can realistically or should have to guess. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
4000 ppi isn't necessarily a large file. It all depends on the dimensions in which those 4000 ppi are contained. If it's a scanned 35mm frame, it would be only about 60 megs. (24 x 36 mm at 4000 ppi). Changing the dimensions to 8 inches by 12 inches would leave it at only about 472 megs. Reducing it to 300 dpi for publication would take it to about 25 meg. PPI is meaningless information in regard to file size unless you indicate the dimension in which those pixels are contained. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 10:35 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The files were scanned @ 4000ppi - they will be reduced to a much more manageable size when sent to the magazine. Shel [Original Message] From: Jens Bladt 4000 ppi is outrageous! If they ask for 4000 ppi it's probably not for printing in the magazines. It may be needed for very special printers, certaily not for normal, photoralistic work. -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Shel Belinkoff I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
You're welcome. And thanks for the recrop suggestion on my wakeboarding shot. I've already done that and reposted my pic. The PDML is a good thing :-). Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Thanks Paul ... you've been very helpful. The first batch of pix have been sent. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist Correction to that last post. [big snip]
Re: Peso - Blue Butt
Ken, Every time I see one of your Denali pictures, I want to go back. I love the Bleached Blond - California look of the bear. This shot is close up and shows the size of the bear well. Plus Focus and DOF are great. On your first URL - your bio page, I don't care much about the workshop leaders liking your photos. You could 'appreciate' learning from them, but your stuff stands on it's own merits and is as good as any I've seen. So go toot your own horn! Regards, Bob S. On 9/28/05, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I gave the wrong URL Duh should be: http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Comments solicited - yeah, nay or other wise Kenneth Waller
Re: auto focus body recommendation solicitation
No formal timing, just my memory from introductory literature and the feel from usage. Bob S. On 10/1/05, E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob Sullivan wrote: (among other things) The PZ-1p is a bit faster (3.5 frames per sec. vs 2), Shouldn't that be 4 frames per sec. vs. 3? If you've timed them and come up with those numbers, never mind -- I'm going by the published specs. ERNR
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Most pubs I've worked with don't worry too much about exact specs. They can set the color space and ppi in a matter of seconds. You just have to give them enough pixels to work with. For the type of pub Shel specified, a ten to twenty meg file will be fine. For even the best glossy mags, a 70 meg file is enough for a spread. The pub won't know the exact dimension of a shot until the layout is finished. The art has to be purchased before the page can be created. Once the space on the page is determined, the art director will resize the photo to fit. If they only have to make it smaller, they're happy. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 1 Oct 2005 at 7:35, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The files were scanned @ 4000ppi - they will be reduced to a much more manageable size when sent to the magazine. The publishers really should spec the print resolution (PPI) and colour space that the file should be saved in, it's not something that you can realistically or should have to guess. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT:Markham Fair Contest Update
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi gang. Well, as standard practise, the SO and i made our way to the fair after work last night. Standard York region weather for the fair, high winds, cold and rain.:-) Many more entries this year than past. About 1500 as i was told by one of the judges wives and helpers. I didi fairly well. Entered 14 prints and 6 digital photos(shown through a slide show.) Still running about 50% for prizes. This was my only 1st place, and i'm glad it did well as i'm very happy with this photo and i know several thought it was a good shot after posting from GFM.(Ann that would be you, Frank and Mark.LOL) http://photobucket.com/albums/v408/divad_b/?action=viewcurrent=GFM2017.jpg Dave Lets see, how much did you get for that prize ? Sharing the wealth with us? :) Great going, Dave, but I don't think you needed Mark and Frank and me to tell ya it wasa lovely shot... . ann
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Hi Rob ... I think they key word here is most, although I'm not speaking with a lot of experience yet, as I'm just starting to see what results can be obtained from some of my older lenses. This far, of the four or five that I've checked, one just doesn't look sharp at all - although I will check it again - and another shows lots of purple fringing, which I never noticed with film. I seem to recall you putting up some pics showing one lens or another that lacked sharpness on the digi. Shel [Original Message] From: Rob Studdert Digital lenses are marketing hype, most lenses that perform well on film will perform well in a direct digital capture system.
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:57 AM, Cotty wrote: I think you're wrong! God one knows who of us is really right ;-) (If you want reasons, I gotta think a bit harder - and it's late here - I'll try and come up with something tomorrow. Suffice it to say for now, that leading camera manufacturers *love* to change things and make things better - if they can - and the rest *have* to play catch-up. APS-C is an anomaly IMO and will be consigned to the history books by 2010, 2015 tops. There is no historical basis for APS-C - that part of the market will eventually be dominated by fixed-lens SLRs. There was no historical basis for 35 mm film before II WW too ;-) And look what happened ;-) All 35mm-style DSLRs will all achieve 'full' 24X36mm status within 10 years maximum. And if you want to know why 24X36mm, ask someone in the railway business about track width ;-))) As you can see from our talks we are divided. Some people would love to have FF DSLR, some are just happy with APS-C. Yes, with time FF cameras will get more affordable, but by this time APS-C DSLRs will get even more cheap and affordable than now and will sell 100x better than FF models. Imagine that most consumers who buy now sub $1000 [ ... ] How do you think? What such a consumer will choose in let's say two years from now? 12 MPix APS-C camera for 499$ or 12 MPix FF camera for 1999$ if they look similar physically and in technical parameters??? I think that might be more like 12 MPix APS-C for $499 vs. 20MPix FF camera for $999. Now, it has already been proven that they are willing to go up from say $400-500 for a reasonably good camera, to 1000 for a much better offering... - T
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On 1 Oct 2005 at 8:03, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Rob ... I think they key word here is most, although I'm not speaking with a lot of experience yet, as I'm just starting to see what results can be obtained from some of my older lenses. This far, of the four or five that I've checked, one just doesn't look sharp at all - although I will check it again - and another shows lots of purple fringing, which I never noticed with film. I seem to recall you putting up some pics showing one lens or another that lacked sharpness on the digi. Hi Shel, I think the key is that it's far easier to be critical of a digital capture when it at 200% on a 'puter screen. Most lenses that perform badly on film are bad on a DSLR, it just depends how critical the viewer is. I think also that you'll find purple fringing is more a sensor issue than a lens one. Lenses that suffer CA (red/green, blue/yellow shifts) tend to be more visible, but again I still think most were poor on film to but just not viewed as critically. In any case even pretty bad lens CA can be remedied when shooting RAW so it's not too much of an issue. I assume one major reason that some lenses look like better performers on a DSLR than film is that their poor edge performance has been effectively masked by cropping. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Yeah, it's OK ... ;-)) From what I understand, it's the forum of choice for many Canon users LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist The PDML is a good thing :-).
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
On 1 Oct 2005 at 11:01, Paul Stenquist wrote: Most pubs I've worked with don't worry too much about exact specs. They can set the color space and ppi in a matter of seconds. You just have to give them enough pixels to work with. For the type of pub Shel specified, a ten to twenty meg file will be fine. For even the best glossy mags, a 70 meg file is enough for a spread. The pub won't know the exact dimension of a shot until the layout is finished. The art has to be purchased before the page can be created. Once the space on the page is determined, the art director will resize the photo to fit. If they only have to make it smaller, they're happy. Granted but indicating minimum file sizes and which colour space to use and embed would likely cause less problems than specifying something vague like 8x10. It's kind of like being provided a street address with no suburb or country. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
If they want JPEG images they probably want them at 72ppi. An 8x10 at 72ppi is not a large file. It seems small, I would think the thing to do is clarify that with the magazine. As to the size of the print on the screen in Photoshop, under EditPreferencesUnits Rulers there is a New Document Preset Resolutions section. Set Screen Resolution to a value that will display a Print Size image actual size. On my monitor that is 96ppi at 1280x1024 and 112ppi at 1600x1200. You can set rulers on and measure that they match a physical ruler. It may take a bit of trial and error. This has nothing to do with the size of the print from the printer but only the size on the screen I like my print sized monitor image to match theactual printed image. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On Oct 1, 2005, at 5:10 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: I think that might be more like 12 MPix APS-C for $499 vs. 20MPix FF camera for $999. Now, it has already been proven that they are willing to go up from say $400-500 for a reasonably good camera, to 1000 for a much better offering... I think that for now we are just speculating :-) So far it doesn't look so - the cheapest APS-C DSLRs are already selling for 650$ (only 30% more than my prediction) while cheapest FF camera is about 3300$ (about 230% more than you predicted). There's no chance that 20MP FF DSLR will be $999 in two years until there's strong competition from other manufacturers... -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Den 1. okt. 2005 kl. 16.34 skrev Rob Studdert: On 1 Oct 2005 at 16:16, DagT wrote: You still dont get it. The oversampling is good for removing information that the algorithms put there because they give frequency components that results from the pixel pitch. I would expect that with increased sensor density the manufacturer would simply provide a matched diffusion filter which effectively cuts off spatial frequencies just above the sensors Nyquist frequency. Over-sampling in a simple non-TD system with a matched LPF really makes no sense. It does if you can avoid or reduce the diffusing. Yes, they do filter the sensor optically (diffusing) but more pixels may be better because you get better contrast. They may still do this on a 10MP sensor because some lenses has enough resolution to need it, but not to the same extent. This is, by the way, one of the reasons why digital lenses need other qualities than resolution. To some degree resolution make problems. Better contrast simply translates to higher recorded spatial frequencies or resolution, which as Herb suggested will be lost on a poor performing lens. No, the Fourier transform does not generate new frequencies when you only vary the amplitude. Digital lenses are marketing hype, most lenses that perform well on film will perform well in a direct digital capture system. Most, maybe, but especially the wide angles need special considerations. DagT
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
As I said in another post, if they want JPEG files they probably want them at 72ppi. It sounds like they normally print snapshots in their Sunday Magazine. However, Shel, ought to query them about their preferred ppi. They are the only ones who can tell him for sure.. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Rob Studdert wrote: On 1 Oct 2005 at 7:35, Shel Belinkoff wrote: The files were scanned @ 4000ppi - they will be reduced to a much more manageable size when sent to the magazine. The publishers really should spec the print resolution (PPI) and colour space that the file should be saved in, it's not something that you can realistically or should have to guess. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Hi Shel, Newspaper supplements could be around 133 lpi halftone printing screen, multiply by quality factor of 1.5 (normal) or even 2 (best, but usually used for coated paper stock zines), that's around 200 ppi, 8x10. You can perhaps use more generous ppi as if it's an editorial photo, newpaper photoeditors like to crop a lot ;-) Frantisek
Re: Loire Valley photo web page revised
Hi! That's kind of what I thought the first time I created a page with this Photoshop automation procedure. It's reassuring to know I'm not the only web geek who thinks about such things. I just ran a few find-and-replace operations on all 108 pages and I think I've got the behavior you describe working properly. Almost, Mark, just almost. The position of next button varies between vertical and horizontal shots... But I am pedantic a$$**le anyway ;-). Gorgeous set of photographs which put me to shame, because neither my Norwegian nor British trip galleries are not there... Boris
Re: PESO: Taken on a hike
Chortle Cherepakha or Tzav... Make your pick, folks :-)... Boris the chuckling ;-)
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
No, Bill, at Ulan Bator they will anounce the MZ-D 5000. It will have a 5000mp full-frame sensor. Will take a card (accepts all current image cards) full (max size 1000gb) of full-res images at 25fps. The sensor will be interchangable, intitially there will be a 32bit per pixel color-sensor that comes with the camera, and an optional non-interpolated BW-sensor. Future sensor upgrades will be possible. Other professional features include a popup flash with a guide number of 10. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Kevin Waterson Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Pentax's interest in the pro market is spelled medium format. Indeed, but where is the Pentax 645D? Scheduled for release concurrent with the upcoming Ulan Bator camera show. William Robb
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
That's only because we're more forgiving than most Canon users. Shel Belinkoff wrote: Yeah, it's OK ... ;-)) From what I understand, it's the forum of choice for many Canon users LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist The PDML is a good thing :-). -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Saturday, October 1, 2005, 5:58:15 PM, graywolf wrote: g As I said in another post, if they want JPEG files they probably want g them at 72ppi. It sounds like they normally print snapshots in their Huh? Either I don't understand you, or you us ;-) 72ppi in 8x10 photo would be awfully small resolution for printing... it's like a cameraphone! Frantisek
Re: PESO - Lizard (NOT OT: actual Pentax gear used!)
Hi! At the Baltimore Aquarium. Cropped: http://photography.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?pos=-25 Full frame (same lizard, same pose, different image): http://photography.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?pos=-26 If you could edit in your own reflection, it would hilarious. Otherwise, it is just very good lizard shot ;-). Boris
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
The first production 35mm still camera was the 1910 Tourist Multipla. The Leica was introduced in 1921. That was quite a while before WWII, in the case of the TM it was before WWI. If you mean when 35mm became ubiquitous that wasn't until the 1970's. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: There was no historical basis for 35 mm film before II WW too ;-) And look what happened ;-)
Re: First PESO. Dew Drop.
Hi! Ok. Here is my first PESO. I can't decide if I like this or not, so I'd like some feedback to see what others think. Something just doesn't feel right, but I can't put my finger on it. http://www.pbase.com/davekennedy/image/46480026 Dave, I think it is good attempt. For some difficult to put in words reason my eyes do reach the dew drop but they don't stop there... Since, it would seem the drop was the main subject, I should say, I fail on the test ;-). Partly I think it is due to the fact that the main leading line (from top left to bottom right) is green upon green background... Didn't you take more shots on the same occasion? Boris
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Yes, and they probably print camera phone photos in their magazine supplement. The thing here is any publication wanting high resolution images is not going to request jpegs. The standard ppi for jpegs is 72. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Frantisek wrote: Saturday, October 1, 2005, 5:58:15 PM, graywolf wrote: g As I said in another post, if they want JPEG files they probably want g them at 72ppi. It sounds like they normally print snapshots in their Huh? Either I don't understand you, or you us ;-) 72ppi in 8x10 photo would be awfully small resolution for printing... it's like a cameraphone! Frantisek
Re: PAW PESO - Blurred Wheel
Hi! Grabbed this from my office window this morning. I made about four or five exposures as some cars went by, and kind of liked this one. The pattern surprised me. http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/blurredwheel.html Details: istDS, 77mm Ltd, 1/30 sec @ F7.1, ISO 200 ... a little cropping in PS ... Caves of Steel... Boris
Re: PESO - The Morning Drive
Hi! Here's my morning drive. http://Georges.smugmug.com/photos/37815932-M.jpg Eastbound traffic goes straight into the morning Sun. It reminded of that R.E.M. song... You know, something to do with hurt and with traffic jam... Boris
Pentax Anti Pixel Party (tomorrow) ?
Hi there, we were slightly faster than expected and now we are back in Bay Area. Anyone interested to join us tomorrow somewhere in SF? Exact place and time to be arranged - suggestions are welcome... Cheers, Bedo.
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
You can rest assured that they do not want the jpegs at 72dpi. We're not talking about web publishing here. They want jpegs because they don't fill up the mailbox. Even my stock house wants maximum quality jpegs. Just to save room on the server. I probide 360 dpi, 50 meg jpegs for the stock house. If they sell one, they convert it to tiff. Magazines must have at least a 10 meg file for publication on paper. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 11:51 AM, graywolf wrote: If they want JPEG images they probably want them at 72ppi. An 8x10 at 72ppi is not a large file. It seems small, I would think the thing to do is clarify that with the magazine. As to the size of the print on the screen in Photoshop, under EditPreferencesUnits Rulers there is a New Document Preset Resolutions section. Set Screen Resolution to a value that will display a Print Size image actual size. On my monitor that is 96ppi at 1280x1024 and 112ppi at 1600x1200. You can set rulers on and measure that they match a physical ruler. It may take a bit of trial and error. This has nothing to do with the size of the print from the printer but only the size on the screen I like my print sized monitor image to match theactual printed image. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Shel Belinkoff wrote: I've got a few pics that are going to a magazine. They are now 4000ppi PSD or TIFF files of about 130mb in size. The magazine wants 5x7 or 8x10 sized JPEG files. What would be the ideal ppi for something like this - the magazine is one of those weekend supplements for a newspaper. Also, when I've resized the photos and looked at them @ print size in PS, they seem to be smaller than the dimensions indicate. Can someone explain that to me. I've never done this magazine/newspaper thing before in quite this way - submitting the pix via email. Shel
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
I just wanted to say that with all the doom and gloom that some people have expressed in this thread, I find it ironic that I switched from Nikon to Pentax when I bought my first DSLR. I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything by having the Pentax DSLR, as opposed to having the Nikon DSLR. In fact, I feel like I have more features that matter to me personally. I also consider my *istDS a professional camera. Okay, it might be at the low end of the professional scale in the eyes of some people, but it's still possible to do almost anything I want with the *istDS. As far as reliability is concerned, I'm convinced that the camera will far outlive my needs. By the time it's worn out, the technology will be so advanced that I would want to replace it with something else anyway. In the meantime, I expect the camera to serve me very well. I'll still have my Nikon film camera and a few lenses, but I don't plan to buy any new lenses or major accessories for the Nikon. The Pentax DSLR on the other hand, will probably get a few lenses and maybe a dedicated flash unit or two. For the most part, I'm very happy with Pentax. The few issues I have will probably be addressed in the near future. For example, there is a lack of prime lenses made especially for digital, but Pentax has realized this and is supposedly working on correcting that. In the future it would be nice to have more megapixels, but I'm sure that Pentax will eventually get there. I'm very hopeful for the future of Pentax. I think they definitely have the potential to become much stronger in the market than what they currently are. They make nice gear and they deserve more attention and respect from the general public and the professional market than what they've been getting lately. take care, Glen
Re: PESO - Hole
Hi! I laid off posting pics from the Monument Valley trip for awhile. I was going back through them to see what else caught my eye and felt this would be worth showing. This was kind of a big bowl shaped area ringed by this big rock wall. Sand dunes were pressed up against it and on one end was this arch. I climbed up the dune on the opposite side of the arch to get a different vantage point. Pentax *istD, DA 16-45/4, handheld ISO 400, 20mm, 1/1500 sec @ f/4.5 Converted from Raw using Capture One LE http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/monumentvalley_0347.htm Wonderful... However please allow me some nitpicking... I'd like to point out :-), that the person sitting on the sand is crossed by the bush from the foreground... I am not sure I like it. Also the large portion of the bottom part of the image is OOF. My immediate perception was - how huge is this place if a full size human sitting on the sand looks like and ant. Naturally, I may be misreading the shot, Bruce, but perhaps it is worth considering cropping some of the OOF rock and the bush on the bottom... Perhaps even a square interpretation may be worth thinking about. Naturally, I mean no offense, just my honest humble opinion. Boris
Re: PESO -- Angelita
Hi! This is a photo of my wife's cousin's daughter taken at a family outing a few weeks ago. MX, M85/2, HP5+, Ilfosol S 1+9. Of the seven frames she allowed me to take, this one is my favorite. Thanks for looking. http://twosixteen.com/gallery/index.php?id=178 As far as my zero knowledge of Spanish goes, Angelita means Baby Angel, right? She is in anything but angelic mood. You managed to catch the moment just right. On the other hand, to my taste the bokeh is rather harsh. Also I think I'd like the background to be somewhat lighter so as to bring out the girl's face even more. Boris
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: On Oct 1, 2005, at 5:10 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: I think that might be more like 12 MPix APS-C for $499 vs. 20MPix FF camera for $999. Now, it has already been proven that they are willing to go up from say $400-500 for a reasonably good camera, to 1000 for a much better offering... I think that for now we are just speculating :-) So far it doesn't look so - the cheapest APS-C DSLRs are already selling for 650$ (only 30% more than my prediction) while cheapest FF camera is about 3300$ (about 230% more than you predicted). There's no chance that 20MP FF DSLR will be $999 in two years until there's strong competition from other manufacturers... No, I may have been exaggerating a bit (or a lot) about the price, although I'm quite sure the gap between FF and APS-C will become smaller. But 20MP for an FF camera is in many ways a more conservative estimate than 12MP in an entry-level APS-C one. An FF sensor with the same density as a 12MP APS-C one would have something like 27MP. The point is, the $650 cameras you mention do not have the same specs as the $3300 FF one. The only 12MP APS-C camera I know actually costs 40-50% more than That 12MP FF, and over half of That Other 16MP FF, at least around here. I think we can safely assume that it will remain like that, i.e. it will never be a question of choosing between an expensive FF camera and a low-end APS-C with a similar spec; the FF offering is always going to have a higher pixel count and probably be higher-spec in other areas, too. (And the same-spec APS-C won't cost *that* much less.) - Toralf
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
There's no such thing as a standard resolution for jpegs. Jpeg is just a way of compressing an image. A lot of pubs request jpegs because they have to depend on e-mail for delivery. The better pubs have an ftp server, and they can handle tiffs. No publication, save perhaps a school newsletter, would use a 72 dpi 8x10. Heck, I don't even size that small for the web. On Oct 1, 2005, at 12:28 PM, graywolf wrote: Yes, and they probably print camera phone photos in their magazine supplement. The thing here is any publication wanting high resolution images is not going to request jpegs. The standard ppi for jpegs is 72. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Frantisek wrote: Saturday, October 1, 2005, 5:58:15 PM, graywolf wrote: g As I said in another post, if they want JPEG files they probably want g them at 72ppi. It sounds like they normally print snapshots in their Huh? Either I don't understand you, or you us ;-) 72ppi in 8x10 photo would be awfully small resolution for printing... it's like a cameraphone! Frantisek
Re: OT - Sizing a photo for publication
Saturday, October 1, 2005, 6:28:31 PM, graywolf wrote: g Yes, and they probably print camera phone photos in their magazine g supplement. The thing here is any publication wanting high resolution g images is not going to request jpegs. The standard ppi for jpegs is 72. Sorry, but you are wrong on this. Agency I work with which supplies even Time and Newsweek asks for jpegs. It's pretty much standard in editorial photography for transfer of photographs. ~12MB files that come around 1-2MB as jpegs. Same with other agencies. That's for editorial (news). Advertising and other commercial stock is different. And everybody prints cameraphones photos now ;-) I dislike the term citizen journalism, there are journalism standards every journalist should abide by (although some don't, and even more _owners_ of newspapers don't, even if their journalists would like to). Fra
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
graywolf wrote: No, Bill, at Ulan Bator they will anounce the MZ-D 5000. It will have a 5000mp full-frame sensor. Will take a card (accepts all current image cards) full (max size 1000gb) of full-res images at 25fps. The sensor will be interchangable, intitially there will be a 32bit per pixel color-sensor that comes with the camera, and an optional non-interpolated BW-sensor. Future sensor upgrades will be possible. Other professional features include a popup flash with a guide number of 10. And that 1000Gb card will also cost about $10, and have a shelf lifetime of at least 200 years, so we never have to transfer data unless we want to, or use another format for backup. And I will actually buy a digital camera, this time ;-) Hmmm Maybe we actually should try to get interchangable sensors on that wish list. It would at least be fun to hear what e.g. Pentax think about it... But perhaps we can't expect a lot of feedback anyway... - Toralf
Re: PESO -- Angelita
I've come back to this shot a few times since you first posted it and I have to say I really like it. The intensity of her expression really makes it. Very well done. Dave On 9/30/05, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a photo of my wife's cousin's daughter taken at a family outing a few weeks ago. MX, M85/2, HP5+, Ilfosol S 1+9. Of the seven frames she allowed me to take, this one is my favorite. Thanks for looking. http://twosixteen.com/gallery/index.php?id=178 -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- You have to hold the button down -Arnold Newman
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
I wouldn't have a problem buying another lens or lots more lenses. The question is whether I feel it wise to invest in more K-mount lenses when I'm not sure Pentax is going to be around in a couple of years, or if they will be producing the camera I wish to purchase. Tom C. From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:34:06 +0200 Buying an extra lens (ultra-wide) will cost you less than buying a FF SLR and then you'll gain a bonus telephoto lens in your outfit. That's all. Dario - Original Message - From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 7:15 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... I agree with you to a large extent. I'm whining because I would like my lens/camera combo to produce results like a 35mm camera body, i.e., a 28mm lense produces an image on the sensor with the normal 28mm FOVm instead of 42mm. Tom C. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:17:02 + Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul That's what I'm hoping for in the future, FF 12+ MP. I would have little desire to carry a 645D around with me when other makers would offer essentialy the same in a 35mm size body. Tom C. From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:29:56 +0100 On 29/9/05, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed: I guess that sort of sums my feelings. I agree with Paul that I haven't found 6 MP inadequate, but then what have I to compare it to? Suppose we took a photo and wanted to crop it by some factor for display or printing. Assuredly a 12, 16 etc., megapixel camera will allow this to be done with a higher degree of (dare I say resolution) quality, than a 10MP camera, or than a 6MP camera. Excuse me for being a complete dolt here. But can someone tell me what the point of an APS-C sensor DSLR at 16 or even 12 MP is? Sincerely, I fail to see it. If they're going to cram 16 MP onto a chip that size, why not just make a 24x36mm sensor? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
GRIN Don't worry if they ever do offer replacable sensors they will be like the printhead in my printer. $90 for a new printhead and $50 (after rebate) for a new printer. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Toralf Lund wrote: graywolf wrote: No, Bill, at Ulan Bator they will anounce the MZ-D 5000. It will have a 5000mp full-frame sensor. Will take a card (accepts all current image cards) full (max size 1000gb) of full-res images at 25fps. The sensor will be interchangable, intitially there will be a 32bit per pixel color-sensor that comes with the camera, and an optional non-interpolated BW-sensor. Future sensor upgrades will be possible. Other professional features include a popup flash with a guide number of 10. And that 1000Gb card will also cost about $10, and have a shelf lifetime of at least 200 years, so we never have to transfer data unless we want to, or use another format for backup. And I will actually buy a digital camera, this time ;-) Hmmm Maybe we actually should try to get interchangable sensors on that wish list. It would at least be fun to hear what e.g. Pentax think about it... But perhaps we can't expect a lot of feedback anyway... - Toralf
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
It seems the 645D may be/might be coming in a year late... Tom C. From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:13:46 +1000 This one time, at band camp, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pentax's interest in the pro market is spelled medium format. Indeed, but where is the Pentax 645D? 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: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
FS: 645 Outfit (yesterday was Friday)
Hi gang I've be offered a 645 MF outfit: 220 Back 300mm F4 ED + 1.4 ED conv 200mm F4 120mm F4 Machro All in excellent - like new condition. The seller is asking 1200 USD for the lot (220 back, 300mm ED + 1.4 ED, 120 MM macro and a 200mm ) 1200 USD (ebay survey). Any offers, please? Regards Jens Bladt
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Tom C wrote: I wouldn't have a problem buying another lens or lots more lenses. The question is whether I feel it wise to invest in more K-mount lenses when I'm not sure Pentax is going to be around in a couple of years, or if they will be producing the camera I wish to purchase. Tom C. Seems you're falling for that ol' marketing trap, Tom... I have and use cameras that are more than 30 years old, some over 50 years old, with lenses that are even older than that, as well as lenses that are still made today! Pentax has done a good job of keeping old customers needs in mind, so far as I'm concerned. Many who are using the very latest top of the line digital offerings from Pentax won't agree with me at all, but a careful look at their products belie claims they are ignoring their faithful... In truth, who cares if Pentax isn't around in another couple of years? If they disappeared from the face of the earth tonight, I'd _still_ have all my older 35mm bodies, some fine digital cameras, and ALL of my lovely older lenses. THEY won't disappear! I continually shake my head at those comments that come from the folks who actually believe that crap about present day cameras becoming obsolete. What's obsolete, but feeding a rampant quest for more and more new products. If you WANT new and can afford to keep refreshing your supply of equipment, have at it, and good luck to you. Seriously! But to believe that the slightly older stuff is well on it's way to becoming decrepit, well...that's just not true! *I* probably am, but my camera gear isn't! g IMMHO, keith whaley
RE: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
...or two. When was the Hassie H2 with Imacon sensor/Ixpress back presented? It seems a lot of pro's are using this already, judging from TV. I guess it's quite expensive, being from Scandinavia, but I can't seem to find a price anywhere. I guess it's in the neighbourhood of 10.000-15.000 USD?? Some more asian competition might very be good for the photographers! Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 19:31 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... It seems the 645D may be/might be coming in a year late... Tom C. From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:13:46 +1000 This one time, at band camp, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pentax's interest in the pro market is spelled medium format. Indeed, but where is the Pentax 645D? 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: PAW - Otago Gold
That's a stunning shot Dave. Dave On 10/1/05, David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if I'm getting ahead of myself or catching up as it's only been a couple of days since the last one. This is a pretty sunrise I photographed in Dunedin during Easter. We stayed at a beautiful old guest house that was being restored (which is why we could afford to stay there). One morning we got up early and watched the sunrise from the balcony. Otago is the name of the province in which Dunedin is located, and it is known for its gold rush in the late 1800s. There might not be much gold left in the ground, but there's plenty in the sky on the right morning. http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=104t=1 I did take a pic with a wider lens but the band of cloud at the top is quite thin so it wasn't as effective as this one. BTW this is from the same shooting session as a previous PAW of mine: http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=92t=1 As always, comments are welcome. Cheers, - Dave
Re: Optio Camera for Cat Pix
Shel Belinkoff wrote: The recently announced Optio S6 has a Pet Mode, Not all subjects are willing to stand still and say “Cheese!” Fortunately, the OptioS6 features tracking AF* which can track a moving subject around the frame, while maintaining precise focus for pin-sharp results. Adding further convenience, this mode is automatically activated upon selection of Sport and Pet modes. Shel Excellent call, Shel. If I was doing it all over again, I'd buy this one instead of my S4 and S5i... Great little camera. Great lens, too. keith whaley [Original Message] From: E.R.N. Reed I would be interested in learning if there *is* such a thing as a small digital with fast response time. I think fast-responding digicam is still an oxymoron.
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
PESO - Cape May teaser (OT - not Pentax)
Black skimmer: errr. ummm. skimming http://photography.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?pos=-27 or if the above link isn't working or is taking too long: http://home.mindspring.com/~c_skofteland/id32.html Comments always welcome. Christian
Re: PESO - Cape May teaser (OT - not Pentax)
Excellent action shot. Thanks for sharing. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 2:39 PM, Christian wrote: Black skimmer: errr. ummm. skimming http://photography.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?pos=-27 or if the above link isn't working or is taking too long: http://home.mindspring.com/~c_skofteland/id32.html Comments always welcome. Christian
SV: PESO - Cape May teaser (OT - not Pentax)
Brilliant, Great shot! Well done. Jens Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 20:40 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: PESO - Cape May teaser (OT - not Pentax) Black skimmer: errr. ummm. skimming http://photography.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?pos=-27 or if the above link isn't working or is taking too long: http://home.mindspring.com/~c_skofteland/id32.html Comments always welcome. Christian
RE: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, Don Sanderson wrote: I finally put my entry in: 3 In body image stabilisation. 2 Faster, larger buffer. (10 RAW file burst.) 2 Full K/M Compatibility. 1 10+ Megapixel with present low noise level. 2 Battery/Vertical grip availability. 1 Larger, easier to use/locate joystick and buttons. 1 Selection of user interchangable focusing screens. Price? Kostas
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Hi Keith, If we're talking about film cameras I'd agree with you. I perceive it's going to be different in the digital world though. Who here expects their *ist D and derivatives, to be the camera they're shooting with 5 years from now, 10 years from now? I don't. Will service be available for the older digital bodies 5/10 years from now? If so, at what price? Digital camera life cycles and viability is heading down the same path as home computers. Darn, if buy one today (PC, that is) and it lasts 2-3 years and breaks, is it worth repairing, or is it better to purchase a new more powerful one at a lower price? Will 35mm film and processing be available 5/10 years from now and at what price? I hear where your coming from and wish I believed it to be true in the future, but I sorta don't. :) Tom C. From: keith_w [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:05:37 -0700 Tom C wrote: I wouldn't have a problem buying another lens or lots more lenses. The question is whether I feel it wise to invest in more K-mount lenses when I'm not sure Pentax is going to be around in a couple of years, or if they will be producing the camera I wish to purchase. Tom C. Seems you're falling for that ol' marketing trap, Tom... I have and use cameras that are more than 30 years old, some over 50 years old, with lenses that are even older than that, as well as lenses that are still made today! Pentax has done a good job of keeping old customers needs in mind, so far as I'm concerned. Many who are using the very latest top of the line digital offerings from Pentax won't agree with me at all, but a careful look at their products belie claims they are ignoring their faithful... In truth, who cares if Pentax isn't around in another couple of years? If they disappeared from the face of the earth tonight, I'd _still_ have all my older 35mm bodies, some fine digital cameras, and ALL of my lovely older lenses. THEY won't disappear! I continually shake my head at those comments that come from the folks who actually believe that crap about present day cameras becoming obsolete. What's obsolete, but feeding a rampant quest for more and more new products. If you WANT new and can afford to keep refreshing your supply of equipment, have at it, and good luck to you. Seriously! But to believe that the slightly older stuff is well on it's way to becoming decrepit, well...that's just not true! *I* probably am, but my camera gear isn't! g IMMHO, keith whaley
RE: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
$1700.00 max -Original Message- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 2:11 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, Don Sanderson wrote: I finally put my entry in: 3 In body image stabilisation. 2 Faster, larger buffer. (10 RAW file burst.) 2 Full K/M Compatibility. 1 10+ Megapixel with present low noise level. 2 Battery/Vertical grip availability. 1 Larger, easier to use/locate joystick and buttons. 1 Selection of user interchangable focusing screens. Price? Kostas
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Jens Bladt wrote: ...or two. When was the Hassie H2 with Imacon sensor/Ixpress back presented? It seems a lot of pro's are using this already, judging from TV. I guess it's quite expensive, being from Scandinavia, but I can't seem to find a price anywhere. I guess it's in the neighbourhood of 10.000-15.000 USD?? I've seen Norwegian retail prices for some of them, but the only one I could find right now was NOK 241000 for the Imacon Ixpress 132C. I *think* I saw a lower-spec model qouted at something like 125000, possibly not including 25% tax. Compare that to NOK6-7 for the EOS-1Ds mark II, or 7900 for an *istDS and you should get a general idea of the price range. Actually, I would expect prices to be approximately the same in Denmark... Some more asian competition might very be good for the photographers! Probably. I find it quite interesting that there are actually two Danish companies (the other being PhaseOne) that produce MF format digital photo equipment, though - and those are also the only ones I know about. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 19:31 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... It seems the 645D may be/might be coming in a year late... Tom C. From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:13:46 +1000 This one time, at band camp, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pentax's interest in the pro market is spelled medium format. Indeed, but where is the Pentax 645D? 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: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey
I should add that I would of course expect to pay extra for the grip and screens. Don -Original Message- From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 2:16 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey $1700.00 max -Original Message- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 2:11 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Daily Update-Pentax Petition and Petition Survey On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, Don Sanderson wrote: I finally put my entry in: 3 In body image stabilisation. 2 Faster, larger buffer. (10 RAW file burst.) 2 Full K/M Compatibility. 1 10+ Megapixel with present low noise level. 2 Battery/Vertical grip availability. 1 Larger, easier to use/locate joystick and buttons. 1 Selection of user interchangable focusing screens. Price? Kostas
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
RE: PAW - Otago Gold
Beautiful shot Dave! Tom C. From: David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PAW - Otago Gold Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 21:20:40 +1200 Not sure if I'm getting ahead of myself or catching up as it's only been a couple of days since the last one. This is a pretty sunrise I photographed in Dunedin during Easter. We stayed at a beautiful old guest house that was being restored (which is why we could afford to stay there). One morning we got up early and watched the sunrise from the balcony. Otago is the name of the province in which Dunedin is located, and it is known for its gold rush in the late 1800s. There might not be much gold left in the ground, but there's plenty in the sky on the right morning. http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=104t=1 I did take a pic with a wider lens but the band of cloud at the top is quite thin so it wasn't as effective as this one. BTW this is from the same shooting session as a previous PAW of mine: http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=92t=1 As always, comments are welcome. Cheers, - Dave
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I think they key word here is most, although I'm not speaking with a lot of experience yet, as I'm just starting to see what results can be obtained from some of my older lenses. Can you please drop us a line when you evaluate the 30? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it didn't speaks volumes. As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their problems. It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good about them. In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That means I will continue to buy lenses. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: PUG is late
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, AvK wrote: Please be patient until thursday when i am back. No problem Adelheid. Thanks for letting us know. Kostas
Re: PESO: On the Board
Hello Paul, Got some nice shots there - that lens seems to be quite sharp. I may even have to consider picking one up sometime. -- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, October 1, 2005, 5:31:46 AM, you wrote: PS Shot some more wakeboariding a couple of weeks ago. I used the DA PS 50-200 for these. Manual focused it,. It has a good feel used that way, PS and is quite easy to focus in bright sunlight. My friends have a new PS boat, by the way, which is designed for wakeboarding and creates a PS bigger wake. That's why this fellow is able to launch himself five feet PS above the water. Comments are welcome and appreciated. PS Paul PS http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770890size=lg PS http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887
Re: PAW - Otago Gold
Hello David, Very cool shot! Love the cloud buildup on the top and then the foreground with small silhouettes just tying the whole thing together. Nicely done. -- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, October 1, 2005, 2:20:40 AM, you wrote: DM Not sure if I'm getting ahead of myself or catching up as it's only DM been a couple of days since the last one. DM This is a pretty sunrise I photographed in Dunedin during Easter. We DM stayed at a beautiful old guest house that was being restored (which DM is why we could afford to stay there). One morning we got up early DM and watched the sunrise from the balcony. DM Otago is the name of the province in which Dunedin is located, and it DM is known for its gold rush in the late 1800s. There might not be DM much gold left in the ground, but there's plenty in the sky on the DM right morning. DM http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=104t=1 DM I did take a pic with a wider lens but the band of cloud at the top DM is quite thin so it wasn't as effective as this one. DM BTW this is from the same shooting session as a previous PAW of mine: DM http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=92t=1 DM As always, comments are welcome. DM Cheers, DM - Dave
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
John, Because you seem firmly convinced of your position, please clarify for me in what way digital provides you, a much better picture-taking experience. At the moment of capture? This is in the serious hope that I'll read something other than immediate feed back. Jack --- John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it didn't speaks volumes. As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their problems. It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good about them. In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That means I will continue to buy lenses. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary
Re: PESO - Cape May teaser (OT - not Pentax)
On 1/10/05, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed: Black skimmer: errr. ummm. skimming http://photography.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?pos=-27 or if the above link isn't working or is taking too long: http://home.mindspring.com/~c_skofteland/id32.html Comments always welcome. WOW. That is a fantastic shot you utter barstard!! Nat. Geo. 2 page spread, no mistake. I officially hate you. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
That pretty well sums it up for me. Good post, John. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:05 PM, John Forbes wrote: Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it didn't speaks volumes. As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their problems. It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good about them. In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That means I will continue to buy lenses. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: PESO: On the Board
Thanks Bruce. Yes, the lens is another nice bargain from Pentax. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Hello Paul, Got some nice shots there - that lens seems to be quite sharp. I may even have to consider picking one up sometime. -- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, October 1, 2005, 5:31:46 AM, you wrote: PS Shot some more wakeboariding a couple of weeks ago. I used the DA PS 50-200 for these. Manual focused it,. It has a good feel used that way, PS and is quite easy to focus in bright sunlight. My friends have a new PS boat, by the way, which is designed for wakeboarding and creates a PS bigger wake. That's why this fellow is able to launch himself five feet PS above the water. Comments are welcome and appreciated. PS Paul PS http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770890size=lg PS http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3770887
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
This one time, at band camp, keith_w [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I continually shake my head at those comments that come from the folks who actually believe that crap about present day cameras becoming obsolete. What's obsolete, but feeding a rampant quest for more and more new products. Not new products, competitive products. I still have 6 k1000 bodies, 2 P30n bodies, MZ-S, 6x7 as well as several *istD's. 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: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
That's a lot of money. On second thought a Taxi driver must invest in a car - a new Mercedes Benz (most common cap here) is appr. 1 million Danish Kroners, icluding normal taxes - perhaps 500.000 kr for cap driver. An old rule of thumb here says that a million (161.000 USD) invested will create one job. So I guess for a photographer it's not that expensive to pay perhaps 100.000 kr (16.000 USD) for a camera. Does anyone have a clue about the price of a 645D? How many Megapixel? Yes, the Danish IT-industry was wery fast in creating a good sensor (Ixpress) and scanners (Imacon). I think they started off by making backs for Rollieflex (SL 66) in the 1980'ies. The first sensors were really scanners - with very long exposure. Good for commercial photography, showing technical stuff and such. Much have changed since then. I think Imacon was bought by Hasselblad or they merged, as their website said, with Imacon last year. So, it's a Swedane company, really. Actually I was told that the sensors come from Havdrup, a small village 5 miles from where I live, 35 km south of Copenhagen. I should visit them some day :-) Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Toralf Lund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 21:18 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Jens Bladt wrote: ...or two. When was the Hassie H2 with Imacon sensor/Ixpress back presented? It seems a lot of pro's are using this already, judging from TV. I guess it's quite expensive, being from Scandinavia, but I can't seem to find a price anywhere. I guess it's in the neighbourhood of 10.000-15.000 USD?? I've seen Norwegian retail prices for some of them, but the only one I could find right now was NOK 241000 for the Imacon Ixpress 132C. I *think* I saw a lower-spec model qouted at something like 125000, possibly not including 25% tax. Compare that to NOK6-7 for the EOS-1Ds mark II, or 7900 for an *istDS and you should get a general idea of the price range. Actually, I would expect prices to be approximately the same in Denmark... Some more asian competition might very be good for the photographers! Probably. I find it quite interesting that there are actually two Danish companies (the other being PhaseOne) that produce MF format digital photo equipment, though - and those are also the only ones I know about. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 19:31 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... It seems the 645D may be/might be coming in a year late... Tom C. From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:13:46 +1000 This one time, at band camp, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pentax's interest in the pro market is spelled medium format. Indeed, but where is the Pentax 645D? 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: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
Ditto -- Bruce Saturday, October 1, 2005, 2:10:53 PM, you wrote: PS That pretty well sums it up for me. Good post, John. PS Paul PS On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:05 PM, John Forbes wrote: Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it didn't speaks volumes. As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their problems. It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good about them. In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That means I will continue to buy lenses. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not doing the same. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
I'm not John, but I can answer from my point of view. First and foremost for me is control of the entire process from exposure to print. I had grown weary of scratched, dirty negatives. Second is control of color temperature. I shoot in tungsten without losing any stops due to filtration. I can easily turn the gray of a cloudy day into nice, even warm light. Third is being able to change ISO on the fly. I shoot my granddaughter in the living room at 1600 ISO, then walk outside and shoot a kid playing on the street at ISO 200. Third is reduced expensies. I was spending over $150 a week on film and processing. Fourth is being able to fine tune an exposure in the RAW converter. I have much more control there than I do scanning negatives. Oh, and then there's that immediate feedback :-). Hey, it's a good thing. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:40 PM, Jack Davis wrote: John, Because you seem firmly convinced of your position, please clarify for me in what way digital provides you, a much better picture-taking experience. At the moment of capture? This is in the serious hope that I'll read something other than immediate feed back. Jack --- John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it didn't speaks volumes. As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their problems. It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good about them. In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That means I will continue to buy lenses. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage
Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
On 1/10/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: That pretty well sums it up for me. Good post, John. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:05 PM, John Forbes wrote: Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. Now boys.. Let's be honest...this *is* a discussion list, right? And come on - Tom's line is not really negative. He's just trying to encourage debate, right Tom? Tom? Right Tom? (where is the bugger?? ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
I'll second that, John and Paul. I am in fact a very proud owner of a *istD and a MZ-S. Whenever I have some money to spend - I go for some nice glass. F. 2.8 or better, regardless of the focal length. Right now I'm testing a Sigma 2.8/70-200mm AP0. I'm considering a used FA 2.8/80-200mm in stead. At first the MZ-D was predicted to have a price tag of 10.000 USD. I would probably never get it anyway. The people who judge, buy or order my photographs never ask what camera brand I use. Only the photographs are of any interst. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 23:11 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... That pretty well sums it up for me. Good post, John. Paul On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:05 PM, John Forbes wrote: Tom, The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place, and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort people's assessment of Pentax's true position. You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it didn't speaks volumes. As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their problems. It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good about them. In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That means I will continue to buy lenses. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'. I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in the marketplace. Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100 Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms. Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That way you'll make your worst fears come true. It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism. People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much. Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures. John On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than owners of a film Pentax 645 system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000 On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger or heavier than the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's sensor won't be true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models will probably remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to market (if at all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end Canon DSLR kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of lenses (which I would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out of Pentax) I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other people in my position not
