Re: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
C'mon, now you've spoiled it for me... It is like telling the end of a movie... Bart [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17/05/2006 22:47 Okay, so what happens next is that everyone who doesn't live in America will chime in how evil America is, and some people who do live in America will jump in and agree, while some people who live in America will insist it isn't so, and so what? and then Bob will wake up and throw in some general xenophobia, and Bill Robb might insult someone, and then someone will threaten to leave the list, and some lurker will write me a nasty email saying he will stop sponging info from the contributors if I don't get control, and then someone will suggest that it would all be better if we all jumped to a google/ yahoo/smartgroups/webforum format, and some other people will tell them to kiss off, and then it will go downhill from there. So that's the next week on this thread, the Reader's Digest Condensed version, without the profanity. Can we just skip it now?
Re: Ideas for Pentax
Rob, It's Proof. Not a bad flick ...I saw it for the first time last June and enjoyed it. Have you seen it, or do you want to see it? Shel [Original Message] From: Rob Studdert I don't know. Which brings me to a rather loosely related question; does anyone know the title of the movie where a blind photographer is deceived by the friend who describes his shots?
RE: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
-Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I believe that there was a thread with the wonderful subject line Lobbing hand-grenades over the transom. Perhaps it was Throwing, not lobbing. But the thread title has stuck with me for a number of years, at least three -- gotta go look it up. I think Mafud was the major contributor to that one. If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... Bob
RE: Picasso's Camera
-Original Message- From: Stephen D'Andrea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 May 2006 02:11 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Picasso's Camera http://www.detroitmona.com/picasso's_camera.htm Interesting? Yes. Fascinating? In a way, yes. Funny? Quite. Real? Hm. Come on. This is a joke, right? An elaborate one with strong implications for the people will believe what they are led to believe theme of some contemporary art, but still, an enormous pulling of our visual legs. Those color photos suggest Photoshop a lot more than they do the early 20th century. Call me a skeptic, albeit one with an appreciative sense of humor, but I'm not buying it. Am I just missing everyone's wry wink of the eye? That gets lost in email. not necessarily. Picasso was using photography at the time that he was painting Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, and his prints show that he was experimenting in ways that clearly foreshadow Cubism. For example, there is a well-known portrait he made of Le Douanier Rousseau which he overprinted with another negative of one of Rousseau's paintings. Les Demoiselles d'Avignon was a truly shocking and revolutionary painting when it was first shown. Even his contemporary artists didn't understand it. He had many, many influences on the composition, from classical European art to African masks and ethnographic photos and his own photos. Of course, the colour photos shown on the website are not by Picasso, and the website does not claim that they are, but he certainly used photography. Bob
Lens ghosting
Using the new DS, I was able to test the Pentax mount lenses which we have. We have a light board, and I took a piece of aluminum foil and poked holes in it with a thumbtack, as well as a few slices with a pocket knife. With the foil on the light board, and the exposure set for massive overexposure of the lightboard, you can see pinholes of light coming through the lens. At a wide open aperture, you can see ghosting around the pinholes. All the SMC lenses were good, except a 35-105 f3.5 which is old enough that it has slack in the zoom and its focus changes considerably while zooming. This lens had a blue flare around the pinholes of light. We also have some old generic brand lenses. A 28mm f2.8 was ok until you got down to 2.8, at which point it was pathetic. I tested it with a church service a few days ago and people under the spot light ended up blurry. Two different 135 f2.8s were also useless at 2.8. They're fine at f4. When you sit in a dark room and shine a flashlight through the 28mm at f2.8, you can see the flashlight beam ghosting all over inside the lens. I decided to open up the lens and try cleaning the glass. It helped a little bit but not much. The lens is easily 20+ years old ( CPC brand, I read somewhere it was a Pentax 'generic' label?? ), with worn aperture notches ( you almost have to hold it on 2.8 ), so it was no loss if something went wrong. The most fascinating thing about it was the element in the middle, which is almost a hemispherical piece of glass. Too bad these old primes are no good at 2.8. Another disappointment was the Tokina 28-70 f2.8 ATX Pro SV, a used lens from KEH in beautiful condition. It was only useful at f4 and up. We have the 16-45 f4 DA, a 75-150 f4 M SMC, a 50 f1.7 A SMC, and a 50 f2.0 M SMC. These are all great. There is also a Tokina 60-300 f4-5.6 SZ-X which does not mount on the DS or the ZX-M due to an extra large shield around the aperture lever. Was there a reason they added this? Can it be cut down to size safely? We'll probably end up buying a Sigma 24-70 f2.8, which has good results at 2.8 on the brand C camera, and a Sigma 80-200 f2.8 which has good reviews at 2.8 as well. It'd be neat if someone made an APC sensor sized equivalent to the 80-200 f2.8, which would be around a 50-150 f2.8 DA. Something a little lighter to carry around all day long. Brian
Re: ebay phishing scam got me
On Wed, 17 May 2006, Mark Stringer wrote: I had to log in to get to the item as usual ebay policy. What, to see an item? You don't need to log in for that. Good think you noticed, Mark. Kostas
Re: Lens ghosting
On Thu, 18 May 2006 07:55:05 +0100, Brian Dunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Using the new DS, I was able to test the Pentax mount lenses which we have. We have a light board, and I took a piece of aluminum foil and poked holes in it with a thumbtack, as well as a few slices with a pocket knife. With the foil on the light board, and the exposure set for massive overexposure of the lightboard, you can see pinholes of light coming through the lens. At a wide open aperture, you can see ghosting around the pinholes. All the SMC lenses were good, except a 35-105 f3.5 which is old enough that it has slack in the zoom and its focus changes considerably while zooming. This lens had a blue flare around the pinholes of light. We also have some old generic brand lenses. A 28mm f2.8 was ok until you got down to 2.8, at which point it was pathetic. I tested it with a church service a few days ago and people under the spot light ended up blurry. Two different 135 f2.8s were also useless at 2.8. They're fine at f4. When you sit in a dark room and shine a flashlight through the 28mm at f2.8, you can see the flashlight beam ghosting all over inside the lens. I decided to open up the lens and try cleaning the glass. It helped a little bit but not much. The lens is easily 20+ years old ( CPC brand, I read somewhere it was a Pentax 'generic' label?? ), with worn aperture notches ( you almost have to hold it on 2.8 ), so it was no loss if something went wrong. The most fascinating thing about it was the element in the middle, which is almost a hemispherical piece of glass. Too bad these old primes are no good at 2.8. Another disappointment was the Tokina 28-70 f2.8 ATX Pro SV, a used lens from KEH in beautiful condition. It was only useful at f4 and up. We have the 16-45 f4 DA, a 75-150 f4 M SMC, a 50 f1.7 A SMC, and a 50 f2.0 M SMC. These are all great. There is also a Tokina 60-300 f4-5.6 SZ-X which does not mount on the DS or the ZX-M due to an extra large shield around the aperture lever. Was there a reason they added this? Can it be cut down to size safely? We'll probably end up buying a Sigma 24-70 f2.8, which has good results at 2.8 on the brand C camera, and a Sigma 80-200 f2.8 which has good reviews at 2.8 as well. It'd be neat if someone made an APC sensor sized equivalent to the 80-200 f2.8, which would be around a 50-150 f2.8 DA. Something a little lighter to carry around all day long. Pentax have announced a DA 1:2.8 50-135mm for release in December. Neat indeed. Coming along at the same time as the new 10Mp body and the Da 1:2.8 16-50mm, it's going to be an expensive time for some of us. :-) John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Ideas for Pentax
Rob, the Australian one was Proof - Genevieve Picot and Hugo Weaving, IIRC. John Coyle Praxis Data Solutions (www.epraxisdata.com) Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 9:29 AM Subject: Re: Ideas for Pentax SNIP I don't know. Which brings me to a rather loosely related question; does anyone know the title of the movie where a blind photographer is deceived by the friend who describes his shots? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http:/home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Test -please ignore
This one time, at band camp, Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yer had ter look, eh? :-) consider it ignored 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: OT: External HD's and two OS's
Mark Roberts wrote: Carlos Royo wrote: Windows XP won't let you format a partition in the FAT32 system if it is bigger than 32 GB. But you can do it (I mean, formatting FAT32 bigger partitions) using third party utilities You can do it with DOS! You are right, Mark. You can, as long as it is the DOS that comes with Windows 98/SE/ME, but not with previous versions. Carlos
Re: Picasso's Camera
Stephen D'Andrea wrote: Interesting? Yes. Fascinating? In a way, yes. Funny? Quite. Real? Hm. Come on. This is a joke, right? As you say, Stephen, it is a joke, and not a very intelligent one. Carlos
Re: Lens ghosting
On Thu, 18 May 2006, Brian Dunn wrote: It'd be neat if someone made an APC sensor sized equivalent to the 80-200 f2.8, which would be around a 50-150 f2.8 DA. Something a little lighter to carry around all day long. Pentax (and Tokina :-)) has announced one such lens. Not sure when it's expected. Kostas
Re: Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
Fra: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dato: 2006/05/18 Thu AM 02:56:07 CEST Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's Carlos Royo wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On May 16, 2006, at 1:43 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: You can get what you want, but you need to set the drive up for it. Windows XP limits the size of a FAT32 drive to 32Gbytes when formatting, they want you to use NTFS. I have a 250 gig drive formatted FAT32 in Windows. Might be a version thing. Last time I went to do this, Win XPP *would not* allow me to create a volume greater than 32Mbytes with its supplied utilities. Windows XP won't let you format a partition in the FAT32 system if it is bigger than 32 GB. But you can do it (I mean, formatting FAT32 bigger partitions) using third party utilities, such as Partition Magic and others, and the resulting partition will be read and written by XP or Windows 2000 and other operating system without any problems. Carlos OS X will also do it. Format in MS-DOS mode and it will do a FAT32 partition. I did that with my external HD, and it worked fine except for some problems with characters in some file names that wasn't compatible with the MS system. Now that I only use the disc for backup I've formated it with OSX file system. For transporting files between PC and Mac I'm considering something like this: http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10655 DagT
Re: Everything new is obscure again
Welcome back, Stephen. The AF 400T works quite well with my *istD. I use it in TTL, flash auto, and manual modes. In TTL it works best at ISO 400. The next Pentax digital is rumored to be a 10 megapixel camera with anti-shake. The buffer should be considerably larger than the present cameras and the write speed should be faster. It will most likely be APS-C sensor size, like the current cameras. The focal length of your lenses won't change, but the field of view they deliver will. The factor is approximately 1.5. For example, a 300 mm lens will deliver a field of view that is roughly equivalent to that of a 450 mm lens on a full-frame 35 mm camera. Paul On May 17, 2006, at 11:38 PM, Stephen D'Andrea wrote: Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. In the intervening years I've been drawn closer to going digital, so the time has come to ask the right questions of the people in the know. 1. Can someone give me a brief explanation (or confirmation) of the differences in the istD, DL, and DS (plus the 2 versions). I've read what I can about them but just when I think I'm getting the general idea of them in comparison I still feel like something eludes me. For example, I know the plain D is the oldest of the three, and the most expensive, but I find myself asking, Why is this camera still being made? I get the general sense that the D is aimed at a higher level user than the DL or DS, though they all have many of the same features, and the LCD screens are bigger on the more recent models, but I still don't feel like I have a clear idea of what the D can do that the DS or DL can't. What makes the D cost twice as much as a camera that's several years newer? 2. I'm attracted to the Ds for the Pentax experience I've had for the last 27 years and the option to use my existing A series lenses. Can someone clarify what happens to the focal length when an older lens is put on the newer body? 3. Can I use my AF400T flash with any of the Ds? 4. What are the latest rumors about the next generation of Pentax digital SLRs? I know one of the inevitable questions about dispensing advice will be What kind of photographer are you? The easiest answer is somewhere in that vague area that defines people who have a bachelor's degree in photography, do some freelance commercial work when they have to, but generally do their own personal photo projects. After 18 years with an MX I bought in college (with money I earned using my dad's Spotmatic), I've used an LX for the past eight or nine years. And, boy, you go away from the list for a few months and a whole new set of acronyms pops up. You certainly can't tell the players if you don't have a scorecard. Would someone patient be so kind to explain what the following terms mean to the casual reader: GESO PESO PAW GFM PEOW anything else that comes to mind Thanks. I did miss reading the messages and am glad to be tuned in again. -Stephen
Re: FA 20~35 or FA35/2.0
On Tue, 16 May 2006 17:32:22 +0100, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 16 May 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: the years have come to appreciate the short, wide, M24~35 zoom, so the Do you still have that lense and these thoughts about it on the -Ds? If yes, it looks like a no-brainer for me. It may look like a no-brainer to you, but have you thought about the crop factor? 24-35 on digital is 36-52 on 35mm. The difference between 24 and 36 is not insubstantial. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
I did that with my external HD, and it worked fine except for some problems with characters in some file names that wasn't compatible with the MS system. Now that I only use the disc for backup I've formated it with OSX file system. For transporting files between PC and Mac I'm considering something like this: http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10655 DagT Hu. Interesting piece of hardware. I'll look into this. Thanks for the link. Dave Brooks
Re: Regarding RAW converters
Rob Studdert wrote: On 17 May 2006 at 23:34, Aaron Reynolds wrote: I had a life, but then I bought a computer with a modem. Mark! I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to what I have now. - anonymous
Re: Lens ghosting
John Forbes wrote: Pentax have announced a DA 1:2.8 50-135mm for release in December. Neat indeed. Can you say USM? I knew you could.
Re: Test -please ignore
Kevin Waterson wrote: This one time, at band camp, Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yer had ter look, eh? :-) consider it ignored I'm going to print it out and pin it on the wall so I can keep ignoring it for years in the comfort on my own home.
Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
Carlos Royo wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: Carlos Royo wrote: Windows XP won't let you format a partition in the FAT32 system if it is bigger than 32 GB. But you can do it (I mean, formatting FAT32 bigger partitions) using third party utilities You can do it with DOS! You are right, Mark. You can, as long as it is the DOS that comes with Windows 98/SE/ME, but not with previous versions. Just a note: Wouldn't You can do it with DOS make a nifty t-shirt/bumper sticker slogan? ;-) (I always partition and format my disks from a command line interface: GUI's are for wimps!
Re: Regarding RAW converters
What is life? First you take orders from your parents, then you take orders from your teachers, then you take orders from your bosses, then you take orders from your wife, then your take orders from your kids, then you die. In between you worry about money. Gor, I am glad I don't have one. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Aaron Reynolds wrote: I can't take credit -- it's a variation on a button I've had for about ten years. It and Cheer up, emo kid are my favourites. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: Regarding RAW converters Date: Wed May 17, 2006 11:34 pm Size: 328 bytes To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net On 17 May 2006 at 23:34, Aaron Reynolds wrote: I had a life, but then I bought a computer with a modem. Mark! Been dying to do that! Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http:/home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
On May 18, 2006, at 8:00 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: Just a note: Wouldn't You can do it with DOS make a nifty t-shirt/bumper sticker slogan? ;-) Send it to Unamerican.com -- I'm sure they'd print that. I ordered a large batch of their ASSUME THIS PHONE IS TAPPED stickers a few years ago and put 'em on all the phones in the house. -Aaron
Re: GESO: Birds of prey portraits
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Toine wrote: About the one eyed owl. I somehow like it like this. http://leende.net/galleries/roofvogels/roof_2.htm I like it too. http://leende.net/galleries/roofvogels/roof_4.htm But the above made me laugh. Excellent. Kostas
Re: Everything new is obscure again
Stephen, With respect to Question #1: All the cameras have the same sensor and basic electrical components. D was the first - uses CF cards, capable of taking a battery pack/vertical grip. DS was the second - uses SD cards, slightly different controls instruction set. (capabilities are identical to the D, bigger LCD for chimping?) No vertical grip. DL cheaper alternative but uses porro mirror for viewfinder, not penta prism. (capabilities are identical to the Ds) No vertical grip. DS2, DL2 - introduced with bigger LDC on the back of the camera and a software upgrade (at least in the DS2). (Software upgrade is available on the Pentax USA site so you can update your DS if you have one - 5 minutes with a high speed internet connection - Thanks Pentax!) Bottom line is these are all a family of cameras based on the same electronics and capable of delivering the same digital results. The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. The DL cuts some corners (viewfinder) to drop the price for the mass market. Regards, Bob S. On 5/17/06, Stephen D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. In the intervening years I've been drawn closer to going digital, so the time has come to ask the right questions of the people in the know. 1. Can someone give me a brief explanation (or confirmation) of the differences in the istD, DL, and DS (plus the 2 versions). I've read what I can about them but just when I think I'm getting the general idea of them in comparison I still feel like something eludes me. For example, I know the plain D is the oldest of the three, and the most expensive, but I find myself asking, Why is this camera still being made? I get the general sense that the D is aimed at a higher level user than the DL or DS, though they all have many of the same features, and the LCD screens are bigger on the more recent models, but I still don't feel like I have a clear idea of what the D can do that the DS or DL can't. What makes the D cost twice as much as a camera that's several years newer? 2. I'm attracted to the Ds for the Pentax experience I've had for the last 27 years and the option to use my existing A series lenses. Can someone clarify what happens to the focal length when an older lens is put on the newer body? 3. Can I use my AF400T flash with any of the Ds? 4. What are the latest rumors about the next generation of Pentax digital SLRs? I know one of the inevitable questions about dispensing advice will be What kind of photographer are you? The easiest answer is somewhere in that vague area that defines people who have a bachelor's degree in photography, do some freelance commercial work when they have to, but generally do their own personal photo projects. After 18 years with an MX I bought in college (with money I earned using my dad's Spotmatic), I've used an LX for the past eight or nine years. And, boy, you go away from the list for a few months and a whole new set of acronyms pops up. You certainly can't tell the players if you don't have a scorecard. Would someone patient be so kind to explain what the following terms mean to the casual reader: GESO PESO PAW GFM PEOW anything else that comes to mind Thanks. I did miss reading the messages and am glad to be tuned in again. -Stephen
Re: Everything new is obscure again
On Thu, 18 May 2006, Bob Sullivan wrote: DL cheaper alternative but uses porro mirror for viewfinder, not penta prism. (capabilities are identical to the Ds) No vertical grip. Stephen asked if he can use the AF400T on the cameras. I think the answer is effectively no for the DL; owners of the camera can confirm what the limitations are. Kostas
Question about photo gear shop in Houston TX
Hi! A friend of a friend of mine is in Houston TX. He wants to buy some gear and is looking for advise about *good* and hopefully *cheap* store where he can buy it. Thanks in advance. -- Boris
Re: Everything new is obscure again
-- Original message -- From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. I have two D cameras. No issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. Except for double the battery life in the D with a grip, individual controls for aperture and shutter speed, and vertical hold controls and shutter releas. All of which I need. Both the D and the DS are very good cameras. It's a trade-off: the fully featured D vs. the larger buffer and faster write speed of the S.
Re: Everything new is obscure again
Clearly Bob doesn't have a D! :-) The later bodies lack several of the D's capabilities, like continuous focus in all exposure modes; wireless flash using the RTF to trigger the remote unit; and most functions available via knobs rather than menu-diving. All of these are useful, at least for me. The wireless flash system is excellent. There are no prototyping issues of any significance whatsoever. This is the preferred body EXCEPT for those who like to shoot continuously. All the other bodies are faster. They are also cheaper, which is obviously a consideration, too. One or more of the latest bodies will not work with any flash other than (I think) the (expensive but good) AF360FTZ. John On Thu, 18 May 2006 13:45:04 +0100, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen, With respect to Question #1: All the cameras have the same sensor and basic electrical components. D was the first - uses CF cards, capable of taking a battery pack/vertical grip. DS was the second - uses SD cards, slightly different controls instruction set. (capabilities are identical to the D, bigger LCD for chimping?) No vertical grip. DL cheaper alternative but uses porro mirror for viewfinder, not penta prism. (capabilities are identical to the Ds) No vertical grip. DS2, DL2 - introduced with bigger LDC on the back of the camera and a software upgrade (at least in the DS2). (Software upgrade is available on the Pentax USA site so you can update your DS if you have one - 5 minutes with a high speed internet connection - Thanks Pentax!) Bottom line is these are all a family of cameras based on the same electronics and capable of delivering the same digital results. The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. The DL cuts some corners (viewfinder) to drop the price for the mass market. Regards, Bob S. On 5/17/06, Stephen D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. In the intervening years I've been drawn closer to going digital, so the time has come to ask the right questions of the people in the know. 1. Can someone give me a brief explanation (or confirmation) of the differences in the istD, DL, and DS (plus the 2 versions). I've read what I can about them but just when I think I'm getting the general idea of them in comparison I still feel like something eludes me. For example, I know the plain D is the oldest of the three, and the most expensive, but I find myself asking, Why is this camera still being made? I get the general sense that the D is aimed at a higher level user than the DL or DS, though they all have many of the same features, and the LCD screens are bigger on the more recent models, but I still don't feel like I have a clear idea of what the D can do that the DS or DL can't. What makes the D cost twice as much as a camera that's several years newer? 2. I'm attracted to the Ds for the Pentax experience I've had for the last 27 years and the option to use my existing A series lenses. Can someone clarify what happens to the focal length when an older lens is put on the newer body? 3. Can I use my AF400T flash with any of the Ds? 4. What are the latest rumors about the next generation of Pentax digital SLRs? I know one of the inevitable questions about dispensing advice will be What kind of photographer are you? The easiest answer is somewhere in that vague area that defines people who have a bachelor's degree in photography, do some freelance commercial work when they have to, but generally do their own personal photo projects. After 18 years with an MX I bought in college (with money I earned using my dad's Spotmatic), I've used an LX for the past eight or nine years. And, boy, you go away from the list for a few months and a whole new set of acronyms pops up. You certainly can't tell the players if you don't have a scorecard. Would someone patient be so kind to explain what the following terms mean to the casual reader: GESO PESO PAW GFM PEOW anything else that comes to mind Thanks. I did miss reading the messages and am glad to be tuned in again. -Stephen -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs
Blue is one of my favorite cats, and whenever I visit with him I like to grab a snap or two. Yesterday was no exception, although Blue wasn't cooperating by engaging in his assortment of tricks and poses. He found a warm, sunny spot, and he wasn't moving. This is far from my best photo of him, but my client will enjoy it regardless. Does the photo seem a little too sharp to you? It looks close to being so on my monitor, but not quite so. Hmmm - I wonder if LCD screens show greater contrast/sharpness than CRT screen ... any thoughts on that? http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html istDS, A50/1.4, F8.0 @ 1/640, ISO 200 Shel
Re: PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs
It doesn't look over sharp to me. Nice shot. I like the light, the lines of the stairs and the muted colour. Cheers, Dave S. On 5/18/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blue is one of my favorite cats, and whenever I visit with him I like to grab a snap or two. Yesterday was no exception, although Blue wasn't cooperating by engaging in his assortment of tricks and poses. He found a warm, sunny spot, and he wasn't moving. This is far from my best photo of him, but my client will enjoy it regardless. Does the photo seem a little too sharp to you? It looks close to being so on my monitor, but not quite so. Hmmm - I wonder if LCD screens show greater contrast/sharpness than CRT screen ... any thoughts on that? http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html istDS, A50/1.4, F8.0 @ 1/640, ISO 200 Shel
Re: Everything new is obscure again
- Original message -- From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. I have two D cameras. No issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. Except for double the battery life in the D with a grip, individual controls for aperture and shutter speed, and vertical hold controls and shutter releas. All of which I need. Both the D and the DS are very good cameras. It's a trade-off: the fully featured D vs. the larger buffer and faster write speed of the S.
Re: Everything new is obscure again
What modes is continuous focus disabled in -- the programs? Works fine for me in M and AV on the DS2. As for the control set, I miss the vertical grip and front dial, but do not miss the implementation of drive mode and ISO on the D, which require you to change position relative to the camera to see what you're doing on the top LCD and also change your hand position -- why people prefer to do this instead of tapping their thumb three times while just pulling their eye away from the finder is beyond me. Manual white balance on the D was also quite counter-intuitive in comparison. -Aaron -Original Message- From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: Everything new is obscure again Date: Thu May 18, 2006 9:42 am Size: 4K To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Clearly Bob doesn't have a D! :-) The later bodies lack several of the D's capabilities, like continuous focus in all exposure modes; wireless flash using the RTF to trigger the remote unit; and most functions available via knobs rather than menu-diving. All of these are useful, at least for me. The wireless flash system is excellent. There are no prototyping issues of any significance whatsoever. This is the preferred body EXCEPT for those who like to shoot continuously. All the other bodies are faster. They are also cheaper, which is obviously a consideration, too. One or more of the latest bodies will not work with any flash other than (I think) the (expensive but good) AF360FTZ. John On Thu, 18 May 2006 13:45:04 +0100, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen, With respect to Question #1: All the cameras have the same sensor and basic electrical components. D was the first - uses CF cards, capable of taking a battery pack/vertical grip. DS was the second - uses SD cards, slightly different controls instruction set. (capabilities are identical to the D, bigger LCD for chimping?) No vertical grip. DL cheaper alternative but uses porro mirror for viewfinder, not penta prism. (capabilities are identical to the Ds) No vertical grip. DS2, DL2 - introduced with bigger LDC on the back of the camera and a software upgrade (at least in the DS2). (Software upgrade is available on the Pentax USA site so you can update your DS if you have one - 5 minutes with a high speed internet connection - Thanks Pentax!) Bottom line is these are all a family of cameras based on the same electronics and capable of delivering the same digital results. The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. The DL cuts some corners (viewfinder) to drop the price for the mass market. Regards, Bob S. On 5/17/06, Stephen D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. In the intervening years I've been drawn closer to going digital, so the time has come to ask the right questions of the people in the know. 1. Can someone give me a brief explanation (or confirmation) of the differences in the istD, DL, and DS (plus the 2 versions). I've read what I can about them but just when I think I'm getting the general idea of them in comparison I still feel like something eludes me. For example, I know the plain D is the oldest of the three, and the most expensive, but I find myself asking, Why is this camera still being made? I get the general sense that the D is aimed at a higher level user than the DL or DS, though they all have many of the same features, and the LCD screens are bigger on the more recent models, but I still don't feel like I have a clear idea of what the D can do that the DS or DL can't. What makes the D cost twice as much as a camera that's several years newer? 2. I'm attracted to the Ds for the Pentax experience I've had for the last 27 years and the option to use my existing A series lenses. Can someone clarify what happens to the focal length when an older lens is put on the newer body? 3. Can I use my AF400T flash with any of the Ds? 4. What are the latest rumors about the next generation of Pentax digital SLRs? I know one of the inevitable questions about dispensing advice will be What kind of photographer are you? The easiest answer is somewhere in that vague area that defines people who have a bachelor's degree in photography, do some freelance commercial work when they have to, but generally do their own personal photo projects. After 18 years with an MX I bought in college (with money I earned using my dad's Spotmatic), I've used an LX for the past eight or nine years. And, boy, you go away from the list for a few months and a whole new set of acronyms pops up. You certainly can't tell the players if you don't have a scorecard. Would someone patient be so
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Bob W wrote: If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... I joined the list sometime around April, 2001 so I just missed the Mafud era. After reading the above, I'm almost sorry I missed it! :-) -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net
Re: FA 20~35 or FA35/2.0
- Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: FA 20~35 or FA35/2.0 24-35 on digital is 36-52 on 35mm. AAGHH. It's even worse when they do it backwards. William Robb
Re: Everything new is obscure again
John, while the DS didn't has AF-C in all modes when introduced, all of the Pentax DSLR's currently support AF-C in all modes (DS got it with firmware 2.0). Note the AF unit on the DL's and the buffer is cut down (DL's have same sized buffer as D, DS/DS2 have twice the buffer). The DL's require P-TTL flash for TTL modes, the DS and D doe plain TTL as well. -Adam John Forbes wrote: Clearly Bob doesn't have a D! :-) The later bodies lack several of the D's capabilities, like continuous focus in all exposure modes; wireless flash using the RTF to trigger the remote unit; and most functions available via knobs rather than menu-diving. All of these are useful, at least for me. The wireless flash system is excellent. There are no prototyping issues of any significance whatsoever. This is the preferred body EXCEPT for those who like to shoot continuously. All the other bodies are faster. They are also cheaper, which is obviously a consideration, too. One or more of the latest bodies will not work with any flash other than (I think) the (expensive but good) AF360FTZ. John On Thu, 18 May 2006 13:45:04 +0100, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen, With respect to Question #1: All the cameras have the same sensor and basic electrical components. D was the first - uses CF cards, capable of taking a battery pack/vertical grip. DS was the second - uses SD cards, slightly different controls instruction set. (capabilities are identical to the D, bigger LCD for chimping?) No vertical grip. DL cheaper alternative but uses porro mirror for viewfinder, not penta prism. (capabilities are identical to the Ds) No vertical grip. DS2, DL2 - introduced with bigger LDC on the back of the camera and a software upgrade (at least in the DS2). (Software upgrade is available on the Pentax USA site so you can update your DS if you have one - 5 minutes with a high speed internet connection - Thanks Pentax!) Bottom line is these are all a family of cameras based on the same electronics and capable of delivering the same digital results. The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. The DL cuts some corners (viewfinder) to drop the price for the mass market. Regards, Bob S. On 5/17/06, Stephen D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. In the intervening years I've been drawn closer to going digital, so the time has come to ask the right questions of the people in the know. 1. Can someone give me a brief explanation (or confirmation) of the differences in the istD, DL, and DS (plus the 2 versions). I've read what I can about them but just when I think I'm getting the general idea of them in comparison I still feel like something eludes me. For example, I know the plain D is the oldest of the three, and the most expensive, but I find myself asking, Why is this camera still being made? I get the general sense that the D is aimed at a higher level user than the DL or DS, though they all have many of the same features, and the LCD screens are bigger on the more recent models, but I still don't feel like I have a clear idea of what the D can do that the DS or DL can't. What makes the D cost twice as much as a camera that's several years newer? 2. I'm attracted to the Ds for the Pentax experience I've had for the last 27 years and the option to use my existing A series lenses. Can someone clarify what happens to the focal length when an older lens is put on the newer body? 3. Can I use my AF400T flash with any of the Ds? 4. What are the latest rumors about the next generation of Pentax digital SLRs? I know one of the inevitable questions about dispensing advice will be What kind of photographer are you? The easiest answer is somewhere in that vague area that defines people who have a bachelor's degree in photography, do some freelance commercial work when they have to, but generally do their own personal photo projects. After 18 years with an MX I bought in college (with money I earned using my dad's Spotmatic), I've used an LX for the past eight or nine years. And, boy, you go away from the list for a few months and a whole new set of acronyms pops up. You certainly can't tell the players if you don't have a scorecard. Would someone patient be so kind to explain what the following terms mean to the casual reader: GESO PESO PAW GFM PEOW anything else that comes to mind Thanks. I did miss reading the messages and am glad to be tuned in again. -Stephen
Re: PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs
Blue appears to have been disturbed. Has an impatient appearance of being half awake. On my monitor, the image has absolutely no appearance of over sharpening. In fact, I'd guess the intent was for a soft rendering. Nice lighting. Jack --- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Blue is one of my favorite cats, and whenever I visit with him I like to grab a snap or two. Yesterday was no exception, although Blue wasn't cooperating by engaging in his assortment of tricks and poses. He found a warm, sunny spot, and he wasn't moving. This is far from my best photo of him, but my client will enjoy it regardless. Does the photo seem a little too sharp to you? It looks close to being so on my monitor, but not quite so. Hmmm - I wonder if LCD screens show greater contrast/sharpness than CRT screen ... any thoughts on that? http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html istDS, A50/1.4, F8.0 @ 1/640, ISO 200 Shel __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs
I like it Shel. Doesn't look overly sharp to me on my LCD. I've looked @ a lot of my older images (that were processed using a CRT monitor) on my LCD haven't noticed any contrast/sharpness issues. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs Blue is one of my favorite cats, and whenever I visit with him I like to grab a snap or two. Yesterday was no exception, although Blue wasn't cooperating by engaging in his assortment of tricks and poses. He found a warm, sunny spot, and he wasn't moving. This is far from my best photo of him, but my client will enjoy it regardless. Does the photo seem a little too sharp to you? It looks close to being so on my monitor, but not quite so. Hmmm - I wonder if LCD screens show greater contrast/sharpness than CRT screen ... any thoughts on that? http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html istDS, A50/1.4, F8.0 @ 1/640, ISO 200 Shel
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
- Original Message - From: Christian Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) I joined the list sometime around April, 2001 so I just missed the Mafud era. After reading the above, I'm almost sorry I missed it! :-) He was fun for a while. Push this button and see what happens was the game I enjoyed. After it got predictable, it got boring. William Robb
Re: Question about photo gear shop in Houston TX
Boris, I recommend visiting the following two (2) stores: Houston Camera Exchange 5900 Richmond Houston, TX 77057 (800) 226-3725 http://www.hcehouston.com Camera Co.-Op. 801 Durham Dr Houston, TX 77007 (713) 522-7837 I have visited both and they sometimes have some good deals. Regards, Jose R. Rodriguez
PESO - Sunning on the Stairs
Blue is one of my favorite cats, and whenever I visit with him I like to grab a snap or two. Yesterday was no exception, although Blue wasn't cooperating by engaging in his assortment of tricks and poses. He found a warm, sunny spot, and he wasn't moving. This is far from my best photo of him, but my client will enjoy it regardless. Does the photo seem a little too sharp to you? It looks close to being so on my monitor, but not quite so. Hmmm - I wonder if LCD screens show greater contrast/sharpness than CRT screen ... any thoughts on that? http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html istDS, A50/1.4, F8.0 @ 1/640, ISO 200 Shel
Re: Am I the only person flying to GFM via Charlotte?
Thanks for the general invite Rick. I'm flying into Asheville this time -- knock an hour off the drive time. Norm From: Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] If not, I hereby renew my invitation to join me in my rental car for the drive to GFM (about noon Friday) and back (right after the close of festivities Sunday).
Re: ebay phishing scam got me
This was very cleverly done. I got scammed by thinking I had already been scammed. To wit: Sorry to hear it, Mark. They caught me a couple of months ago on a day when I was very tired. This must be how the fellow with all those FA* 300 f2.8s for sale gets access to eBay. Joe
Re: Am I the only person flying to GFM via Charlotte?
Thanks for the general invite Rick. I'm flying into Asheville this time -- knock an hour off the drive time. Norm From: Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] If not, I hereby renew my invitation to join me in my rental car for the drive to GFM (about noon Friday) and back (right after the close of festivities Sunday).
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Didn't Brad Dodo join in somewhere to, but I believe he was replying to his own posts... Norm From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person...
Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
On May 18, 2006, at 5:00 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: I always partition and format my disks from a command line interface: GUI's are for wimps! Formatting a 120G drive in FAT32 from DOS under WinME took nearly 12 hours. Formatting the same drive in FAT32 on Mac OS X took 40 minutes. I'll take the GUI any time. :-) Godfrey
Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
I use partition magic and it does the job in a jiffy. I set up a 300 gbyte drive a couple of months ago (three partitions) in about an hour and I went back to make changes a couple of times as well. Don Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On May 18, 2006, at 5:00 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: I always partition and format my disks from a command line interface: GUI's are for wimps! Formatting a 120G drive in FAT32 from DOS under WinME took nearly 12 hours. Formatting the same drive in FAT32 on Mac OS X took 40 minutes. I'll take the GUI any time. :-) Godfrey --No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.6.0/342 - Release Date: 17.5.2006 -- Dr E D F Williams www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616
Re: Measuring Megapixels
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/back-testing.shtml Perhaps this test of several digital cameras and backs may make interesting reading since there seems to be little activity here on the list. No pentax content, but ~plenty~ of megapixels ;-)) Indeed! I'd say it's not really off-topic. More sort of potentially-on :-). I think Canon's 1DsMk2 and Mamiyas with backs will be the real competitors to the coming 645D from Pentax. In my eyes, there seems to be a distinct, but not _very_ large step up in resolution between the C and the MedF. While financially far-fetched, I'd sure like to own one of them 645D babies when they arrive...:-) Jostein
RE: Everything new is obscure again
Welcome Stephen. Well guys, I guess we can stop believing he was the smart one. :-) Tom C. From: Stephen D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Everything new is obscure again Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 23:38:13 -0400 Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. Thanks. I did miss reading the messages and am glad to be tuned in again. -Stephen
Re: PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs
http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html - Nice, Shel. Maybe the best cat pic you've posted. The shadows make this one. With any more sharpening it would have been overdone, but this amount looks okay. Joe
Re: Everything new is obscure again
The later bodies lack several of the D's capabilities, like continuous focus in all exposure modes; Firmware v2 allowed AF-C operation in all modes on the DS body. The DL, DS2, DL2 all had it to start with. ... most functions available via knobs rather than menu-diving. There have been many debates about this. I find the DS layout nearly ideal, better than the D in several respects (like having ISO setting on a dedicated Fn menu rather than having to change the selector mode and look in a different place to set it, etc). Both are functional and work well overall. It is so rare that I touch the Menu button at all, the notion of menu-diving seems overstated. I do use the Fn menu often ... usually to change ISO setting. This is the preferred body EXCEPT for those who like to shoot continuously. All the other bodies are faster. They are also cheaper, which is obviously a consideration, too. I don't know about preferred. I prefer the DS over the D. One or more of the latest bodies will not work with any flash other than (I think) the (expensive but good) AF360FTZ. The DL/DL2 bodies only support P-TTL flash metering, so to get all the body's features you need a P-TTL capable flash unit. That's the AF360FGZ or AF540FGZ from Pentax, or the Sigma EF 500 DG Super. Of course, any of the bodies will work with any manual flash unit, or any flash unit that contains its own auto-metering unit built-in. Wireless control of a fully dedicated flash unit with the built-in flash is only available with the D model, but that again limits you to the same three flash units as the D. Wireless control of a fully dedicated flash unit is also possible with the DS, presuming you have two of them (one on the camera). Godfrey
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... Wow. I remember Mafud but somehow I missed those exchanges entirely. I read the list in those days on Pentax's web site. Maybe Pentax censored that stuff. What a pity. I suppose the archive has gone to the digital aether. Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
I remember Mafud and got some friendly off-list emails from him at one stage. But from Brad Dobo I got promises of bodily harm (that included the loss of all my teeth) in response to a diplomatic (and kindly I thought) suggestion that he seek help. I have a feeling I was not the only one threatened with mayhem. Don Joseph Tainter wrote: If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... Wow. I remember Mafud but somehow I missed those exchanges entirely. I read the list in those days on Pentax's web site. Maybe Pentax censored that stuff. What a pity. I suppose the archive has gone to the digital aether. Joe -- Dr E D F Williams www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
OH MY GOD THAT THREAD HAS DEFINITIVE PROOF. Thank you for sharing it, Joe. -Aaron On May 18, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote: Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Join the crowd...what a whack job. I do remember the look on TV's face, at GFM, when I introduced myself to him as Brad Dodo - it was rather frightening. Norm From: Don Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] I remember Mafud and got some friendly off-list emails from him at one stage. But from Brad Dobo I got promises of bodily harm (that included the loss of all my teeth) in response to a diplomatic (and kindly I thought) suggestion that he seek help. I have a feeling I was not the only one threatened with mayhem.
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Wow, Wow, Wow!!! Thanks for the laugh! Tom C. From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:46:44 -0700 Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Wow... That's every bit as manic as I remember Mafud. Jostein - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:46 PM Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
On May 18, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Norman Baugher wrote: Join the crowd...what a whack job. I do remember the look on TV's face, at GFM, when I introduced myself to him as Brad Dodo - it was rather frightening. Oh, brilliant! Wish I had thought of that. -Aaron
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Actually, Bill Robb is Kirkland Ramsay, Mafud and Matt Grene. He denies it vociferously, of course, but those in the know have been aware of it for a long time. Other list members have assumed alter egos as well. Cotty once took on the persona of a lunatic school teacher from London, Ontario. He eventually tired of it. Paul -- Original message -- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... Wow. I remember Mafud but somehow I missed those exchanges entirely. I read the list in those days on Pentax's web site. Maybe Pentax censored that stuff. What a pity. I suppose the archive has gone to the digital aether. Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Actually, Bill Robb is Kirkland Ramsay, Mafud and Matt Grene. He denies it vociferously, of course, but those in the know have been aware of it for a long time. Other list members have assumed alter egos as well. Cotty once took on the persona of a lunatic school teacher from London, Ontario. He eventually tired of it. Paul -- Original message -- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... Wow. I remember Mafud but somehow I missed those exchanges entirely. I read the list in those days on Pentax's web site. Maybe Pentax censored that stuff. What a pity. I suppose the archive has gone to the digital aether. Joe
Re: Everything new is obscure again
Aaron, I think I am right in saying that Continuous AF only works in Sport mode on the DS. I assumed it did the same on the DS2, but presumably Pentax have added back a bit of functionality if it also works in Av and M. I have to say that I don't change ISO from shot to shot. If I did so, then perhaps your thumb-tapping technique would be easier. John On Thu, 18 May 2006 15:05:00 +0100, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What modes is continuous focus disabled in -- the programs? Works fine for me in M and AV on the DS2. As for the control set, I miss the vertical grip and front dial, but do not miss the implementation of drive mode and ISO on the D, which require you to change position relative to the camera to see what you're doing on the top LCD and also change your hand position -- why people prefer to do this instead of tapping their thumb three times while just pulling their eye away from the finder is beyond me. Manual white balance on the D was also quite counter-intuitive in comparison. -Aaron -Original Message- From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: Everything new is obscure again Date: Thu May 18, 2006 9:42 am Size: 4K To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Clearly Bob doesn't have a D! :-) The later bodies lack several of the D's capabilities, like continuous focus in all exposure modes; wireless flash using the RTF to trigger the remote unit; and most functions available via knobs rather than menu-diving. All of these are useful, at least for me. The wireless flash system is excellent. There are no prototyping issues of any significance whatsoever. This is the preferred body EXCEPT for those who like to shoot continuously. All the other bodies are faster. They are also cheaper, which is obviously a consideration, too. One or more of the latest bodies will not work with any flash other than (I think) the (expensive but good) AF360FTZ. John On Thu, 18 May 2006 13:45:04 +0100, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen, With respect to Question #1: All the cameras have the same sensor and basic electrical components. D was the first - uses CF cards, capable of taking a battery pack/vertical grip. DS was the second - uses SD cards, slightly different controls instruction set. (capabilities are identical to the D, bigger LCD for chimping?) No vertical grip. DL cheaper alternative but uses porro mirror for viewfinder, not penta prism. (capabilities are identical to the Ds) No vertical grip. DS2, DL2 - introduced with bigger LDC on the back of the camera and a software upgrade (at least in the DS2). (Software upgrade is available on the Pentax USA site so you can update your DS if you have one - 5 minutes with a high speed internet connection - Thanks Pentax!) Bottom line is these are all a family of cameras based on the same electronics and capable of delivering the same digital results. The first of the series, the *ist D, has the usual Pentax prototyping issues. The DS drops some of those initial features and gets to a great camera with everything you need. The DL cuts some corners (viewfinder) to drop the price for the mass market. Regards, Bob S. On 5/17/06, Stephen D'Andrea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, After a couple years absence I've returned to the list. My passion for Pentax never waned during my time away, but my leisure to keep up with the list did. In the intervening years I've been drawn closer to going digital, so the time has come to ask the right questions of the people in the know. 1. Can someone give me a brief explanation (or confirmation) of the differences in the istD, DL, and DS (plus the 2 versions). I've read what I can about them but just when I think I'm getting the general idea of them in comparison I still feel like something eludes me. For example, I know the plain D is the oldest of the three, and the most expensive, but I find myself asking, Why is this camera still being made? I get the general sense that the D is aimed at a higher level user than the DL or DS, though they all have many of the same features, and the LCD screens are bigger on the more recent models, but I still don't feel like I have a clear idea of what the D can do that the DS or DL can't. What makes the D cost twice as much as a camera that's several years newer? 2. I'm attracted to the Ds for the Pentax experience I've had for the last 27 years and the option to use my existing A series lenses. Can someone clarify what happens to the focal length when an older lens is put on the newer body? 3. Can I use my AF400T flash with any of the Ds? 4. What are the latest rumors about the next generation of Pentax digital SLRs? I know one of the inevitable questions about dispensing advice will be What kind of photographer are you? The easiest answer is somewhere in that vague area that defines people who have a bachelor's degree in photography, do some freelance commercial work when they have to, but
Re: Regarding RAW converters
Pancho Hasselbach Wed, 17 May 2006 13:29:17 -0700 Collin, may I politely point to you that I for example, and most likely some other list members, have that weird thing called life, too. Good for the two of us. Though some of the *smart* responses haven't been so encouraging. : ) As I understood your question it wasn't about minutae but about basics. It's minutae in the sense of being little things scattered here and there. As I've read, as stated, lots of discussion about the items, little if anything was mentioned about costs, etc. hence my postings. That's the minutae I was talking about. A few things have been mentioned here and there, but nothing concise that I could find. The list archive offers a search function, which is a fast way for scanning those lotsa postings. I spend more time in the archives than in the emails. Last night I watched Alias and went to a dramatic presentation @ church. Anyone here have a Milo Rimbaldi photograph? Moreso, by asking questions that have been treated vastely in the past you create even more (probably unnecessary) traffic. You adressed me with your reply, so it's me who asks you to be sensible about giving and taking. It's you who wants to know something, what should be wrong about your own effort in first place to acquire some knowledge out of the archive? Others do that, too. I've put forth effort to find scattered info and didn't (and don't) think it frivilous to try to get the information into a concise set of responses. Your concern is understood but I think a bit presumptive about my character and integrity. Collin
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
- Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Yup. Pseudo Mafud. Fer sure. I wonder if he'd remember me. William Robb
Re: PESO - Blue Sunning on the Stairs
I don't think so, but I'm very pleased that you like it feel it's a good 'un. Thanks for looking. BTW, I did try to work with the shadows - that's what first caught my interest. Shel [Original Message] From: Joseph Tainter http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/sun_on_stairs.html Nice, Shel. Maybe the best cat pic you've posted. The shadows make this one. With any more sharpening it would have been overdone, but this amount looks okay.
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Actually, Bill Robb is Kirkland Ramsay, Mafud and Matt Grene. And The Who, too. Fred
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Norman Baugher wrote: Join the crowd...what a whack job. I do remember the look on TV's face, at GFM, when I introduced myself to him as Brad Dodo - it was rather frightening. Ah yes, one of the classic Norm Baugher incidents! (I wish I had been there to watch.)
RE: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Nice to see that Bruce Rubenstein put in an appearance in that thread too. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 May 2006 17:57 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) OH MY GOD THAT THREAD HAS DEFINITIVE PROOF. Thank you for sharing it, Joe. -Aaron On May 18, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote: Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
OT: Controversial subjects now the Goriller of 3B
I knew that PDML's wide ranging discussions covered almost everything imaginable, but I never ever thought I'd run across Nigel Molesworth here. Larf! *UncaMikey On May 17, 2006, at 5:43 PM, Bob W wrote: As any fule kno. Bob http://www.stcustards.free-online.co.uk/
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Bob W wrote: If I remember correctly, Mafud and Kirkland Ramsay III (Presbyterian) where arguing vehemently against each other, with Matt (?) Grene providing vociferous support to one of the main protagonists. What made it so special is that all three of them were, in fact, the same person... Here's my record of Mafud's incarnations: Suda Mafud ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Kirkland Ramsey M. T. Greene Matt Greene ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Ed ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Note that for the last one he changed his name but forgot to change the email address associated with it :) The Listmeister tells me he re-subbed a few more times under different names but only made one or two posts under each one.
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
On Thu, 18 May 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cotty once took on the persona of a lunatic school teacher from London, Ontario. He eventually tired of it. Umm, make a search for 'discombobulation' in: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Cotty? Kostas
Re: OT: External HD's and two OS's
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On May 18, 2006, at 5:00 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: I always partition and format my disks from a command line interface: GUI's are for wimps! Formatting a 120G drive in FAT32 from DOS under WinME took nearly 12 hours. Formatting the same drive in FAT32 on Mac OS X took 40 minutes. I'll take the GUI any time. :-) 12 hours? I can't believe that lack of a GUI was responsible for that! I formatted my 250 gig drive under DOS 7 (Win98) and it took about an hour. I'd guess hardware was the issue. *Something* besides the OS, anyway.
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Bob W wrote: Nice to see that Bruce Rubenstein put in an appearance in that thread too. Oh, I'd forgotten about him. Some of my favorite Rubenstein quotes: Thinking that Pentax will start selling an up to date DSLR, when they've sold nothing more than simple PS digital cameras, is pure fantasy. It isn't that Pentax will use some new lens mount on an interchangeable DSLR, they aren't going to release an interchangeable lens DSLR. They missed their window of opportunity and have passed on making this type of product. By the time that Pentax would ever start selling an IL-DSLR, anyone who wanted digital will have been long gone. I have no idea why anyone seriously thought, as opposed to wished, that Pentax would sell a DSLR. People who have a need for digital have, and will, find other solutions. And this last gem: I don't expect any major, or long term, effect on the Pentax used equipment market. Wonder what he'd pay for my MZ-S now? g
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
But nowhere near as well-informed. Mafud may have been an opinionated loudmouth with absolutely no tolerance for dissenting opinions, and an extreme ability to see insults and racial slurs where none was intended, but he wasn't an ignoramus. On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:11:18PM +0200, Jostein wrote: Wow... That's every bit as manic as I remember Mafud. Jostein - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:46 PM Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
Re: OT: Controversial subjects now the Goriller of 3B
Why not? We all know dere Nigel was a keen photographer (we've seen the photographs of Molesworth 2, Peason, etc.). On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:35:53PM -0500, Unca Mikey wrote: I knew that PDML's wide ranging discussions covered almost everything imaginable, but I never ever thought I'd run across Nigel Molesworth here. Larf! *UncaMikey On May 17, 2006, at 5:43 PM, Bob W wrote: As any fule kno. Bob http://www.stcustards.free-online.co.uk/
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
I don't know. I'd bet money this was the same guy, especially since at one point in the thread there was reference to a web gallery by Ed Greene with photos in it attributed to Suda Mafud. And subsequent to that being pointed out, the gallery was removed. He was an ignoramus... at times. The other option could be that this is Son of Mafud. Tom C. From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:05:46 -0400 But nowhere near as well-informed. Mafud may have been an opinionated loudmouth with absolutely no tolerance for dissenting opinions, and an extreme ability to see insults and racial slurs where none was intended, but he wasn't an ignoramus. On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:11:18PM +0200, Jostein wrote: Wow... That's every bit as manic as I remember Mafud. Jostein - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:46 PM Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe
WTB: Pentax LX SC-69 (or SC-21) Focusing Screen
I would like to purchase a new or unused Pentax LX SC-69 Focusing Screen for my LX. I recently scratched my existing focusing screen and would like to replace it. I may also consider a new/unused SC-21 screen, if a SC-69 screen is not available. I have already asked Peter from Camera Direct and he will be checking to see if he can obtain any from Japan. So, if you have one you are willing to sell to me, please contact me off list. Thanks, Jose R. Rodriguez
RE: GESO: Blues
WOW - I'd like to hear the version with Peter Green! Where might I find it? Regards jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Tim Øsleby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 15. maj 2006 14:12 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: GESO: Blues Your band sure sound like a hefty act Jens. And you where able to keep a steady beat. I don't really remember the Cream version, but as I recall, you sound a bit looser, a bit jazzier. The singers nasal sound is very similar to Clapton ;-) Never the less. This and Cream is or RB, rhythm and blues. Clapton has rerecorded the song, acoustic, him and Peter Green. That's much closer to the original Johnson recording (I've got that on CD). Less bells and whistles, and a lot harder to play. I've also found a version by Tom Waits, very different, but pretty hefty too. I'm also trying to download the Cream version. So far, in vain :-( 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: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14. mai 2006 10:26 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: GESO: Blues That's true, Butch. In the late sixties the guitar palyer in my band visited London. He was the first Danish guy to buy a WOW-WOW pedal there. We formed a band playing all the great Cream songs: Sunshine of Your Love, Strange Brew and of course Crossroads. We named the band - very orininally - Crowd. We had lots of gigs for a year or two. I was the drummer and my kid brother Ole (16 years at the time) was the singer and bass player. Here's Crossroads in our cover-version: http://www.jensbladt.dk/Images/Crowd-Crossroads-1969.mp3 Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Butch Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. maj 2006 03:21 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: GESO: Blues Jens wrote I think it floats just fine. This is not Eric Clapton and Cream, playing in arecord studio. It's really folk music - hobo music, isn't it? Originally played by people with no education, walking from street to street, playing for the poor people, day-labourers, whores, guests in cheap crummy restaurants etc. That is at least the impression I get from the lyrics in the songs. To me this sound just about right ;-) The original was done by Robert Johnson and was much closer to that version then Cream's version was. Cream's version is in my opinion is a prime example of English blues rock of the 60's and is in my personal top ten songs of all time. Clapton has since proved he is as adept at playing traditional Chicago blues and is no slouch at acoustic blues either. Butch -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/338 - Release Date: 05/12/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/338 - Release Date: 05/12/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/338 - Release Date: 05/12/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.6.1/343 - Release Date: 05/18/2006
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: Yup. Pseudo Mafud. Fer sure. I wonder if he'd remember me. William Robb Do you think this guy actually has a psychopathic/identity problem or does he get his kicks this way? Tom C.
Re: Measuring Megapixels
Hey, they forgot this baby: http://postpossum.spymac.com/images/IMGP2616s.jpg ;) http://tinyurl.com/zmrhz (cheat sheet) Didn't have it long enough enough to take a 78mb picture of a cat though. Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: Re: Measuring Megapixels From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/back-testing.shtml Perhaps this test of several digital cameras and backs may make interesting reading since there seems to be little activity here on the list. No pentax content, but ~plenty~ of megapixels ;-)) Indeed! I'd say it's not really off-topic. More sort of potentially-on :-). I think Canon's 1DsMk2 and Mamiyas with backs will be the real competitors to the coming 645D from Pentax. In my eyes, there seems to be a distinct, but not _very_ large step up in resolution between the C and the MedF. While financially far-fetched, I'd sure like to own one of them 645D babies when they arrive...:-) Jostein
RE: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
I liked Bruce. He was an ornery old bastard with a great turn of phrase. He probably felt crowded out... -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 May 2006 21:03 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Bob W wrote: Nice to see that Bruce Rubenstein put in an appearance in that thread too. Oh, I'd forgotten about him. Some of my favorite Rubenstein quotes: Thinking that Pentax will start selling an up to date DSLR, when they've sold nothing more than simple PS digital cameras, is pure fantasy. It isn't that Pentax will use some new lens mount on an interchangeable DSLR, they aren't going to release an interchangeable lens DSLR. They missed their window of opportunity and have passed on making this type of product. By the time that Pentax would ever start selling an IL-DSLR, anyone who wanted digital will have been long gone. I have no idea why anyone seriously thought, as opposed to wished, that Pentax would sell a DSLR. People who have a need for digital have, and will, find other solutions. And this last gem: I don't expect any major, or long term, effect on the Pentax used equipment market. Wonder what he'd pay for my MZ-S now? g
PESO - Digue Carnot
Another night view from the French seaport of Boulogne-sur-Mer. http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1439402 Comments, critique and suggestions as always most welcome. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
Re: PESO - Digue Carnot
Excellent. Your night photography is fascinating. Keep them coming. Paul On May 18, 2006, at 6:24 PM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: Another night view from the French seaport of Boulogne-sur-Mer. http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1439402 Comments, critique and suggestions as always most welcome. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
AF360 Help
Hi everyone, I need some information on setting the AF360 and can't find my manual, so I thought I'd ask here for some help. I want to set the flash to work in manual mode and triggered by another manual flash going off (wireless slave mode). I thought that this could be done, but have never tried before. All help appreciated Thanks -- Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon
PESO - Peek-a-Boo
One of the nice things about having a small, digital camera always handy on my desk, is being able to catch fleeting moments like this one. http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/peekaboo.html Shel
Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
God, can things get any worse. Photo funk for many months and now i get an email from a photo company that is a lot bigger than moi, stating that they have the rights to shoot anequine show next weekend, that i'm supposed to have,from the guy who has nothing to do with it anymore. The new managers are clients of mine and gabe me the show over 10 months ago. This guy is really aggressive and i have emailed an called him back on this, bit, do you think this is a muscle effort. I mean the guy he is quoting left that show 2 years ago. I don't know what to do now. He has taken one show from me already this year, but i knew that. Am i being over run because i'm a small business(he has 4 mac's several tent staff and 5 photographers. I'm me and my web site. Ladies and Gents, i'm in a real mental funk tonight. Any thing i can do here, and words of encouragement Lord n\knows its needed here tonight. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
Hi Dave, Talk to the managers who gave you the job. Get it in writing. If you have a lawyer friend, perhaps you can get him to write a tough letter to the guys who are trying to muscle you out. Good luck. Paul On May 18, 2006, at 9:12 PM, Dave Brooks wrote: God, can things get any worse. Photo funk for many months and now i get an email from a photo company that is a lot bigger than moi, stating that they have the rights to shoot anequine show next weekend, that i'm supposed to have,from the guy who has nothing to do with it anymore. The new managers are clients of mine and gabe me the show over 10 months ago. This guy is really aggressive and i have emailed an called him back on this, bit, do you think this is a muscle effort. I mean the guy he is quoting left that show 2 years ago. I don't know what to do now. He has taken one show from me already this year, but i knew that. Am i being over run because i'm a small business(he has 4 mac's several tent staff and 5 photographers. I'm me and my web site. Ladies and Gents, i'm in a real mental funk tonight. Any thing i can do here, and words of encouragement Lord n\knows its needed here tonight. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: Do you think this guy actually has a psychopathic/identity problem or does he get his kicks this way? He told me one time when he was berating me offlist (I probably deserved it) that all sorts of authours write under pseudonym. I believe he mentioned Hemingway specifically. William Robb
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
- Original Message - From: Dave Brooks Subject: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business God, can things get any worse. Photo funk for many months and now i get an email from a photo company that is a lot bigger than moi, stating that they have the rights to shoot anequine show next weekend, that i'm supposed to have,from the guy who has nothing to do with it anymore. The new managers are clients of mine and gabe me the show over 10 months ago. This guy is really aggressive and i have emailed an called him back on this, bit, do you think this is a muscle effort. I mean the guy he is quoting left that show 2 years ago. I don't know what to do now. He has taken one show from me already this year, but i knew that. Am i being over run because i'm a small business(he has 4 mac's several tent staff and 5 photographers. I'm me and my web site. Ladies and Gents, i'm in a real mental funk tonight. Any thing i can do here, and words of encouragement Lord n\knows its needed here tonight. If you have the contract in hand, tell him to take a flying f#ck at a rolling doughnut. If you don't, then get in touch with the event organizers and ask them what gives. Then tell the peon to take a flying f#ck at the moon. William Robb
Re: AF360 Help
Leon, I don't have my manual handy either, but I know that it is available on Pentax USA's web site. Joe
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
And after you get the assignment in writing from the managers who have the authority to do so, have them write to the muscle guys informing them that the former manager has no authority to give them the rights to photograph the show. -P Paul Stenquist wrote: Hi Dave, Talk to the managers who gave you the job. Get it in writing. If you have a lawyer friend, perhaps you can get him to write a tough letter to the guys who are trying to muscle you out. Good luck. Paul On May 18, 2006, at 9:12 PM, Dave Brooks wrote: God, can things get any worse. Photo funk for many months and now i get an email from a photo company that is a lot bigger than moi, stating that they have the rights to shoot anequine show next weekend, that i'm supposed to have,from the guy who has nothing to do with it anymore. The new managers are clients of mine and gabe me the show over 10 months ago. This guy is really aggressive and i have emailed an called him back on this, bit, do you think this is a muscle effort. I mean the guy he is quoting left that show 2 years ago. I don't know what to do now. He has taken one show from me already this year, but i knew that. Am i being over run because i'm a small business(he has 4 mac's several tent staff and 5 photographers. I'm me and my web site. Ladies and Gents, i'm in a real mental funk tonight. Any thing i can do here, and words of encouragement Lord n\knows its needed here tonight. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT)
Wow, Wow, Wow!!! Thanks for the laugh! Tom C. From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Controversial subjects (RE: Zone Alarm (Now OT) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:46:44 -0700 Mafud lives! Now dba Ed Greene: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FVwmtag= Joe -- Oh, there's more. Get the full name here. Must be a distinguished ancestry. Unfortunately the AOL link is dead: http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=44325 But you can sponsor him for a Photo.Net membership. Joe
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
Dave, I know some high powered local attorneys who hate jackasses. If you pretend to like baseball, they will help you -- just get it in writing from your show clients that it's your show. -Aaron p.s. you don't even have to pretend to like baseball.
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
Sorry to hear about your trouble, Dave. I can't offer advice beyond what you've already seen posted. Just don't accept it without a fight. Best wishes. Joe
RE: PESO - Digue Carnot
Nice shot ... I wonder if the railroad tracks are needed. It's a different pic with and without them ... more context with the tracks, more abstract without. Shel [Original Message] From: Ralf R. Radermacher Another night view from the French seaport of Boulogne-sur-Mer. http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1439402
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
Hi Dave, I have kind of skimmed over the other answers I see what you have gotten, but I think it may be more complicated than they indicate. The thing that you have to find out is did the former manager have the authority at the time to bind the organization. And who has a written contract with them, you or him? However, if you managed to get a written agreement from the organization then things are different, even if they have a prior agreement with the other guy, you do have an agreement with them and they are liable to meet that agreement with you. See it begins to get complicated. You really need to talk to a local attorney. This is not something we can advise you on even if we know all the facts. Talk to an attorney about this case. You might want get general advice about contracts for the future from him too, so if something like this happens again you know in advance what you have to do. The only thing I can tell you is, don't give up until you have lost. Do not just back down because the other guy is bigger. Even if he wins, you may also, if the organization gave a contract to both of you they are the ones with a problem. But you can be sure they do have an attorney on hand, and you are going to have to stand your ground in any case. Welcome to the world of business. The least you are going to get out of this is to learn how to not let yourself get into a situation like this in the future. However, it goes in the end, consider it a learning experience. Oh, yes, be firm, but very polite with the organization people. Your attitude should be that you do not have a problem with them, but are just trying to straighten out an contract problem. After all you will probably want to continue doing business with them in the future. Let me repeat that important statement. Don't give up until you have lost. Remember what happens to a team that walks off the field in the seventh inning, they forfeit the game. Make sure you have lost, and not just forfeited. The very least you want to do is leave everyone aware that they are dealing with a professional. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Dave Brooks wrote: God, can things get any worse. Photo funk for many months and now i get an email from a photo company that is a lot bigger than moi, stating that they have the rights to shoot anequine show next weekend, that i'm supposed to have,from the guy who has nothing to do with it anymore. The new managers are clients of mine and gabe me the show over 10 months ago. This guy is really aggressive and i have emailed an called him back on this, bit, do you think this is a muscle effort. I mean the guy he is quoting left that show 2 years ago. I don't know what to do now. He has taken one show from me already this year, but i knew that. Am i being over run because i'm a small business(he has 4 mac's several tent staff and 5 photographers. I'm me and my web site. Ladies and Gents, i'm in a real mental funk tonight. Any thing i can do here, and words of encouragement Lord n\knows its needed here tonight. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H
Re: AF360 Help
Leon, I was told by someone (sorry, I don't remember who) that both the 360 and 500 would work as triggers in wireless mode. I asked Pentax who had no info to confirm, but suggested trying it as there could be some operational possibilities not covered by the manual. I didn't. I've only done it with the MZ-S using the built in flash and 360 in P-TTL. Jack --- Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone, I need some information on setting the AF360 and can't find my manual, so I thought I'd ask here for some help. I want to set the flash to work in manual mode and triggered by another manual flash going off (wireless slave mode). I thought that this could be done, but have never tried before. All help appreciated Thanks -- Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Need a shoulder, and advice on my business
May be largely (or totally) bluff and bluster unsupported by authority. You've got to get specific and professionally aggressive. Keep it subdued, matter-of-fact and respectful. So much is unknown that a further detailed course ends with the good advice rendered by others that an attorney needs to be involved. Will be anxious to hear the outcome. Best of luck. Jack --- Dave Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: God, can things get any worse. Photo funk for many months and now i get an email from a photo company that is a lot bigger than moi, stating that they have the rights to shoot anequine show next weekend, that i'm supposed to have,from the guy who has nothing to do with it anymore. The new managers are clients of mine and gabe me the show over 10 months ago. This guy is really aggressive and i have emailed an called him back on this, bit, do you think this is a muscle effort. I mean the guy he is quoting left that show 2 years ago. I don't know what to do now. He has taken one show from me already this year, but i knew that. Am i being over run because i'm a small business(he has 4 mac's several tent staff and 5 photographers. I'm me and my web site. Ladies and Gents, i'm in a real mental funk tonight. Any thing i can do here, and words of encouragement Lord n\knows its needed here tonight. Dave David J Brooks Equine, Pets, Bands, Rural Landscape Photography in York Region www.caughtinmotion.com Pentax istD, PZ-1, Nikon D1 D2H __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: PESO - Digue Carnot
Don't like the sign. Otherwise, a striking shot. Jack --- Ralf R. Radermacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another night view from the French seaport of Boulogne-sur-Mer. http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1439402 Comments, critique and suggestions as always most welcome. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: PESO - Digue Carnot
Nicely executed, I like it. However it attracts me more without the foreground tracks. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Ralf R. Radermacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO - Digue Carnot Another night view from the French seaport of Boulogne-sur-Mer. http://www.photosight.ru/photo.php?photoid=1439402 Comments, critique and suggestions as always most welcome. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
Re: PESO - Peek-a-Boo
Nice Shel, but I wish both eyes were as defined as the left one. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO - Peek-a-Boo One of the nice things about having a small, digital camera always handy on my desk, is being able to catch fleeting moments like this one. http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/peekaboo.html Shel
