RE: Anti-shake, after the fact
At 01:07 PM 10/08/2006, you wrote: I was employed at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the RADAR Science and Technology group from 1984 to 1988. That makes me feel pretty shallow. I spent most of 84'-88' sitting on the back of a boat drinking Flaming Lamborghinis, listening to Depeche Mode and chatting up girls. At least that's what I remember... Simon You guy's are making me feel really young. '84-'88 were grades 2-6 for me. :-) Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Father and child
http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20060810101241 Father and child instead of mother and child icon. -- home http://roman.blakout.net/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: any opinions on the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC?
Yes I'd like to know more about it too, specialy I'd like to know about EX18-50/2.8 against DA16-45/4. 2006/8/10, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I ended up buying the Sigma tonight. It just suited my needs. Amita - Amita, please let us know what you think of it. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
On Aug 10, 2006, at 12:02 AM, David Savage wrote: I was employed at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the RADAR Science and Technology group from 1984 to 1988. That makes me feel pretty shallow. I spent most of 84'-88' sitting on the back of a boat drinking Flaming Lamborghinis, listening to Depeche Mode and chatting up girls. At least that's what I remember... Simon You guy's are making me feel really young. '84-'88 were grades 2-6 for me. Remember the old saw about age and treachery... ;-) Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
At 04:21 PM 10/08/2006, you wrote: On Aug 10, 2006, at 12:02 AM, David Savage wrote: I was employed at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the RADAR Science and Technology group from 1984 to 1988. That makes me feel pretty shallow. I spent most of 84'-88' sitting on the back of a boat drinking Flaming Lamborghinis, listening to Depeche Mode and chatting up girls. At least that's what I remember... Simon You guy's are making me feel really young. '84-'88 were grades 2-6 for me. Remember the old saw about age and treachery... ;-) Godfrey Yep. And I don't even have beauty to fall back on. ;-) Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
I've read a few months ago about a PS camera that features such software shake reduction. The camera movement (kernel) is detected by actual accelerometers just like with hardware AS, but the shake correction is not done physically through lens or sensor position control, but by an embedded software post-processing. I can't remember which camera brand it is though. Such deconvolution techniques have been used for quite a while by astrophotographers. The movement kernel is very easy to determine in this case, just pick a star image and you get the camera movement to be removed. Patrice 2006/8/9, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Software-based anti-shake that works on photos you've already taken: http://news.com.com/Researchers+take+the+blur+out+of+shaky+photos/2100-1041_3-6102910.html?tag=nefd.lede -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Fake SanDisk Cards on eBay
I purchased a fake SanDisk CF card on eBay, and fortunately got my money back pretty easily. Nonetheless, I just thought I'd pass the following info on so that those here could be all the wiser. Article on FAKE SanDisk Ultra Compact Flash Cards Exposed http://tinyurl.com/zqemt The sellers name in my particular case was crossfocus... but I'm sure there are dozens others. Be mindful. - Jerome -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Compare ways for antishake
I would like to find articles/web pages comparing the two different ways for solving antishake: adjust sensor in the body - adjust optic elements in the lens I would appreciate your view on this subject and your links to interesting articles/web pages. Do you think Pentax are choosing the best way? regards/falke -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Compare ways for antishake
On Aug 10, 2006, at 4:39 AM, Bengt Falke wrote: adjust sensor in the body - adjust optic elements in the lens ... Do you think Pentax are choosing the best way? Everything is a compromise. There is no such thing as a simple 'best'. Building lenses with optical image stabilization means making larger, heavier, more complex lenses that cost more. On the other hand, stabilization parameters can be optimized on a per-lens basis and those who need/want it have the option of buying it or not. Building bodies with image stabilization at the sensor means a small cost in body size and price, the limits of optimization are a little lower, and the difference in cost of complexity/fragility of the body vs the lens is difficult to evaluate. On the other hand, it means that you get lighter, simpler cheaper lenses, more support with improved function for older lenses, and image stabilization can be applied to all lenses as required/desired. I have used cameras with both in-body stabilization and in-lens stabilization. They both work very well when implemented well, in practical terms it's hard to see a difference in use. I feel Pentax is choosing a good compromise, presuming they do a good job in implementation. Buying the K100D or the upcoming 10Mpixel body will extend IS feature to using my existing lenses, which I am already happy with, so it preserves my investment and costs me only the incremental addition of another body to my existing kit. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Compare ways for antishake
On Aug 10, 2006, at 8:13 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Buying the K100D or the upcoming 10Mpixel body will extend IS feature to using my existing lenses, which I am already happy with, so it preserves my investment and costs me only the incremental addition of another body to my existing kit. Bingo. I don't care if anti-shake implemented in the lens would be functionally better, as long as it's functionally good in this configuration. If it were in-lens, I'd have a huge upgrade cost, where with this option I pay one low price to upgrade everything I own and everything I will purchase in the future. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
Doug Franklin wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: Perhaps it could be reverse engineered to *add* authentic simulated camera shake to photos that don't already have it! Or I could hand Frank my camera. ;- I think the reciprocal of Nyquist frequency should be dubbed the Theriault frequency. Surely it plays an important role in establishing proper blur? ;-) (Just wait until Frank gets back from vacation and starts going through his backlogged email!) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
I think the Fuji F30 has that kind of system in it. I'll know more on Friday when mine arrives. Godfrey On Aug 10, 2006, at 3:09 AM, Patrice LACOUTURE wrote: I've read a few months ago about a PS camera that features such software shake reduction. The camera movement (kernel) is detected by actual accelerometers just like with hardware AS, but the shake correction is not done physically through lens or sensor position control, but by an embedded software post-processing. I can't remember which camera brand it is though. Such deconvolution techniques have been used for quite a while by astrophotographers. The movement kernel is very easy to determine in this case, just pick a star image and you get the camera movement to be removed. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Compare ways for antishake
2006/8/10, Bengt Falke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I would like to find articles/web pages comparing the two different ways for solving antishake: adjust sensor in the body - adjust optic elements in the lens I would appreciate your view on this subject and your links to interesting articles/web pages. Do you think Pentax are choosing the best way? regards/falke Then you should add the third (new) category: digitally post-process the image (blurred). Besides cost, it may be have some advantages (e.g power usage). When storing RAW images, a camera could just record the shake movements in the RAW file, and the actual processnig could be done off-line... Very little battery usage, no CPU power needed (so no extra delay), original image preserved... But of course no direct Jpeg output. I have a couple copies of the French magazine Chasseur d'Images with real life tests of the effectiveness of the AS systems: 2 guys try to shoot resolution targets handheld, with varying exposure times. Then they compare at which shutter speed the images get blurred, with and without AS. I'll try and get a hand on these papers. For the moment, I just can remember their global Pros and Cons about the two technologies you mentioned: Optics: - Pro: works both for digital and film SLRs - Pro: Stabilizes the viewfinder image - Con: restricted to specific (usually high-end) lenses Sensor: - Pro: Exists only for Digital - Pro: applies to all lenses (even discontinued ones that Pentaxists love) - Con: No viewfinder stabilization Both seem to have the following cons: - Power consumption (a monopod or a faster lens work without batteries) - Only compensate for movements of the camera, NOT of the subject (a faster lens does both, within limits). By the way, their tests showed that the K100D seems to performs rather not as well as Nikon's or Canon's stabilized lenses (about 1 f-stop worse). I wonder if it's due to the technology itself, or the maturity of the company with this technology. Patrice -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: One more time check
Aaron Reynolds wrote: Holy crap -- according to the headers, the internet got this three minutes before you sent it! YOU CAN GO BACK IN TIME! I'm sorry I ever doubted you, Dave Since he can go backwards in time, you should apologise that you are *going to* doubt him ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: One more time check
- Original Message - From: Mark Roberts Subject: Re: One more time check Aaron Reynolds wrote: Holy crap -- according to the headers, the internet got this three minutes before you sent it! YOU CAN GO BACK IN TIME! I'm sorry I ever doubted you, Dave Since he can go backwards in time, you should apologise that you are *going to* doubt him ;-) Too late. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: One more time check
Aaron Reynolds wrote: Holy crap -- according to the headers, the internet got this three minutes before you sent it! YOU CAN GO BACK IN TIME! I'm sorry I ever doubted you, Dave Since he can go backwards in time, you should apologise that you are *going to* doubt him ;-) Ya.:-) Dave -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Dot... Wait
Tom C wrote: Our dog Dot, a Blue Heeler, after a romp in the water. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4776813 Tom C. What, you don't want her to have a fair shake? :) Nice portrait, Tom ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: One more time check
But I already HAVE doubted him! Stupid Star Trek time paradox... -Aaron -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: One more time check Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:08 am Size: 451 bytes To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Aaron Reynolds wrote: Holy crap -- according to the headers, the internet got this three minutes before you sent it! YOU CAN GO BACK IN TIME! I'm sorry I ever doubted you, Dave Since he can go backwards in time, you should apologise that you are *going to* doubt him ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
PESO: Magician's assistant ?
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg I'm having such fun ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: One more time check
Aaron Reynolds wrote: But I already HAVE doubted him! Stupid Star Trek time paradox... As Douglas Adams noted in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, time travel was*, by its very nature, invented at *every* point in history. :-P * Yes, this makes the use of the past tense was somewhat questionable, but H2G2 also has a funny bit on the problem of verb tenses when dealing with time travel. -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Compare ways for antishake
- Original Message - From: Bengt Falke [EMAIL PROTECTED] adjust sensor in the body - adjust optic elements in the lens I would appreciate your view on this subject and your links to interesting articles/web pages. Do you think Pentax are choosing the best way? Yes. Pentax is choosing the best way. The main drawback with optical IS is that even a simple telephoto lens aquire the complexity of a super zoom lens when IS is added. All things equal (all things doesn't necessarily need to be equal), an IS lens will have less optical quality than the SAME lens without the IS feature. This is because IS just add lens elements that does not improve optical quality; the opposite in fact happens as IS introduce various abberations that needs to be corrected by even more lens elements. This can be read in the optical IS patents. You get a far more complex lens with typically the double amount of glass than similar lens without IS. We all know what 12-18 lens elements do for things like flare among others Pål -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
Cute, different, and nicely composed. A catpic keeper:-) Paul -- Original message -- From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg I'm having such fun ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Compare ways for antishake
- Original Message - From: Patrice LACOUTURE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Both seem to have the following cons: - Power consumption (a monopod or a faster lens work without batteries) This is wrong if Pentax is to be believed. SR only start to work the moment the shutter is released (in contrast with optical IS) which means that the extra power consumption is minimal. By the way, their tests showed that the K100D seems to performs rather not as well as Nikon's or Canon's stabilized lenses (about 1 f-stop worse). I wonder if it's due to the technology itself, or the maturity of the company with this technology. No. I think it is due to the fact that it is a CDI tests which means it is not to be trusted. Pål -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
Ann, what could you have possibly done to deserve that fur person? :) Anyway, good for you! Jack --- Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg I'm having such fun ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE Compare ways for antishake
In our Canon S3 IS there is a setting for when it is used together with a converter in font of the lens so I guess that the in-body anti shake must know the focal length to be able to calculate the anti shake compensation. I suppose new lenses have connections for this, but how do you enter this for old lenses (I have some of those) on the K100/K10D? As an old Pentax fan with a couple of film body's I am aiming for the K10D but the investment in lenses (with or without anti shake) are really the big decision for me because you will not replace them as often as the body. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
Jack Davis wrote: Ann, what could you have possibly done to deserve that fur person? :) Anyway, good for you! Jack LOL -- I'm not sure whether you are wondering how GOOD I've been or how Naughty :) ann --- Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg I'm having such fun ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: any opinions on the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC?
On 8/10/06, Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes I'd like to know more about it too, specialy I'd like to know about EX18-50/2.8 against DA16-45/4. 2006/8/10, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Amita, please let us know what you think of it. Thanks, Joe I'm taking it out this weekend, so I'll let you guys know how it is. I can't really compare it to the DA 16-45 since I don't have that lens. This lens is actually a replacement for my Sig 18-125mm F3.5 - F5.6, which I bought last year but have barely used. (A shame, because it's great for a snapshot lens.) Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE Compare ways for antishake
On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Bengt Falke wrote: I suppose new lenses have connections for this, but how do you enter this for old lenses (I have some of those) on the K100/K10D? It has a way to manually enter the focal length up to 800mm. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
Me either. :P Jack --- Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jack Davis wrote: Ann, what could you have possibly done to deserve that fur person? :) Anyway, good for you! Jack LOL -- I'm not sure whether you are wondering how GOOD I've been or how Naughty :) ann --- Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg I'm having such fun ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Father and child
Sweet shot, Roman! -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, August 10, 2006, 12:22:35 AM, you wrote: R http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20060810101241 R Father and child instead of mother and child icon. R -- R home http://roman.blakout.net/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
So where is the saw? -- Bruce Thursday, August 10, 2006, 6:34:31 AM, you wrote: AS http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg AS I'm having such fun AS ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Going on vacation and unsubscribing for a while
Hi! Tomorrow with G-d help I'd board the plain and go for a two weeks long vacation abroad. Thus I shall unsubscribe from the list in few hours ;-). Hopefully I have what to present for PAWs and PUG... -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Mediterranean looks
In a message dated 8/9/2006 12:05:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20060806183540 Looks like I'll be making more sessions with this model and your comment to my initial improvisations would be appreciated. Thank you. Mediterranean = Very nice shots, Roman. Yup, he's hunky -- meaning good looking. Definitely use again. How nice to have a stud muffin for a change. Marnie aka Doe ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:02:11PM +0800, David Savage wrote: At 01:07 PM 10/08/2006, you wrote: I was employed at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the RADAR Science and Technology group from 1984 to 1988. That makes me feel pretty shallow. I spent most of 84'-88' sitting on the back of a boat drinking Flaming Lamborghinis, listening to Depeche Mode and chatting up girls. At least that's what I remember... Simon You guy's are making me feel really young. '84-'88 were grades 2-6 for me. Hmm. I was working at Apollo computer, developing graphics software for their workstations. That gave me a personal-use system with a 1024x1024 colour display (and an 8Mhz 68000 CPU, together with a whopping 3MB of memory and a 140MB hard drive). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Going on vacation and unsubscribing for a while
Hopefully..is good. Don't let the chase cut too deeply into your relaxation. Jack --- Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! Tomorrow with G-d help I'd board the plain and go for a two weeks long vacation abroad. Thus I shall unsubscribe from the list in few hours ;-). Hopefully I have what to present for PAWs and PUG... -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
Let's see...grades 2-6...that would have been 1948-52. :} -P David Savage wrote: You guy's are making me feel really young. '84-'88 were grades 2-6 for me. :-) Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
Bruce Dayton wrote: So where is the saw? -- I don't see it anywhere ann Bruce Thursday, August 10, 2006, 6:34:31 AM, you wrote: AS http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg AS I'm having such fun AS ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Dot... Wait
Thanks to everyone for the comments on the photo. Jack, yes it sounds a little funny when we call her Dot, Come! Both dogs understand a little Morse Code... Dot, Dash! Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: PESO - Dot... Wait Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:32:26 -0400 Tom C wrote: Our dog Dot, a Blue Heeler, after a romp in the water. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4776813 Tom C. What, you don't want her to have a fair shake? :) Nice portrait, Tom ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Dot... Wait
:-)) J --- Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to everyone for the comments on the photo. Jack, yes it sounds a little funny when we call her Dot, Come! Both dogs understand a little Morse Code... Dot, Dash! Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: PESO - Dot... Wait Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:32:26 -0400 Tom C wrote: Our dog Dot, a Blue Heeler, after a romp in the water. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4776813 Tom C. What, you don't want her to have a fair shake? :) Nice portrait, Tom ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount. Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I wrote back to ask if they would consider releasing one if they got enough letters, they wrote back and said that the Pentax market would have to pick up tremendously in order for them to release the lens in that mount. I'm confused by two things here. 1) the lens I want is the cropped version of their 28-75 f/2.8, a superb lens which is available for Pentax, and I told them that 2) They released this lens for MINOLTA, which has, what, three users? For some reason, this episode is really sticking in my craw. I realize that I should have a better reason to want to switch systems (need a more capable body, etc.) but it's very tempting right now for me to start thinking about building a Canon system when Nate has a spare 20D that I can use. And then there is the fact of Pentax' slow RD, but that hasn't bothered me too much yet since I've been pretty happy with the *istD. I probably wouldn't abandon Pentax completely, at least not at first, but I'd probably start slowly with a couple of C*non-mount lenses I like. Has anyone else has made the jump this way? And am I overreacting? This is the first time I've given serious thought to switching. Thanks, Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Pentax is going to be selling a 16/50/2.8 later this year. That probably has a lot to do with Tamron's decision. Plus, Pentax is partnered with Tokina on lens development. I am completely happy with the Pentax lenses. I have no desire for third party lenses. And with the new lenses that will be available soon, there won't be any gaps in the lineup. The DA lenses have so far proven to be superb. The 12-24/4, for example, is a gem. Paul -- Original message -- From: Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount. Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I wrote back to ask if they would consider releasing one if they got enough letters, they wrote back and said that the Pentax market would have to pick up tremendously in order for them to release the lens in that mount. I'm confused by two things here. 1) the lens I want is the cropped version of their 28-75 f/2.8, a superb lens which is available for Pentax, and I told them that 2) They released this lens for MINOLTA, which has, what, three users? For some reason, this episode is really sticking in my craw. I realize that I should have a better reason to want to switch systems (need a more capable body, etc.) but it's very tempting right now for me to start thinking about building a Canon system when Nate has a spare 20D that I can use. And then there is the fact of Pentax' slow RD, but that hasn't bothered me too much yet since I've been pretty happy with the *istD. I probably wouldn't abandon Pentax completely, at least not at first, but I'd probably start slowly with a couple of C*non-mount lenses I like. Has anyone else has made the jump this way? And am I overreacting? This is the first time I've given serious thought to switching. Thanks, Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Hi Amita, Well, I have very little interest in third party lenses so our interests seem to be at odds. I went from Canon equipment to Pentax equipment and have been very pleased with the Pentax bodies and lenses, they've covered all my needs well. But if you cannot get what you want/need in Pentax and it is available in another system, the path for you is clear. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
I think what you have is a general concern that I share. That is, it seems, that a larger array of new off-the-shelf lenses and accessories is available for other brands than is available for Pentax. That's of course, understandable, since the other brands outsell Pentax 10-1 (generalizing here). The fact that they mention the Pentax market needing to pick up tremendously just shows that they're concentrating on the portion of the market where the money is at. Minolta is now Sony, which will likely have a lot of users just on brand recognition. Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:15:51 -0400 I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount. Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I wrote back to ask if they would consider releasing one if they got enough letters, they wrote back and said that the Pentax market would have to pick up tremendously in order for them to release the lens in that mount. I'm confused by two things here. 1) the lens I want is the cropped version of their 28-75 f/2.8, a superb lens which is available for Pentax, and I told them that 2) They released this lens for MINOLTA, which has, what, three users? For some reason, this episode is really sticking in my craw. I realize that I should have a better reason to want to switch systems (need a more capable body, etc.) but it's very tempting right now for me to start thinking about building a Canon system when Nate has a spare 20D that I can use. And then there is the fact of Pentax' slow RD, but that hasn't bothered me too much yet since I've been pretty happy with the *istD. I probably wouldn't abandon Pentax completely, at least not at first, but I'd probably start slowly with a couple of C*non-mount lenses I like. Has anyone else has made the jump this way? And am I overreacting? This is the first time I've given serious thought to switching. Thanks, Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Tamron has a close association with Sony,and did with Minolta as well (A fair number of later Minolta AF lenses were rebadged Tamron's, including several of their high-end lenses). Considering that Sony is the current producer of Minolta AF mount cameras Tamron releasing Alpha mount lenses is a given. The only surprise with the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 being released in Minolta Mount is that it was released as a Tamron instead of a Sony. -Adam Amita Guha wrote: I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount. Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I wrote back to ask if they would consider releasing one if they got enough letters, they wrote back and said that the Pentax market would have to pick up tremendously in order for them to release the lens in that mount. I'm confused by two things here. 1) the lens I want is the cropped version of their 28-75 f/2.8, a superb lens which is available for Pentax, and I told them that 2) They released this lens for MINOLTA, which has, what, three users? For some reason, this episode is really sticking in my craw. I realize that I should have a better reason to want to switch systems (need a more capable body, etc.) but it's very tempting right now for me to start thinking about building a Canon system when Nate has a spare 20D that I can use. And then there is the fact of Pentax' slow RD, but that hasn't bothered me too much yet since I've been pretty happy with the *istD. I probably wouldn't abandon Pentax completely, at least not at first, but I'd probably start slowly with a couple of C*non-mount lenses I like. Has anyone else has made the jump this way? And am I overreacting? This is the first time I've given serious thought to switching. Thanks, Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pentax is going to be selling a 16/50/2.8 later this year. That probably has a lot to do with Tamron's decision. Plus, Pentax is partnered with Tokina on lens development. I am completely happy with the Pentax lenses. I have no desire for third party lenses. And with the new lenses that will be available soon, there won't be any gaps in the lineup. The DA lenses have so far proven to be superb. The 12-24/4, for example, is a gem. Paul Paul, I suspect the only reason Amita cares about third party lenses for Pentax bodies is to save money. 20 years or so ago there were lots of _good_ 3rd party ones for the k-mount bodies. Ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Going on vacation and unsubscribing for a while
'see you' when you get back Russell Hi! Tomorrow with G-d help I'd board the plain and go for a two weeks long vacation abroad. Thus I shall unsubscribe from the list in few hours ;-). Hopefully I have what to present for PAWs and PUG... -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K110D - Why bother?
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K110D - Why bother?
I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing another 6MP DSLR was somehow a good marketing strategy. Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: PDML PDML@pdml.net Subject: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:12:37 -0700 A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Amita, Without getting at all specific, something I rarely do, a couple months back I was reading dpreview Canon chat. Big hairy Canon whine for not carrying a lens line equivalent to Pentax. All manner of examples were offered, including the LTD primes. They were critical of both the choices and relative quality of available Canon lenses. I understand your frustration at not finding certain third party lenses for Pentax, but Canon users have their own grips. Jack --- Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount. Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I wrote back to ask if they would consider releasing one if they got enough letters, they wrote back and said that the Pentax market would have to pick up tremendously in order for them to release the lens in that mount. I'm confused by two things here. 1) the lens I want is the cropped version of their 28-75 f/2.8, a superb lens which is available for Pentax, and I told them that 2) They released this lens for MINOLTA, which has, what, three users? For some reason, this episode is really sticking in my craw. I realize that I should have a better reason to want to switch systems (need a more capable body, etc.) but it's very tempting right now for me to start thinking about building a Canon system when Nate has a spare 20D that I can use. And then there is the fact of Pentax' slow RD, but that hasn't bothered me too much yet since I've been pretty happy with the *istD. I probably wouldn't abandon Pentax completely, at least not at first, but I'd probably start slowly with a couple of C*non-mount lenses I like. Has anyone else has made the jump this way? And am I overreacting? This is the first time I've given serious thought to switching. Thanks, Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Amita Guha wrote: I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount. Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I wrote back to ask if they would consider releasing one if they got enough letters, they wrote back and said that the Pentax market would have to pick up tremendously in order for them to release the lens in that mount. The odds of you getting these replies from someone who *really* knew about Tamron's long-term plans for supporting Pentax mount are very slim indeed. In fact, if the person(s) who wrote to you were on this side of the Pacific, I'd bet the odds are effectively zero. I also think that the Pentax market *is* going to pick up tremendously with cameras already appearing in places like Circuit City and the arrival of the K100D and soon the K10D (not to mention Samsung-branded cameras coming into circulation). -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
- Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele Subject: Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses Paul, I suspect the only reason Amita cares about third party lenses for Pentax bodies is to save money. 20 years or so ago there were lots of _good_ 3rd party ones for the k-mount bodies. Twenty years ago, Pentax was a company with brand recognition as well. They let things slide for too long, and now there is an entire generation of buyers who have never heard of them. OTOH, if one is interested in cheap 3rd partly lenses instead of the ones supplied by the manufacturer, it really doesn't matter what brand of camera body you use. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Tom C wrote: I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing another 6MP DSLR was somehow a good marketing strategy. 1) It's less expensive than the K100D 2) It doesn't have that stupid ist name ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
I think the K110D is much better than the DL on many counts. First, if the AF is anything like the K100D (which I own), it's *MUCH* better than what you get on the DL; second, it's much more future proof by being SDHC compatible. I personally don't think Pentax will ever release a firmware upgrade for anything before the K100/110Ds for SDHC compatibility, they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy their new cameras while they're in deep financial shit. In case you don't know, SDHC allows the camera to use SD cards larger than 2GB. Yet another advantage of the K110D over the DL is better JPGs from the K110. Pentax Photobrowser 3 with Silkypix RAW engine is also something that should count in favor of the K110D. Also, she should wait a month for the prices of K110Ds to settle at around the DL level, while the DL will go even lower. So in the end, if she doesn't use AF much, won't be using cards bigger than 2GB and doesn't mind shooting RAW (if she wants the best image quality), the DL is a fine choice. -Asad Shel Belinkoff wrote: A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
I only note one difference, that being the K110D has an 11 pt AF system whereas the DL has a 3 pt system. DL 'prox $80 less. Jack --- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Shel - Both have pentamirrors rather than a pentaprism - as near as I can tell, the only difference is the the K110 has 11 point autofocus, while the DL has 3 point, and the K110 will do high speed flash with a dedicated flash unit and the DL doesn't have this feature. If money is a factor, there is a $100 rebate on the DL through October 11. http://tinyurl.com/qsd7j http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/scms_docs//Essential.rebate.pad.july2006_copy.pdf -P Shel Belinkoff wrote: A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Exactly. I shoot with Pentax because I like Pentax lenses. It has nothing to do with brand loyalty. That's why I have no serious interest in third party lenses. Paul -- Original message -- From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele Subject: Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses Paul, I suspect the only reason Amita cares about third party lenses for Pentax bodies is to save money. 20 years or so ago there were lots of _good_ 3rd party ones for the k-mount bodies. Twenty years ago, Pentax was a company with brand recognition as well. They let things slide for too long, and now there is an entire generation of buyers who have never heard of them. OTOH, if one is interested in cheap 3rd partly lenses instead of the ones supplied by the manufacturer, it really doesn't matter what brand of camera body you use. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Twenty years ago, Pentax was a company with brand recognition as well. They let things slide for too long, and now there is an entire generation of buyers who have never heard of them. OTOH, if one is interested in cheap 3rd partly lenses instead of the ones supplied by the manufacturer, it really doesn't matter what brand of camera body you use. I guess it depends on your definition of cheap. The lenses I'm interested are all above US $500, and if that's cheap to you, more power to you. Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
On 8/10/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Have you mentioned the Samsung GX-1S? Looks to be a DS2, more or less. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=searchQ=b=271mnp=0.0mxp=0.0shs=ci=6222ac=Submit.x=19Submit.y=11Submit=Go -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com Shoot more film! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Magician's assistant ?
Nicley framed and great pose on her. Cat people unite.:-) Dave http://users.rcn.com/annsan/longlittlekittybw.jpg I'm having such fun ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Just a though, but IIRC the K1[01]0D does DNG RAW files. Are they compressed to a non-stupid level? Anyone know? -Cory -- * * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA * * Electrical Engineering* * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * * -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
On Aug 10, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Asad Masede wrote: they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy their new cameras while they're in deep financial shit You mean while they're selling cameras in record numbers and at the highest profitability for the camera division in the history of the company? That kind of shit? -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Wanting to Move to Digital
I would like to move toward digital for a number of reasons, mostly the ability to take lots of shots and losing the baddies without wasting film. But, I've got a ton of old Pentax glass, mostly old screwmount Takumars, but also some more recent AF zooms for my ZX-5N. So I went out today to look at am IST DS (or maybe a DL??) at the local camera shop just to see and feel the camera. I liked the feel, and might adapt to all the controls, but the whole lens thing has me stumped. I believe (but the salesman was not sure) that I can use all my old glass (screwmount with my adapter). But am not sure if a) there will be any metering at all, or b) whether I could use an aperture priority setting and set the aperture manually while the camera sets the exposure. Can y'all explain what would happen? I'm also put off by the focal length conversion. My 28-105 and 28-300 would become almost a normal to tele lens with no wide angle at all. But the kit lens (18-55 I think) looks like junk and is not much in the tele department either. So then I'm back to carrying several lenses which can be a royal pain under some circs. How do y'all handle this? thanks chuck -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:51:54 +0100, Asad Masede [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy their new cameras while they're in deep financial shit. -Asad Pentax are a profit-making company. Saying they are in deep financial shit is: 1 Untrue 2 Indicative that you are in deep intellectual shit (ie: stupid) John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Where does this come from? Profitability defined how? at the highest profitability for the camera division in the history of the company? That kind of shit? -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:16:57PM -0400, Cory Papenfuss wrote: Just a though, but IIRC the K1[01]0D does DNG RAW files. Are they compressed to a non-stupid level? Anyone know? Neither the K100D nor K110D produce DNG RAW files. The new version of Pentax Photo Laboratory (SilkyPix in disguise) can convert PEF to DNG. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Wanting to Move to Digital
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:25:46PM -0400, chuck wrote: I would like to move toward digital for a number of reasons, mostly the ability to take lots of shots and losing the baddies without wasting film. But, I've got a ton of old Pentax glass, mostly old screwmount Takumars, but also some more recent AF zooms for my ZX-5N. So I went out today to look at am IST DS (or maybe a DL??) at the local camera shop just to see and feel the camera. I liked the feel, and might adapt to all the controls, but the whole lens thing has me stumped. I believe (but the salesman was not sure) that I can use all my old glass (screwmount with my adapter). But am not sure if a) there will be any metering at all, or b) whether I could use an aperture priority setting and set the aperture manually while the camera sets the exposure. Can y'all explain what would happen? I already answered this in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems But, just in case you missed the reply there, I said: Simple enough. Your AF lenses will work just fine - no problems - in P, Tv, Av M modes, with full aperture metering. Your screw-mount lenses will work with an adapter just as they did on your ZX-5n - you will be limited to Av M modes, and (because the lens will stop down immediately when you turn the aperture ring) metering will be done in stop-down metering mode. The camera wil happily select an appropriate exposure in Av mode. If you have any other manual focus K-mount lenses, the big question is whether the lens has an A setting on the aperture ring. If it does, everything will be fine (although, of course, you'll have to focus manually). Older lenses will have to be used in metered manual mode (not in Av mode) where you set the aperture by hand, and you have to tell the camera to set an exposure (which you do by pushing the AE-L button, whereupon the camera stops down the lens, takes a meter reading, selects an appropriate shutter speed, and opens the iris up again). and 28-300 would become almost a normal to tele lens with no wide angle at all. But the kit lens (18-55 I think) looks like junk and is not much in the tele department either. So then I'm back to carrying several lenses which can be a royal pain under some circs. How do y'all handle this? The 18-55 lens is by no means junk. There are several other lenses you might consider (14, 16-45, 12-24, 10-17 fisheye) at various price points, with a new f2.8 zoom due shortly. Personally I find a 28-105 a wonderful everyday lens on a small-sensor camera, but no two users are alike. And again, personally, I'd rather carry a bagfull of lenses than rely on a 10x superzoom to cover all eventualities. If I want to go light I'll take the 28-105, an 80-320, and a 50mm. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
The only resaon i use Nikon Dslr's is that in 2001, Pentax did not have anything to even consider. A Nikon used D1 was made available to me, and i took it. I would be shooting Canon had the photographer i bought from shot that system instead of Nikon. It was a matter of supply and demand i suppose. The third party lenses i bought for my Nikons were focal lengths i wanted and readily available. I do understand your frustration, but i have two systems and they both are used for different things. Might be worth while to have two. Dave Quoting Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Has anyone else has made the jump this way? And am I overreacting? This is the first time I've given serious thought to switching. Thanks, Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: My Chevy
My uncle Dave's Chevy: http://www.robertstech.com/temp/39chevy.jpg :) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
AdobeRGB vs. sRGB
For several month I used sRGb as a color model for my *istDL, then brief noote that AdobeRGB gives greater color reproduction made me find AdobeRGB.icc profile for ufraw and two pictures take on the same time of the day, at about same conditions speak for them self: Adobe RGB http://roman.blakout.net/r-rated/460x690-IMGP6038.jpg sRGB http://roman.blakout.net/r-rated/400x600-IMGP5317.jpg Comparison of these two color spaces explains why http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm -- home http://roman.blakout.net/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: So Much Enablement, So Little Time
--- John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - AF540FGZ Probably the best Pentax-compatible flash I've used. I love the low-light focus-assist feature! I only wish it had a strobe-flash mode. I love that it has different modes for each of Pentax's camera lines: 35mm, 645, 67, and Digital. Now if only they made it compatible with my old Auto110... ;) John, I agree. I have been using this flash on the MZ-S and I'm very happy with the results. I especially like the using the flash close to my subjects and bouncing the flash straight up with the catchlight panel. This produces some really pleasing soft results that barely seem like flash photos: http://www.members.aol.com/bmacrae/family.jpg (MZ-S, FA 24-90mm zoom, Aperture Priority, probably f5.6) I used the flash recently via the hot shoe grip on the 67II with Porta 400 and it also performed very well. One strange thing however is that the coverage angles in 67 mode do not match most actual 67 lens focal lengths. The manual states to use a smaller angle per the focal length of the lens. So, I used the 120 setting when shooting with the 165mm f2.8 lens. It worked just fine. The wide angle panel is also nice and I've tested it with my 20mm f2.8 and it does cover the frame. A very nice flash all around. Recycle time was never an issue. It will be interesting to see how well it performs with the power pack when it comes out. -Brendan MacRae __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
I do understand your frustration, but i have two systems and they both are used for different things. Might be worth while to have two. That's kind of what I was thinking. I might feel differently if I didn't have a Canon body collecting dust at home, but since I have one at my disposal, I may as well try it. Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
Mark Roberts wrote: I think the reciprocal of Nyquist frequency should be dubbed the Theriault frequency. Surely it plays an important role in establishing proper blur? ;-) It's probably the Theriaultian Golden Mean or some such. :-) (Just wait until Frank gets back from vacation and starts going through his backlogged email!) He should just consider it an entertaining extension to the vacation. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Chipmunk Flare
Nice. We have several Black and grey squirrels in out back yard i'v been trying to get all summer. One day. Dave Quoting Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is all about a cute accident. At Bryce Canyon, UT, several years back, my wife was 'playing' with a chipmunk by placing bits of Ritz crackers on a pine root. (Probably a Chipmunk nutritional NO NO). It would dart out and promptly vaporize. I took a few shots and, when processed, was surprised by this reminder of the gymnastic floor exercise move known as a flare. Hence, the title. This image is an extremely small part of the frame and not quite a solid freeze. Jack Comments welcome http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=158 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lense
On 8/10/06, Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amita, Without getting at all specific, something I rarely do, a couple months back I was reading dpreview Canon chat. Big hairy Canon whine for not carrying a lens line equivalent to Pentax. All manner of examples were offered, including the LTD primes. They were critical of both the choices and relative quality of available Canon lenses. I understand your frustration at not finding certain third party lenses for Pentax, but Canon users have their own grips. Jack Interesting. Thanks for the perspective. I do know about some of the Canon problems because of Nate. I thought Canon L-glass was comparable to the Ltd lenses, but maybe not? I guess that's all the more reason to keep two kits. :) Amita -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
And anyway these software version 3 are vavailable for DS/DL/D also. 2006/8/10, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:16:57PM -0400, Cory Papenfuss wrote: Just a though, but IIRC the K1[01]0D does DNG RAW files. Are they compressed to a non-stupid level? Anyone know? Neither the K100D nor K110D produce DNG RAW files. The new version of Pentax Photo Laboratory (SilkyPix in disguise) can convert PEF to DNG. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
John Forbes wrote: 2 Indicative that you are in deep intellectual shit (ie: stupid) John Wow, when did I ever insult you? Is venting online the only way you can cope with your frustration? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Aug 10, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Asad Masede wrote: they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy their new cameras while they're in deep financial shit You mean while they're selling cameras in record numbers and at the highest profitability for the camera division in the history of the company? That kind of shit? -Aaron They've just begun to do that, they have started climbing out of their hole, yes, but are they out of it? IMO, no. -Asad -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
The screen on the K110D is bigger, brighter, and has a better viewing angle. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:19 pm Size: 749 bytes To: PDML PDML@pdml.net A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Profitability defined as money coming in above money spent, 'record' as in they had a higher total dollar amount profit on cameras than any other month in the history of the company and followed it up the next month with an even better month. As to where, same place I hear everything. ;) -Aaron -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:36 pm Size: 271 bytes To: pdml@pdml.net Where does this come from? Profitability defined how? at the highest profitability for the camera division in the history of the company? That kind of shit? -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake, after the fact
On Aug 9, 2006, at 2:14 PM, Cotty wrote: Yeah, and he also made a mean cup of tea as well. I'm glad to have multiple talents. ]'-) G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE Compare ways for antishake
On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Bengt Falke wrote: In our Canon S3 IS there is a setting for when it is used together with a converter in font of the lens so I guess that the in-body anti shake must know the focal length to be able to calculate the anti shake compensation. I suppose new lenses have connections for this, but how do you enter this for old lenses (I have some of those) on the K100/K10D? If it works similarly to Minolta, it doesn't need to know lens focal length to work. I used some old T-Mount lenses on the Minolta 7D and the IS worked just fine. It even worked with an old Russian mirror lens! Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lense
On Aug 10, 2006, at 2:34 PM, Amita Guha wrote: ... I thought Canon L-glass was comparable to the Ltd lenses, but maybe not? ... Seen from a marketing and price positioning perspective, it is. Whether a specific lens offering in the Canon L line matches or exceeds the performance of a Pentax Limited lens depends upon the lens, of course. Canon L lenses are very high quality, in general, but so are Pentax Limiteds, A*, FA*, etc. It's difficult to make a direct equivocation because Canon has no 77mm, Pentax has no 24-105L, etc. I will say that on imaging performance the Pentax FA20-35/4 AL is on par with the Canon 17-40/4L, although the latter lens has more features and is more robustly built. The Pentax FA50/1.4 and Canon EF50/1.4 USM are similarly about on par, with a small advantage in rendering to the Pentax. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Sorry, is this based on something factual or when you say IMO do you mean that you're just guessing about Pentax's financials? -Aaron -Original Message- From: Asad Masede [EMAIL PROTECTED] They've just begun to do that, they have started climbing out of their hole, yes, but are they out of it? IMO, no. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Same size actually, the DL was the first Pentax with the 2.5 screen. -Adam Aaron Reynolds wrote: The screen on the K110D is bigger, brighter, and has a better viewing angle. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:19 pm Size: 749 bytes To: PDML PDML@pdml.net A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Parts commonality. K110D is replacing the DL entirely. Because it can be made from K100D parts. -Adam Tom C wrote: I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing another 6MP DSLR was somehow a good marketing strategy. Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: PDML PDML@pdml.net Subject: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:12:37 -0700 A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lenses
Amita wrote: Has anyone else has made the jump this way? No. not really. If I wanted third party lenses I would have bought a third party camera -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
I was questioning the wisdom of continuing with any 6MP DSLR body when the bar has been raised in entry level DSLRs for some time now. Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 18:30:41 -0400 Parts commonality. K110D is replacing the DL entirely. Because it can be made from K100D parts. -Adam Tom C wrote: I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing another 6MP DSLR was somehow a good marketing strategy. Tom C. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: PDML PDML@pdml.net Subject: K110D - Why bother? Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:12:37 -0700 A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and, of course, the DL is quite a bit less expensive than the K110D. I don't see much difference between the DL and the K110D. Are there any features that the K110D that the DL doesn't? I can't find any of significance. However, my friend is relying on me to help her make the decision ... any thoughts on the comparison between the two cameras? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE Compare ways for antishake
- Original Message - From: Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] If it works similarly to Minolta, it doesn't need to know lens focal length to work. I used some old T-Mount lenses on the Minolta 7D and the IS worked just fine. It even worked with an old Russian mirror lens! It needs focal lenght info to work and theres no way Minoltas system can work to its optimum (or at all except for accidentally) without this info. Pål -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Thanks, Scott ... good to know. I forgot about the Samsung. Might be worth adding to the discussion with my friend. Shel [Original Message] From: Scott Loveless Have you mentioned the Samsung GX-1S? Looks to be a DS2, more or less. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Thank you so much, Paul. Very good and valuable information. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Sorenson Both have pentamirrors rather than a pentaprism - as near as I can tell, the only difference is the the K110 has 11 point autofocus, while the DL has 3 point, and the K110 will do high speed flash with a dedicated flash unit and the DL doesn't have this feature. If money is a factor, there is a $100 rebate on the DL through October 11. http://tinyurl.com/qsd7j http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/scms_docs//Essential.rebate.pad.july2006_ copy.pdf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Mediterranean looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 8/9/2006 12:05:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20060806183540 Looks like I'll be making more sessions with this model and your comment to my initial improvisations would be appreciated. Thank you. Mediterranean = Very nice shots, Roman. Yup, he's hunky -- meaning good looking. Definitely use again. How nice to have a stud muffin for a change. Marnie aka Doe ;-) Ha, ha, ha... My daughter bought me a T-shirt (I'll send you a shot of it) that says, G E E Z E R formerly known as STUD MUFFIN Well, at least she got part of it right. keith ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
That's what I heard forgot about it, though. tks! Shel [Original Message] From: Aaron Reynolds The screen on the K110D is [...] brighter, and has a better viewing angle. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
How so? Please be as specific as you can. Thanks. Shel [Original Message] From: Asad Masede I think the K110D is much better than the DL on many counts. First, if the AF is anything like the K100D (which I own), it's *MUCH* better than what you get on the DL; -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Chipmunk Flare
Thanks, Dave! Jack --- David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nice. We have several Black and grey squirrels in out back yard i'v been trying to get all summer. One day. Dave Quoting Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is all about a cute accident. At Bryce Canyon, UT, several years back, my wife was 'playing' with a chipmunk by placing bits of Ritz crackers on a pine root. (Probably a Chipmunk nutritional NO NO). It would dart out and promptly vaporize. I took a few shots and, when processed, was surprised by this reminder of the gymnastic floor exercise move known as a flare. Hence, the title. This image is an extremely small part of the frame and not quite a solid freeze. Jack Comments welcome http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=158 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: venting about lack of available 3rd party other lense
Amita Guha wrote: I thought Canon L-glass was comparable to the Ltd lenses, but maybe not? Canon L-glass is equivalent to the Pentax FA* lenses. The Pentax Limiteds *can* be made to perform like Canon L lenses - just smear a light coating of Vaseline on the front element of the Ltd lens... :) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
On Aug 10, 2006, at 4:02 PM, Tom C wrote: I was questioning the wisdom of continuing with any 6MP DSLR body when the bar has been raised in entry level DSLRs for some time now. Which bar? Just because 8 and 10 Mpixel cameras are out there at similar pricing doesn't mean that they do any better on image quality. The entry-level DSLR market generally isn't concerned with making a 13x19 and larger presentation prints, the difference in ultimate resolution is barely noticeable at 8x12 and 11x17 inch print sizes. Perhaps you mean the marketing bar. Regardless, the Pentax 6Mpixel SLRs return superb results. I'm finishing up another exhibit's batch of 11x14s right now and the quality is delightful. As long as the sensor is available, it's proven technology that will make excellent photographs. As time goes on, they'll be available for lower and lower prices. Why kill a good thing? Far as I can tell from reports, the K110D is an advance on the DL models in having faster AF, improved JPEG rendering out of the camera, and commonality of parts with the K100D. Why not sell it? Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
Well, I can't (and won't) do any timed tests, but the K100D is much better at low light AF than the last gen of Pentax DSLRs. I have an *ist DS and it has trouble locking onto subjects when it's dark, and when it does lock-on, it's slow; the K100D on the other hand, locks on very quickly even in low-light situations. Another thing is that the AF motor seems to have been replaced with a much faster one, higher pitched whine but it's fast, faster with NiMH batteries than the DS is with CRV-3s. I haven't done any tests or trials, but I use both cameras day-in-day-out and the difference is very noticeable. hope this helps, -Asad Shel Belinkoff wrote: How so? Please be as specific as you can. Thanks. Shel [Original Message] From: Asad Masede I think the K110D is much better than the DL on many counts. First, if the AF is anything like the K100D (which I own), it's *MUCH* better than what you get on the DL; -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: AdobeRGB vs. sRGB
- Original Message - From: Roman Subject: AdobeRGB vs. sRGB For several month I used sRGb as a color model for my *istDL, then brief noote that AdobeRGB gives greater color reproduction made me find AdobeRGB.icc profile for ufraw and two pictures take on the same time of the day, at about same conditions speak for them self: Adobe RGB http://roman.blakout.net/r-rated/460x690-IMGP6038.jpg sRGB http://roman.blakout.net/r-rated/400x600-IMGP5317.jpg Comparison of these two color spaces explains why http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm Yes, this is mostly correct, but are you taking into account the print output? If you are having photographic prints done, then use sRGB. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Wanting to Move to Digital
- Original Message - From: chuck Subject: Wanting to Move to Digital I would like to move toward digital for a number of reasons, mostly the ability to take lots of shots and losing the baddies without wasting film. But, I've got a ton of old Pentax glass, mostly old screwmount Takumars, but also some more recent AF zooms for my ZX-5N. So I went out today to look at am IST DS (or maybe a DL??) at the local camera shop just to see and feel the camera. I liked the feel, and might adapt to all the controls, but the whole lens thing has me stumped. I believe (but the salesman was not sure) that I can use all my old glass (screwmount with my adapter). But am not sure if a) there will be any metering at all, or b) whether I could use an aperture priority setting and set the aperture manually while the camera sets the exposure. Can y'all explain what would happen? I'm also put off by the focal length conversion. My 28-105 and 28-300 would become almost a normal to tele lens with no wide angle at all. But the kit lens (18-55 I think) looks like junk and is not much in the tele department either. So then I'm back to carrying several lenses which can be a royal pain under some circs. How do y'all handle this? There aren't a lot of 24x36mm DSLRs out there, so get used to the new format. I don't know about the 18-55, though I have heard it is a decent performer from people whose opinions I have come to repect. I am willing to carry several lenses, to the point I only have one zoom lens, and wouldn't have it if I could have gotten a 10mm lens from Pentax. Some things are worth a little pain. Pretty much any Pentax lens will work on any Pentax DSLR, from screw mount on up to the most modern. You will get metering with all of them AFAIK, though non A lenses use a stop down AE metering method. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K110D - Why bother?
- Original Message - From: Asad Masede Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother? John Forbes wrote: 2 Indicative that you are in deep intellectual shit (ie: stupid) John Wow, when did I ever insult you? Is venting online the only way you can cope with your frustration? It's all good. I called John a bad name once. Now he's called you a bad name, so you can call me a bad name and everyone's karma is even. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
