Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Yes, I understood that, but my thinking was that perhaps now a redesign with the smaller sensor and mirror areas in mind, and perhaps newer, more advanced construction techniques and materials, could yield even smaller lenses. Just wondering ... Shel [Original Message] From: Adam Maas Shel, I mention later design solely because the SMC-M series were the first Pentax lens series designed with compactness as a major feature across the line. -Adam Shel Belinkoff wrote: I'm talking about the lens diameter, not the barrel diameter. For example, the diameter of the front element of my 35mm Summicron (f/2.0) is about 1-inch while the front element of my Pentax 35mm f/2.0 is 1.5-inches. I'd be curious what the diameter of the front element is on an M or A 35mm 2.0 ... anybody got that figure? You mention later design. That implies that the lens diameter (just the glass) is smaller than earlier models. If that's the case, then it should be possible to design a smaller diameter lens for a DA than for film - at least that's one way to look at it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Godfrey, Kiron did make a quite good 28/2 in K mount. You may want to look around to see if there is an SMC-A version of it (Mine's in plain K mount). I'm not entirely sure, but suspect the Vivitar 28/2 is also the same design. -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: The 50mm focal length for an SLR is generally implemented as a symmetrical lens design because there's enough room for the moving mirror behind it, so the size is dependent upon the f/stop and light path desired, coupled with the bulkiness of the mount that supports the features you want. Compare a Leica Summilux-M 50/1.4 lens with a Pentax FA50/1.4 ... the Pentax is darn near the same size, despite the mount having a lot more bits in it than the Leica. Fast 35mm SLR lenses are generally mild inverted telephotos so the front elements grow in size compared to RF camera lenses of yore. Modern RF 35mm are also often mild inverted tele designs ... my last Summicron-M 35/2 ASPH was not much smaller than the Pentax FA35/2 AL, if at all. I don't know that a high quality, very compact 50mm f/2.8 Limited would be a bad idea. Although I appreciate the speed of my FA50/1.4, it is most often at lens openings of f/4-f/8. Of course, I doubt that I need another 50mm lens and would likely not buy it... That DA28/2 Limited, on the other hand, would be my most used lens. Godfrey On Sep 16, 2006, at 8:30 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Why couldn't they make a smaller 50/1.4? Yes, a nice, fast 28 would be wonderful, and a 35/1.4 would be a kick as well. Jumping to a 50/2.8 would seem like a real step backwards for any number of reasons. I don't see that they'd be able to make a 50mm f/1.4-1.2 lens much smaller than the current FA50/1.4 and it is a great performer. It would be much more to my liking if they released the same optics in a D-FA lens mount. A compact, pancake DA50/2.8 Limited might be neat, but I'd rather they did a compact DA28/2 Limited! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO: Going for a Walk with Grandpa
On 16/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: All with the Panasonic point and shoot. Some from the hip. Lots of fun for grandpa. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=643396 Lovely set. Number 4's a cracker. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
I could be wrong but I think it was the 31mm Ltd. f1.8 a few years ago. Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: [Original Message] From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture zooms, and that's fast primes. What is the way out of slow primes? Fast primes ... Yup, and the last one such that Pentax issued was? Kostas -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
That reminds me, I saw an Aston Martin in town today. That makes one in five years. I guess another may come through in 2011 grin. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty much over, so i can spend the odd weekend doing photos for myself. Today was the annual Stouffville Car Show and i had a chance to wonder around and take some shots, Even after i spent time with Franks BW lab guy. He does very good work BTW. :-) Here is the first one that stands out for me anyway. I have several more i';ll add later. Comments welcome. istD, DA 50-200, Raw and converted in CS. Paul, i don;t know how you do it. This was hard to do, with people standing and sitting in spots i wish they would.nt. They also had papaers in the windshields that i found hard to work around. Nice to do someting else for a change.:-) Dave Brooks Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Who needs SR, just get CSI Miami
Hockey is only a few weeks away, lads. And i agree, network TV sucks, especially since Air Farce is not on yet. Dave Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Football, Mark, football. Not to mention almost every feature film and a wide range of indy films available in high definition. By and large, network TV sucks. Some of the rest of is okay. Gotta get back to Michigan at Notre Dame. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:32 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: D Brooks wrote: Quoting Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sep 15, 2006, at 11:02 PM, David Savage wrote: I've seen a few eposodes where they take pictures holding the D/SLR out at arms length like a PS composing with the LCD. Well, they are actors after all, not photographers. Ur, um, well all but one of them are actors. HAR. Mark Sorry, that went right by me. Not having had a television since about 1988, I'm a bit out of touch with current programs! (With the 65-mile commute to the university where I now work, I'm staying overnight in a motel one night a week. There I've had the opportunity to see what I'm missing and I can tell you I have *no* plans to purchase a TV any time in the foreseeable future!) -- 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 Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Pretty cars. I don't know much about '20s and '30s cars. Is that front one a Duesenberg? -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
The FA limited lenses. All in the last few years. More will follow to be sure. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: [Original Message] From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture zooms, and that's fast primes. What is the way out of slow primes? Fast primes ... Yup, and the last one such that Pentax issued was? Kostas -- 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: OT: Bummer
On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed: I came close last night, but just missed it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1 That wide a 20mm f4 ? -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Decision
On 16/9/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: I would not demean such a person by referring to her/him as a 'kid', even if I were a crusty old curmudgeon. Hey, some of us *demand* it ;- -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
Thanks Paul. I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their car(s), when i layed down or knealt down and took the shot. Most peple were shooting higher up. Not a death look or anything like that, but a, why are you taking a picture of my car like that, look. Could it be because i had two cameras over my neck and my Lowepro backpack, and they thought i was a pro, even though i was using Pentax. LOL Dave Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nice. That's the kind of work you have to do at a car show. Full frame car pics are almost out of the question. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:23 PM, David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty much over, so i can spend the odd weekend doing photos for myself. Today was the annual Stouffville Car Show and i had a chance to wonder around and take some shots, Even after i spent time with Franks BW lab guy. He does very good work BTW. :-) Here is the first one that stands out for me anyway. I have several more i';ll add later. Comments welcome. istD, DA 50-200, Raw and converted in CS. Paul, i don;t know how you do it. This was hard to do, with people standing and sitting in spots i wish they would.nt. They also had papaers in the windshields that i found hard to work around. Nice to do someting else for a change.:-) Dave Brooks Equine Photography in York Region -- 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 Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Relative Size of K10D vs. *ist-Ds
On 16/9/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: How dare people use language like distal phalange when they know there are children reading this list? I think Frank's away this weekend. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
I've found that two cameras make you a pro even if you're shooting Pentax:-)). Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:16 PM, David J Brooks wrote: Thanks Paul. I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their car(s), when i layed down or knealt down and took the shot. Most peple were shooting higher up. Not a death look or anything like that, but a, why are you taking a picture of my car like that, look. Could it be because i had two cameras over my neck and my Lowepro backpack, and they thought i was a pro, even though i was using Pentax. LOL Dave Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nice. That's the kind of work you have to do at a car show. Full frame car pics are almost out of the question. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:23 PM, David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty much over, so i can spend the odd weekend doing photos for myself. Today was the annual Stouffville Car Show and i had a chance to wonder around and take some shots, Even after i spent time with Franks BW lab guy. He does very good work BTW. :-) Here is the first one that stands out for me anyway. I have several more i';ll add later. Comments welcome. istD, DA 50-200, Raw and converted in CS. Paul, i don;t know how you do it. This was hard to do, with people standing and sitting in spots i wish they would.nt. They also had papaers in the windshields that i found hard to work around. Nice to do someting else for a change.:-) Dave Brooks Equine Photography in York Region -- 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 Equine Photography in York Region -- 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: Decision
On 16/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: I'm senile, but I'm not stupid:-). I'm just stupid ;-)) Come on guys, break it up!! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Who can translate Swedish for us?
It was on the dpreview forum: Please see the K10D pentax catalogue at http://www.pentax.no/accounts/433774/File/Datablader/8690.pdf Looks like the 43mm LE is a goner, guess I am happy that I got mine in time :-) They are in the 13 page brochure that's been mentioned before, I believe. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Who needs SR, just get CSI Miami
On 16/9/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Sorry, that went right by me. Not having had a television since about 1988, I'm a bit out of touch with current programs! (With the 65-mile commute to the university where I now work, I'm staying overnight in a motel one night a week. There I've had the opportunity to see what I'm missing and I can tell you I have *no* plans to purchase a TV any time in the foreseeable future!) TV's are really useful when hooked up to a DVD player and you sit for a couple of glorious hours watching The Odd Couple. I found it difficult to breathe, I was laughing so hard. I must get hold of The Front Page. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
it doesn't seem to work that way. The Olympus lenses designed for the 4/3 cameras seems to be pretty much the same size weight as their 135 equivalents. However, they do seem to be able to do other interesting things, such as a 35-100 fixed f/2 zoom, which is equivalent to a 70-200/2, and a 150/2 - equivalent to 300/2. http://www.olympus-esystem.com/dea/products/lens/index.html -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff Sent: 16 September 2006 23:13 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies Yes, I understood that, but my thinking was that perhaps now a redesign with the smaller sensor and mirror areas in mind, and perhaps newer, more advanced construction techniques and materials, could yield even smaller lenses. Just wondering ... Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO: Going for a Walk with Grandpa
Thanks Cotty On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:17 PM, Cotty wrote: On 16/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: All with the Panasonic point and shoot. Some from the hip. Lots of fun for grandpa. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=643396 Lovely set. Number 4's a cracker. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.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: OT: Bummer
At 06:16 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote: Message: 10 Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 15:04:08 -0700 From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: OT: Bummer To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Why not just say what it is you missed instead of making any curious or interested parties go looking for it, you know, something like I was bidding on a Gortex Lens Cover for a 77mm Ltd and just missed it by a few minutes. Here's the URL for anyone interested: Shel Ok. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://www.brendemuehl.net http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: PESO: Fungus
It's fly agaric - magic mushroom - where the fairies live! Plenty round here this time of year. Plenty of mushrooms too. My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and rendition. Jens Bladt wrote: My *ist D has caught a huge fungus today: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/24451/ Regards -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Peso One for Steady
10 a penny round here! Although I did see a very beautiful DB5 last week, and they're not so common. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of graywolf Sent: 16 September 2006 23:15 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Peso One for Steady That reminds me, I saw an Aston Martin in town today. That makes one in five years. I guess another may come through in 2011 grin. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
What are you when you use three? Paul Stenquist wrote: I've found that two cameras make you a pro even if you're shooting Pentax:-)). Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:16 PM, David J Brooks wrote: Thanks Paul. I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their car(s), when i layed down or knealt down and took the shot. Most peple were shooting higher up. Not a death look or anything like that, but a, why are you taking a picture of my car like that, look. Could it be because i had two cameras over my neck and my Lowepro backpack, and they thought i was a pro, even though i was using Pentax. LOL Dave Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nice. That's the kind of work you have to do at a car show. Full frame car pics are almost out of the question. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:23 PM, David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty much over, so i can spend the odd weekend doing photos for myself. Today was the annual Stouffville Car Show and i had a chance to wonder around and take some shots, Even after i spent time with Franks BW lab guy. He does very good work BTW. :-) Here is the first one that stands out for me anyway. I have several more i';ll add later. Comments welcome. istD, DA 50-200, Raw and converted in CS. Paul, i don;t know how you do it. This was hard to do, with people standing and sitting in spots i wish they would.nt. They also had papaers in the windshields that i found hard to work around. Nice to do someting else for a change.:-) Dave Brooks Equine Photography in York Region -- 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 Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
A masochist. (Although I admit to using a 35mm SLR, a Mamiya TLR and a Speed Graphic 4x5 when shooting drag racing from the starting line some thirty years ago.) Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:56 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: What are you when you use three? Paul Stenquist wrote: I've found that two cameras make you a pro even if you're shooting Pentax:-)). Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:16 PM, David J Brooks wrote: Thanks Paul. I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their car(s), when i layed down or knealt down and took the shot. Most peple were shooting higher up. Not a death look or anything like that, but a, why are you taking a picture of my car like that, look. Could it be because i had two cameras over my neck and my Lowepro backpack, and they thought i was a pro, even though i was using Pentax. LOL Dave Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nice. That's the kind of work you have to do at a car show. Full frame car pics are almost out of the question. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:23 PM, David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty much over, so i can spend the odd weekend doing photos for myself. Today was the annual Stouffville Car Show and i had a chance to wonder around and take some shots, Even after i spent time with Franks BW lab guy. He does very good work BTW. :-) Here is the first one that stands out for me anyway. I have several more i';ll add later. Comments welcome. istD, DA 50-200, Raw and converted in CS. Paul, i don;t know how you do it. This was hard to do, with people standing and sitting in spots i wish they would.nt. They also had papaers in the windshields that i found hard to work around. Nice to do someting else for a change.:-) Dave Brooks Equine Photography in York Region -- 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 Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Vivitar built a Series 1 28/1.9 in both screwmount and K-mount. Always wanted one. Couldn't afford it new and haven't found a used K version. But it's reportedly a superb lens. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Godfrey, Kiron did make a quite good 28/2 in K mount. You may want to look around to see if there is an SMC-A version of it (Mine's in plain K mount). I'm not entirely sure, but suspect the Vivitar 28/2 is also the same design. -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: The 50mm focal length for an SLR is generally implemented as a symmetrical lens design because there's enough room for the moving mirror behind it, so the size is dependent upon the f/stop and light path desired, coupled with the bulkiness of the mount that supports the features you want. Compare a Leica Summilux-M 50/1.4 lens with a Pentax FA50/1.4 ... the Pentax is darn near the same size, despite the mount having a lot more bits in it than the Leica. Fast 35mm SLR lenses are generally mild inverted telephotos so the front elements grow in size compared to RF camera lenses of yore. Modern RF 35mm are also often mild inverted tele designs ... my last Summicron-M 35/2 ASPH was not much smaller than the Pentax FA35/2 AL, if at all. I don't know that a high quality, very compact 50mm f/2.8 Limited would be a bad idea. Although I appreciate the speed of my FA50/1.4, it is most often at lens openings of f/4-f/8. Of course, I doubt that I need another 50mm lens and would likely not buy it... That DA28/2 Limited, on the other hand, would be my most used lens. Godfrey On Sep 16, 2006, at 8:30 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Why couldn't they make a smaller 50/1.4? Yes, a nice, fast 28 would be wonderful, and a 35/1.4 would be a kick as well. Jumping to a 50/2.8 would seem like a real step backwards for any number of reasons. I don't see that they'd be able to make a 50mm f/1.4-1.2 lens much smaller than the current FA50/1.4 and it is a great performer. It would be much more to my liking if they released the same optics in a D-FA lens mount. A compact, pancake DA50/2.8 Limited might be neat, but I'd rather they did a compact DA28/2 Limited! -- 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 One for Steady
A lot of them in Detroit as well. The owners drive them. You know, Ford execs. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Bob W wrote: 10 a penny round here! Although I did see a very beautiful DB5 last week, and they're not so common. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of graywolf Sent: 16 September 2006 23:15 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Peso One for Steady That reminds me, I saw an Aston Martin in town today. That makes one in five years. I guess another may come through in 2011 grin. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- -- 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: Who needs SR, just get CSI Miami
The single most important character in that show is Horatio's sunglasses. The show would only last 40 minutes if they deleted all the scenes of the sunglasses being taken off before the delivery of a supposedly deep and meaningful line and then being put back on before he enters a dark crime scene. James - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 7:32 AM Subject: Re: Who needs SR, just get CSI Miami D Brooks wrote: Quoting Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sep 15, 2006, at 11:02 PM, David Savage wrote: I've seen a few eposodes where they take pictures holding the D/SLR out at arms length like a PS composing with the LCD. Well, they are actors after all, not photographers. Ur, um, well all but one of them are actors. HAR. Mark Sorry, that went right by me. Not having had a television since about 1988, I'm a bit out of touch with current programs! (With the 65-mile commute to the university where I now work, I'm staying overnight in a motel one night a week. There I've had the opportunity to see what I'm missing and I can tell you I have *no* plans to purchase a TV any time in the foreseeable future!) -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Steve Larson, who used to frequent the list more frequently, had one I believe. And if my failing memory hasn't let me down, I had a chance to use it while we were in Santa Barbara a few years ago. Nice lens, although I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold a year or so back. I found the 28/2.0 to be a bit soft at the edges until f4.0, but after that quite nice throughout the range. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist Vivitar built a Series 1 28/1.9 in both screwmount and K-mount. Always wanted one. Couldn't afford it new and haven't found a used K version. But it's reportedly a superb lens. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Peso One for Steady
The DB4 and the DB5, especially the DB4-GT Zagato, have always been my favorite Astons. http://www.astonmartins.com/db4_5_6_s/db4gt_zagato.htm Shel [Original Message] From: Bob W 10 a penny round here! Although I did see a very beautiful DB5 last week, and they're not so common. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: popphoto.com k10D
That wasn't the point... Paul... I think you know that. The fact is that some of you can't stand to hear objectivity expressed. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 19:24:01 -0400 It's simple, Tom. The *ist cameras were very good. This camera appears to be better. Why is that hard to understand? On Sep 15, 2006, at 5:30 PM, Tom C wrote: My point is largely this: I am amazed by the strenuous defense of Pentax (by some) when 6MP is all they had to offer, juxtaposed by the instant desire to abandon 6MP when Pentax has better. I understand the 2nd part, but not the first. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:25:05 -0400 Dig away. On Sep 15, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Tom C wrote: Why was I riduculed then? You want me to dig them out? Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:44:44 -0400 That's the biggest crock of BS I've ever seen on the list. We've all been clamoring for a higher resolution camera for a long time. I would say it's unanimous. On the other hand, many of us did point out that the 6 MP cameras worked very well. There's a difference that you apparently don't understand. Paul On Sep 15, 2006, at 12:30 PM, Tom C wrote: I've got emails saved from 3 months back when a lot of you guys were ridiculing me for wanting more than a 6MP DSLR and saying I thought it was foolish for Pentax to continue making them, and how you were TOTALLY HAPPY and SATISFIED with your 6MP Pentax. Now your all in line to buy a new one! *IF* Pentax Japan actually listens to this list and takes seriously the views expressed here (which I highly doubt), then you actually owe all the 'negative', 'whining', ' Chicken Little's' on this list a 'Thank you' for theor voice, because otherwise you'd convince Pentax to kep on churning out more of the same. Now, that's a hoot. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 23:05:46 -0400 Rob, you're a hoot. First you complain that the Pentax offerings aren't good enough. Now, you're complaining that they're too good. HAR! On Sep 14, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 15/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sheesh, for now take some pleasure and pride in what Pentax is trying to do here, that the camera is ore a leader than anything Pentax has produced in a long time, accept that the company may never really compete with Canon in terms of numbers, enjoy the concept of forwards and backwards lens compatibility, check out the camera when it arrives in your area, and decide if it's worthwhile for you. It's the likely excessive demand that they are creating that has me worried, the price point has got people from all aver the place interested. The point is that they can't compete with Canon numbers, we all know this. -- 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 -- 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 -- 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 -- 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: OT: Bummer
At 06:40 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote: Message: 5 Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:22:24 +0100 From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Bummer To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed: I came close last night, but just missed it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1 That wide a 20mm f4 ? The old K is a big beast, like the K35/2. I got to see one last year in Dayton at the ham radio gathering. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://www.brendemuehl.net http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT: Bummer
FWIW: I had both the K20/4 and the M20/4 at the same time For a while. I did extensive tests and I couldn't Find any differences (on fine grain film) so I sold The M because I like the feel of the K better, its Certainly no beast, slightly bigger (longer)than say a 50mm/1.4. Tbe M was too small for me, the focus ring too being so thin. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Collin R Brendemuehl Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 7:50 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Bummer At 06:40 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote: Message: 5 Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:22:24 +0100 From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Bummer To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed: I came close last night, but just missed it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1 That wide a 20mm f4 ? The old K is a big beast, like the K35/2. I got to see one last year in Dayton at the ham radio gathering. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://www.brendemuehl.net http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- 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: It is ingenious! Was: Does this mean what I think it means?
On 17/09/06, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you provide a reference on that? A quick goggle search* finds nothing the contradicts my explanation. Your comment may be accurate on the quantum level but I do not think we can quite apply it to current image sensors, but would be interested in seeing something about where you are getting that from. Photons, like all quantum particles, are very slippery critters and probably act that way, but I do not know of any photo diode that gives out a quantized signal --in a macro world sense. I admit my physics knowledge is not as up to date as it could be. But I do believe folks are trying to digitalize non-digital phenomena, if the information was digital we would not need an ADC. It's still an analogue signal it's just not continuous, an ADC is still required in order to produce digital representations of the voltage levels. You have to consider that real size of the photo diode component of the sensor. Its width is only tens of wavelengths (considering active sensitivity to about 700nm) across (6.05 x 6.05um) in the case of the sensor in the K10D and it may only be two or three atoms deep, this is why numbers like 40k electrons for saturation are being bandied about (though I suspect that the sensor in the K10D would be closer to about 32k, unfortunately Sony specs aren't direct comparable with those from the majority of other manufacturers). It's a bit mind contorting but the analogue output of the sensor is governed by the electron count so if the devices were noiseless you would see discrete steps in the analogue output. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
The Pentax lens is undoubtedly quite a bit lighter, and of course it gives you all the metering options on a DSLR. I suspect that the Vivitar, like all the early Series 1 lenses, is an all-metal little tank. Probably quite heavy. But there's something to be said for that. I love my Series 1, first version 90/2.5 macro. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 7:35 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Steve Larson, who used to frequent the list more frequently, had one I believe. And if my failing memory hasn't let me down, I had a chance to use it while we were in Santa Barbara a few years ago. Nice lens, although I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold a year or so back. I found the 28/2.0 to be a bit soft at the edges until f4.0, but after that quite nice throughout the range. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist Vivitar built a Series 1 28/1.9 in both screwmount and K-mount. Always wanted one. Couldn't afford it new and haven't found a used K version. But it's reportedly a superb lens. -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because you need a 35.7mm diameter front element for a 50mm f1.4, or a 41.6mm front element for a 50mm f1.2. The Pentax FA 50mm f1.4 is already about the smallest on the market, at it's size, I'd suspect the size of the optics necessary for the speed are more of a limiting factor than the image circle or barrel design. I would liek to see an updated D-FA version. I agree the size is limited by the element diameters but there is a lot of fat on the FA 50/1.4, more so than the A version, if one could be built similar to the FA77 form factor it would be more compact. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: popphoto.com k10D
Of course we can stand to hear objectivity expressed. We're still waiting to here it from certain quarters:-). And that is the point. The *ist cameras were better than many of us expected to see from Pentax. Many of us think this camera will be better. That' s objective. And it's expressed. Paul Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 7:46 PM, Tom C wrote: That wasn't the point... Paul... I think you know that. The fact is that some of you can't stand to hear objectivity expressed. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 19:24:01 -0400 It's simple, Tom. The *ist cameras were very good. This camera appears to be better. Why is that hard to understand? On Sep 15, 2006, at 5:30 PM, Tom C wrote: My point is largely this: I am amazed by the strenuous defense of Pentax (by some) when 6MP is all they had to offer, juxtaposed by the instant desire to abandon 6MP when Pentax has better. I understand the 2nd part, but not the first. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:25:05 -0400 Dig away. On Sep 15, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Tom C wrote: Why was I riduculed then? You want me to dig them out? Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:44:44 -0400 That's the biggest crock of BS I've ever seen on the list. We've all been clamoring for a higher resolution camera for a long time. I would say it's unanimous. On the other hand, many of us did point out that the 6 MP cameras worked very well. There's a difference that you apparently don't understand. Paul On Sep 15, 2006, at 12:30 PM, Tom C wrote: I've got emails saved from 3 months back when a lot of you guys were ridiculing me for wanting more than a 6MP DSLR and saying I thought it was foolish for Pentax to continue making them, and how you were TOTALLY HAPPY and SATISFIED with your 6MP Pentax. Now your all in line to buy a new one! *IF* Pentax Japan actually listens to this list and takes seriously the views expressed here (which I highly doubt), then you actually owe all the 'negative', 'whining', ' Chicken Little's' on this list a 'Thank you' for theor voice, because otherwise you'd convince Pentax to kep on churning out more of the same. Now, that's a hoot. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: popphoto.com k10D Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 23:05:46 -0400 Rob, you're a hoot. First you complain that the Pentax offerings aren't good enough. Now, you're complaining that they're too good. HAR! On Sep 14, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 15/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sheesh, for now take some pleasure and pride in what Pentax is trying to do here, that the camera is ore a leader than anything Pentax has produced in a long time, accept that the company may never really compete with Canon in terms of numbers, enjoy the concept of forwards and backwards lens compatibility, check out the camera when it arrives in your area, and decide if it's worthwhile for you. It's the likely excessive demand that they are creating that has me worried, the price point has got people from all aver the place interested. The point is that they can't compete with Canon numbers, we all know this. -- 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 -- 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 -- 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 -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Talk like what, Rob? Do you mean the more ready acceptance of slower lenses? I think we've seen that dumbing down with the prevalence of slower, variable aperture zooms. Yes, I fear the fastest lenses we'll see from Pentax from now on are f2.8 zooms and more farty little pancake lenses as primes. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
Not sure, but i don;t think so. Most of them today were from the big 3. Dave Quoting Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]: David J Brooks wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Pretty cars. I don't know much about '20s and '30s cars. Is that front one a Duesenberg? -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Seems we've visited this place before... Reminding me there was a 38mm f/1.8, 40mm f/1.4, 60mm f/1.5, and 70mm f/2 all made for 18x24mm coverage... by Olympus for the Pen F. They didn't do as much with wide angles; their fast 25mm coming in at f/2.8. Unfortunately these lenses are not applicable to today's dSLRs since their back-focus is too short, about the same as for an M-Leica. Mi Doug On 09/16/06 14:21, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually I'd like to see a lens somewhere in the 55-60mm range with a max aperture between 1.2 and 2.0, and a fast 35mm sort of like a fast 50mm on 35mm film. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Eric Featherstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm talking about the lens diameter, not the barrel diameter. For example, the diameter of the front element of my 35mm Summicron (f/2.0) is about 1-inch while the front element of my Pentax 35mm f/2.0 is 1.5-inches. I'd be curious what the diameter of the front element is on an M or A 35mm 2.0 ... anybody got that figure? M 35/2 front element is 1 1/16 The front element of my Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH is about 34mm (about 1 1/3) and concave but the filter ring is 46mm. Wide angle lenses particularly special designs don't conform to the simple Gaussian model that most fast 50 primes do. Generally the front element diameter of a fast 50 is simply the focal length / max aperture. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but the idea is tempting. I imagine myself walking around slick pony tail, dark shades and a leather coat. My point was simply that a pancake is not a substitute for fast lens. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Digital Image Studio Sent: 17. september 2006 02:36 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies On 17/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Talk like what, Rob? Do you mean the more ready acceptance of slower lenses? I think we've seen that dumbing down with the prevalence of slower, variable aperture zooms. Yes, I fear the fastest lenses we'll see from Pentax from now on are f2.8 zooms and more farty little pancake lenses as primes. -- 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 -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Since we're getting 1.8 zooms, I think we'll get some fast primes as well. It all hinges on camera sales. If the demand for a higher spec camera like the K10 exceeds demand for the K100, Pentax will answer the market's call. It's just good business. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 8:35 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 17/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Talk like what, Rob? Do you mean the more ready acceptance of slower lenses? I think we've seen that dumbing down with the prevalence of slower, variable aperture zooms. Yes, I fear the fastest lenses we'll see from Pentax from now on are f2.8 zooms and more farty little pancake lenses as primes. -- 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 -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve Larson, who used to frequent the list more frequently, had one I believe. And if my failing memory hasn't let me down, I had a chance to use it while we were in Santa Barbara a few years ago. Nice lens, although I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold a year or so back. I found the 28/2.0 to be a bit soft at the edges until f4.0, but after that quite nice throughout the range. I had two A28/2 at one stage, it's a really nice lens to use, I sold it when I bought my 31LTD, wish I hadn't now. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but the idea is tempting. I imagine myself walking around slick pony tail, dark shades and a leather coat. Pony tail aside I think that they are entirely overrated. They are small (not always an advantage particularly if your preference is manual focus) and slow, the current ones have no aperture ring and don't cover a full frame yet the 70mm will cost almost the same as the faster 77 which is hardly huge. The 21mm looks like a reasonable performer but really for the price and considering the slow speed and limited coverage design I would have expected it to be a far better performer than the now almost 20 year old A20/2.8 but it doesn't appear to be significantly better if at all but for flare resistance perhaps. My point was simply that a pancake is not a substitute for fast lens. I agree. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D extra tidbits from Japanese page
On 17/09/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: LOL. Tom, Adam Rob received an ear bashing were labeled negative a couple of days ago for saying that. I guess we can add Paul to the list of negative naysayers. I prefer to be labeled as realistic, cautious and practical, you ain't heard negative yet. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Piaggio
Adam Maas wrote: It certainly appears to. I do have to read the instructions though. Powell Hargrave wrote: Nice shot. So panning with SR on works? I think Pentax recommends turning it off when panning. http://static.flickr.com/98/244670476_9452ca7abf_b.jpg K100D, SMC-M 50mm f2 wide open at 1/100. ISO 400 and SR on. I'm anxiously awaiting more reports on using SR with panning, since I do a _lot_ of panning at the track. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D extra tidbits from Japanese page
David Savage wrote: I guess we can add Paul to the list of negative naysayers. This whole line of conversation reminds me of Spiro Agnew's and Richard Nixon's Nattering Nabobs of Negativism. And of the classic anagram of Mr. Agnew's name. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
P. J. Alling wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture zooms, and that's fast primes. What is the way out of slow primes? Fast primes ... Yup, and the last one such that Pentax issued was? I could be wrong but I think it was the 31mm Ltd. f1.8 a few years ago. I think the 77/1.8 came after the 31. -- 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: PESO: Fungus
Jens Bladt wrote: My *ist D has caught a huge fungus today: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/24451/ Woohoo! They'll love you in Amsterdam. :-) I haven't seen an /Amanita Muscaria/ since college. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Peso One more for Steady
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4948475 Not much of a car shot, but i liked the message. istD, 16-45 f4, Raw-CS conversion. Comments?? Dave Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Fungus
P. J. Alling wrote: My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and rendition. Poisonous or hallucinogenic, depending on who you ask. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Piaggio
I have my Nikon 70-200 VR on all the time and pan quite a bit with the flat work, equine wise. Seems to work that way, so i'd suspect it would Pentax wise. BTW Adam, nice shot Dave Quoting Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Adam Maas wrote: It certainly appears to. I do have to read the instructions though. Powell Hargrave wrote: Nice shot. So panning with SR on works? I think Pentax recommends turning it off when panning. http://static.flickr.com/98/244670476_9452ca7abf_b.jpg K100D, SMC-M 50mm f2 wide open at 1/100. ISO 400 and SR on. I'm anxiously awaiting more reports on using SR with panning, since I do a _lot_ of panning at the track. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- 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: It is ingenious! Was: Does this mean what I think it means?
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 05:45:09PM -0400, graywolf wrote: Can you provide a reference on that? A quick goggle search* finds nothing the contradicts my explanation. Your comment may be accurate on the quantum level but I do not think we can quite apply it to current image sensors, but would be interested in seeing something about where you are getting that from. Photons, like all quantum particles, are very slippery critters and probably act that way, but I do not know of any photo diode that gives out a quantized signal --in a macro world sense. The point is that you're not in a macro world. The change in voltage level that would be indicated by the smallest possible change in a 22-bit number is well below the change in voltage that would be caused by the presence of just one additional electron in the sensor site (by a couple of orders of magnitude). You're trying to measure an analog quantity to a precision that puts you firmly in the quantum domain. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT: Bummer
Wow!!! Someone got a steal of a deal there. --- Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I came close last night, but just missed it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1 Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://www.brendemuehl.net http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- 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
Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
Collin, are you a ham too? I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :) I'm a technician class ham, soon to upgrade to general or extra. --- Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 06:40 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote: Message: 5 Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:22:24 +0100 From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Bummer To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed: I came close last night, but just missed it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1 That wide a 20mm f4 ? The old K is a big beast, like the K35/2. I got to see one last year in Dayton at the ham radio gathering. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://www.brendemuehl.net http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Aperture ring? For what? On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:18 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 17/09/06, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but the idea is tempting. I imagine myself walking around slick pony tail, dark shades and a leather coat. Pony tail aside I think that they are entirely overrated. They are small (not always an advantage particularly if your preference is manual focus) and slow, the current ones have no aperture ring and don't cover a full frame yet the 70mm will cost almost the same as the faster 77 which is hardly huge. The 21mm looks like a reasonable performer but really for the price and considering the slow speed and limited coverage design I would have expected it to be a far better performer than the now almost 20 year old A20/2.8 but it doesn't appear to be significantly better if at all but for flare resistance perhaps. My point was simply that a pancake is not a substitute for fast lens. I agree. -- 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 -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
By one measure, you could actually say the shot from the small-sensor camera actually has more magnification, as you're magnifying a smaller image on the sensor to fill the same sized print. But, despite that, the small-sensor camera still ends up with more DOF. On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 04:46:53PM -0400, graywolf wrote: Just to clarify my other post on this, a 70mm on the digital has exactly the same magnification as a 105mm on on 35mm film if the images are framed the same and printed the same size (and they would necessarily have to be taken from the same distance), and thus has no effect on the DOF. In this particular case only the difference in aperture diameter is giving the 70mm a bit more DOF. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Mark Roberts wrote: John Francis wrote: On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 01:28:26PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: Ryan Brooks wrote: Adam Maas wrote: At f2.4, the 70 is about perfect for me. Essentially the same length and speed as the legendary Nikon 105 f2.5, which is a superb portrait lens. You are getting more DOF with the 70mm though. Not true. Not at the same subject magnification, anyway. (And that's what you'll be doing if you compare both lenses as portrait lenses.) Actually, Mark, Ryan is right. A portrait taken with a 105mm lens at f2.8 on a full-frame camera will have a shallower depth of field than the same portrait (taken from the same spot and enlarged to the same size) Right. But I specified same subject magnification, not taken from the same spot. And same subject magnification is pretty much how everyone does portraits: You frame as a head shot, waist-up, 3/4 or full length and compare two lenses with this view. I've never heard anyone saying. Well this Lens 1 has shallower depth of field with a head shot than Lens 2 does with a 3/4 shot: It's not a meaningful or useful comparison. -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 04:16:42PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: John Francis wrote: On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 01:28:26PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: Ryan Brooks wrote: Adam Maas wrote: At f2.4, the 70 is about perfect for me. Essentially the same length and speed as the legendary Nikon 105 f2.5, which is a superb portrait lens. You are getting more DOF with the 70mm though. Not true. Not at the same subject magnification, anyway. (And that's what you'll be doing if you compare both lenses as portrait lenses.) Actually, Mark, Ryan is right. A portrait taken with a 105mm lens at f2.8 on a full-frame camera will have a shallower depth of field than the same portrait (taken from the same spot and enlarged to the same size) Right. But I specified same subject magnification, not taken from the same spot. And same subject magnification is pretty much how everyone does portraits: You frame as a head shot, waist-up, 3/4 or full length and compare two lenses with this view. I've never heard anyone saying. Well this Lens 1 has shallower depth of field with a head shot than Lens 2 does with a 3/4 shot: It's not a meaningful or useful comparison. The two situations I described (105mm lens on a full-frame camera, 70mm lens on a 1.5x crop factor camera such as the Pentax DSLRs) will have exactly the same framing - both will be, say, head-and- shoulder shots if taken from the same point. *That*'s how most people do portraits - you frame the shot to use the entire area of your viewfinder. And the full-frame camera will have less DOF on that head-and-shoulders shot than the small-sensor camera will have with an image framed exactly the same way. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Fungus
Depending on which variety of Amanitas it might be. Some are psychoactive, some can kill you. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: P. J. Alling wrote: My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and rendition. Poisonous or hallucinogenic, depending on who you ask. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- 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: Pentax 750Z
On 9/16/06, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An ugly time of day, for sure... I'm now polishing off my second lager of the evening. Once again, life is good. -- 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: Pentax 750Z
On 9/16/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Scott Loveless wrote: Typical PS shutter lag. Standard Pentax PS gripe. Thanks for the long report. Any comments on the lens? The lens is fine, as far as I can tell. It is SMC and the front element is recessed a bit. I've not noticed any flare. Bill is probably more qualified to discuss the technical merits of the lens. -- 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: Pentax 750Z
On 9/16/06, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I actually managed to bend the hinge on a Canon PowerShot G1. It (the hinge) still worked, but it was very stiff to operate, and the screen didn't lie quite flat when in the closed position. It eventually got replaced when the camera had to go in for an unrelated repair. The hinge on ours starting making a popping sound when rotated. The image on the screen would not invert, and the screen would shut off completely when locked against the body and facing out. It was entirely internal. There was no visible damage. -- 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
Windows XP Media Edition Slide Show
I just dug out an old CD of a local hot air balloon rally and played it as a slide show on the media edition. It's really neat. Landscape oriented shots zoom to slightly more than fit the screen and portrait oriented shots scroll to more than fill the screen, yet also end up showing the entire photo in great detail. Bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Who can translate Swedish for us?
Wow. Looks like they are converting all the DA lense lineup to be USM? I better start saving up, or selling my non-USM DA lenses now! rg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was on the dpreview forum: Please see the K10D pentax catalogue at http://www.pentax.no/accounts/433774/File/Datablader/8690.pdf Looks like the 43mm LE is a goner, guess I am happy that I got mine in time :-) They are in the 13 page brochure that's been mentioned before, I believe. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
Jon Myers wrote: Collin, are you a ham too? There are a few of us. I'm also a Technician license, but I haven't been active much the last two years or so. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
IIRC there were people with 77's on the list when the 31mm was announced. In fact the 43 and 77 look like the work of the same design team. The 31 is almost a different family all together. Mark Roberts wrote: P. J. Alling wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture zooms, and that's fast primes. What is the way out of slow primes? Fast primes ... Yup, and the last one such that Pentax issued was? I could be wrong but I think it was the 31mm Ltd. f1.8 a few years ago. I think the 77/1.8 came after the 31. -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aperture ring? For what? You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls that photographers have over how a photographic exposure is set. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Fungus
Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Depending on which variety of Amanitas it might be. Some are psychoactive, some can kill you. Is that why i have a problem remembering the 60's. G Dave Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: P. J. Alling wrote: My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and rendition. Poisonous or hallucinogenic, depending on who you ask. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- 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 -- Equine and pet photography, York and Durham Region. www.caughtinmotion.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Windows XP Media Edition Slide Show
Sounds like your back Bill. Dave Quoting Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I just dug out an old CD of a local hot air balloon rally and played it as a slide show on the media edition. It's really neat. Landscape oriented shots zoom to slightly more than fit the screen and portrait oriented shots scroll to more than fill the screen, yet also end up showing the entire photo in great detail. Bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Equine and pet photography, York and Durham Region. www.caughtinmotion.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Windows XP Media Edition Slide Show
I didn't mention that some of the shots need to be deleted. I was using the MZ-S at the time and some of the shots of the afterglow (burning at night to light up a tethered balloon like a light bulb) show a fair amount of camera movement. Phyllis has a few days off for fall break in October, so I hope to get up there during the week and get some fall color shots. Hopefully I'll be able to stand steady by then, or maybe use my monopod as a cane and get some macro shots of leaves. Bill -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of D Brooks Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 10:36 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Windows XP Media Edition Slide Show Sounds like your back Bill. Dave Quoting Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I just dug out an old CD of a local hot air balloon rally and played it as a slide show on the media edition. It's really neat. Landscape oriented shots zoom to slightly more than fit the screen and portrait oriented shots scroll to more than fill the screen, yet also end up showing the entire photo in great detail. Bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Equine and pet photography, York and Durham Region. www.caughtinmotion.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: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
On 9/16/06, Jon Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Collin, are you a ham too? I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :) There's a bunch of us lurking around here. I've got my Extra ticket. -Mat, N2NJZ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works just fine. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 10:29 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aperture ring? For what? You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls that photographers have over how a photographic exposure is set. -- 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 -- 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: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
KG4LOV, not active at the present time. Bill -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mat Maessen Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 10:45 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer) On 9/16/06, Jon Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Collin, are you a ham too? I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :) There's a bunch of us lurking around here. I've got my Extra ticket. -Mat, N2NJZ -- 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: Pentax 750Z
Just got one of these (refurbished grade A stock) for my son - anyone have one? Any comments? I LOVED that camera when we had it in stock at my store. The lens was very sharp, and the super macro mode was a lot of fun to play with on slow days. It was a little difficult to sell because of its relatively high price, but once customers realized how many cool features it had, most of them went for it. Focus can be a little slow, which is what causes that shutter lag people have mentioned, but if you pre-focus (press halfway and hold), it snaps pretty quick. I think it has a pan focus feature too, which allows it to take a shot almost instantly. I expect your son will enjoy it. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO: Fungus
I always assume mushrooms are poisonous, there are a number of varieties that are quite edible, which have mimics which will kill you dead quickly or slowly. I have a friend who's a mycologist, he collects mushrooms to eat occasionally . If he gets just one he's not sure of in a batch he throws all of them out. Paul Stenquist wrote: Depending on which variety of Amanitas it might be. Some are psychoactive, some can kill you. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: P. J. Alling wrote: My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and rendition. Poisonous or hallucinogenic, depending on who you ask. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works just fine. It might work fine, but it's not my preference, my preference is to use the aperture ring, as it is on my Mamiya and Leicas. I'm not happy that I am being steered away from my preferential mode of operation, I'm allowed not to like this and I don't see why I shouldn't be able to say so. I don't view the way that things have progressed as good or advantageous to me because they simply aren't. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Peso One for Steady
Very nice, Dave! I like the soft light. Have you considered a tighter crop, maybe just above the headlights and just in front of the bumper? Rick --- David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803 Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty much over, so i can spend the odd weekend doing photos for myself. Today was the annual Stouffville Car Show and i had a chance to wonder around and take some shots, Even after i spent time with Franks BW lab guy. He does very good work BTW. :-) Here is the first one that stands out for me anyway. I have several more i';ll add later. Comments welcome. istD, DA 50-200, Raw and converted in CS. Paul, i don;t know how you do it. This was hard to do, with people standing and sitting in spots i wish they would.nt. They also had papaers in the windshields that i found hard to work around. Nice to do someting else for a change.:-) Dave Brooks Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW __ 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Well, now I feel a little better - at least not so alone in my foolishness. Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Shel Belinkoff I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold a year or so back. I found the 28/2.0 to be a bit soft at the edges until f4.0, but after that quite nice throughout the range. I had two A28/2 at one stage, it's a really nice lens to use, I sold it when I bought my 31LTD, wish I hadn't now. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
I know that aperture dials are not your preference. I also am very familiar with the purpose of an aperture ring. I was turning them when you were still in knickers. But I responded to your post in like manner. I own a number of lenses that have aperture dials rather than aperture rings. I certainly didn't bemoan the disappearance of the dial. I won't bemoan the disappearance of the ring. What was practical yesterday is not necessarily practical today. They all serve the same purpose. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 10:49 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works just fine. It might work fine, but it's not my preference, my preference is to use the aperture ring, as it is on my Mamiya and Leicas. I'm not happy that I am being steered away from my preferential mode of operation, I'm allowed not to like this and I don't see why I shouldn't be able to say so. I don't view the way that things have progressed as good or advantageous to me because they simply aren't. -- 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 -- 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: Ordered a K10D
I ordered five, one for everyone in my family, plus one more backup. :) Not. I'm waiting for the (hopefully) eventual price drop and to see what kind of image quality we are going to get from 10Mp. rg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to share, from where did you order it? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Hmm. I think I want the A28/2 as well. Much more practical than the Vivitar, although I wonder which is better. We may never know. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 11:01 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Well, now I feel a little better - at least not so alone in my foolishness. Shel [Original Message] From: Digital Image Studio Shel Belinkoff I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold a year or so back. I found the 28/2.0 to be a bit soft at the edges until f4.0, but after that quite nice throughout the range. I had two A28/2 at one stage, it's a really nice lens to use, I sold it when I bought my 31LTD, wish I hadn't now. -- 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
Ordered a K10D
I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to share, from where did you order it? Shel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ordered a K10D
I ordered and paid for a K10D from Amazon, which seems to be the only internet provider who is taking orders. I've also asked to be notified when available from BH. I would prefer to buy from them, but they are not taking orders. According to them, the few they took were a mistake. Where did you place your order? Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 11:10 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to share, from where did you order it? 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: Ordered a K10D
I didn't order the camera - three people I personally know did, and you're now the fourth person I know, although I don't know you personally. Bob Sullivan ordered from BH, another from John Celio @ Reed's Camera here in the East Bay. I don't specifically recall where the third person ordered from, although I think it was from John as she's local.. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist I ordered and paid for a K10D from Amazon, which seems to be the only internet provider who is taking orders. I've also asked to be notified when available from BH. I would prefer to buy from them, but they are not taking orders. According to them, the few they took were a mistake. Where did you place your order? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ordered a K10D
i did exactly the same. mishka On 9/16/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I ordered and paid for a K10D from Amazon, which seems to be the only internet provider who is taking orders. I've also asked to be notified when available from BH. I would prefer to buy from them, but they are not taking orders. According to them, the few they took were a mistake. Where did you place your order? Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 11:10 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to share, from where did you order it? 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: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
Amateur Extra KD2L - Original Message - From: Jon Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 6:48 PM Subject: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer) Collin, are you a ham too? I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :) I'm a technician class ham, soon to upgrade to general or extra. --- Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 06:40 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote: Message: 5 Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:22:24 +0100 From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Bummer To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed: I came close last night, but just missed it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1 That wide a 20mm f4 ? The old K is a big beast, like the K35/2. I got to see one last year in Dayton at the ham radio gathering. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://www.brendemuehl.net http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- 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: K10D extra tidbits from Japanese page
On 9/17/06, Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/09/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: LOL. Tom, Adam Rob received an ear bashing were labeled negative a couple of days ago for saying that. I guess we can add Paul to the list of negative naysayers. I prefer to be labeled as realistic, cautious and practical, you ain't heard negative yet. I don't believe in labels man. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
I agree... As I was telling Godfrey, the loss of the aperture ring is just crazy to me. I noticed in the question posed by Shel about the 50mm lenses that I'm not alone in this. Many folks wanted a 50mm for digital as long as it came with an aperture ring. I'm going to have to get used to not having them I suppose, but I don't see the advantage...I just don't see it. -Brendan --- Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aperture ring? For what? You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls that photographers have over how a photographic exposure is set. -- 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 -- 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: Ordered a K10D
Sullivan ordered from BH, another from John Celio @ Reed's Camera here in the East Bay. I don't specifically recall where the third person ordered from, although I think it was from John as she's local.. Only one person so far has asked for me and mentioned you, Shel. Thanks very much for the referral! Was the third person Marnie? John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Ordered a K10D
Hi Shel, You know me personally. You've just been spared the pain of seeing me:-). Yes, Bob Sullivan was one of the few orders BH took. I tried to order and asked them about that. They admitted a mistake. They soon changed their Out of Stock nomenclature to New- coming soon. I think that's something they invented just for the K10D. I need a backup body for a couple of upcoming shoots. But I didn't want to be stuck with an *istD that I couldn't sell. So I'm trying to time this just right. Amazon says I'll have a camera some time between October 17 and 31. That will work if it's true. If BH comes through in the meantime, I'll cancel and buy from them. I know they'll help me out if there is a problem. Amazon is somewhat of an unknown in that regard. Paul On Sep 16, 2006, at 11:47 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I didn't order the camera - three people I personally know did, and you're now the fourth person I know, although I don't know you personally. Bob Sullivan ordered from BH, another from John Celio @ Reed's Camera here in the East Bay. I don't specifically recall where the third person ordered from, although I think it was from John as she's local.. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Stenquist I ordered and paid for a K10D from Amazon, which seems to be the only internet provider who is taking orders. I've also asked to be notified when available from BH. I would prefer to buy from them, but they are not taking orders. According to them, the few they took were a mistake. Where did you place your order? -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Rob...I'm totally with you on this. Using a dial on a camera body to control the aperture is nuts to me. I don't see it as an advantage either. To me it seems cumbersome and ridiculous. -Brendan --- Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works just fine. It might work fine, but it's not my preference, my preference is to use the aperture ring, as it is on my Mamiya and Leicas. I'm not happy that I am being steered away from my preferential mode of operation, I'm allowed not to like this and I don't see why I shouldn't be able to say so. I don't view the way that things have progressed as good or advantageous to me because they simply aren't. -- 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 -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Brendan MacRae [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm going to have to get used to not having them I suppose, but I don't see the advantage...I just don't see it. That's because the advantage is not yours, it's to the manufacturer, they can produce a cheaper interface and then add a heap of functionality that they can then use in marketing. Regardless of the stream of arguments that have been produced to support the dropping of aperture ring support I would still like to see it and I would pay more for a body that had it. We know it's possible to produce a body that provides control via aperture ring and control dial but apparently it's just not something we need. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
There's no significant advantage to eliminating the aperture ring other than reduced complexity. But, likewise, there is no advantage to retaining it. The camera functions just as well without it. Paul On Sep 17, 2006, at 12:07 AM, Brendan MacRae wrote: I agree... As I was telling Godfrey, the loss of the aperture ring is just crazy to me. I noticed in the question posed by Shel about the 50mm lenses that I'm not alone in this. Many folks wanted a 50mm for digital as long as it came with an aperture ring. I'm going to have to get used to not having them I suppose, but I don't see the advantage...I just don't see it. -Brendan --- Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aperture ring? For what? You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls that photographers have over how a photographic exposure is set. -- 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 -- 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: Ordered a K10D
No, it wasn't Marnie ... but in all honesty, I'd not post it publicly on the list if it were. It would be her choice to do that. It's a woman I know, but I was just guessing that she may have ordered from you. She may have ordered before your announcement. Well, my meds are kicking in, time to get outta here. See y'all in the morning. Shel [Original Message] From: John Celio Sullivan ordered from BH, another from John Celio @ Reed's Camera here in the East Bay. I don't specifically recall where the third person ordered from, although I think it was from John as she's local.. Only one person so far has asked for me and mentioned you, Shel. Thanks very much for the referral! Was the third person Marnie? John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement. -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Ason one of the guys pushing a D-FA 50, it has nothing to do with the aperture ring and everything to do with loving my LX. -Adam Brendan MacRae wrote: I agree... As I was telling Godfrey, the loss of the aperture ring is just crazy to me. I noticed in the question posed by Shel about the 50mm lenses that I'm not alone in this. Many folks wanted a 50mm for digital as long as it came with an aperture ring. I'm going to have to get used to not having them I suppose, but I don't see the advantage...I just don't see it. -Brendan --- Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aperture ring? For what? You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls that photographers have over how a photographic exposure is set. -- 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 -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
Digital Image Studio wrote: On 17/09/06, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but the idea is tempting. I imagine myself walking around slick pony tail, dark shades and a leather coat. Pony tail aside I think that they are entirely overrated. They are small (not always an advantage particularly if your preference is manual focus) and slow, the current ones have no aperture ring and don't cover a full frame yet the 70mm will cost almost the same as the faster 77 which is hardly huge. The 21mm looks like a reasonable performer but really for the price and considering the slow speed and limited coverage design I would have expected it to be a far better performer than the now almost 20 year old A20/2.8 but it doesn't appear to be significantly better if at all but for flare resistance perhaps. Given it's 1/3 of a stop slower, but less expensive than the FA 20/2.8 (About 2/3rds the cost) and a third the size, I really can't see the complaints about the 21 DA. The 70 is quite reasonable too, giving me a replacement for one of my favourite lenses (My 100 f2.8 Series E). The 40 on the other hand is neither fish nor fowl on digital. A fairly useless length and lacking the speed that might make the length less of an issue. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
I do kinda wonder why they didn't use a variation of that mount for 4/3rds. -Adam Doug Miles wrote: Seems we've visited this place before... Reminding me there was a 38mm f/1.8, 40mm f/1.4, 60mm f/1.5, and 70mm f/2 all made for 18x24mm coverage... by Olympus for the Pen F. They didn't do as much with wide angles; their fast 25mm coming in at f/2.8. Unfortunately these lenses are not applicable to today's dSLRs since their back-focus is too short, about the same as for an M-Leica. Mi Doug On 09/16/06 14:21, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually I'd like to see a lens somewhere in the 55-60mm range with a max aperture between 1.2 and 2.0, and a fast 35mm sort of like a fast 50mm on 35mm film. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO - Piaggio
Thanks -Adam David J Brooks wrote: I have my Nikon 70-200 VR on all the time and pan quite a bit with the flat work, equine wise. Seems to work that way, so i'd suspect it would Pentax wise. BTW Adam, nice shot Dave Quoting Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Adam Maas wrote: It certainly appears to. I do have to read the instructions though. Powell Hargrave wrote: Nice shot. So panning with SR on works? I think Pentax recommends turning it off when panning. http://static.flickr.com/98/244670476_9452ca7abf_b.jpg K100D, SMC-M 50mm f2 wide open at 1/100. ISO 400 and SR on. I'm anxiously awaiting more reports on using SR with panning, since I do a _lot_ of panning at the track. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- 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: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
You may not like it. You're entitled to your preferences, as is Rob. But it's neither ridiculous or cumbersome. In fact, it's considerably less cumbersome than an aperture ring. And that's from someone who used aperture rings for forty years. Paul On Sep 17, 2006, at 12:12 AM, Brendan MacRae wrote: Rob...I'm totally with you on this. Using a dial on a camera body to control the aperture is nuts to me. I don't see it as an advantage either. To me it seems cumbersome and ridiculous. -Brendan --- Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works just fine. It might work fine, but it's not my preference, my preference is to use the aperture ring, as it is on my Mamiya and Leicas. I'm not happy that I am being steered away from my preferential mode of operation, I'm allowed not to like this and I don't see why I shouldn't be able to say so. I don't view the way that things have progressed as good or advantageous to me because they simply aren't. -- 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 -- 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: Ordered a K10D
Shel Belinkoff wrote: I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to share, from where did you order it? Shel Stores out here in western Canada do not have Pricing from Pentax yet are also not taking orders yet. I am getting prepared though, last friday I bought a Remote Control F, a Cable Switch CS-205 and ordered the AC Adapter Kit K-ACIOU. -- David S. Nature and wildlife photography http://www.sheppardphotos.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 50/1.4 or 1.2 for the DSLR Bodies
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You may not like it. You're entitled to your preferences, as is Rob. But it's neither ridiculous or cumbersome. In fact, it's considerably less cumbersome than an aperture ring. And that's from someone who used aperture rings for forty years. If I were one handed I'd agree. I can appreciate how it may be an advantage as you seem to be pretty keen on zoom lenses, that means that all your left hand needs to do is adjust the FL assuming you use AF. It's the same as the green button kludge for older lenses, it works but no one can really argue that it's as practical or convenient as a coupled lens. -- 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 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
