Re: K10D and long exposure times

[jim]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:56:27 -0600, Corey Leopold wrote:

I am glad to know that other people had the same problem and that 
Mr Thibault Massart could help us both.

Must send him a card next christmas 

James


>Learn something new every day. This very thing was annoying me
>Friday, now I need to go look for that setting.

>Thanks

>Corey
>> With long exposures, the noise reduction applied by te camera will





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Cotty]

On 29/1/07, Angel Ramos, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Way to go Godfrey!  I did also placed my order!.

When I said there were no angels on this list, I meant except one ;-)

-- 


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: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Henk Terhell]

I haven't got any clue yet from all discussions why Lightroom is so
special that I should buy this. I got Elements 5 which does all
organizing of PEF and DNG files, provides 3.6 RAW conversion, and has
also all the editing tools, like clone brush and healing tool, I (seem
to) need, and is basically cheaper. What extra will Lightroom bring me,
in other words why do I need to replace or amplify Elements by
Lightroom?
It would be useful to see somewhere a side-by-side comparison of all
properties of CS, Elements and Lightroom.

Henk

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> Behalf Of Mike Hamilton
> Sent: 29 January, 2007 3:45 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date 
> announcement
> 
> 
> Hey, they've now included a clone tool and healing brush!  Very nice.
> 
> Mike
>


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Cotty]

On 30/1/07, Thibouille, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Huh Yeah Brits are even more  than us Euro users when it comes to
>dollar conversion... which means the really get * IMO. Sorry but I
>think this is reality.

What, and you didn't get ** when you changed from Francs to Euros?

-- 


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: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Thibouille]

Well not much IMO really.
Some crap companies thought it was a good occasion of driving price
higher, sure, put except those, I see no problem with that. Also, it
lets me buy whatever in EU without problem and a lot easier than
before so I won't complain.

2007/1/30, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 30/1/07, Thibouille, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Huh Yeah Brits are even more  than us Euro users when it comes to
> >dollar conversion... which means the really get * IMO. Sorry but I
> >think this is reality.
>
> What, and you didn't get ** when you changed from Francs to Euros?
>
> --
>
>
> 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
>


-- 

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: K10D and long exposure times

[Thibouille]

Well I didn't do much. I just remember this was a much debated issue
when the D was new, months/years ago. I myself did turn it off very
rarely but I remember well on one occasion I should have turn it off
LOL That's why I remember that now ;)

2007/1/30, jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:56:27 -0600, Corey Leopold wrote:
>
> I am glad to know that other people had the same problem and that
> Mr Thibault Massart could help us both.
>
> Must send him a card next christmas
>
> James
>
>
> >Learn something new every day. This very thing was annoying me
> >Friday, now I need to go look for that setting.
>
> >Thanks
>
> >Corey
> >> With long exposures, the noise reduction applied by te camera will
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Thibouille]

I understand you hesitate and certainly I understand it is somewhat
difficult to see the difference between products and what does what?

However I understand Lightroom is not an image editor (cool 'cos I
really dunno much about the use of those things :) and more toward
Managing collection of image (better than bridge I suppose?) and
developing RAW -> Jpegs. Cool, exactly what I need and price is a lot
more like what I can afford than PS.
PSE might be indeed interesting also.



2007/1/30, Henk Terhell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I haven't got any clue yet from all discussions why Lightroom is so
> special that I should buy this. I got Elements 5 which does all
> organizing of PEF and DNG files, provides 3.6 RAW conversion, and has
> also all the editing tools, like clone brush and healing tool, I (seem
> to) need, and is basically cheaper. What extra will Lightroom bring me,
> in other words why do I need to replace or amplify Elements by
> Lightroom?
> It would be useful to see somewhere a side-by-side comparison of all
> properties of CS, Elements and Lightroom.
>
> Henk
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Mike Hamilton
> > Sent: 29 January, 2007 3:45 PM
> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > Subject: Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date
> > announcement
> >
> >
> > Hey, they've now included a clone tool and healing brush!  Very nice.
> >
> > Mike
> >
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: PESO - snow geese and moon

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

http://photography2.skofteland.net:8080/albums/userpics/10001/snow_moon_IMG_6067.jpg
> http://tinyurl.com/yo5nut
> 
> What do you think?

Tolerable.

8-)


-
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Well not much IMO really.
> Some crap companies ...

Some crap companies? Practically everything has bl**dy doubled. Pubs and
restaurants are particularly bad. Just a few days ago, I drove by a
"friterie" (the Belgian equivalent of a fish and chips shop for the
Brits) where they advertised "moules frites" (mussels and chips) for 17
euros. If he had offered his mussels at 700 francs, a few years ago,
people would have told him to have his head examined. A cup of coffee
has risen from 20 francs (50 cent) to somewhere between 1,20 and 1,60. 

Maybe here in Germany, it's more obvious. At a rate of 2 deutschmarks =
1 euro, everything that sold for one mark before now costs one euro. We
call it the "teuro", from "teuer" = expensive.

I for one want my marks and francs back.

Ralf 

-- 
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  DL9KCG  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Interest in developing a software around photograhy?

[Thibouille]

I know I did one hour later when I realized my question was foolish,
at least foolish to ask that before trying exactly what you wrote...
let's say I was too tired, ok? ;)

Too much World of Warcraft I suppose ...

2007/1/29, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:31:11AM +0100, Thibouille wrote:
> > Mmm I might program just that but it will not come before a time and
> > would be specific to Pentax (at first, at least).
> >
> > BTW anybody knows where to find EXIF specifications ?
>
> Well, the two most obvious things to do would be:
>
>  1)  Try browsing to www.exif.org
>
> or
>
>  2) Type "EXIF specifications" into a Google search.
>
>
> Either of these would have produced for you the answer you want;
> the very first result from Google is a pointer to www.exif.org
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Thibouille]

2007/1/30, Ralf R. Radermacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well not much IMO really.
> We
> call it the "teuro", from "teuer" = expensive.

LOL good one ;)

I think it is a lot more in Germany than here. Of course inlfation is
a lot responsible and probably it is often more easy to put that on
Euro's fault than anythig else.
I mean 20 years ago I did't have to pay €7,5 when I wanted to watch a
movie. Euro's fault only? A bit easy, no ?

-- 

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I think it is a lot more in Germany than here. 

The examples I've quoted are all from Belgium. I wouldn't touch German
coffee with a bargepole. 

Ralf

-- 
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  DL9KCG  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: Fixing inaccurate AF of my *ist D

[mike wilson]

> 
> From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2007/01/29 Mon PM 07:23:03 GMT
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Subject: RE: Fixing inaccurate AF of my *ist D
> 
> Good point, William. I better have Pentax take a good look at it.
> Alos the CF card release button is loose (it fals out once in a while).
> Quite annoying actaully - some day, I'll probably loose it for good
> Regards
> 
> Jens Bladt

What is the Danish for "I'm sorry sir but you have been using this"

> Nytarkort / Greeting Card:
> http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html
> 
> http://www.jensbladt.dk
> +45 56 63 77 11
> +45 23 43 85 77
> Skype: jensbladt248
> 
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William
> Robb
> Sendt: 29. januar 2007 17:31
> Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Emne: Re: Fixing inaccurate AF of my *ist D
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jens Bladt"
> Subject: RE: Fixing inaccurate AF of my *ist D
> 
> 
> > Thanks for answering, William.
> > No, I never took out the screen.
> > I dont' tamper much too much with this advanced device :-)
> > I think the camera got a small bump a few days ago - nothing that made any
> > marks, but enough for me to notice.
> > Perhaps the screen did move.
> > I dont understand you last question.
> > I can see in the view finder, that focus is off when I get the red light
> > confirmation.
> > Is what you are asking is if the screen says unsharp and the files are
> > sharp?
> > No - the files are unsharp too.
> 
> I saw a website a while back that dealt with adjusting the AF sensor
> position in the istD, but I didn't bookmark it.
> I recall the adjustment itself was pretty simple, take off the bottom cover
> and there are 3 screws for position adjust.
> Anyway, I don't expect Pentax would charge overmuch to adjust it, and
> honestly, with the number of shots you have on that camera, a CLA might not
> be a bad idea.
> 
> William Robb
> 
> 
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.14/658 - Release Date: 01/29/2007
> 14:49
> 
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.14/658 - Release Date: 01/29/2007
> 14:49
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 


-
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Thibouille]

> The examples I've quoted are all from Belgium. I wouldn't touch German
> coffee with a bargepole.
>
> Ralf
>
LOL ;)

But I never saw a cofee @ 20 francs a bit before introduction of the
Euro, really. (Well, I might be off).

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Cotty]

On 30/1/07, Ralf R. Radermacher, discombobulated, unleashed:

>The examples I've quoted are all from Belgium. I wouldn't touch German
>coffee with a bargepole. 

Not even one photographed at night on the Rhine in all it's panoramic
glory ;-)

-- 


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: Magnifying eyecup

[Jan van Wijk]

Hi Juan,

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:34:21 -0800, Juan Buhler wrote:

>I just ordered the O-ME53 Magnifying Eyecup from B&H, to use on the K10D.
>
>I plan to use that, and probably a Katz Eye screen with split prism,
>to make up for the small viewfinder (I know it's pretty good for what
>it is, but I'd like one like the MX)
>
>Is anyone here using the magnifying eyecup? Can you comment on it?

I am, but just for a few days sofar :-)

I like it for the magnification, it does help for MF.

It DOES limit the view a bit so you may have to move your eye
slightly to see every corner or all info near the bottom of the screen.

Sofar the PRO's outweight the CON's for me ...

One small added benefit is that it 'sticks out' a bit so your eye, 
and more importantly your nose, is furter from the LCD.
This helps a bit for left-eye shooters like me ...

I may put up an image from the K10D with it fitted later today.
Will put up an URL if I do ...

Regards, JvW


--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Not even one photographed at night on the Rhine in all it's panoramic
> glory ;-)

At the price of a week of heartburn? No thanks, but no. ;-)

For the last 10 years, my photography has been fuelled by:
http://www.cafeliegeois.com/index.htm

Ralf

-- 
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  DL9KCG  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Paul Stenquist]

I'm sure you'll get lots of advice. But the first thing you need to do 
is explain to your wife's cousin that this is not the kind of work you 
do and there's a risk factor involved in your doing it. I recently did 
a similar favor for friends, but I made it clear that I am not a 
wedding photographer. I'm there to take pictures for them, and I will 
do my best to give them some nice shots. You have to do this, or you 
risk alienating a family member. The second thing you must do is shoot 
RAW. The lighting will vary tremendously. Use the flash judiciously, 
and not without a reflector or a ceiling from which to bounce it. Scout 
your locations beforehand and check to see if there is enough light to 
shoot without the flash. You almost certainly will want to shoot 
without flash in the church if it's at all possible. By the way, you 
can buy very professional looking wedding books, but be prepared to 
spend at least $200.
Paul
On Jan 30, 2007, at 12:33 AM, Scott Loveless wrote:

> Hi, gang!
>
> I got roped into doing a wedding in late June for a family member.
> About two years ago I started seriously considering doing this sort of
> work, but then decided against it.  However, my wife's cousin is
> putting together a wedding on a limited budget (it is apparently very
> expensive to bring a young lady to the US if she's planning on staying
> here permanently) and asked if I would consider doing the photography.
>  Knowing that he probably wouldn't be able to afford professional
> photographer I agreed to shoot the event for expenses only.  (He's
> actually not going to pay me a dime, but he doesn't know that yet.)
> I'll be providing them with a small album of prints and a DVD with
> quite a few more "ready to print" photos.  Anyway, I have a few
> questions.
>
> The plan is to shoot as much as possible with a digital body.  I'll
> bring along a couple of film bodies for backup purposes.  As of now
> this means the K100D and probably the PZ-1 and MX.  A couple of zooms,
> a few primes, a tripod and a flash gun or two will round out the kit.
> Am I missing anything?
>
> I guess I need to actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
> Could you recommend any particular books that approach Photoshop from
> a photographer's point of view?
>
> My wife will have her hands full with herding our daughter down the
> aisle (flower girl), as well as helping with the coordination of the
> wedding day, so I'm not expecting any help from her.  This means that
> dumping memory cards to the laptop may not happen until it's all over.
>  Shoot JPEG, or suck it up and buy a few more SD cards to allow me to
> shoot RAW?  I may try to con another family member into doing some
> donkey work for me, but I'm not counting on it.
>
> Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly appreciated.
> In the meantime my daughter's probably going to grow to hate the
> camera, and my next-door-neighbor's teenage daughter is getting free
> senior portraits (I need the practice).
>
> Thanks a bunch!
>
> -- 
> 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
>


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Digital Image Studio]

On 30/01/07, Ralf R. Radermacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> For the last 10 years, my photography has been fuelled by:
> http://www.cafeliegeois.com/index.htm

Ah, no wonder you use a tripod :-)

-- 
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: McNaught - At Last!!

[David Savage]

There's nothing wrong with that. It took me 3 tries before I got
something I was really pleased with :-)

At least you can say you saw it. I had no intention of waiting around
a few thousand years to see it again ;-)

Cheers,

Dave

On 1/30/07, Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After a couple of weeks of crappy or overcast skies, Comet McNaught was 
> finally visible for a few nights in late January 2007 in western Sydney.
>
> This image was taken from my back paddock while being devoured by 
> mosquitos.
>
>
> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/PAW/mcnaught.html
>
> Not as good as some others posted here - but at least I got a photo!

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Scott Loveless]

Thanks, Paul.  The first thing I did when asked to shoot this wedding
was explain to him that I've never done one before and that he should
not expect top notch results.  On one later occasion we had a similar
conversation.  I think I've made it clear, and he's told me that he
understands.

RAW does sound like the better option, if only for white balance
issues.  As for wedding books, Christie spends a lot of time putting
together photo albums and scrap books (I thought photography was
expensive!).  She's picked out a couple of albums we already have that
are still new, and she's very picky about about buying archival
materials.  So I think we're ok there.

Thanks again, Paul.  Much appreciated.

On 1/30/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sure you'll get lots of advice. But the first thing you need to do
> is explain to your wife's cousin that this is not the kind of work you
> do and there's a risk factor involved in your doing it. I recently did
> a similar favor for friends, but I made it clear that I am not a
> wedding photographer. I'm there to take pictures for them, and I will
> do my best to give them some nice shots. You have to do this, or you
> risk alienating a family member. The second thing you must do is shoot
> RAW. The lighting will vary tremendously. Use the flash judiciously,
> and not without a reflector or a ceiling from which to bounce it. Scout
> your locations beforehand and check to see if there is enough light to
> shoot without the flash. You almost certainly will want to shoot
> without flash in the church if it's at all possible. By the way, you
> can buy very professional looking wedding books, but be prepared to
> spend at least $200.
> Paul
> On Jan 30, 2007, at 12:33 AM, Scott Loveless wrote:
>
> > Hi, gang!
> >
> > I got roped into doing a wedding in late June for a family member.
> > About two years ago I started seriously considering doing this sort of
> > work, but then decided against it.  However, my wife's cousin is
> > putting together a wedding on a limited budget (it is apparently very
> > expensive to bring a young lady to the US if she's planning on staying
> > here permanently) and asked if I would consider doing the photography.
> >  Knowing that he probably wouldn't be able to afford professional
> > photographer I agreed to shoot the event for expenses only.  (He's
> > actually not going to pay me a dime, but he doesn't know that yet.)
> > I'll be providing them with a small album of prints and a DVD with
> > quite a few more "ready to print" photos.  Anyway, I have a few
> > questions.
> >
> > The plan is to shoot as much as possible with a digital body.  I'll
> > bring along a couple of film bodies for backup purposes.  As of now
> > this means the K100D and probably the PZ-1 and MX.  A couple of zooms,
> > a few primes, a tripod and a flash gun or two will round out the kit.
> > Am I missing anything?
> >
> > I guess I need to actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
> > Could you recommend any particular books that approach Photoshop from
> > a photographer's point of view?
> >
> > My wife will have her hands full with herding our daughter down the
> > aisle (flower girl), as well as helping with the coordination of the
> > wedding day, so I'm not expecting any help from her.  This means that
> > dumping memory cards to the laptop may not happen until it's all over.
> >  Shoot JPEG, or suck it up and buy a few more SD cards to allow me to
> > shoot RAW?  I may try to con another family member into doing some
> > donkey work for me, but I'm not counting on it.
> >
> > Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly appreciated.
> > In the meantime my daughter's probably going to grow to hate the
> > camera, and my next-door-neighbor's teenage daughter is getting free
> > senior portraits (I need the practice).
> >
> > Thanks a bunch!
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 
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: McNaught - At Last!!

[Brian Walters]

Apparently if you wait "a few thousand years" you still won't see it.  Reports 
I've read suggest that this is it's first? and last visit as its likely to 
break up.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia


Quoting David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> There's nothing wrong with that. It took me 3 tries before I got
> something I was really pleased with :-)
> 
> At least you can say you saw it. I had no intention of waiting
> around
> a few thousand years to see it again ;-)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave
> 
> On 1/30/07, Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > After a couple of weeks of crappy or overcast skies, Comet
> McNaught was finally visible for a few nights in late January 2007
> in western Sydney.
> >
> > This image was taken from my back paddock while being devoured by
> mosquitos.
> >
> >
> > http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/PAW/mcnaught.html
> >
> > Not as good as some others posted here - but at least I got a
> photo!
>

--
Click for dental plans with huge savings, top service and coverage
http://tags.bluebottle.com/fc/CAaCMPJew4J7MFZZE5CDJSFE3pVqKhYB/


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Scott Loveless"
Subject: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation



> Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly appreciated.
> In the meantime my daughter's probably going to grow to hate the
> camera, and my next-door-neighbor's teenage daughter is getting free
> senior portraits (I need the practice).

Keep It Simple, Stupid.
Ferget multiple lenses. Keep your equipment to a minumum. Personally, I'd
recommend just a standard lens. It'll keep you from being caught flat
footed, by having a lens off the camera when something happens, or from
wedging a lens when trying to change it quickly.
I'm sure you will be warned about the "risk factor" of shooting your first 
wedding. Don't sweat it. I've shot probably a thousand weddings during my 
carreer, and feel the risk factor is as great now as it was 35 years ago 
when I was shooting my first ones.
Hint: The girl in the pretty white dress is the VIP that day. Always know 
where she is.

William Robb


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Wide angle backfocus

[Brian Dunn]

I received a 21 Limited.  Center only autofocus always greatly back focuses on 
both ist-DS cameras, more on one than on the other.  The 45 degree focus 
chart showed the 21 Limited back focusing almost off the far end of the 
paper.

I tested other lenses and found that they all back focus when set to wide 
angles.  The amount seems to be proportional to the angle.  For example, you 
could set a 16-45 on a tripod, aim at something 7 feet away, zoom in to 45mm, 
focus, then zoom out and focus again.  The more you zoom out, the more the 
autofocus changes.

All this time I have been zooming in, focusing, zooming out, then taking the 
picture.  It works fine until you get a wide prime like the 21 where there is 
nothing to zoom.  When aimed at something across the street it tries to focus 
past infinity and hits the stops.

Research on the Internet finds discussion about adjusting three screws under 
the base plate of the DS.  These hold the auto focus sensors and you can 
adjust for front or back focus.

So I'm wondering if anyone here would care to take a 16-45 or 18-55 or the 
like, zoom in and aim at something across the room, see on the focus scale 
what distance it chose, then zoom wide and focus again to see if it changed.  
Do all Pentax digital cameras back focus at wide angle?

Has anyone here tried the adjustments under the base plate?

Has anyone had a Pentax repair center successfully fix this issue?


Brian

-- 

Brian Dunn Photographic
http://www.bdphotographic.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Mark Roberts]

Scott Loveless wrote:

>I guess I need to actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
>Could you recommend any particular books that approach 
>Photoshop from a photographer's point of view?

Real World Camera Raw by Bruce Fraser.
Short version: Your main tool is Adobe Bridge - you treat Photoshop and 
Camera Raw as "plug-ins" for Bridge.
Workflow is everything with wedding photography, or any photography 
involving a large volume of shooting.

>Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly appreciated.

Get a legal pad and draw a vertical line down the center of one page. 
At the top of one column goes the groom's name and cell phone number 
and at the top of the other the bride's name and phone. Make sure they 
have their phones on 100% of the time for 48 hours leading up to the 
ceremony (at which point they can shut them off ) and make sure they 
have *your* cell phone number.

Continue in each column listing names of the bride's family in her 
column and the groom's in his. Start making mental notes of getting 
these people in photographs.

Under the family section of each column, list people in the wedding 
party, bridesmaids, etc. in the appropriate column.

Finally, write down the time and location for both the ceremony and the 
reception. Get an address *and* directions and confirm the accuracy of 
both for yourself before the big day. Get the name of whoever is 
performing the ceremony and any rules he/she has for photography.

I'll let others provide equipment ahd shooting tips...


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

"New" T/C's?

[Jack Davis]

Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L" quality
T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?


Jack
 


 

Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com.  Try it now.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 1/30/2007 3:15:29 A.M.  Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I guess I need to  actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
> Could you recommend any  particular books that approach Photoshop from
> a photographer's point of  view?
>
> My wife will have her hands full with herding our daughter  down the
> aisle (flower girl), as well as helping with the coordination  of the
> wedding day, so I'm not expecting any help from her.  This  means that
> dumping memory cards to the laptop may not happen until it's  all over.
>  Shoot JPEG, or suck it up and buy a few more SD cards to  allow me to
> shoot RAW?  I may try to con another family member into  doing some
> donkey work for me, but I'm not counting on  it.
>
> Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly  appreciated.
> In the meantime my daughter's probably going to grow to  hate the
> camera, and my next-door-neighbor's teenage daughter is getting  free
> senior portraits (I need the practice).
>
> Thanks a  bunch!
>
> -- 
> Scott Loveless
>  http://www.twosixteen.com
> Shoot more film!

===
Adobe  Photoshop CS One-on-one by Deke McClelland is an excellent book. I 
suppose there  are versions for later versions of CS as well.

Marnie aka Doe  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: "New" T/C's?

[Jan van Wijk]

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:

>Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L" quality
>T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?

Not that I know of.

I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
sent to the camera ...

(Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)


There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...


Regards, JvW

--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Eactivist]

In a message dated 1/30/2007 1:01:21 A.M.  Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I haven't got any clue yet  from all discussions why Lightroom is so
special that I should buy this. I  got Elements 5 which does all
organizing of PEF and DNG files, provides 3.6  RAW conversion, and has
also all the editing tools, like clone brush and  healing tool, I (seem
to) need, and is basically cheaper. What extra will  Lightroom bring me,
in other words why do I need to replace or amplify  Elements by
Lightroom?
It would be useful to see somewhere a side-by-side  comparison of all
properties of CS, Elements and  Lightroom.

Henk


Agreed. I wonder the same things.  Elements (I have version 5 now too), does 
a good job of organizing photos. So  why would I want Lightroom?

Marnie aka Doe  


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Wide angle backfocus

[Toine]

I see a lot of backfocus shots on my D. I did some tests with long
manual glass (500 mm) and couldn't reproduce backfocus. The focus
light in the viewfinder aligned with my manual focus and pixelpeeping
confirmed this.
I think I need to do some tests with the 16-45 on 16 mm.
Also called Pentax benelux last year and they never heard of backfocus
problems
Since the focus is correct with long glass I wouldn't dare tweaking
with the focus adjustment.

Toine

On 1/30/07, Brian Dunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I received a 21 Limited.  Center only autofocus always greatly back focuses on
> both ist-DS cameras, more on one than on the other.  The 45 degree focus
> chart showed the 21 Limited back focusing almost off the far end of the
> paper.
>
> I tested other lenses and found that they all back focus when set to wide
> angles.  The amount seems to be proportional to the angle.  For example, you
> could set a 16-45 on a tripod, aim at something 7 feet away, zoom in to 45mm,
> focus, then zoom out and focus again.  The more you zoom out, the more the
> autofocus changes.
>
> All this time I have been zooming in, focusing, zooming out, then taking the
> picture.  It works fine until you get a wide prime like the 21 where there is
> nothing to zoom.  When aimed at something across the street it tries to focus
> past infinity and hits the stops.
>
> Research on the Internet finds discussion about adjusting three screws under
> the base plate of the DS.  These hold the auto focus sensors and you can
> adjust for front or back focus.
>
> So I'm wondering if anyone here would care to take a 16-45 or 18-55 or the
> like, zoom in and aim at something across the room, see on the focus scale
> what distance it chose, then zoom wide and focus again to see if it changed.
> Do all Pentax digital cameras back focus at wide angle?
>
> Has anyone here tried the adjustments under the base plate?
>
> Has anyone had a Pentax repair center successfully fix this issue?
>
>
> Brian
>
> --
>
> Brian Dunn Photographic
> http://www.bdphotographic.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: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I subscribe to the notion that if I need to understand a software  
product, a camera or anything else complex, reading the literature  
available and then working with the product is the right way to go.

Lightroom is an image editing tool designed specifically for  
photographic purposes.

Photoshop's history is much broader spectrum than that and, as a  
result, it has many many features that are not relevant to  
photographic endeavors at all, or relevant to only a very limited set  
of uses in photography. That makes it more difficult to learn and  
more complex to use.

Lightroom's design is intended to work with you doing the kinds of  
things that a photographer needs to do ... import exposure files from  
cameras, organize them, rank them, render them, then output them for  
higher level editing, print and web presentation.

The best way to understand for me was to read the Adobe pages, watch  
their videos, and then go to the tutorial videos I marked ** below.

Adobe pages
http://labs.adobe.com
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/

Video tutorials, reviews, other info:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/lightroom1.shtml
http://pictureflow.fileburst.com/_Tutorials/Lightroom_4/01/index.html **
http://www.goingdigital.co.uk/pages/adobelightroomcourses.htm
http://www.photoshopsupport.com/lightroom/tutorials.html
http://www.photoshopuser.com/lightroom/index.html
http://www.seanmcfoto.com/ lightroom/

On the other hand, if what you have is doing the job for you  
satisfactorily, then there's no need to switch.

enjoy,
Godfrey




On Jan 30, 2007, at 12:51 AM, Henk Terhell wrote:

> I haven't got any clue yet from all discussions why Lightroom is so
> special that I should buy this. I got Elements 5 which does all
> organizing of PEF and DNG files, provides 3.6 RAW conversion, and has
> also all the editing tools, like clone brush and healing tool, I (seem
> to) need, and is basically cheaper. What extra will Lightroom bring  
> me,
> in other words why do I need to replace or amplify Elements by
> Lightroom?
> It would be useful to see somewhere a side-by-side comparison of all
> properties of CS, Elements and Lightroom.
>
> Henk
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hamilton
>> Sent: 29 January, 2007 3:45 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date
>> announcement
>>
>>
>> Hey, they've now included a clone tool and healing brush!  Very nice.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
>
> -- 
> 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: Wide angle backfocus

[Rick Womer]

Brian,

In the autofocus era, I doubt that many (if any)
"zooms" are true ol'-fashun focus-preserving
zooms--they all seem to be variable focal length
lenses.

That's certainly true of the lenses I can afford,
anyway (including the fairly pricey 24-90, 16-45, and
10-17).  Don't know about the high-class glass like
the 70-210/2.8.

Rick

--- Brian Dunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> I received a 21 Limited.  Center only autofocus
> always greatly back focuses on 
> both ist-DS cameras, more on one than on the other. 
> The 45 degree focus 
> chart showed the 21 Limited back focusing almost off
> the far end of the 
> paper.
> 
> I tested other lenses and found that they all back
> focus when set to wide 
> angles.  The amount seems to be proportional to the
> angle.  For example, you 
> could set a 16-45 on a tripod, aim at something 7
> feet away, zoom in to 45mm, 
> focus, then zoom out and focus again.  The more you
> zoom out, the more the 
> autofocus changes.
> 
> All this time I have been zooming in, focusing,
> zooming out, then taking the 
> picture.  It works fine until you get a wide prime
> like the 21 where there is 
> nothing to zoom.  When aimed at something across the
> street it tries to focus 
> past infinity and hits the stops.
> 
> Research on the Internet finds discussion about
> adjusting three screws under 
> the base plate of the DS.  These hold the auto focus
> sensors and you can 
> adjust for front or back focus.
> 
> So I'm wondering if anyone here would care to take a
> 16-45 or 18-55 or the 
> like, zoom in and aim at something across the room,
> see on the focus scale 
> what distance it chose, then zoom wide and focus
> again to see if it changed.  
> Do all Pentax digital cameras back focus at wide
> angle?
> 
> Has anyone here tried the adjustments under the base
> plate?
> 
> Has anyone had a Pentax repair center successfully
> fix this issue?
> 
> 
> Brian
> 
> -- 
> 
> Brian Dunn Photographic
> http://www.bdphotographic.com
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 


http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW


 

Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: "New" T/C's?

[Patrick Genovese]

Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250 or
get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300 f/4
+ 1.4x TC

I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?

What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?

Regards

Patrick


On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
>
> >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L" quality
> >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
>
> Not that I know of.
>
> I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
> would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
> sent to the camera ...
>
> (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
>
>
> There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
> needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
> Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
>
>
> Regards, JvW
>
> --
> Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 
Regards

Patrick Genovese

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

In a nutshell, Lightroom is a workflow application combining the  
operations of photo management (importing, sorting, tagging, ranking,  
and organizing) with tonal editing, cropping, presentation and  
outputting for higher level editing. It is designed specifically for  
the photographic endeavor, not as a generalized tool that works  
across the broader spectrum of graphic arts needs like Photoshop/ 
Photoshop Elements. In adopting Lightroom,  Photoshop becomes a  
complement for higher level editing functions (compositing, selective  
manipulations, etc.).

See the links I posted in a separate email for more information  
resources.

Godfrey

On Jan 30, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Thibouille wrote:

> I understand you hesitate and certainly I understand it is somewhat
> difficult to see the difference between products and what does what?
>
> However I understand Lightroom is not an image editor (cool 'cos I
> really dunno much about the use of those things :) and more toward
> Managing collection of image (better than bridge I suppose?) and
> developing RAW -> Jpegs. Cool, exactly what I need and price is a lot
> more like what I can afford than PS.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: "New" T/C's?

[Jack Davis]

Neither, was my intent, but "USM" (ultra-sonic). I'm in yet another
fumble fingers mode...(sigh)

Jack
--- Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L"
> quality
> >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
> 
> Not that I know of.
> 
> I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
> would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
> sent to the camera ...
> 
> (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
> 
> 
> There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
> needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
> Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
> 
> 
> Regards, JvW
> 
> --
> Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 



 

Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate 
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: "New" T/C's?

[Jack Davis]

I'm braced for the 60~250 USM price, which I'm afraid, will be scary.
That may make your decision easy. 8-0
I believe I read awhile back that the intended availability date of
three USM lenses was this March.(?)

Jack
--- Patrick Genovese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250
> or
> get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300
> f/4
> + 1.4x TC
> 
> I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
> nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?
> 
> What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Patrick
> 
> 
> On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
> >
> > >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L"
> quality
> > >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
> >
> > Not that I know of.
> >
> > I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
> > would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
> > sent to the camera ...
> >
> > (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
> >
> >
> > There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
> > needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
> > Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
> >
> >
> > Regards, JvW
> >
> > --
> > Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards
> 
> Patrick Genovese
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 



 

We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love 
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Markus Maurer]

Hi Scott
couldn't you wife assist you as second shooter with the backup camera/flash
set you hopefully have?
Also holding a second flash and organizing people for group shots for you
would be helpful IMHO.
greetings
Markus

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Mark Roberts
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:27 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation


Scott Loveless wrote:

>I guess I need to actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
>Could you recommend any particular books that approach
>Photoshop from a photographer's point of view?



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: I gotta brag

[Norm Baugher]

Bitchin'
Norm

William Robb wrote:
> We had the annual obedience trial at the old dog club this weekend.
> My little Rottie puppy won a PCD title in three trials, and qualified in all 
> four trials.
> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/brag/jester_pcd.html
>
> Pentax content:
> K10D 40/2.8 LTD.
>
> William Robb 
>
>
>   


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:

> Well, obviously there are limits. Just found this on their website:
>
> http://www.cafeliegeois.com/kopi_luwak.htm
>
> 270 USD for 15 cups.

I am taking orders. I have seen how my 18-mth old ferments corn; 
should be easy.

Payment in Pentax equipment gratefully accepted.

Kostas

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Digital Image Studio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Ah, no wonder you use a tripod :-)

A popular misconception. Decent coffee contains much less cafeine and
irritants (i.e. acid) than the cheapo stuff. 

Well, obviously there are limits. Just found this on their website:

http://www.cafeliegeois.com/kopi_luwak.htm

270 USD for 15 cups. 

Ralf

-- 
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  DL9KCG  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

FS: Pentax-A Rear Converter 2x-S ...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I've pretty much decided that my Pentax-A Rear Converter 2x-S is  
redundant (I never use it) so it will be up for sale on Ebay soon  
unless anyone is interested. It's in virtually as-new condition with  
case and caps, and I can provide a printout of the Pentax data sheet.  
Inquiries to me in email, please.

grazie
Godfrey


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Wide angle backfocus

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Very few modern zooms are perfectly parfocal. It is best to focus at  
the focal length you are going to use.

I haven't experienced any obvious focusing errors with the DA21 on  
either DS or K10D bodies; however, the focus is more accurate on the  
K10D. Finding the precise AF sensitive area is often a little tricky  
with a wide lens, however, and can cause some focus inaccuracy.

G

On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:57 AM, Rick Womer wrote:

> Brian,
>
> In the autofocus era, I doubt that many (if any)
> "zooms" are true ol'-fashun focus-preserving
> zooms--they all seem to be variable focal length
> lenses.
>
> That's certainly true of the lenses I can afford,
> anyway (including the fairly pricey 24-90, 16-45, and
> 10-17).  Don't know about the high-class glass like
> the 70-210/2.8.
>
> Rick
>
> --- Brian Dunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I received a 21 Limited.  Center only autofocus
>> always greatly back focuses on
>> both ist-DS cameras, more on one than on the other.
>> The 45 degree focus
>> chart showed the 21 Limited back focusing almost off
>> the far end of the
>> paper.
>>
>> I tested other lenses and found that they all back
>> focus when set to wide
>> angles.  The amount seems to be proportional to the
>> angle.  For example, you
>> could set a 16-45 on a tripod, aim at something 7
>> feet away, zoom in to 45mm,
>> focus, then zoom out and focus again.  The more you
>> zoom out, the more the
>> autofocus changes.
>>
>> All this time I have been zooming in, focusing,
>> zooming out, then taking the
>> picture.  It works fine until you get a wide prime
>> like the 21 where there is
>> nothing to zoom.  When aimed at something across the
>> street it tries to focus
>> past infinity and hits the stops.
>>
>> Research on the Internet finds discussion about
>> adjusting three screws under
>> the base plate of the DS.  These hold the auto focus
>> sensors and you can
>> adjust for front or back focus.
>>
>> So I'm wondering if anyone here would care to take a
>> 16-45 or 18-55 or the
>> like, zoom in and aim at something across the room,
>> see on the focus scale
>> what distance it chose, then zoom wide and focus
>> again to see if it changed.
>> Do all Pentax digital cameras back focus at wide
>> angle?
>>
>> Has anyone here tried the adjustments under the base
>> plate?
>>
>> Has anyone had a Pentax repair center successfully
>> fix this issue?
>>
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Brian Dunn Photographic
>> http://www.bdphotographic.com
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>
>
>
> http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW
>
>
>
> __ 
> __
> Looking for earth-friendly autos?
> Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
> http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
>
> -- 
> 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: "New" T/C's?

[wendy beard]

The Sigma EX 100-300 f/4 is a fantastic lens. I haven't used it with a tc though

On 1/30/07, Patrick Genovese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250 or
> get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300 f/4
> + 1.4x TC
>
> I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
> nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?
>
> What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?
>
> Regards
>
> Patrick
>
>
> On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
> >
> > >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L" quality
> > >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
> >
> > Not that I know of.
> >
> > I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
> > would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
> > sent to the camera ...
> >
> > (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
> >
> >
> > There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
> > needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
> > Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
> >
> >
> > Regards, JvW
> >
> > --
> > Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Patrick Genovese
>
> --
> 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: "New" T/C's?

[Jan van Wijk]

Hi Patrick,

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:17:36 +0100, Patrick Genovese wrote:

>Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250 or
>get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300 f/4
>+ 1.4x TC
>
>I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
>nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?

I have use the Sigma 70-200 EX with the matching 1.4x and 2x EX
converters. With the 1.4x there is hardly any image degradation
just a slight loss of contrast (minor really).

With the 2x converter the image gets a bit softer still, and the corners
are noticably worse than center. Still usuable for most wildlife stuff
with the subject centered though :-)

>What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?


Don't know, never used it.
What I have heard is that the 100-300 EX is as good as the 70-200
so I would expect it does well with the 1.4x too ...

Regards, JvW


PS:
Plan to replace th 70-200 with the 60-250 if quelity is real good
and the price somewhat acceptable :-)

--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: I gotta brag

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Norm Baugher" 
Subject: Re: I gotta brag


> Bitchin'
> Norm

Thanks Norm.
I gotta stop looking like I just came off a jobsite for these things.

William Robb

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

> I guess I need to  actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
> Could you recommend any  particular books that approach Photoshop from
> a photographer's point of  view?
>
> My wife will have her hands full with herding our daughter  down the
> aisle (flower girl), as well as helping with the coordination  of the
> wedding day, so I'm not expecting any help from her.  This  means that
> dumping memory cards to the laptop may not happen until it's  all  
> over.
>  Shoot JPEG, or suck it up and buy a few more SD cards to  allow me to
> shoot RAW?  I may try to con another family member into  doing some
> donkey work for me, but I'm not counting on  it.
>
> Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly  appreciated.
> In the meantime my daughter's probably going to grow to  hate the
> camera, and my next-door-neighbor's teenage daughter is getting  free
> senior portraits (I need the practice).

You want to use RAW and edit in [EMAIL PROTECTED] once converted to  
obtain as much dynamic range as possible ... wedding dresses and  
black tuxedos with skin tones in the same light is one of the more  
difficult scene dynamics.

If you are using Photoshop CS/CS2, Bruce Fraser's "Real World Camera  
Raw with Photoshop CS[CS2]" (there are two different editions for the  
different versions of photoshop) is an essential learning tool for  
RAW image processing in the environment. I feel it has valuable  
information whether or not you are using Photoshop-Camera Raw too.  
While there are lots of other books that address higher level editing  
in Photoshop from useful perspectives, this book presents the basics  
in RAW conversion concepts and workflow that a photographer  
absolutely must have first. (Nowadays, I'd do the editing and image  
management in Lightroom but the conceptual underpinnings in this book  
have proven invaluable anyway.)

Have enough memory on hand to capture 300-400 exposures. That's about  
four 1G cards for a DS/DL, about five for a K10D.

My usual reaction when someone suggests I should do wedding  
photography is to flee.

G

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Magnifying eyecup, images

[Jan van Wijk]

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:18:41 +0100 (CET), Jan van Wijk wrote:

>
>I may put up an image from the K10D with it fitted later today.
>Will put up an URL if I do ...

OK, have some images of the O-ME53 eye-piece up at:

http://www.dfsee.com/gallery/index.php?list=19

There are some images of the K10 with DA21 and DA70
as well, together with some shots made with them ...

http://www.dfsee.com/gallery/index.php?list=21

Regards, JvW

--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Ski tracks

[Roman]

http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20070130154732

Perhaps it only bothers me, how ski tracks "scratch" the surface of the 
snow.

-- 
new photos ever so often... 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Ski tracks

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Roman"
Subject: Ski tracks


> http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20070130154732
>

Contrast is to the point of being cartoonlike, and frankly, I'd straighten 
out the fencepost in the forground, and try to clone some sharp detail into 
it from one of the other rails.
This is all trying to put some silk on the sow's ear.

William Robb 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: "New" T/C's?

[John Francis]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 07:41:59AM -0800, Jack Davis wrote:
> I'm braced for the 60~250 USM price, which I'm afraid, will be scary.
> That may make your decision easy. 8-0
> I believe I read awhile back that the intended availability date of
> three USM lenses was this March.(?)

Since revised; only the 16-50/f2.8 is now scheduled for March,
with the 50-135 & 60-250 coming along some time later in 2007.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

OT - Windows Vista Blog

[Cotty]

A Beeb journalist gets to grips with Vista. Interesting reading.



Start at the bottom.

-- 


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: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[K.Takeshita]

On 1/30/07 12:22 PM, "Cotty", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> 
> Start at the bottom.

Speaking about this;

Mac user switches to Windows Vista,

and then right back to a Mac again

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16873608/

Ken :-))


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[Cotty]

On 30/1/07, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:

>
>Speaking about this;
>
>Mac user switches to Windows Vista,
>
>and then right back to a Mac again
>
>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16873608/
>
>Ken :-))

I'll bet you always read the last page of a novel first, eh Ken? Thanks
for the spoiler!!!  ;-))

-- 


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: "New" T/C's?

[Jack Davis]

RATS!

J
--- John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 07:41:59AM -0800, Jack Davis wrote:
> > I'm braced for the 60~250 USM price, which I'm afraid, will be
> scary.
> > That may make your decision easy. 8-0
> > I believe I read awhile back that the intended availability date of
> > three USM lenses was this March.(?)
> 
> Since revised; only the 16-50/f2.8 is now scheduled for March,
> with the 50-135 & 60-250 coming along some time later in 2007.
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 



 

Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. 
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[pnstenquist]

In truth, the ending was given away in the title. I though that somewhat odd.
Paul
 -- Original message --
From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 30/1/07, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >
> >Speaking about this;
> >
> >Mac user switches to Windows Vista,
> >
> >and then right back to a Mac again
> >
> >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16873608/
> >
> >Ken :-))
> 
> I'll bet you always read the last page of a novel first, eh Ken? Thanks
> for the spoiler!!!  ;-))
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> 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: "New" T/C's?

[Bruce Dayton]

I have the Sigma 100-300/4 and the Sigma 1.4X EX combination.  It is
quite good.  The lens is very nice and works well with the converter.

This entire gallery was shot with that combination:
http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/Blue%20Angels/index.htm

I have used the Kenko 1.5 SHX and the Tamron 1.4 AF converters and
they are not as good as the Sigma.

-- 
Bruce


Tuesday, January 30, 2007, 7:17:36 AM, you wrote:

PG> Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250 or
PG> get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300 f/4
PG> + 1.4x TC

PG> I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
PG> nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?

PG> What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?

PG> Regards

PG> Patrick


PG> On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
>>
>> >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L" quality
>> >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
>>
>> Not that I know of.
>>
>> I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
>> would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
>> sent to the camera ...
>>
>> (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
>>
>>
>> There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
>> needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
>> Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
>>
>>
>> Regards, JvW
>>
>> --
>> Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>


PG> -- 
PG> Regards

PG> Patrick Genovese




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Ski tracks

[Boris Liberman]

Roman, may I humbly suggest that you add a word PESO or PAW in front of 
the subject of your messages when you post pictures. It seems to be 
common practice on the list.

Thanks.


Roman wrote:
> http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20070130154732
> 
> Perhaps it only bothers me, how ski tracks "scratch" the surface of the 
> snow.
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[Cotty]

On 30/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:

>In truth, the ending was given away in the title. I though that somewhat odd.

I'm missing something.

'A Mac user switches to Vista

Reporter trades in his PowerBook for a notebook with Microsoft's new OS'



I reckon Ken's a bit of a masochist ;-)

-- 


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: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[pnstenquist]

You're right. It is I who am missing something. I thought I read the "and back 
again" in the title, but it was in Ken's post. Of course, I don't give a 
hoot:-)).
Paul
 -- Original message --
From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 30/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >In truth, the ending was given away in the title. I though that somewhat odd.
> 
> I'm missing something.
> 
> 'A Mac user switches to Vista
> 
> Reporter trades in his PowerBook for a notebook with Microsoft's new OS'
> 
> 
> 
> I reckon Ken's a bit of a masochist ;-)
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> 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 - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Scott Loveless]

On 1/30/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Scott Loveless"
> Subject: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation
> > Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly appreciated.
> > In the meantime my daughter's probably going to grow to hate the
> > camera, and my next-door-neighbor's teenage daughter is getting free
> > senior portraits (I need the practice).
>
> Keep It Simple, Stupid.

Thanks, I think.

> Ferget multiple lenses. Keep your equipment to a minumum. Personally, I'd
> recommend just a standard lens. It'll keep you from being caught flat
> footed, by having a lens off the camera when something happens, or from
> wedging a lens when trying to change it quickly.

I can do that.  By "standard lens" I'm assuming you mean a 28-80 zoom
or something similar.  Or did you mean a 50?  I'm not sure I could do
an entire wedding with a 50.  Some might be able to, but I doubt I
could make it look good.

> I'm sure you will be warned about the "risk factor" of shooting your first
> wedding. Don't sweat it. I've shot probably a thousand weddings during my
> carreer, and feel the risk factor is as great now as it was 35 years ago
> when I was shooting my first ones.
> Hint: The girl in the pretty white dress is the VIP that day. Always know
> where she is.

Thanks, Bill.  Someone recently stated that you've got a photography
book in you somewhere.  I'm going to agree and suggest that you get
started on it.  Otherwise, I have about two years worth of archives on
my hard drive and could write it for you.Perhaps you could
bring a draft to GFM?

-- 
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: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Scott Loveless]

On 1/30/07, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Scott
> couldn't you wife assist you as second shooter with the backup camera/flash
> set you hopefully have?
> Also holding a second flash and organizing people for group shots for you
> would be helpful IMHO.

I doubt my wife will be able to.  It's my wife's cousin's wedding, so
we'll be guests as well.  Christie will be taking care of the girls
for most of it.  I'll probably have to draft, er, recruit another
family member to help out.  I'm not counting on this and am planning
on having to go solo.

-- 
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: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Scott Loveless]

On 1/30/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scott Loveless wrote:
>
> >I guess I need to actually learn how to use Photoshop efficiently.
> >Could you recommend any particular books that approach
> >Photoshop from a photographer's point of view?
>
> Real World Camera Raw by Bruce Fraser.
> Short version: Your main tool is Adobe Bridge - you treat Photoshop and
> Camera Raw as "plug-ins" for Bridge.
> Workflow is everything with wedding photography, or any photography
> involving a large volume of shooting.

That book comes up in a lot of discussions around here.  Everyone
seems to love it.  I'll pick up a copy soon.

> >Any other advice for a wedding newbie would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Get a legal pad and draw a vertical line down the center of one page.
> At the top of one column goes the groom's name and cell phone number
> and at the top of the other the bride's name and phone. Make sure they
> have their phones on 100% of the time for 48 hours leading up to the
> ceremony (at which point they can shut them off ) and make sure they
> have *your* cell phone number.
>
> Continue in each column listing names of the bride's family in her
> column and the groom's in his. Start making mental notes of getting
> these people in photographs.
>
> Under the family section of each column, list people in the wedding
> party, bridesmaids, etc. in the appropriate column.
>
> Finally, write down the time and location for both the ceremony and the
> reception. Get an address *and* directions and confirm the accuracy of
> both for yourself before the big day. Get the name of whoever is
> performing the ceremony and any rules he/she has for photography.
>
> I'll let others provide equipment ahd shooting tips...

Thanks, Mark.  That's a wonderful idea.  I'll start working on that
once the wedding is bit closer.

-- 
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: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

[Tim Øsleby]

A couple more
http://www.method-photo.co.uk/lightroom/index.html
http://www.lightroomkillertips.com/
I may have posted this next one before
http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_31/essay.html

Personally I find online video tutorials very useful. 


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sent: 30. januar 2007 16:10
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date announcement

I subscribe to the notion that if I need to understand a software  
product, a camera or anything else complex, reading the literature  
available and then working with the product is the right way to go.

Lightroom is an image editing tool designed specifically for  
photographic purposes.

Photoshop's history is much broader spectrum than that and, as a  
result, it has many many features that are not relevant to  
photographic endeavors at all, or relevant to only a very limited set  
of uses in photography. That makes it more difficult to learn and  
more complex to use.

Lightroom's design is intended to work with you doing the kinds of  
things that a photographer needs to do ... import exposure files from  
cameras, organize them, rank them, render them, then output them for  
higher level editing, print and web presentation.

The best way to understand for me was to read the Adobe pages, watch  
their videos, and then go to the tutorial videos I marked ** below.

Adobe pages
http://labs.adobe.com
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/

Video tutorials, reviews, other info:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/lightroom1.shtml
http://pictureflow.fileburst.com/_Tutorials/Lightroom_4/01/index.html **
http://www.goingdigital.co.uk/pages/adobelightroomcourses.htm
http://www.photoshopsupport.com/lightroom/tutorials.html
http://www.photoshopuser.com/lightroom/index.html
http://www.seanmcfoto.com/ lightroom/

On the other hand, if what you have is doing the job for you  
satisfactorily, then there's no need to switch.

enjoy,
Godfrey




On Jan 30, 2007, at 12:51 AM, Henk Terhell wrote:

> I haven't got any clue yet from all discussions why Lightroom is so
> special that I should buy this. I got Elements 5 which does all
> organizing of PEF and DNG files, provides 3.6 RAW conversion, and has
> also all the editing tools, like clone brush and healing tool, I (seem
> to) need, and is basically cheaper. What extra will Lightroom bring  
> me,
> in other words why do I need to replace or amplify Elements by
> Lightroom?
> It would be useful to see somewhere a side-by-side comparison of all
> properties of CS, Elements and Lightroom.
>
> Henk
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hamilton
>> Sent: 29 January, 2007 3:45 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Photoshop Lightroom 1.0 sale and shipping date
>> announcement
>>
>>
>> Hey, they've now included a clone tool and healing brush!  Very nice.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
>
> -- 
> 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 - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Scott Loveless]

On 1/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adobe  Photoshop CS One-on-one by Deke McClelland is an excellent book. I
> suppose there  are versions for later versions of CS as well.
>
Thanks, Marnie.  I'll have a look at it next time I get to the book store.

-- 
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: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[K.Takeshita]

On 1/30/07 2:02 PM, "Cotty", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I reckon Ken's a bit of a masochist ;-)

Thank you for your compliment :-))

Ken


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: Ski tracks

[Bob W]

> Subject: Ski tracks
> 
> http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20070130154732
> 
> Perhaps it only bothers me, how ski tracks "scratch" the 
> surface of the 
> snow.
> 

No - worrying about it keeps me awake most nights. Even in summer.

Bob


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[K.Takeshita]

On 1/30/07 2:34 PM, "K.Takeshita", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> I reckon Ken's a bit of a masochist ;-)
> 
> Thank you for your compliment :-))

But, you were the one who told me to start at the end :-).

Ken


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: McNaught - At Last!!

[Bob W]

McNaught comes to nought.

--
 Bob
 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> Behalf Of Brian Walters
> Sent: 30 January 2007 13:06
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: McNaught - At Last!!
> 
> Apparently if you wait "a few thousand years" you still won't 
> see it.  Reports I've read suggest that this is it's first? 
> and last visit as its likely to break up.
> 
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Wedding photography advice solicitation

[Scott Loveless]

On 1/30/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You want to use RAW and edit in [EMAIL PROTECTED] once converted to
> obtain as much dynamic range as possible ... wedding dresses and
> black tuxedos with skin tones in the same light is one of the more
> difficult scene dynamics.
>
> If you are using Photoshop CS/CS2, Bruce Fraser's "Real World Camera
> Raw with Photoshop CS[CS2]" (there are two different editions for the
> different versions of photoshop) is an essential learning tool for
> RAW image processing in the environment. I feel it has valuable
> information whether or not you are using Photoshop-Camera Raw too.
> While there are lots of other books that address higher level editing
> in Photoshop from useful perspectives, this book presents the basics
> in RAW conversion concepts and workflow that a photographer
> absolutely must have first. (Nowadays, I'd do the editing and image
> management in Lightroom but the conceptual underpinnings in this book
> have proven invaluable anyway.)

You're the second person to suggest raw and Fraser's book.  I'm gonna
take every one's word for it.

> Have enough memory on hand to capture 300-400 exposures. That's about
> four 1G cards for a DS/DL, about five for a K10D.

Just for giggles, I plotted out the amount of film I would need to
shoot the whole thing with the C220 and the PZ-1.  It came in at just
under 300 exposures.  That's a lot of processing and scanning.  Works
out to about $50 for the film and around $100 for processing and
scanning (no proofs).  Some of the film is 1600 Neopan. I'd process
and scan that myself, which means that the cost is negligible, but the
time is considerable.  I only hope that I can keep my photoshop time
to a reasonable level after shooting the wedding with a digital rig.

>
> My usual reaction when someone suggests I should do wedding
> photography is to flee.

Mine, too.  I decided not to do this kind of work a while back and
turned down a few requests.  But I've never actually shot a wedding.
We'll see.

-- 
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: I gotta brag

[Tim Øsleby]

Both of you have every reason to brag :-)

BTW. I had another how-about-getting-a-rottie talk with my beloved. She is
still sceptical about them, but now I have convinced her to go to a "puppet
maker" (I don't bother to look up the proper word for it), and have a closer
look at them. So she is swaying :-)


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
William Robb
Sent: 29. januar 2007 15:50
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: I gotta brag

We had the annual obedience trial at the old dog club this weekend.
My little Rottie puppy won a PCD title in three trials, and qualified in all

four trials.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/brag/jester_pcd.html

Pentax content:
K10D 40/2.8 LTD.

William Robb 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Question on 645n

[Y. Rowe]

I sent the following to the list a couple of days ago. My post appeared but
I wasn't filtering the word 
"a d v i c e". I noticed that there was another long topic that had gone on
a tangent with that word in its title.

Apologies to those who may have seen this already. I'm really like to get
comments on the value of this transaction. Thanks in advance.

 Original post 

I've got a chance to purchase a gently used kit. The camera's been through 
a CLA recently. Seller is asking $1250* for the following:

645N body (excellent condition)
120 film back
SMC FA 75mm 645 f/2.8
SMC A 150mm 645 f/3.5
*includes shipping and insurance

What do you folks think? Good deal or a steal? Anything I should watch for 
in particular?

BTW, I slept the possibility of acquiring it before Christmas at $875. I've 
been kicking myself since two days after contacting the seller when I saw 
the price go up; someone visited eekBay.

 End 

Yolanda


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: "New" T/C's?

[Jack Davis]

"Quite good" is right. Nice resolution in all cases.
Thanks, Bruce, for the input.

Jack
--- Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I have the Sigma 100-300/4 and the Sigma 1.4X EX combination.  It is
> quite good.  The lens is very nice and works well with the converter.
> 
> This entire gallery was shot with that combination:
> http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/Blue%20Angels/index.htm
> 
> I have used the Kenko 1.5 SHX and the Tamron 1.4 AF converters and
> they are not as good as the Sigma.
> 
> -- 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> Tuesday, January 30, 2007, 7:17:36 AM, you wrote:
> 
> PG> Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 -
> 250 or
> PG> get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the
> 100-300 f/4
> PG> + 1.4x TC
> 
> PG> I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
> PG> nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?
> 
> PG> What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?
> 
> PG> Regards
> 
> PG> Patrick
> 
> 
> PG> On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
> >>
> >> >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L"
> quality
> >> >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
> >>
> >> Not that I know of.
> >>
> >> I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
> >> would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
> >> sent to the camera ...
> >>
> >> (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the
> power-contacts
> >> needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
> >> Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards, JvW
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> PDML@pdml.net
> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >>
> 
> 
> PG> -- 
> PG> Regards
> 
> PG> Patrick Genovese
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 



 

Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: McNaught - At Last!!

[Brian Walters]

I think that should be McNought.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia


Quoting Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> McNaught comes to nought.
> 
> --
>  Bob
>  
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> > Behalf Of Brian Walters
> > Sent: 30 January 2007 13:06
> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > Subject: Re: McNaught - At Last!!
> > 
> > Apparently if you wait "a few thousand years" you still won't 
> > see it.  Reports I've read suggest that this is it's first? 
> > and last visit as its likely to break up.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>

--
Free Copier Price Quotes
Compare copier prices & features from multiple dealers and save!
http://tags.bluebottle.com/fc/MhtYWUjNDKNikOZkK90r26kJEEtclVcpE6Eny/


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Question on 645n

[Scott Loveless]

I just priced the same kit at KEH using EX or EX+ gear.  Came out to
1089 plus shipping.

On 1/30/07, Y. Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I sent the following to the list a couple of days ago. My post appeared but
> I wasn't filtering the word
> "a d v i c e". I noticed that there was another long topic that had gone on
> a tangent with that word in its title.
>
> Apologies to those who may have seen this already. I'm really like to get
> comments on the value of this transaction. Thanks in advance.
>
>  Original post 
>
> I've got a chance to purchase a gently used kit. The camera's been through
> a CLA recently. Seller is asking $1250* for the following:
>
> 645N body (excellent condition)
> 120 film back
> SMC FA 75mm 645 f/2.8
> SMC A 150mm 645 f/3.5
> *includes shipping and insurance
>
> What do you folks think? Good deal or a steal? Anything I should watch for
> in particular?
>
> BTW, I slept the possibility of acquiring it before Christmas at $875. I've
> been kicking myself since two days after contacting the seller when I saw
> the price go up; someone visited eekBay.
>
>  End 
>
> Yolanda
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 
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: "New" T/C's?

[Jens Bladt]

Some very nice shots, Bruce!.
Not a bad lens combination.
I especially love the one with the jets in a row - and the smoke stripe
behind the planes. Brilliant.
Regards

Jens
Jens Bladt
Nytarkort / Greeting Card:
http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html

http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248

-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Bruce
Dayton
Sendt: 30. januar 2007 19:12
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: "New" T/C's?


I have the Sigma 100-300/4 and the Sigma 1.4X EX combination.  It is
quite good.  The lens is very nice and works well with the converter.

This entire gallery was shot with that combination:
http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/Blue%20Angels/index.htm

I have used the Kenko 1.5 SHX and the Tamron 1.4 AF converters and
they are not as good as the Sigma.

--
Bruce


Tuesday, January 30, 2007, 7:17:36 AM, you wrote:

PG> Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250 or
PG> get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300 f/4
PG> + 1.4x TC

PG> I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
PG> nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?

PG> What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?

PG> Regards

PG> Patrick


PG> On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:21:48 -0800 (PST), Jack Davis wrote:
>>
>> >Am hankering for the yet to be released 60~250 UCM and an "L" quality
>> >T/C. Any rumblings of a development or release schedule for such?
>>
>> Not that I know of.
>>
>> I would love to see a new high quality 1.4x converter too,
>> would be real nice if it also translated the focallength as
>> sent to the camera ...
>>
>> (Or we need an addition function in the firmware to enter that :-)
>>
>>
>> There are a few (old) third-party TC's that have the power-contacts
>> needed for the UCM (or is it SSM ?) new 'supersonic motor' lenses.
>> Optical quality is quite bad on those though ...
>>
>>
>> Regards, JvW
>>
>> --
>> Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>


PG> --
PG> Regards

PG> Patrick Genovese




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.15/659 - Release Date: 01/30/2007
09:31

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.15/659 - Release Date: 01/30/2007
09:31


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[Cotty]

On 30/1/07, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:

(about being a masochist)

>> Thank you for your compliment :-))
>
>But, you were the one who told me to start at the end :-).

LOL. Thanks mate, best laugh of the day!

Sheesh, gotta love this place :-)

-- 


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: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[Cotty]

On 30/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:

>You're right. It is I who am missing something. I thought I read the
>"and back again" in the title, but it was in Ken's post. Of course, I
>don't give a hoot:-)).

Yes you do - that's why you're here and such a mainstay of the list. I
hoist a glass of Crozesomethingorother to you sir

*hic*

-- 


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

K10D - very positive review in "Amateur Photographer" (UK)

[Colin J]

The K10D gets a very good review in the current issue of the UK weekly magazine 
"Amateur Photographer".  The overall rating is 87%, which is excellent.  The 
only DSLRs to get 90% plus are the Nikon D2X, Canon EOS 5D and 1Ds Mk II.

The reviewer stated:

"With its effective anti-shake and anti-dust systems, its excellent colour, 
good noise control and great user experience, the K10D is a unique model that 
has put Pentax back where it belongs."

It is well worth buying the magazine for this review, which runs to nine pages 
(Wow!).  In the USA, the magazine is available at major bookstores including 
Barnes and Noble and Borders.  It is also available at bookstands at major 
airports and railway stations.

This is a very good time to be a Pentax user.  I am already regretting selling 
most of my Pentax gear!

Colin




___ 
The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from 
your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Olympian

[Matthew Brown]

The E-1 is really an excellent camera; I believe it to be one of the
classic digital SLRs, well-designed and really easy and effective to
use.  It's a shame Olympus haven't produced anything but
consumer-grade cameras since then - if they'd even have put the 8mp or
10mp sensors out of those in the E-1's body, it'd have been better
than the situation pro-level shooters who chose the E-1 have been left
in.  Olympus has been promising a new pro-grade camera for years, but
it never seems to happen.  I'm frankly not sure why. The really
bizarre thing is that they've kept on coming out with extremely
expensive and well-made f/2.0 zooms, without a new camera to put them
on.

-Matt

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Wide angle backfocus

[Brian Dunn]

Just to clarify...  Each of the zooms I tested correctly maintains focus as it 
is zoomed.  If you zoom in, focus, then zoom out wide and take the photo, the 
photo is sharp as can be.  If you autofocus while zoomed out, the autofocus 
moves the focusing collar and the photo is then back focused.  The optics are 
fine, the auto focus sensor or software are what cannot handle the wide 
angle.

Manually focusing is correct each time, so it isn't the focus screen, either.

The fact that I have a habit of zooming in to focus them out to take the 
photo, plus the fact that the focusing screen is accurate, both mean that 
this has not been a problem until I finally got a wide prime.  With the 21 
Limited, the auto focus is never sharp at any distance.

Perhaps the tiniest tweak of the adjusting screws will correct the wide angle 
back focus while not doing much to the tele focus.  Perhaps not, which is why 
I was asking.

By the way, this particular 21 Limited is in fact a bit sharper than the our 
16-45.

Brian


-- 

Brian Dunn Photographic
http://www.bdphotographic.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: K10D - very positive review in "Amateur Photographer" (UK)

[Brian Walters]

I think that's valid grounds for removal from the list.

Damn it man, the list is about Enablement not Disablement!  :-)


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia


Quoting Colin J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> This is a very good time to be a Pentax user.  I am already
> regretting selling most of my Pentax gear!
>

--
Debt Consolidation Quote to Save!
Owe $20,000 or more? Cut payments 50%, be debt free fast, and save!
http://tags.bluebottle.com/fc/MhtYWUi27piaY6b7Menw91d3gYp6xWCJMDQRY/


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Magnifying eyecup

[Mark Cassino]

that looks interesting - I might give one a try.

I have the Magnifying Eyepiece FB whiche _really_ magnifies the finder, 
but it also makes it dark, even when zoomed to the lowest magnification 
setting.

- MCC



Juan Buhler wrote:
> I just ordered the O-ME53 Magnifying Eyecup from B&H, to use on the K10D.
> 
> I plan to use that, and probably a Katz Eye screen with split prism,
> to make up for the small viewfinder (I know it's pretty good for what
> it is, but I'd like one like the MX)
> 
> Is anyone here using the magnifying eyecup? Can you comment on it?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> j
> 


-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, Michigan
www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Digital Image Studio]

Contrary to arguments posted here that flash failure was not a common
fault amongst new Pentax DSLR bodies it appears that many seem to be
prone to the problem (there seems to be a higher incidence flash
problems reported for the K10D than any other single fault):

New K10D Owner Experiences Known Problem
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21589143

-- 
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: Question on 645n

[Y. Rowe]

Thanks for the speedy reply, Scott. DUH! I can't believe I didn't think to
research the kit on KEH. I guess my only defense is that I have never used
them because they usually don't have what I'm seeking in stock.

Hmm...looks like it might be time to do a little horse trading (haggling).

Yolanda

> On 1/30/07, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> I just priced the same kit at KEH using EX or EX+ gear.  Came out to
> 1089 plus shipping.
> --
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com
> Shoot more film!
>
> 
> On 1/30/07, Y. Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I sent the following to the list a couple of days ago. My post appeared
> but

> >  Original post 
> >
> > I've got a chance to purchase a gently used kit. The 
> > camera's been through a CLA recently. Seller is asking $1250*
> > for the following:
> >
> > 645N body (excellent condition)
> > 120 film back
> > SMC FA 75mm 645 f/2.8
> > SMC A 150mm 645 f/3.5
> > *includes shipping and insurance
> >
> >
> > Yolanda
> 
> 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT - Windows Vista Blog

[Paul Stenquist]

I've just begun cocktail hour. Tonight it's Lauder's Blended Scotch  
on the rocks. Lauder's is the world's best scotch that comes in a  
plastic bottle. $20 for 1.75 litre, and it doesn't break if you drop  
it:-).
Paul
On Jan 30, 2007, at 5:03 PM, Cotty wrote:

> On 30/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> You're right. It is I who am missing something. I thought I read the
>> "and back again" in the title, but it was in Ken's post. Of course, I
>> don't give a hoot:-)).
>
> Yes you do - that's why you're here and such a mainstay of the list. I
> hoist a glass of Crozesomethingorother to you sir
>
> *hic*
>
> -- 
>
>
> 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: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Paul Stenquist]

I think people screw up using flash more often than with any other  
single feature. My Pentax 540 works perfectly on the K10D.
Paul
On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:

> Contrary to arguments posted here that flash failure was not a common
> fault amongst new Pentax DSLR bodies it appears that many seem to be
> prone to the problem (there seems to be a higher incidence flash
> problems reported for the K10D than any other single fault):
>
> New K10D Owner Experiences Known Problem
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21589143
>
> -- 
> 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: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Paul Stenquist]

My bad. You were talking about the on-camera flash. Never used it.  
Never will.
Paul
On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:

> Contrary to arguments posted here that flash failure was not a common
> fault amongst new Pentax DSLR bodies it appears that many seem to be
> prone to the problem (there seems to be a higher incidence flash
> problems reported for the K10D than any other single fault):
>
> New K10D Owner Experiences Known Problem
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21589143
>
> -- 
> 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: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Digital Image Studio]

On 31/01/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My bad. You were talking about the on-camera flash. Never used it.
> Never will.

Than yours, like mine, will probably never break whilst the cameras
are in our possession.

-- 
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: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[David Savage]

I use the onboard flash quite a lot...as a wireless trigger for my AF-540FGZ.

Cheers,

Dave

At 08:47 AM 31/01/2007, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>My bad. You were talking about the on-camera flash. Never used it.
>Never will.
>Paul
>On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
>
> > Contrary to arguments posted here that flash failure was not a common
> > fault amongst new Pentax DSLR bodies it appears that many seem to be
> > prone to the problem (there seems to be a higher incidence flash
> > problems reported for the K10D than any other single fault):
> >
> > New K10D Owner Experiences Known Problem
> > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21589143


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Another k10D problem or just an old one?

[David Weiss]

Hello,

Well, the other day I decided to take a look at this k lens 
underexposure issue (which appears to be a real problem) and instead 
found another problem.  Here are the pictures:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/

This is a series of pictures of a white piece of tissue used to wrap a 
Christmas gift.  Light was natural, white balance manually set.  Updated 
firmware.  Obviously, many of these are 1 or 2 stops underexposed, but, 
I was startled at the bands of color (green to the left, magenta to the 
right).

Photos 1-3:  Three is probably close to being exposed properly, but it 
still has a hint of the problem.  The others show it clearly.

Photos 4-6:  So I decided to look at photos that were overexposed at 
different f stops.  I don't see the problem in 4 and 5, but it shows up 
again in 6.

Photos 7-9:  So I thought to change lenses.  Still there on 9, small 
aperture again.

Photo 10:  Might as well check the problem at 400 sensitivity.  A hint 
of the problem.

Photo 11: There it is again.

Seems that the combination of high sensitivity, small aperture and 
underexposure causes the problem.

I also tried RAW and normal instead of bright mode, this did not cause 
the problem to be eliminated.

So, is this just the infamous banding problem magnified a bit?

Is this just my camera?  I hope someone can verify for me that this is 
just a characteristic of this camera.  Not that this would thrill me, 
because I expect something to work properly, but at least I wouldn't 
send my camera in again.

I know that I am not likely to shoot under these conditions, but it 
would be nice if the camera worked properly just the same.

Dave





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Wide angle backfocus

[Digital Image Studio]

On 31/01/07, Brian Dunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I received a 21 Limited.  Center only autofocus always greatly back focuses on
> both ist-DS cameras, more on one than on the other.  The 45 degree focus
> chart showed the 21 Limited back focusing almost off the far end of the
> paper.

How does it focus on objects parallel to the sensor plane, I assume
that you have pre-selected the central focus spot?

> I tested other lenses and found that they all back focus when set to wide
> angles.  The amount seems to be proportional to the angle.  For example, you
> could set a 16-45 on a tripod, aim at something 7 feet away, zoom in to 45mm,
> focus, then zoom out and focus again.  The more you zoom out, the more the
> autofocus changes.

Focus is very much harder to judge when using extreme wide angle
lenses and that goes for the AF system and by eye. Also system focus
adjustment is very much more critical as  any lenses angle of coverage
is increased, lens to sensor plane distance has to be more precise as
the depth of focus becomes smaller with focal length ant any given
aperture (from recollection). My 16-45 doesn't maintain accurate focus
as it's zoomed, and I know that other owners here have reported the
same.

> Has anyone here tried the adjustments under the base plate?

No, but there was another discussion that I read that indicated that
some AF systems also employ a firmware error offset table that's
determined during the factory AF system calibration. whether this is
actually the case or not on your particular Pentax body I'm not sure
but if you're prepared to send it to Pentax to be aligned I guess a
tweaking a few screws will add little to the cost of the AF adjustment
procedure in the case that it goes wrong.

-- 
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: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Bruce Dayton]

Sounds about like me.  If you are going to use a flash, use a REAL
flash.  On all my cameras from way back that had a pop up flash, I
think I have used it perhaps 5 or 6 times in all.  It is a stop gap
for the few times I am unprepared and am willing to compromise the
photo.

-- 
Bruce


Tuesday, January 30, 2007, 3:47:47 PM, you wrote:

PS> My bad. You were talking about the on-camera flash. Never used it.
PS> Never will.
PS> Paul
PS> On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:

>> Contrary to arguments posted here that flash failure was not a common
>> fault amongst new Pentax DSLR bodies it appears that many seem to be
>> prone to the problem (there seems to be a higher incidence flash
>> problems reported for the K10D than any other single fault):
>>
>> New K10D Owner Experiences Known Problem
>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21589143
>>
>> -- 
>> 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: Another k10D problem or just an old one?

[Paul Stenquist]

Don't know what's going on here, but grossly underexposed pictures,  
which almost all of these are, will not yield good results. I also  
think shooting white with the jpeg bright setting might be somewhat  
of a problem. I think it's possible to generate bad results with any  
camera if one works hard enough to achieve them. Some of my  
underexposed transparencies from my Speed Graphic were real clunkers.
Paul
On Jan 30, 2007, at 7:00 PM, David Weiss wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> Well, the other day I decided to take a look at this k lens
> underexposure issue (which appears to be a real problem) and instead
> found another problem.  Here are the pictures:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
>
> This is a series of pictures of a white piece of tissue used to wrap a
> Christmas gift.  Light was natural, white balance manually set.   
> Updated
> firmware.  Obviously, many of these are 1 or 2 stops underexposed,  
> but,
> I was startled at the bands of color (green to the left, magenta to  
> the
> right).
>
> Photos 1-3:  Three is probably close to being exposed properly, but it
> still has a hint of the problem.  The others show it clearly.
>
> Photos 4-6:  So I decided to look at photos that were overexposed at
> different f stops.  I don't see the problem in 4 and 5, but it  
> shows up
> again in 6.
>
> Photos 7-9:  So I thought to change lenses.  Still there on 9, small
> aperture again.
>
> Photo 10:  Might as well check the problem at 400 sensitivity.  A hint
> of the problem.
>
> Photo 11: There it is again.
>
> Seems that the combination of high sensitivity, small aperture and
> underexposure causes the problem.
>
> I also tried RAW and normal instead of bright mode, this did not cause
> the problem to be eliminated.
>
> So, is this just the infamous banding problem magnified a bit?
>
> Is this just my camera?  I hope someone can verify for me that this is
> just a characteristic of this camera.  Not that this would thrill me,
> because I expect something to work properly, but at least I wouldn't
> send my camera in again.
>
> I know that I am not likely to shoot under these conditions, but it
> would be nice if the camera worked properly just the same.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Bruce Dayton]

Hello David,

I used to do that with AF360FGZ's for studio work or on a bracket.  In
studio, I found they didn't have enough power to deliver the DOF that
I needed.  On a bracket, it worked but I found that the ambient light and
subject/background reflectivity could have some impact on the
reliability of the main flash firing.  I replaced the 360's
with Alien Bees studio lights, which got rid of one problem and now
just use a wired approach for the flash bracket so the popup flash has
become a non-issue to me.  And I no longer have problems with the
popup flash or wireless connection.

-- 
Bruce


Tuesday, January 30, 2007, 4:10:35 PM, you wrote:

DS> I use the onboard flash quite a lot...as a wireless trigger for my 
AF-540FGZ.

DS> Cheers,

DS> Dave

DS> At 08:47 AM 31/01/2007, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>>My bad. You were talking about the on-camera flash. Never used it.
>>Never will.
>>Paul
>>On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
>>
>> > Contrary to arguments posted here that flash failure was not a common
>> > fault amongst new Pentax DSLR bodies it appears that many seem to be
>> > prone to the problem (there seems to be a higher incidence flash
>> > problems reported for the K10D than any other single fault):
>> >
>> > New K10D Owner Experiences Known Problem
>> >
>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21589143





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: The K10D flash problem that isn't (well not really)

[Digital Image Studio]

On 31/01/07, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use the onboard flash quite a lot...as a wireless trigger for my AF-540FGZ.

Techhead! :-)

-- 
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: Another k10D problem or just an old one?

[Paul Stenquist]

BTW, I shoot with K lenses quite frequently. No problem.
A couple of recent examples:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5458250&size=lg
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5458281&size=lg
On Jan 30, 2007, at 7:00 PM, David Weiss wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> Well, the other day I decided to take a look at this k lens
> underexposure issue (which appears to be a real problem) and instead
> found another problem.  Here are the pictures:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
>
> This is a series of pictures of a white piece of tissue used to wrap a
> Christmas gift.  Light was natural, white balance manually set.   
> Updated
> firmware.  Obviously, many of these are 1 or 2 stops underexposed,  
> but,
> I was startled at the bands of color (green to the left, magenta to  
> the
> right).
>
> Photos 1-3:  Three is probably close to being exposed properly, but it
> still has a hint of the problem.  The others show it clearly.
>
> Photos 4-6:  So I decided to look at photos that were overexposed at
> different f stops.  I don't see the problem in 4 and 5, but it  
> shows up
> again in 6.
>
> Photos 7-9:  So I thought to change lenses.  Still there on 9, small
> aperture again.
>
> Photo 10:  Might as well check the problem at 400 sensitivity.  A hint
> of the problem.
>
> Photo 11: There it is again.
>
> Seems that the combination of high sensitivity, small aperture and
> underexposure causes the problem.
>
> I also tried RAW and normal instead of bright mode, this did not cause
> the problem to be eliminated.
>
> So, is this just the infamous banding problem magnified a bit?
>
> Is this just my camera?  I hope someone can verify for me that this is
> just a characteristic of this camera.  Not that this would thrill me,
> because I expect something to work properly, but at least I wouldn't
> send my camera in again.
>
> I know that I am not likely to shoot under these conditions, but it
> would be nice if the camera worked properly just the same.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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: "New" T/C's?

[Patrick Genovese]

Thanks for the info... I was hoping that someone would trash at least
one of the combos making my decision easier :-)   The problem with
Malta is that you have to buy almost on faith... There is no way i'm
going to be able to try out a 70-200 f/2.8 or a 100-300.. unless I go
abroad.

Regards

Patrick

On 1/30/07, Jan van Wijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:17:36 +0100, Patrick Genovese wrote:
>
> >Talking of T/Cs I've been debating whether to wait for the 60 - 250 or
> >get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC combo or possibly the 100-300 f/4
> >+ 1.4x TC
> >
> >I know that the 70-200 f/2.8 enjoys a good reputation but i know
> >nothing about their t/c... Any opinions on the combination ?
>
> I have use the Sigma 70-200 EX with the matching 1.4x and 2x EX
> converters. With the 1.4x there is hardly any image degradation
> just a slight loss of contrast (minor really).
>
> With the 2x converter the image gets a bit softer still, and the corners
> are noticably worse than center. Still usuable for most wildlife stuff
> with the subject centered though :-)
>
> >What about the 100-300 f/4 + 1.4 t/c ?
>
>
> Don't know, never used it.
> What I have heard is that the 100-300 EX is as good as the 70-200
> so I would expect it does well with the 1.4x too ...
>
> Regards, JvW
>
>
> PS:
> Plan to replace th 70-200 with the 60-250 if quelity is real good
> and the price somewhat acceptable :-)
>
> --
> Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 
Regards

Patrick Genovese

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: Camera based SR vs. lens based IS?

[Tim Øsleby]

Thank you Marnie and others for putting up with me, and for trying to
provide me with an answer. 


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30. januar 2007 02:30
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Camera based SR vs. lens based IS?

In a message dated 1/28/2007 4:07:35 P.M.  Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps I'd better add a few  words about why I ask this question. 
I've read a review that almost quotes  the Canon marketing department on
this
issue. I'm ok with that, but when the  author serves this as the truth I
react. So now I have a debate going in a  Norwegian forum about this issue.
BTW. I didn't start it, some other guy  questioned the quoting first. 

Speaking of angels. I'm not on a crusade  in this issue. I'm simply asking
for first hand experiences. First hand  experiences are a lot more worth
than
defensive marketing.  


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain  Norwegian)

===
Well, speaking from experience, Canon IS lenses  work very well. It's
rescued 
many a shot.

But since I haven't tried  Pentax AS (yet), I can make no comments on that.

Marnie aka Doe :-)  


-- 
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: New to List and PESO -- Night in the Park

[Tim Øsleby]

Welcome. A fine picture. Please show us more. 

Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Corey Leopold
Sent: 28. januar 2007 19:44
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: New to List and PESO -- Night in the Park

Hello everyone,

I'm new to the list, and new to Digital SLR Photography.  I had been
craving a Cannon 30d for about a year, but when I finally got really
serious and read reviews, etc... I decided on the K10d.

I had the added (dubious) benefit of some old Sears k-mount lenses
floating around my house that were my fathers.  Probably not the best
lenses, but they work and I have that attachment with my father that
way.

Anyway I was out and about in Hemisfair Park near the Tower of the
Americas and took this photo last night.  Taken with the 18-55 kit
lense.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/82/371597300_1513d87f9b_b.jpg

Converted to B&W in the beta of Lightroom.

Thanks

Corey

-- 
Check out my Photo Stream at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cleopold73

-- 
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: 77mm f1.8 ltd

[Tim Øsleby]

Do you have more lenses for sale ;-)


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
William Robb
Sent: 28. januar 2007 23:18
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: 77mm f1.8 ltd


- Original Message - 
From: "David J Brooks"
Subject: Re: 77mm f1.8 ltd


>I ordered one back in early December. Not holding my breath.

Damn. All the interest in this lens all of a sudden. I "sold" my silver one 
a year and a half ago to a list member who, as of yet, hasn't bothered to 
pay me for it.
Sigh.

William Robb 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net