Re: curing myself of Facebook
Bob W wrote: > Just couldn't cope with it... email is my preferred method of communicating when a phone call is not possible (which is my FAVORITE type of communication) so for those of you who are on it, please don't invite me back - just don't want to do it ann Well said. There are too many 'inboxes' to check already. Home email, work email. Landline and voicemail, mobile phone and voicemail, text messages, work phone and voicemail, letter box, snail mail at work, intray at work, real people in person (!), notes on the fridge door. I don't need any more. People keep trying to get me on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, instant messaging, more mobile phones. Aaargh! No. Sometimes I long for the days when you all there was was a letter, phone call or visit if you wanted to talk to someone. And bad luck if they were out. Sometimes? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
ann sanfedele wrote: > Again - from Roosevelt Island Great. The light is really beautiful. More! :-) Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf Web : http://www.fotoralf.de -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Punting
On 29/8/09, Derby Chang, discombobulated, unleashed: >Most relaxing to watch. Did you have to close off the river while stunt >punting? Har! No I was quite cunning.. -- 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 to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
OT: There are no crazy people in Nebraska
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7673591.stm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: curing myself of Facebook
The only reason I am using Facebook is because I can reach it from my phone. I was invited to the other 'social life' pages but I believe social life is better if it's lived in a pub next to a beer (or orange juice in my case) :) .t ann sanfedele wrote: Just couldn't cope with it... email is my preferred method of communicating when a phone call is not possible (which is my FAVORITE type of communication) so for those of you who are on it, please don't invite me back - just don't want to do it ann as in ann sanfedele http://annsan.smugmug.com et al -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Adam wrote : "Unfortunately while that's a nice theory it is not born out in practice."edit, see full quote below. No, I dont agree. Are you trying to say that a FF lens has to have the same resolution across the board as an APS lens across the board to match the APS overall system resolution?? No it wouldnt, That makes no sense. With the sensors at the overall resolution of today (6Mp and up) a FF system will outperform an APS system of same total pixels with same quality lens in absolute lp/mm by a large margin, so much so that like I said, even with a LOWER quality lens in lp/mm it still can outperform or match an APS system on resolution. Yes, pixel density matters, but with todays overall sensor resolutions, pixel density is already high enough such that lens quality significantly affects overall resolution. If sensors had much lower overall pixels, lenses wouldnt matter as much and sensor size wouldnt help things, but by now, lenses to matter and sensor size help improve performance with real world lens resolutions. Of course its harder to design a FF lens that has same resolution as an APS lens at same focal length, but with the larger FF sensor, you need to use longer focal length ( same AOV ) and it doesnt NEED to be same resolution as the APS lens to still outperform APS system overall. J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:27 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:54 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > FF Systems can achieve higher image quality despite using inferior > "average" lenses. Lens cost can be less with FF systems because the > lens doesn't have to be as good with a FF system as it does for a > APS-C system for same or even better system image quality. Similar to > the reason even a mediorce lens on the 8x10 format destroyed the very > best lenses on the 35mm format. The larger the format, the lenses > become less critical, not more critical to overall system performance. Unfortunately while that's a nice theory it is not born out in practice. As a practical matter it's easier to make a lens with the necessary Zone A(Centre) and Zone B(APS-C edge) performance for APS-C than to make one which has the necessary Zone C(35mm edge) performance for even low-MP FF. High edge performance on a 35mm image circle is simply harder than high edge performance on APS-C and there's not enough difference in format size to get the same effect as LF. High-MP FF, which is becoming the norm, is absolutely brutal on lenses. You have to move up to MF Digital to get pixel densities low enough for lens quality to start dropping out of the equation. Pixel density is the deteminant for how much lens performance matters. And FF these days has pixel densities in the same range as APS-C (The Sony 24.5MP bodies have an 11MP APS-C crop mode for example), but further out in the image circle of the lens. The A850 shares the A900's sensor as well as it's tendency to show the warts of lenses that performed well on APS-C cameras and on film cameras. These cameras, along with the 21MP Canons, obsolete all but the absolute highest-performing lenses if you want acceptable IQ from them. > > I don't know why some are confused about FF cameras, > its all about image quality. The higher the better. > This is why when 35mm cameras dominated there were > MF, 4x5, 8x10 and even larger cameras in use. Image > quality matters. APS digital is not the ultimage with anything better > being overkill. Just from a cropping flexibility standpoint, higher > image quality is better > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) APS-C is the same idea as 35mm was back in the day. The best combination of IQ, size and cost for most of the market. Cheap FF is a boon for those who need the absolute most IQ and are on a limited budget since they can spend more on the lenses they need, but for those who need better balanced performance APS-C remains the current sweet-spot. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:30 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > Adam wrote : "Unfortunately while that's a nice theory it is not born > out in practice."edit, see full quote below. > > No, I don’t agree. Are you trying to say that a FF lens has to have > the same resolution across the board as an APS lens across the board > to match the APS overall system resolution?? No it wouldn’t, That makes > no sense. You are correct from a theoretical standpoint. The problem is that in general we aren't dealing with systems of similar resolution but rather with systems of similar pixel density. Given current pixel densities common to 35mm FF and to APS-C cameras on the market today, there is only a fairly small difference in the necessary lens resolution to be sufficient for good results from each format, but it's significantly more difficult to maintain that necessary resolution across the 35mm frame, particularly with wide-angle lenses. > > With the sensors at the overall resolution of today (6Mp and up) > a FF system will outperform an APS system of same total pixels > with same quality lens in absolute lp/mm by a large margin, so much > so that like I said, even with a LOWER quality lens in lp/mm > it still can outperform or match an APS system on resolution. > Yes, pixel density matters, but with todays overall sensor resolutions, > pixel density is already high enough such that lens quality > significantly affects overall resolution. If sensors had much > lower overall pixels, lenses wouldn’t matter as much and sensor > size wouldn’t help things, but by now, lenses to matter and sensor > size help improve performance with real world lens resolutions. First off, given the same quality of lens of sufficient performance, ie a lens which exceeds theperformance requirements of each system the performance difference between FF and APS-C is small, not large in the real world given identical pixel count. There's just not enough difference in the size of the formats (It's just about exactly a doubling in area, notably smaller than the jump from 35mm to even 645) The only real advantages of FF become better High ISO performance and slightly increased dynamic range. But even in the case where this holds true (Which is only with the Nikon 12MP FX bodies) getting sufficient corner performance out of the lenses on FF is becoming difficult, whereas we aren't hitting serious performance issues with mid-range lenses on even 15MP APS-C. 20+MP Full-frame, which accounts for the majority of the FF bodies on the market today has pixel densities in the 10-12MP APS-C equavalent range and therefore needs similar performance from lenses across the 35mm frame to not show visible degradation in the corners. This is MUCH harder to acheive than a lot of people expected. This is a case where theory and real-world performance part ways due to other factors. In fee simple, getting the necessary resolution for even 15MP APS-C across the APS-C frame is easier for lens designers than getting the edge performance on 35mm FF necessary to not show degraded corner performance on 12MP FF and that degraded corner performance can be seen on prints. So while your math is correct, what works in theory in this case doesn't in practice because of additional factors. > > Of course its harder to design a FF lens that has same resolution as > an APS lens at same focal length, but with the larger FF sensor, you > need to use longer focal length ( same AOV ) and it doesn’t NEED to be > same resolution > as the APS lens to still outperform APS system overall. > > > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The problem being that as a practical matter, the FF lens needs to closely approximate the APS-C lens's resolution across a wider image circle because the FF sensor has similar pixel density to the APS-C and thus will resolve similarly. It comes down to two things. FF simply doesn't have enough of a size advantage over APS-C to reap the advantages inherent in a larger format in a significant way and the much higher pixel count of most FF bodies means they need lens resolutions approaching that demanded by the highest-resolution APS-C sensors but across the larger frame which is significantly more difficult. As a practical matter, it's easier to design lenses which are up to the performance of APS-C sensors at current pixel densities than to do the same for current FF sensors. This means that there is a fairly large cost delta inherent to FF due to the demand for the highest performance lenses available, while APS-C can deliver its practical best with much cheaper glass. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
Nice pic. Pretty light. Is it a power generating facility? Paul On Aug 29, 2009, at 1:55 AM, ann sanfedele wrote: Again - from Roosevelt Island http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv ann http://annsan.smugmug.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Lightroom Questions
I'm late on this :-) I'm with Godfrey on this. One reason is that Adobe have moved some essential tools around, the cropping tool is one example. They moved it from the lower bar to one of the side bars. In other words, you will force him to learn the same things twice. -- MaritimTim 2009/8/18 Brendan MacRae : > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 12:26:00 PM >> Subject: Re: Lightroom Questions >> >> I strongly suggest starting with LR2. Why put your father through two >> learning curves? The improvements in LR2 over LR1 are huge. >> > > I hear ya, but there are lots of reasons. Firstly the cost of the current > version. Secondly, he's new to everything so it won't matter much. Unless v2 > is 100% easier to use than v1 it won't be much help to him. He's not going to > be using most of the features so something basic is just fine. I just want > him to have something that will handle the RAW workflow that does more than > the Pentax software. > > -Brendan > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- MaritimTim -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
Nice lighting and composition Ann Dave On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:55 AM, ann sanfedele wrote: > Again - from Roosevelt Island > > http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large > > http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv > > > ann > http://annsan.smugmug.com > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: peso - Brittany
I'm 60/40 for the colour version. The B&W seems a bit more dramatic, but the colour a bit more daring. Dave On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Sasha Sobol wrote: > I need your advice - color or bw? > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/sobol/3864313344/in/set-72157622040375943/ > http://www.flickr.com/photos/sobol/3864310112/in/set-72157622040375943/ > > The full set (small): > http://www.flickr.com/photos/sobol/sets/72157622040375943/ > > Thanks, > --Sasha > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: peso - Brittany
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Derby Chang wrote: > B&W. I would have pulled back slightly. The pose is a little awkward, so a > bit less crop might have helped. Pretty set, though. The first shot is my > favourite. If i was allowed to get that close to a pretty girl, i'm gona get close. :-) :-) Dave > > D > > -- > > der...@iinet.net.au > http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: Har ki dun trek photos
Womderful series of photos. This one i like a lot. http://picasaweb.google.co.in/pdml.live/HKD#5374129055267831010 Dave On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:53 AM, Subash wrote: > hi, > > pictures from my first trek in the himalayas, which turned out to be > an amazing experience. this is an attempt at a pictorial narrative of > that experience. :) it was an eight days trip, though the actual trek > was for five days, covering 75km. we trekked from a place called > sankhri, approximately 6200 ft, to a place called har ki dun, at about > 11,600 ft. > > had taken extensive tips from dave savage to try and do some star > trails photography but, as it turned out, it was the monsoon season > and it was mostly cloudy. > > it is a rather large collection (30) and i realise one ought to be > ruthlessly deleting the bad ones but, to give a slightly different > spin on bill robb's words, i guess my standards are rather low :-) > > do tell me what you think: > http://picasaweb.google.co.in/pdml.live/HKD# > > regards, subash > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: peso: tram
Ann, all i get when i click on the link is a gallery. Which one is it.?? Dave On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:43 PM, ann sanfedele wrote: > at the place where you get on the tram from Roosevelt Island back to > Manhattan - hand held and no flash tweaked a little > in Elements to brighten color of yellow thingy in foreground and cropped > just a wee bit on left to get rid of a glary white light. > > A friend just moved into an apartment on the island today - > > http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/630498772_fChvR/Large > > ann > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: peso: tram adjusted
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM, ann sanfedele wrote: > Actually, I really did call it TRAM as a bit of irony -- its more about the > bridge and the crazy tramway mechanics.. > that being said ... I did make a file with Marnie's suggestion and I think > I like it... but I waffle... > I think I shouldn't name pesos... > > here is the "marnie edit' so to speak > > http://annsan.smugmug.com/Other/Stuff-to-show-PDML-for-various/4796533_saNpx/1/631009097_pThkK/Large > > at the moment it is in an unlisted gallery ... > > ann > > > Ah. Now i see it. That's a great shot. Love the geometry to it. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I admit I'm more amenable to the "APS-C forever", unless it is beaten out by 4/3. The point is that even though MF and LF existed, the smaller 35 mm dominated because the IQ was good enough. I think that's where APS-C or 4/3 is now. Of course, "good enough" doesn't make sense to many on this list because there is an intrinsic selection for folks with higher photographic standards. OTOH, I think that non-slr cameras like the EP-1 and the G1 are about to start eating up some of the enthusiast market. If anything kills the APS-C DSLR it will be these. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I'm unsure of 4/3rds viability long-term. I suspect strongly that the lower-end 4/3rds DSLR's will be killed off by Micro4/3rds and the higher-end line will be on life support and exist mostly to fill in the gaps for Micro-4/3rds users. 4/3rds simply hasn't been able to capitalize on the promise of smaller lenses and cameras. As a practical matter Pentax simply dominates the small DSLR segment, offering a true compact system in the K-m/DA Limiteds, a compact high-performance system with the K-7 and DA Limiteds where Olympus actually has some of the larger available crop-format DSLR's (the E-3, E-30 and E-520 are all among the largest entries in their respective segments, the E-450 and E620 are only the smallest when considered without a mounted lens, the K-m/DA40 package is smaller than either of the compact E-series bodies paired with the 25 pancake, their smallest configuration) I think that Micro4/3rds has a strong future ahead of it as it's getting the chance to build serious market share before there's any real competition in its segment. -Adam On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Desjardins, Steve wrote: > I admit I'm more amenable to the "APS-C forever", unless it is beaten out by > 4/3. The point is that even though MF and LF existed, the smaller 35 mm > dominated because the IQ was good enough. I think that's where APS-C or 4/3 > is now. Of course, "good enough" doesn't make sense to many on this list > because there is an intrinsic selection for folks with higher photographic > standards. OTOH, I think that non-slr cameras like the EP-1 and the G1 are > about to start eating up some of the enthusiast market. If anything kills > the APS-C DSLR it will be these. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
What Dave said!Regards, Bob S. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 8:08 AM, David J Brooks wrote: > Nice lighting and composition Ann > > Dave > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:55 AM, ann sanfedele wrote: >> Again - from Roosevelt Island >> >> http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large >> >> http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv >> >> >> ann >> http://annsan.smugmug.com >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > > > > -- > Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. > www.caughtinmotion.com > http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ > York Region, Ontario, Canada > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: There are no crazy people in Nebraska
In a message dated 8/29/2009 2:35:31 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, p...@web-options.com writes: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7673591.stm What? I found the legal ruling that since "God" had no known address and papers couldn't be served to him/her because of that, quite sane and reasonable. Marnie ;-) - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
In a message dated 8/28/2009 10:54:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ann...@nyc.rr.com writes: Again - from Roosevelt Island http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i 3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv ann http://annsan.smugmug.com == Heh. Nice shot. But to have it really be for Ralf, you gotta shoot it at night. Marnie aka Doe :-) - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO Watching you
I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Nice, Toine! Jack --- On Sat, 8/29/09, Toine wrote: > From: Toine > Subject: PESO Watching you > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 8:10 AM > I don't think I have posted this one > as a peso. Checked PPG today and > they accepted it :) > > http://tinyurl.com/kkttav > > Thanks for viewing (or watching), > > Toine > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > directly above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I agree. I should have said micro-4/3 since that's what the G1 and E-P1 are. -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:23 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 I'm unsure of 4/3rds viability long-term. I suspect strongly that the lower-end 4/3rds DSLR's will be killed off by Micro4/3rds and the higher-end line will be on life support and exist mostly to fill in the gaps for Micro-4/3rds users. 4/3rds simply hasn't been able to capitalize on the promise of smaller lenses and cameras. As a practical matter Pentax simply dominates the small DSLR segment, offering a true compact system in the K-m/DA Limiteds, a compact high-performance system with the K-7 and DA Limiteds where Olympus actually has some of the larger available crop-format DSLR's (the E-3, E-30 and E-520 are all among the largest entries in their respective segments, the E-450 and E620 are only the smallest when considered without a mounted lens, the K-m/DA40 package is smaller than either of the compact E-series bodies paired with the 25 pancake, their smallest configuration) I think that Micro4/3rds has a strong future ahead of it as it's getting the chance to build serious market share before there's any real competition in its segment. -Adam On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Desjardins, Steve wrote: > I admit I'm more amenable to the "APS-C forever", unless it is beaten out by > 4/3. The point is that even though MF and LF existed, the smaller 35 mm > dominated because the IQ was good enough. I think that's where APS-C or 4/3 > is now. Of course, "good enough" doesn't make sense to many on this list > because there is an intrinsic selection for folks with higher photographic > standards. OTOH, I think that non-slr cameras like the EP-1 and the G1 are > about to start eating up some of the enthusiast market. If anything kills > the APS-C DSLR it will be these. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: peso - Brittany
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:12 AM, David J Brooks wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Derby Chang wrote: > >> B&W. I would have pulled back slightly. The pose is a little awkward, so a >> bit less crop might have helped. Pretty set, though. The first shot is my >> favourite. > > If i was allowed to get that close to a pretty girl, i'm gona get close. > > :-) :-) Well, I was not too close - I was using 77mm limited which brings me close :) > > Dave >> >> D >> >> -- >> >> der...@iinet.net.au >> http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > > > > -- > Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. > www.caughtinmotion.com > http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ > York Region, Ontario, Canada > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: ann sanfedele wrote: Again - from Roosevelt Island Great. The light is really beautiful. More! :-) Ralf Glad you like it, Ralf - I was lucky to be there then - visiting a friend who had just moved to the island - until then I had not been there for um maybe 20 or 30 years. ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
Yeah it's an LIPA (Long Island Power) plant... I had though it was Con-Ed ann paul stenquist wrote: Nice pic. Pretty light. Is it a power generating facility? Paul On Aug 29, 2009, at 1:55 AM, ann sanfedele wrote: Again - from Roosevelt Island http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv ann http://annsan.smugmug.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
ooops - maybe it is Con Ed... it is called the Ravenswood Power Plant and there is some controversy going on about it being sold to TransCanada... I'm not really up on the story ann paul stenquist wrote: Nice pic. Pretty light. Is it a power generating facility? Paul On Aug 29, 2009, at 1:55 AM, ann sanfedele wrote: Again - from Roosevelt Island http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv ann http://annsan.smugmug.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
eactiv...@aol.com wrote: http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i 3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv ann http://annsan.smugmug.com == Heh. Nice shot. But to have it really be for Ralf, you gotta shoot it at night. Marnie aka Doe :-) Point taken , Marine :-) (power point?)- well so I cheated a little - and, hey, it was dark where _he_lives when I took it soo (ann ducks) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Nice, Toine -- classic subject from unusual angle... I want to sing 'Let a smile be your _umbella_ ' remembering a tiny bit of botanical terms. ok I'll shut up now Toine wrote: I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Ehh.. I don't get it. Which song? Toine 2009/8/29 ann sanfedele : > Nice, Toine -- classic subject from unusual angle... > > I want to sing 'Let a smile be your _umbella_ ' remembering a tiny bit of > botanical terms. > > ok I'll shut up now > > Toine wrote: > >> I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and >> they accepted it :) >> >> http://tinyurl.com/kkttav >> >> Thanks for viewing (or watching), >> >> Toine >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> >> > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:10:41 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, to...@repiuk.nl writes: I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine === Don't get the title, but very well done. Nice back/top lighting, nice background. Pretty. Marnie aka Doe :-) - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I don't follow your logic, the higher the overall sensor resolution and sensor pixel densities get with time, the more the overall system resolution depends on the lens' absolute resolution AND FORMAT SIZE. If you use two lenses with same across the board resolution ( say 60 lp/mm), the larger FF sensor will approach 50% higher linear resolution (2.25X total resolution) with infinitely good sensors. Conversely, with infinitely good sensors, a FF lens with only 66% percent of the APS lens would give same overall system resolution. Now of course the sensors are not infinite resolution, but the same logic applies, all else being equal, the larger format will give higher system resolution for a given lens resolution or for same system resolution a lower resolution lens on the larger FF format can give same system resolution. This sounds like talking in circles I guess. Anyway, sure if you have FF lenss that in the corners are less than 66% of the APS lens minimum, then nothing is to be gained. And sure, I guess on some mediorce or really wide angle lenses not designed for digital that may be occuring, but there are also many great FF lenses than have corner to corner performance at some apertures that exceeds 66% of the APS lens counterpart's resolution, and with those lenses at those apertures the net result is higher overall system resolution with FF vs APS. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:19 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:30 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > Adam wrote : "Unfortunately while that's a nice theory it is not born > out in practice."edit, see full quote below. > > No, I don't agree. Are you trying to say that a FF lens has to have > the same resolution across the board as an APS lens across the board > to match the APS overall system resolution?? No it wouldn't, That > makes no sense. You are correct from a theoretical standpoint. The problem is that in general we aren't dealing with systems of similar resolution but rather with systems of similar pixel density. Given current pixel densities common to 35mm FF and to APS-C cameras on the market today, there is only a fairly small difference in the necessary lens resolution to be sufficient for good results from each format, but it's significantly more difficult to maintain that necessary resolution across the 35mm frame, particularly with wide-angle lenses. > > With the sensors at the overall resolution of today (6Mp and up) a FF > system will outperform an APS system of same total pixels with same > quality lens in absolute lp/mm by a large margin, so much so that like > I said, even with a LOWER quality lens in lp/mm it still can > outperform or match an APS system on resolution. Yes, pixel density > matters, but with todays overall sensor resolutions, pixel density is > already high enough such that lens quality significantly affects > overall resolution. If sensors had much lower overall pixels, lenses > wouldn't matter as much and sensor size wouldn't help things, but by > now, lenses to matter and sensor size help improve performance with > real world lens resolutions. First off, given the same quality of lens of sufficient performance, ie a lens which exceeds theperformance requirements of each system the performance difference between FF and APS-C is small, not large in the real world given identical pixel count. There's just not enough difference in the size of the formats (It's just about exactly a doubling in area, notably smaller than the jump from 35mm to even 645) The only real advantages of FF become better High ISO performance and slightly increased dynamic range. But even in the case where this holds true (Which is only with the Nikon 12MP FX bodies) getting sufficient corner performance out of the lenses on FF is becoming difficult, whereas we aren't hitting serious performance issues with mid-range lenses on even 15MP APS-C. 20+MP Full-frame, which accounts for the majority of the FF bodies on the market today has pixel densities in the 10-12MP APS-C equavalent range and therefore needs similar performance from lenses across the 35mm frame to not show visible degradation in the corners. This is MUCH harder to acheive than a lot of people expected. This is a case where theory and real-world performance part ways due to other factors. In fee simple, getting the necessary resolution for even 15MP APS-C across the APS-C frame is easier for lens designers than getting the edge performance on 35mm FF necessary to not show degraded corner performance on 12MP FF and that degraded corner performance can be seen on prints. So while your math is correct, what wor
PESO: in the woods
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/3867754586/ pentax spotmatic sp II super takumar 135 2.5 fuji 100 nikon ls-1000 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses for these reasons. If APS had been designed from scratch the difference would be more significant. For me, Image quaity trumps all. That's why people spend big bucks for good lenses and are willing to carry bulky lenses for better quality too. IQ is pretty good now, but If I could get much better for a resonable cost and size increase, I would certainly consider it. Another factor is system cost. With FF you don't need as good optics as you do for APS for same quality. This could reduce the cost of lenses considerably and that would have a large effect of reduction of the totals system cost. FF system could cost way less that APS system for same quality which always would be welcome. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Desjardins, Steve Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:14 AM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 I admit I'm more amenable to the "APS-C forever", unless it is beaten out by 4/3. The point is that even though MF and LF existed, the smaller 35 mm dominated because the IQ was good enough. I think that's where APS-C or 4/3 is now. Of course, "good enough" doesn't make sense to many on this list because there is an intrinsic selection for folks with higher photographic standards. OTOH, I think that non-slr cameras like the EP-1 and the G1 are about to start eating up some of the enthusiast market. If anything kills the APS-C DSLR it will be these. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
There is an old song called "Let a Smile be your UMBRELLA" and i was punning on that with the botanical term that describes the flower you photographed from the family _umbelliferae_ has to do with the way the flowers branch out at the top of a stem, I believe anyway, nice flower ann Toine wrote: Ehh.. I don't get it. Which song? Toine 2009/8/29 ann sanfedele : Nice, Toine -- classic subject from unusual angle... I want to sing 'Let a smile be your _umbella_ ' remembering a tiny bit of botanical terms. ok I'll shut up now Toine wrote: I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Marnie -- look to the right... you'll get the title... I didn't notice at first either. ann eactiv...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:10:41 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, to...@repiuk.nl writes: I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine === Don't get the title, but very well done. Nice back/top lighting, nice background. Pretty. Marnie aka Doe :-) - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Now I get it. Googled the title. Never heard the song. And I also didn't know the botanical family name umbelliferae. I learn a lot (including photography) on this list. Toine 2009/8/29 ann sanfedele : > There is an old song called "Let a Smile be your UMBRELLA" > and i was punning on that with the botanical term that describes > the flower you photographed from the family _umbelliferae_ > has to do with the way the flowers branch out at the top of a stem, I > believe > > anyway, nice flower > ann > > Toine wrote: > >> Ehh.. I don't get it. Which song? >> >> Toine >> >> 2009/8/29 ann sanfedele : >> >>> >>> Nice, Toine -- classic subject from unusual angle... >>> >>> I want to sing 'Let a smile be your _umbella_ ' remembering a tiny bit >>> of >>> botanical terms. >>> >>> ok I'll shut up now >>> >>> Toine wrote: >>> >>> I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> >> > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Or click on the image for full screen, larger is better Toine 2009/8/29 ann sanfedele : > Marnie -- look to the right... you'll get the title... > I didn't notice at first either. > > ann > > eactiv...@aol.com wrote: > >> In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:10:41 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> to...@repiuk.nl writes: >> I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and >> they accepted it :) >> >> http://tinyurl.com/kkttav >> >> Thanks for viewing (or watching), >> >> Toine >> >> === >> Don't get the title, but very well done. Nice back/top lighting, nice >> background. Pretty. >> >> Marnie aka Doe :-) >> >> - >> We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when >> we created them. Albert Einstein >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> >> > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
J.C. O'Connell wrote: I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses for these reasons. If APS had been designed from scratch the difference would be more significant. We all have evidence that's not true in practice. The 4/3 system was designed from scratch, but a 4/3 based outfit is hardly smaller than a comparable APS-C outfit. For unknown reasons, cameras are as big as APS-C bodies (if not bigger) and lenses need one extra stop for getting comparable depth of field and IQ (as the smaller sensor needs approximately one-stop lower sensitivity value to be used for getting camparable noise). So a 150/2 on 4/3 is required for getting 200/4 performance on APS-C (which in turn can be comparable to 300/5.6 on FF). Or at least this is how I see things. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Wrong equivalence. That should read: So a 150/2 on 4/3 is required for getting 200/2.8 performance on APS-C (which in turn can be comparable to 300/4 on FF). Or at least this is how I see things. The conclusion is the same. Dario - Original Message - From: "Dario Bonazza" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:41 PM Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 J.C. O'Connell wrote: I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses for these reasons. If APS had been designed from scratch the difference would be more significant. We all have evidence that's not true in practice. The 4/3 system was designed from scratch, but a 4/3 based outfit is hardly smaller than a comparable APS-C outfit. For unknown reasons, cameras are as big as APS-C bodies (if not bigger) and lenses need one extra stop for getting comparable depth of field and IQ (as the smaller sensor needs approximately one-stop lower sensitivity value to be used for getting camparable noise). So a 150/2 on 4/3 is required for getting 200/4 performance on APS-C (which in turn can be comparable to 300/5.6 on FF). Or at least this is how I see things. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 01:24:27PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit: > I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are > really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, > registration etc as FF cameras. [snip] Which is a very good thing for in-body anti-shake systems. Also a good thing for battery life; that nice large battery compartment and half the sensor size is about root 2 of the power requirements. This is always going to help. > For me, Image quaity trumps all. [snip] Just before Hitler's War started, somebody asked asked the fellow running the Cunard line what it was like to have the largest, fastest liners in service in the world. His reply was that they were the smallest, slowest ships that would do the job he needed them to do. Theoretical image quality does me no good; the best image quality I can _use_ is the best image quality I can print, and that's constrained by the printer and will be for quite a while, and even if it wasn't, there's some decent evidence that people just can't _see_ better than 600 dpi or so. Never mind how much stuff is being done for the web, or the trajectory of increase for content actively displayed; the effective image quality limit is in the printer tech, not the camera tech. So long as that's true, the requirement is for a camera that *keeps* that true, not for the best theoretically achievable IQ. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Especially with my old eyes! ann Toine wrote: Or click on the image for full screen, larger is better Toine 2009/8/29 ann sanfedele : Marnie -- look to the right... you'll get the title... I didn't notice at first either. ann eactiv...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:10:41 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, to...@repiuk.nl writes: I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine === Don't get the title, but very well done. Nice back/top lighting, nice background. Pretty. Marnie aka Doe :-) - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: in the woods
Luka, I like the repeated pattern between the girl's knee and the tree. The picture has a woodsy feel to it. Regards, Bob S. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Luka Knezevic-Strika wrote: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/3867754586/ > > pentax spotmatic sp II > super takumar 135 2.5 > fuji 100 > nikon ls-1000 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
That's sorta my point, A FF Pentax DSLR is not going to be that much bigger than the current APS DSLR because APS is already using the same size lens mount, registration etc and those will not increase in size with a FF Pentax DSLR. 4/3 DSLRs are smaller than APS DSLRs are they not? Arent the lens mounts smaller, and the registrations shorter too? -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:41 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 J.C. O'Connell wrote: >I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really >retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, registration >etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF DSLRs and lenses are >hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses for these reasons. If APS >had been designed from scratch the difference would be more >significant. We all have evidence that's not true in practice. The 4/3 system was designed from scratch, but a 4/3 based outfit is hardly smaller than a comparable APS-C outfit. For unknown reasons, cameras are as big as APS-C bodies (if not bigger) and lenses need one extra stop for getting comparable depth of field and IQ (as the smaller sensor needs approximately one-stop lower sensitivity value to be used for getting camparable noise). So a 150/2 on 4/3 is required for getting 200/4 performance on APS-C (which in turn can be comparable to 300/5.6 on FF). Or at least this is how I see things. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:13 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > I don't follow your logic, the higher the overall sensor resolution > and sensor pixel densities get with time, the more the overall system > resolution depends > on the lens' absolute resolution AND FORMAT SIZE. If you use two lenses > with > same across the board resolution ( say 60 lp/mm), the larger FF sensor > will approach > 50% higher linear resolution (2.25X total resolution) with infinitely > good sensors. Conversely, with infinitely good sensors, a FF lens with > only 66% percent of the APS lens would give same overall system > resolution. This is only the case if the lens is the limiting factor across the board for resolution, the field of view is the same and the pixel density is the same. One of those factors is generally not the case in any given situation. The biggest problem is that lens resolution usually isn't the limiting factor except at the edges and degradation of edge performance is unfortunately obvious in scenes with high-frequency detail near the edges of the frame (as is quite often the case in Landscapes, the most common application for high-MP digital). Note I'm not quibbling with your math, it's correct and would apply in an ideal system. > Now of course the sensors are not infinite resolution, but the same > logic > applies, all else being equal, the larger format will give higher system > resolution > for a given lens resolution or for same system resolution a lower > resolution > lens on the larger FF format can give same system resolution. This > sounds > like talking in circles I guess. All things being equal, this is certainly the case. > > Anyway, sure if you have FF lenss that in the corners are less than 66% > of the APS lens minimum, then nothing is to be gained. And sure, I guess > on some mediorce or really wide angle lenses not designed for digital > that may be occuring, but there are also many great FF lenses than have > corner to corner performance at some apertures that exceeds 66% of the > APS lens counterpart's resolution, and with those lenses at those > apertures > the net result is higher overall system resolution with FF vs APS. > > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The problem is that even most 'good' wide-angles from the film era are being shown to be less than satisfactory on high-MP FF. What was sufficient performance to be considered an excellent performer on film is simply not enough for 20+MP digital. There are rather few wide-angle designs, even in the 28mm range which have edge performance suitable for high-MP FF. Once you hit around 20mm, you're starting to run into options being countable on a single hand. Really, the only ~20mm primes that are up to high-MP digital are the Contax Distagon 21mm f2.8 T* and the second version of the Leica Elmarit-R 19mm f2.8. Even superb performers like the Olympus 21's are running out of resolution at ~21MP. You can, in some cases, recover the performance in post (Canon's DPP software does an excellent job of this with Canon's L wide zooms, as does DXOptics with any lens/camera combination they have a profile for) Most of those lenses which are 'good' on film do have enough centre resolution for APS-C. But the rolloff in performance into Zone C is the real issue. The problem is making lenses which do not show visual degradation of edge performance vs centre performance on the two formats because there is now enough resolving power at the edge of the sensor for this to matter. The increased resolution across the smaller imaging circle of APS-C is easier to achieve than maintaining consistent resolution across the larger image circle of FF. This is exaggerated by the fact that FF lenses must also be able to perform to APS-C requirements due to the market bias towards APS-C (all the FF makers also have APS-C lines which sell far more cameras and are a major market for both APS-C and FF lenses). A lot of this comes down to the fact that a number of the limiting factors to resolution in 35mm film photography have been removed with the advent of digital and that's making lenses which delivered superb performance on film into mediocre performers on digital. This is because film flatness and registration error for 35mm film are no longer an issue. A sensor is nearly perfectly flat and even with body-IS the sensor registration really cannot vary anywhere near as much as film thickness and flatness allow. In other words, the rolloff on the MTF graph in zone C for 35mm lenses is becoming visible because the factors that used to hide it are no longer an issue. But the primary limiting factors are not the math and physics behind resolution, but a combination of cost and market factors. You can make lenses up to APS-C performance cheaper than you can for lenses up to high-MP FF. And because of that, the available inexpensive FF lenses are disappearing because they're visibly outperformed by the high-MP FF sensors in most applications where you'd wan
Re: PESO: in the woods
Great composition! 2009/8/29 Luka Knezevic-Strika : > http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/3867754586/ > > pentax spotmatic sp II > super takumar 135 2.5 > fuji 100 > nikon ls-1000 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
higher image quality trump all for me not solely because higher final image quality is always needed, but because of other things you can do like crop more while maintaining same final image quality. To me, cropping ability is very powerful because it allows you to capture much quicker and easier, and fine tune the composition to perfection in post processing. All else being equal, you could lop off half a FF image and still end up just as nice I.Q. as an uncropped APS image. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Graydon Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:45 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 01:24:27PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit: > I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really > retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, registration > etc as FF cameras. [snip] Which is a very good thing for in-body anti-shake systems. Also a good thing for battery life; that nice large battery compartment and half the sensor size is about root 2 of the power requirements. This is always going to help. > For me, Image quaity trumps all. [snip] Just before Hitler's War started, somebody asked asked the fellow running the Cunard line what it was like to have the largest, fastest liners in service in the world. His reply was that they were the smallest, slowest ships that would do the job he needed them to do. Theoretical image quality does me no good; the best image quality I can _use_ is the best image quality I can print, and that's constrained by the printer and will be for quite a while, and even if it wasn't, there's some decent evidence that people just can't _see_ better than 600 dpi or so. Never mind how much stuff is being done for the web, or the trajectory of increase for content actively displayed; the effective image quality limit is in the printer tech, not the camera tech. So long as that's true, the requirement is for a camera that *keeps* that true, not for the best theoretically achievable IQ. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > That's sorta my point, > A FF Pentax DSLR is not going to be that much bigger > than the current APS DSLR because APS is already using > the same size lens mount, registration etc > and those will not increase in size with a FF Pentax DSLR. While mount and register remain the same, the mirror box is significantly smaller which allows smaller bodies in practice from APS-C. As a practical matter the smallest FF DSLR (the Canon 5D) is the same size as the largest APS-C DSLR (the Nikon D300s) but overall APS-C DSLR's are generally much smaller than any FF SLR. Depth is pretty similar across the various lines (depending on grip configuration) but smaller prisms and the ability to put circuitry and batteries into places that would extend into the mirror box on FF allow more compact designs. > > 4/3 DSLRs are smaller than APS DSLRs are they not? > Arent the lens mounts smaller, and the registrations > shorter too? Lens mount is smaller, registration is a bit shorter at ~38mm, cameras are generally on the large side for their class (the E-3, E-30 and E-520 are all larger than their competition aside from the outlier than is the D300). The smallest available body is the Olympus E-450, but the smallest available body/lens combination is the Pentax K-m with DA Limited 40/2.8. > > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) > Home Page - www.jchriso.com > Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are > really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, > registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF > DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses > for these reasons. If APS had been designed from scratch > the difference would be more significant. > > For me, Image quaity trumps all. That's why people > spend big bucks for good lenses and are willing to > carry bulky lenses for better quality too. IQ is pretty > good now, but If I could get much better for a resonable > cost and size increase, I would certainly consider it. > > Another factor is system cost. With FF you don't need > as good optics as you do for APS for same quality. > This could reduce the cost of lenses considerably > and that would have a large effect of reduction > of the totals system cost. FF system could cost > way less that APS system for same quality which always > would be welcome. > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) If IQ trumps all and weight is not an issue, the answer is to buy a MFDB (there are at least 2 22MP MFDB's available new for costs similar to a 1DsmIII or D3X) and go medium format, not to go for the FF DSLR's. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: in the woods
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 19:57:06 +0200 Toine wrote: > 2009/8/29 Luka Knezevic-Strika : > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/3867754586/ > > > > pentax spotmatic sp II > > super takumar 135 2.5 I love the way the model's curves and lines echo those of the trees framing her. also the voyeuristic quality gives it a boost lovely shot Bran -- "Love" is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own... Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition.- Robert Heinlein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
In a message dated 8/29/2009 10:31:17 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ann...@nyc.rr.com writes: OH. Got it. Hehehehe. Marnie Old eyes, to be sure. == Marnie -- look to the right... you'll get the title... I didn't notice at first either. ann eactiv...@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:10:41 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >to...@repiuk.nl writes: >I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and >they accepted it :) > >http://tinyurl.com/kkttav > >Thanks for viewing (or watching), > >Toine > - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc. There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame. None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing, consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more choose not to go full-frame than they could have chosen not to go digital. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO Watching you
Nicely done. Good composition, exposure & colors. Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: "Toine" Subject: PESO Watching you I don't think I have posted this one as a peso. Checked PPG today and they accepted it :) http://tinyurl.com/kkttav Thanks for viewing (or watching), Toine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: in the woods
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:18:15PM +0200, Luka Knezevic-Strika wrote: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/3867754586/ Very nice. Was it a deliberate pun based on "sitting bare in the woods"? > > pentax spotmatic sp II > super takumar 135 2.5 > fuji 100 > nikon ls-1000 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT GESO: Decoder Ring (w/ Bridezilla and Seekae)
On Aug 28, 2009, at 16:34 , Derby Chang wrote: Decoder Ring, rightly lauded for their gorgeous Somersault soundtrack, have gone back to an all-instrumental outfit. Not that "instrumental" music quite accurately describes what they do. What an an epic set. All three bands boundary-riding the post-rock paddock. http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/09/09_08/09_08_decoder/index.htm Good set. I'm all for 13 and 15 as well. Some good moods caught in many of the others. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com There is no off position to the genius switch. Genius can, however, be observed as insanity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I would disagree that lens resolution usually isnt the limiting factor with ** todays high density APS sensors **. The small high density sensors used now generally ruthlessly reveal all the shortcomings of what I would say the majority, not the minority of lenses out there. This is probably the main reason to argue in favor of going FF. By now APS is pretty much real world lens limited, not sensor limtited. By going to larger FF sensors overall system resolution can be increased much more than any possible increase in future APS lens resolution performance. With even my lowly istDS's 6Mp sensor I can easily see the difference in resolution/MTF between very good and truly excellent lenses. I would assume with higher resolution sensors the differences are even more evident and more often lens limited. Unless you are using world class lenses and at their optimum apertures all the time, in most cases lens performance can certianly be a limiting factor on resolution in many cases not just a few and not just in the corners of the lens image circle. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:57 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:13 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > I don't follow your logic, the higher the overall sensor resolution > and sensor pixel densities get with time, the more the overall system > resolution depends on the lens' absolute resolution AND FORMAT SIZE. > If you use two lenses with > same across the board resolution ( say 60 lp/mm), the larger FF sensor > will approach > 50% higher linear resolution (2.25X total resolution) with infinitely > good sensors. Conversely, with infinitely good sensors, a FF lens with > only 66% percent of the APS lens would give same overall system > resolution. This is only the case if the lens is the limiting factor across the board for resolution, the field of view is the same and the pixel density is the same. One of those factors is generally not the case in any given situation. The biggest problem is that lens resolution usually isn't the limiting factor except at the edges and degradation of edge performance is unfortunately obvious in scenes with high-frequency detail near the edges of the frame (as is quite often the case in Landscapes, the most common application for high-MP digital). Note I'm not quibbling with your math, it's correct and would apply in an ideal system. > Now of course the sensors are not infinite resolution, but the same > logic applies, all else being equal, the larger format will give > higher system resolution > for a given lens resolution or for same system resolution a lower > resolution > lens on the larger FF format can give same system resolution. This > sounds > like talking in circles I guess. All things being equal, this is certainly the case. > > Anyway, sure if you have FF lenss that in the corners are less than > 66% of the APS lens minimum, then nothing is to be gained. And sure, I > guess on some mediorce or really wide angle lenses not designed for > digital that may be occuring, but there are also many great FF lenses > than have corner to corner performance at some apertures that exceeds > 66% of the APS lens counterpart's resolution, and with those lenses at > those apertures the net result is higher overall system resolution > with FF vs APS. > > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The problem is that even most 'good' wide-angles from the film era are being shown to be less than satisfactory on high-MP FF. What was sufficient performance to be considered an excellent performer on film is simply not enough for 20+MP digital. There are rather few wide-angle designs, even in the 28mm range which have edge performance suitable for high-MP FF. Once you hit around 20mm, you're starting to run into options being countable on a single hand. Really, the only ~20mm primes that are up to high-MP digital are the Contax Distagon 21mm f2.8 T* and the second version of the Leica Elmarit-R 19mm f2.8. Even superb performers like the Olympus 21's are running out of resolution at ~21MP. You can, in some cases, recover the performance in post (Canon's DPP software does an excellent job of this with Canon's L wide zooms, as does DXOptics with any lens/camera combination they have a profile for) Most of those lenses which are 'good' on film do have enough centre resolution for APS-C. But the rolloff in performance into Zone C is the real issue. The problem is making lenses which do not show visual degradation of edge performance vs centre performance on the two formats because there is now enough resolving power at the edge of the sensor for this to matter. The increased re
Re: OT GESO: Decoder Ring (w/ Bridezilla and Seekae)
By the way, let Bridezilla know they can tour up here in the USA, Seattle specific, anytime they wish. I'll not only buy tickets, but photograph their performances for them in return for travel, room, and board. On Aug 28, 2009, at 16:34 , Derby Chang wrote: Decoder Ring, rightly lauded for their gorgeous Somersault soundtrack, have gone back to an all-instrumental outfit. Not that "instrumental" music quite accurately describes what they do. What an an epic set. All three bands boundary-riding the post-rock paddock. Joseph McAllister Pentaxian http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
well I think the thing to consider is that the volume of a FF Pentax DSLR would not be 1.5x1.5x1.5 = approx 3.375 times the volume of their APS dslrs because not everything has to be scaled up, just some things. I havent really done any studies on these, but I would have a hunch that the body + lens volume increase for going from APS to FF with Pentax would be much less than a factor of 3.375 to 1. In other words the format size increases proportionally faster than the body volume does when going from APS to FF body because of things that wont get bigger in the FF body. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 2:05 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > That's sorta my point, > A FF Pentax DSLR is not going to be that much bigger > than the current APS DSLR because APS is already using > the same size lens mount, registration etc > and those will not increase in size with a FF Pentax DSLR. While mount and register remain the same, the mirror box is significantly smaller which allows smaller bodies in practice from APS-C. As a practical matter the smallest FF DSLR (the Canon 5D) is the same size as the largest APS-C DSLR (the Nikon D300s) but overall APS-C DSLR's are generally much smaller than any FF SLR. Depth is pretty similar across the various lines (depending on grip configuration) but smaller prisms and the ability to put circuitry and batteries into places that would extend into the mirror box on FF allow more compact designs. > > 4/3 DSLRs are smaller than APS DSLRs are they not? > Arent the lens mounts smaller, and the registrations > shorter too? Lens mount is smaller, registration is a bit shorter at ~38mm, cameras are generally on the large side for their class (the E-3, E-30 and E-520 are all larger than their competition aside from the outlier than is the D300). The smallest available body is the Olympus E-450, but the smallest available body/lens combination is the Pentax K-m with DA Limited 40/2.8. > > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) > Home Page - www.jchriso.com > Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT GESO: Decoder Ring (w/ Bridezilla and Seekae)
On 29/8/09, Joseph McAllister, discombobulated, unleashed: >By the way, let Bridezilla know they can tour up here in the USA, >Seattle specific, anytime they wish. I'll not only buy tickets, but >photograph their performances for them in return for travel, room, and >board. Joseph is such a nice guy offering to buy them all air tickets to the USA :) -- 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 to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
in some cases IQ does trump all. I have some very nice family photos I shot on 8x10 and Im glad I did. I had 35mm, MF, 4x5 at the time but I didn't skimp. Now of course 8x10 is very inapprpriate for many things, Im not saying it's the best, no way. But for me, I would gladly trade up to a slightly larger DSLR body if I could get higher image quality with same lenses or get same image quality with cheaper lenses. I don't need a super tiny body all the time. After using the Pentax 67 beast for a while or dealing with a 8x10 view, a FF dslr will still be compact in my mind. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 2:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really > retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, registration > etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF DSLRs and lenses are > hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses for these reasons. If APS > had been designed from scratch the difference would be more > significant. > > For me, Image quaity trumps all. That's why people > spend big bucks for good lenses and are willing to > carry bulky lenses for better quality too. IQ is pretty > good now, but If I could get much better for a resonable > cost and size increase, I would certainly consider it. > > Another factor is system cost. With FF you don't need > as good optics as you do for APS for same quality. > This could reduce the cost of lenses considerably > and that would have a large effect of reduction > of the totals system cost. FF system could cost > way less that APS system for same quality which always > would be welcome. > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) If IQ trumps all and weight is not an issue, the answer is to buy a MFDB (there are at least 2 22MP MFDB's available new for costs similar to a 1DsmIII or D3X) and go medium format, not to go for the FF DSLR's. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I disagree on it not making any difference(s). The ultimate image performance obtainable out of the APS format is not going to be as great as the ultimate performance obtainable out of the FF digital format. Larger formats have the potential for higher IQ performance when properly executed. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 2:32 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc. There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame. None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing, consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more choose not to go full-frame than they could have chosen not to go digital. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Mark Roberts wrote: Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc. There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame. None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing, consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more choose not to go full-frame than they could have chosen not to go digital. I fully agree. This FF marketing trend is the most important aspect of the whole matter, replacing for DSLR users the silly pixel race which took place among P&S's. The donkey is flying and I want to do that too ;-) Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
FF should not only be able to achieve higher system resolution at same or larger sensor resolutions, it should also be able to achieve same low noise performance at higher ISO sensitivities than APS sensor due to larger area sensor pixels. Just like APS images better than tiny digital p&s sensors when done right, D-FF should image better than D-APS when done right. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 3:44 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 Mark Roberts wrote: > Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc. > > There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame. > None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing, > consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more > choose not to go full-frame than they could have chosen not to go > digital. I fully agree. This FF marketing trend is the most important aspect of the whole matter, replacing for DSLR users the silly pixel race which took place among P&S's. The donkey is flying and I want to do that too ;-) Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
J.C. O'Connell wrote: FF should not only be able to achieve higher system resolution at same or larger sensor resolutions, it should also be able to achieve same low noise performance at higher ISO sensitivities than APS sensor due to larger area sensor pixels. Just like APS images better than tiny digital p&s sensors when done right, D-FF should image better than D-APS when done right. 1) When done right, D-FF should image better than D-APS when done right. I agree. 2) D-APS already outperforms the highest needs of say 99% the DSLR users. This makes No.1 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users. 3) Most DSLR users want FF. This makes No.2 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users and resurrects No1. Sweet surrender, I guess. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Some refinements in my thoughts below: J.C. O'Connell wrote: FF should not only be able to achieve higher system resolution at same or larger sensor resolutions, it should also be able to achieve same low noise performance at higher ISO sensitivities than APS sensor due to larger area sensor pixels. Just like APS images better than tiny digital p&s sensors when done right, D-FF should image better than D-APS when done right. 1) At its highest, D-FF should image better than D-APS at its highest, especially in poor light and harsh conditions. 2) D-APS already outperforms the highest needs of say 99% the DSLR users. This makes No.1 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users. 3) An ever-increasing number of DSLR users want FF. When they will be the majority, it will make No.2 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users, thus resurrecting No.1. Sweet surrender, I guess. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:42:15PM +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote: > > 3) An ever-increasing number of DSLR users want FF. When they will be the > majority, it will make No.2 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users, thus > resurrecting No.1. You're forgetting the most important point - a FF DSLR will always be more expensive than an APS-C DSLR. And whatever they may *say* they want, 99% of DSLR purchasers will vote with their wallet and buy the cheaper DSLR. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
John Francis wrote: >And whatever they may *say* >they want, 99% of DSLR purchasers will vote with their wallet and >buy the cheaper DSLR. So no one on this list owns a K7 then? Or bought a K20 when it was new? Or a Nikon D700? (Hi, Dave Savage!) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT GESO: Decoder Ring (w/ Bridezilla and Seekae)
Cotty wrote: On 29/8/09, Joseph McAllister, discombobulated, unleashed: By the way, let Bridezilla know they can tour up here in the USA, Seattle specific, anytime they wish. I'll not only buy tickets, but photograph their performances for them in return for travel, room, and board. Joseph is such a nice guy offering to buy them all air tickets to the USA :) -- Thanks for the comments, guys That's very sweet of you, Joseph. As it happens, they will be in New York next month playing at All Tomorrow's Parties. You just have to get them back to the west coast http://www.atpfestival.com/Events/ATPNewYork2009/LineUp/Bridezilla.php D -- der...@iinet.net.au http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: There are no crazy people in Nebraska
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7673591.stm > > > What? I found the legal ruling that since "God" had no known > address and papers couldn't be served to him/her because of > that, quite sane and reasonable. > Maybe. On the other hand he/she/they/it is/are omnipresent, so it doesn't matter where you serve them, and omniscient, so he/she/it/they know/s the papers have been served. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
- Original Message - From: "John Francis" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:54 PM Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:42:15PM +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote: 3) An ever-increasing number of DSLR users want FF. When they will be the majority, it will make No.2 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users, thus resurrecting No.1. You're forgetting the most important point - a FF DSLR will always be more expensive than an APS-C DSLR. And whatever they may *say* they want, 99% of DSLR purchasers will vote with their wallet and buy the cheaper DSLR. They will be the majority when the price point will be affordable for most. I don't think it's today. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
It occurs to me that arguing what sort of lenses you need to get the full performance out of a full frame camera is like arguing what sort of tires you need to get the full performance out of a Ferrari. Most of us can't afford it, and most of those who can afford it don't have the skill to make use of it. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
people don't just buy DSLR bodies, they buy DSLR systems (bodies and lenses) . Since FF system can match or outperform an APS system with lower performance, less costly lenses, a FF system could cost less, not more for same level of peformance as an all APS system even if the body alone costs more than an APS body alone. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Francis Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 4:54 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:42:15PM +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote: > > 3) An ever-increasing number of DSLR users want FF. When they will be > the > majority, it will make No.2 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users, thus > resurrecting No.1. You're forgetting the most important point - a FF DSLR will always be more expensive than an APS-C DSLR. And whatever they may *say* they want, 99% of DSLR purchasers will vote with their wallet and buy the cheaper DSLR. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: There are no crazy people in Nebraska
In a message dated 8/29/2009 2:12:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, p...@web-options.com writes: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7673591.stm > > > What? I found the legal ruling that since "God" had no known > address and papers couldn't be served to him/her because of > that, quite sane and reasonable. > Maybe. On the other hand he/she/they/it is/are omnipresent, so it doesn't matter where you serve them, and omniscient, so he/she/it/they know/s the papers have been served. Bob == True. But think of the problems if he/she/it/they actually showed up in court. So it was a good argument for the judge to use to deter that. Marnie aka Doe ;-) I can be silly all day (and into the night, for that matter). - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS bodies do to achieve same level of system peformance. That's the main appeal of FF bodies. No super tweeked, super performance leneses are required, mortal lenses can be applied to them for same results due to larger sensor format. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Larry Colen Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 5:16 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 It occurs to me that arguing what sort of lenses you need to get the full performance out of a full frame camera is like arguing what sort of tires you need to get the full performance out of a Ferrari. Most of us can't afford it, and most of those who can afford it don't have the skill to make use of it. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:37:41PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit: > people don't just buy DSLR bodies, they buy DSLR systems (bodies and > lenses) . > Since FF system can match or outperform an APS system with lower > performance, > less costly lenses, a FF system could cost less, not more > for same level of peformance as an all APS system even if the body > alone costs more than an APS body alone. It could, but they don't. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 5:40 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS > bodies do to achieve same level of system peformance. > That's the main appeal of FF bodies. No super tweeked, > super performance leneses are required, mortal lenses > can be applied to them for same results due to larger sensor format. > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The problem is that this is simply not the case in reality. In reality we have to deal with the fact that lenses capable of performing to the requirements of current APS-C sensors are significantly less expensive than the equivalent for a FF sensor. I can buy a normal zoom capable of outresolving a 12MP APS-C sensor across it's entire image circle at f5.6 for $600USD (see the Tamron 17-50/2.8 or Sigma 18-50/2.8 HSM or any of several slower but wider-range zooms like the Sigma 17-70 or Nikkor 16-85VR), but a lens which offers similar performance on FF will cost me at least $1000 (Canon 24-105L). Ditto for an ultra-wide zoom (Both Sigma 10-20's, Tokina 12-24/4 or 11-16/2.8) but then the equivalent will cost me $1500 (Canon 16-35L II, Nikkor 14-24/2.8). And no, primes are not the answer. There are essentially no currently available primes for FF systems that are wider than 35mm, cheaper than $1000 USD new and sharp across the frame 2 stops down from wide open on current 20+MP FF bodies. There are quite a number of primes that can do that for APS-C (wider than 24mm, cheaper than $1000, sharp across the frame 2 stops down) including a number of FF primes that can't do that on current FF bodies. A nice theory, but in practice the real market limitation of FF is lens cost, not body cost. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
depends how many lenses you buy and how much you save on each FF lens. Of course Pentax cant do FF in near future, last time I checked they had about 4 FF lenses currently available. They are not not ready to sell a FF system. They would rather sell you poorly tested very expensive DA lenss and a tiny sensor at this point. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Graydon Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 6:23 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:37:41PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit: > people don't just buy DSLR bodies, they buy DSLR systems (bodies and > lenses) . > Since FF system can match or outperform an APS system with lower > performance, less costly lenses, a FF system could cost less, not more > for same level of peformance as an all APS system even if the body > alone costs more than an APS body alone. It could, but they don't. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did it would around $2K like Sony, no? How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make up the extra $800 or so for the FF Penatx body vs the APS body? Answer - not many at all. A few at most. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 6:39 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 5:40 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS bodies do to > achieve same level of system peformance. That's the main appeal of FF > bodies. No super tweeked, super performance leneses are required, > mortal lenses can be applied to them for same results due to larger > sensor format. > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The problem is that this is simply not the case in reality. In reality we have to deal with the fact that lenses capable of performing to the requirements of current APS-C sensors are significantly less expensive than the equivalent for a FF sensor. I can buy a normal zoom capable of outresolving a 12MP APS-C sensor across it's entire image circle at f5.6 for $600USD (see the Tamron 17-50/2.8 or Sigma 18-50/2.8 HSM or any of several slower but wider-range zooms like the Sigma 17-70 or Nikkor 16-85VR), but a lens which offers similar performance on FF will cost me at least $1000 (Canon 24-105L). Ditto for an ultra-wide zoom (Both Sigma 10-20's, Tokina 12-24/4 or 11-16/2.8) but then the equivalent will cost me $1500 (Canon 16-35L II, Nikkor 14-24/2.8). And no, primes are not the answer. There are essentially no currently available primes for FF systems that are wider than 35mm, cheaper than $1000 USD new and sharp across the frame 2 stops down from wide open on current 20+MP FF bodies. There are quite a number of primes that can do that for APS-C (wider than 24mm, cheaper than $1000, sharp across the frame 2 stops down) including a number of FF primes that can't do that on current FF bodies. A nice theory, but in practice the real market limitation of FF is lens cost, not body cost. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: There are no crazy people in Nebraska
Sat Aug 29 16:38:27 CDT 2009 Eactivist wrote: > In a message dated 8/29/2009 2:12:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, pml at web-options.com writes: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7673591.stm > > > > > > What? I found the legal ruling that since "God" had no known > > address and papers couldn't be served to him/her because of > > that, quite sane and reasonable. > > > > Maybe. On the other hand he/she/they/it is/are omnipresent, so it doesn't > matter where you serve them, and omniscient, so he/she/it/they know/s the > papers have been served. > > Bob > > > == > True. But think of the problems if he/she/it/they actually showed up in > court. > > So it was a good argument for the judge to use to deter that. > > Marnie aka Doe ;-) I can be silly all day (and into the night, for that > matter). It would have to be (transferred) referred to the Court of Higher-Authority! :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:40:42PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS > bodies do to achieve same level of system peformance. > That's the main appeal of FF bodies. No super tweeked, > super performance leneses are required, mortal lenses > can be applied to them for same results due to larger sensor format. So why are the Nikon full frame lenses so much more expensive than their APS lenses? Could it be easier to make lenses that are really good over an area that is half as big as it is to make a lens that is decent over the larger area? Alternatively, is it possible that that is only true if the full frame sensor doesn't have the same pixel size as the smaller sensor, that customers who have bought into the resolution hype, are not going to settle for the same resolution in a bigger sensor, but with twice the sensor area will want twice the resolution? Or maybe Nikon just figures that they can get more money from people willing to pay $2500 for a body. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did > it would around $2K like Sony, no? > > How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make > up the extra $800 or so for the FF Penatx body > vs the APS body? > > Answer - not many at all. A few at most. > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The question is 'how many of these cheaper non-DA lenses exist' and the response is none. Nor do they exist in the three systems that offer both APS-C and FF bodies. Nor will they exist anytime soon. The reality is you're going to pay around double for FF lenses which do not restrict FF sensor performance with current sensors than you will for APS-C lenses which do not restrict current APS-C sensor performance, this applies to normal and wide zooms as well as wide primes (there are plenty of normal and longer primes and telephoto zooms which are up to both APS-C and FF sensors, but there's no money to be saved there either since the ones which can perform adequately on only one type of sensor are doing so on APS-C). -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: curing myself of Facebook
Peter Zalabai wrote: The only reason I am using Facebook is because I can reach it from my phone. I was invited to the other 'social life' pages but I believe social life is better if it's lived in a pub next to a beer (or orange juice in my case) :) .t I believe it is better if its lived (anyplace IRL ) next to a person - but pass the orange juice, thats ok too ann ann sanfedele wrote: Just couldn't cope with it... email is my preferred method of communicating when a phone call is not possible (which is my FAVORITE type of communication) so for those of you who are on it, please don't invite me back - just don't want to do it ann as in ann sanfedele http://annsan.smugmug.com et al -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Birthday
Bit late on this thread (been away in Hong Kong for a week): my oldest camera is a Rolleicord Vb from about 1955, which still works perfectly, although it does seem to have been built for a left-handed person! John in Brisbane -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Desjardins, Steve Sent: Tuesday, 25 August 2009 10:23 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: Birthday A 50 year old (functional) camera is a noble artifact. My oldest camera (that I have owned since new) is a 1974 SP500. I never use it anymore but I can't bring myself to get rid of it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:19:45PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: > On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > > huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did > > it would around $2K like Sony, no? > > > > How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make > > up the extra $800 or so for the FF Penatx body > > vs the APS body? > > > > Answer - not many at all. A few at most. > > -- > > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) > > The question is 'how many of these cheaper non-DA lenses exist' and > the response is none. Nor do they exist in the three systems that > offer both APS-C and FF bodies. Nor will they exist anytime soon. The > reality is you're going to pay around double for FF lenses which do > not restrict FF sensor performance with current sensors than you will > for APS-C lenses which do not restrict current APS-C sensor > performance, this applies to normal and wide zooms as well as wide > primes (there are plenty of normal and longer primes and telephoto > zooms which are up to both APS-C and FF sensors, but there's no money > to be saved there either since the ones which can perform adequately > on only one type of sensor are doing so on APS-C). Plus, for telephotos, the "crop factor" works to the advantage of APS-C. It's a lot cheaper to buy a 200mm/f2.8 or 400mm/f5.6 than it is to buy a 300mm/f2.8 or 600mm/f5.6. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO: Dome in the Mist
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9712560 Comments welcome. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PPG quota
I filled in the data form for a PPG account shortly after it opened a few years ago. Then, I read here and elsewhere about the ridiculous review system, which has only gotten more ridiculous. I tried to look at people's photos, and found the interface to be slower than an Apple II in Job's garage. "Screw this", I said, and have never uploaded anything. When the very few PDMLers who post things to the PPG post PESOs there, I usually run out of patience wth the incredibly slow interface long before I've seen the photos. Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Bong Manayon wrote: > From: Bong Manayon > Subject: PPG quota > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 7:44 PM > After a long spell, I uploaded > something in PPG and discovered that we > now have a quota of 1 upload a week. Should make > voting easier... > > -- > Bong Manayon > http://www.bong.uni.cc > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > directly above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- Ed
Peter, I think this would work better in B&W. Ed's "ruddy" complexion and a color rendering don't collaborate very well. One might also use the gradient tool in LR or PS to decrease the exposure on the right. I like the focus. Overall, it's a characterful portrait. Cheers, Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Tue, 8/25/09, P. J. Alling wrote: > From: P. J. Alling > Subject: PESO -- Ed > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2009, 8:08 PM > Just another informal portrait. > http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20ed.html > > Equipment: Pentax K20D w/sec Pentax M 85mm f2.0 > > As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. > > -- > > The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with > either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with > gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he > might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is > not a free man any more than a dog. > > --G. K. Chesterton > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > directly above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
none exist? umm about 25 million PK mount FF lenses do exist. They are called the SMC Pentax K,M,A,F,& FA series lenses and that's not even counting the many third party FF K mounts. Not all of them would be suitable for FF digital of course for a number of reasons but I bet the number is NOT zero. Some of the best digital suitable PK lenses on FF will probably kill their DA equivs for sheer format size reasons. FF lenses don't need be "not restricting the FF sensor performance" to necessaarily beat the APS system performance. In other words, if they choose to make the FF sensor at same pixel density at the best APS sensors, that doesn't mean the FF lenses would have to be non resticting the sensor to still end up with higher overall system resolution than the best APS sensors and lenses system performance, the format size difference can swamp the other parameter differences. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:20 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did > it would around $2K like Sony, no? > > How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make > up the extra $800 or so for the FF Penatx body > vs the APS body? > > Answer - not many at all. A few at most. > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) The question is 'how many of these cheaper non-DA lenses exist' and the response is none. Nor do they exist in the three systems that offer both APS-C and FF bodies. Nor will they exist anytime soon. The reality is you're going to pay around double for FF lenses which do not restrict FF sensor performance with current sensors than you will for APS-C lenses which do not restrict current APS-C sensor performance, this applies to normal and wide zooms as well as wide primes (there are plenty of normal and longer primes and telephoto zooms which are up to both APS-C and FF sensors, but there's no money to be saved there either since the ones which can perform adequately on only one type of sensor are doing so on APS-C). -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
if the FF body had same sensor pixel density as proposed by others as their best APS sensors, cropping the FF image would give same result as the APS, in that case the APS body doesn't have any "lower cost long teles" advantage, you could do same with the FF body if desired. Just crop the FF image to APS size. Not only that, but even if the FF sensor were same resolution as the APS sensors the tele performance would most likely be better with the longer F.L. lenses on FF than the shorter FL lenses on APS because generally speaking long teles are not the sharpest tools in the shed and the increase in format size from APS to FF helps soft lenses more than it helps razor sharp ones. -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Francis Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 8:51 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:19:45PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: > On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell > wrote: > > huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did > > it would around $2K like Sony, no? > > > > How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make up the > > extra $800 or so for the FF Penatx body vs the APS body? > > > > Answer - not many at all. A few at most. > > -- > > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) > > The question is 'how many of these cheaper non-DA lenses exist' and > the response is none. Nor do they exist in the three systems that > offer both APS-C and FF bodies. Nor will they exist anytime soon. The > reality is you're going to pay around double for FF lenses which do > not restrict FF sensor performance with current sensors than you will > for APS-C lenses which do not restrict current APS-C sensor > performance, this applies to normal and wide zooms as well as wide > primes (there are plenty of normal and longer primes and telephoto > zooms which are up to both APS-C and FF sensors, but there's no money > to be saved there either since the ones which can perform adequately > on only one type of sensor are doing so on APS-C). Plus, for telephotos, the "crop factor" works to the advantage of APS-C. It's a lot cheaper to buy a 200mm/f2.8 or 400mm/f5.6 than it is to buy a 300mm/f2.8 or 600mm/f5.6. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Dome in the Mist
Layer effect caused by the mist, well seen. Effective composition. Jack --- On Sat, 8/29/09, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > From: Daniel J. Matyola > Subject: PESO: Dome in the Mist > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 6:51 PM > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9712560 > > Comments welcome. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > directly above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PPG quota
Nothing is perfect, Rick. The Pentax Photo Gallery is a wonderful display of interesting images. It is well worth participating in. I am often frustrated when they reject one of my favorite images, or take a long time to "review" one, but I enjoy looking at the collection and the other entries, and I am grateful that Pentax spent the time and money to create and maintain it. We have all become used to instant gratification, but patience is still a virtue we all need from time to time. Dan On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > > > I filled in the data form for a PPG account shortly after it opened a few > years ago. > > Then, I read here and elsewhere about the ridiculous review system, which has > only gotten more ridiculous. > > I tried to look at people's photos, and found the interface to be slower than > an Apple II in Job's garage. > > "Screw this", I said, and have never uploaded anything. When the very few > PDMLers who post things to the PPG post PESOs there, I usually run out of > patience wth the incredibly slow interface long before I've seen the photos. > > > > Rick > > http://photo.net/photos/RickW > > > --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Bong Manayon wrote: > >> From: Bong Manayon >> Subject: PPG quota >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" >> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 7:44 PM >> After a long spell, I uploaded >> something in PPG and discovered that we >> now have a quota of 1 upload a week. Should make >> voting easier... >> >> -- >> Bong Manayon >> http://www.bong.uni.cc >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link >> directly above and follow the directions. >> > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Dome in the Mist
Thanks, Jack On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > Layer effect caused by the mist, well seen. Effective composition. > > Jack > > --- On Sat, 8/29/09, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > >> From: Daniel J. Matyola >> Subject: PESO: Dome in the Mist >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" >> Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 6:51 PM >> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9712560 >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link >> directly above and follow the directions. >> > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PPG quota
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:41:18PM -0700, Rick Womer wrote: > > > I filled in the data form for a PPG account shortly after it opened a few > years ago. > > Then, I read here and elsewhere about the ridiculous review system, which has > only gotten more ridiculous. > > I tried to look at people's photos, and found the interface to be slower than > an Apple II in Job's garage. > > "Screw this", I said, and have never uploaded anything. > > > > Rick Me too! (except that I signed up shortly *before* the gallery public opening) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Yeah but the Michellin Pilot Sport Cup tires are the best. Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: "Larry Colen" Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 It occurs to me that arguing what sort of lenses you need to get the full performance out of a full frame camera is like arguing what sort of tires you need to get the full performance out of a Ferrari. Most of us can't afford it, and most of those who can afford it don't have the skill to make use of it. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Peso - one for Ralf :-)
That's a doozey, Ann. Great light & interesting subject. Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: "ann sanfedele" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:55 AM Subject: Peso - one for Ralf :-) Again - from Roosevelt Island http://annsan.smugmug.com/On-the-Road-or-On-Foot/New-York-New-York/2564371_i3HHm/1/633193442_Aakk9/Large http://tinyurl.com/lgpnnv ann http://annsan.smugmug.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Dome in the Mist
Nice framing & nice mist, Dan. I know it's a dome, but it also kind of looks like a giant golf ball :-). Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: "Daniel J. Matyola" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 8:51 PM Subject: PESO: Dome in the Mist http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9712560 Comments welcome. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Yee Haw & other Pentax Stuff
I was at Central Camera today & on display in the window is a 300mm Takumar screw mount lens, f4, I believe, for $349. IIRC there was a tripod mount attached as well. Contact info can be found at the link below--if anyone is interested. I'm sure if you call they'll tell you all about the 300mm in the window. Just an FYI http://www.centralcamera.com/home.php And I finally got the DA 40mm, f2.8. Yee Haw! Just a little miscellaneous photo whimsy here. 1st 2 were taken with the DA21mm & last four with DA40mm. http://www.caguila.com/caguila/misc1/ whimsical comments welcome :-) Cheers, Christine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PPG quota
Me three! And I signed up before the gallery opened too! Nice images, but a pain in the butt to view or join. Regards, Bob S. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:18 PM, John Francis wrote: > On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:41:18PM -0700, Rick Womer wrote: >> >> >> I filled in the data form for a PPG account shortly after it opened a few >> years ago. >> >> Then, I read here and elsewhere about the ridiculous review system, which >> has only gotten more ridiculous. >> >> I tried to look at people's photos, and found the interface to be slower >> than an Apple II in Job's garage. >> >> "Screw this", I said, and have never uploaded anything. >> >> >> >> Rick > > Me too! (except that I signed up shortly *before* the gallery public opening) > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I'll be in the UK (probably in early September)
Well, it looks as though that might just work. I had hoped to be in the UK earlier, but somebody dropped the ball in making my travel arrangements, so it's unlikely I'll be travelling much before the 10th. That probably means I'll be near London for the weekend of the 12th/13th and maybe the 19th/20th. I don't think I'm likely to be able to make it up to Northumbria, though. It's possible, but I can't commit to it - I have to give priority to the reasons why I'm going over to the UK in the first place, after all. On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 09:05:11PM +0200, AlunFoto wrote: > Have meetings in London 10. and 11. September. That's Thursday and > Friday, so I'm sure it will be possible to extend the stay to Sunday. > > Jostein > > 2009/7/29 John Francis : > > > > I'm probably going to be in the UK for a couple of weeks at > > the beginning of September. ?I'll be in the London/Kent area; > > anyone for a PDML meetup? > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > > follow the directions. > > > > > > -- > http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
